266 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
confusing names to a rational and scientific nomenclature by those who are 
acknowledged to be the standard authorities on this subject.” But would 
they do it? If so I welcome the proposal, though all the same I have my 
doubts on the subject. We have already had a Nomenclature Committee, 
who laid down certain rules on the subject, and the next thing necessary 
seems to be a Conference to decide how to deal with those who don’t carry 
them out. I make no charge for the suggestion. 
As to the larger question, I should think a single genus would serve for 
an experiment. Cattleya, for instance, would serve for any ordinary Con- 
ference as long as they would care to sit, and the advantage of commencing 
with this one would be that, try how they would, it would be impossible to 
make the confusion worse than it already is. Species, varieties, sub- 
varieties, sections, and one hardly knows what besides, are mixed up in the 
utmost confusion, and the Conference which succeeds in putting them on an 
intelligible basis will deserve the thanks of all Orchidists. 
One matter more and I have done. At page 205 I called attention to a 
list of so-called new species, varieties, and hybrids, whose claim to the title 
must be traced back for a varying and sometimes considerable number of 
years. I now see Galeandra lagoensis solemnly announced as ‘‘ Nov. Sp.,” 
which looks well, no doubt, until you discover that it was described in 1881. 
And Cattleya x Hardyana laversinensis is not a new variety, in spite of the 
statement to the chabed No wonder our records get mixed at times. 
ARGUS. 
CYPRIPEDIUM x EDWARDII. 
A flower of this beautiful hybrid has been sent by R. H. Scataces. 
Esq., The Woodlands, Streatham, which shows that it has decidedly 
improved since it was originally described and figured in our pages (vol. i. 
p- 23). ‘The dorsal sepal is barely under two and a quarter inches broad, 
and shows the influence of the pollen parent, C. Fairieanum, in being closely 
veined and somewhat reticulated with deep purple. The lip and staminode 
are much like those of C. superbiens, the other parent, while the petals 
are fairly intermediate in character, being beautifully spotted along the 
nerves with purple-brown on a light ground, the margin being suffused with 
purple, undulate, and beautifully ciliate. This distinct and beautiful hybrid 
was raised in the collection of H. Graves, Esq., Orange, New Jersey, 
U.S.A., by Mr. R. M. Grey, and its merits may. be inferred from the fact 
SS year it received an Award of Merit fiom the Royal Horticultural 
Bo, en 
