309 THE ORCHID REVIEW. [OCTOBER, 1909, 
our minds, and enabled us to offer O. sarcodes with a degree of confidence 
that we otherwise should not have felt. Since then we have from time to 
time received additional consignments of the species from the same party, 
so that its whereabouts in Brazil is well known, and we have great pleasure 
in publishing it for perhaps the first time.” Dr. Lane’s confirmation is 
interesting, and it may be added that in the Flora Brasiliensis Prof. Cogniaux 
only gives the garden records. 
We now come to the question of possible natural hybrids of O. sarcodes, 
and, as already remarked, I have long suspected O. amictum, Lindl., to bea 
hybrid between it and O. pubes. It was described and figured in 1847 
(Bot. Reg., xxxiil. t. 66), as a Brazilian plant which flowered with Messrs. 
Loddiges in April ofthat year. It agrees with the two species mentioned in 
habit, while the flowers are about intermediate in size, colour and structural 
details. It is significant that no one has ever obtained an importation of it, 
but I suspect that some of the forms between O. sarcodes and O. pubes for 
which Dr. Lane can find no classification will have to be referred here. I 
find also a significant note by Mr. Day. In June, 1875, he painted a flower 
(Orch. Draw., xviii. t. 70) from a plant purchased a few days earlier for £15 
at a sale of Mr. W. Bull’s, held at Stevens’ Rooms. It was sold under the 
name of Oncidium curtum, but is different from Lindley’s plant of that 
name (Bot. Reg., xxxiii. t. 68). Mr. Day remarked : “‘ It is very much like 
O. Forbesii and O. crispum, but differs much in the form of the bulbs. 
This has nocolumn wings. It appears to me to approach O. sarcodes— 
perhaps it may be a hybrid.” In June, 1877, he painted the inflorescence, 
besides making a drawing of the whole plant (J.c., xxii., tt. 7, 8). He then 
remarked that the plant, though purchased at Bull’s Sale, was grown and 
flowered by Mr. W. Marriott, of Edmonton, and added: ‘‘ There were four 
others, so-called, but I thought only one of them was true.” The plant 
figured seems to be a form of O. Gardneri, Lindl., which I have suggested is _ 
probably a hybrid, though from a different parentage. The question must 
be reconsidered in the light of the above facts. 
R, A. R. 
SOBRALIA LILIASTRUM., 
A FLOWERING branch of a Sobralia has been sent from the Birmingham 
Botanic Garden, by Mr. T. Humphreys, which was recently determined as 
-S. Elisabethze (Gard. Chron., 1909, i. p. 83). The plant was figured and 
described by Schomburgk, in 1841 (Verh. Befoerd. Gartenb. Preuss., Xv. Pp. 
135, tt. 1, 2), as a native of British Guiana, but proves identical with the 
earlier S. Liliastrum, Lindl. (Gen. & Sp. Orch., p. 177), a species very rarely 
seen in cultivation, though a flower was figured by Mr. Day in July, 1868 
(Orch. Draw., xiv. t. 25), and is recorded as “imported from Brazil by 
