DECEMBER, 1909.] THE ORCHID REVIEW. 357 
traveller has known of the species, but the real difficulty lay in obtaining the 
services of escorts of reliable natives. 
‘“‘ From time to time parcels of glass beads and watches, linen and bright 
handkerchiefs were sent from England to propitiate the natives. But they 
were suspicious and hard to pacify. 
“The Orchid hunter bided his time, and with an escort of friendly 
natives seized an opportunity to secure a collection of the plants, and had 
them rapidly conveyed to the coast. 
** The comforts of civilisation were not for the intrepid hunter, whose bed 
was in the primeval forests, and whose breakfast—and whose life—depended 
on his gun. Fever lurked in the swamp and mountain and morass, and 
there were a hundred natural obstacles to be overcome. 
‘‘Messrs. Sander prefer not to state the place of origin of the new 
Orchid, of which they possess at present fifty plants. 
‘** The agent who secured the new Orchid has now gone to New Guinea 
in quest of an Orchid that only grows among the bones of dead men.”’ 
Another cutting, and this from a horticultural paper, states that the 
plant is from the Philippines. Mycorrespondent wants to know—but never 
mind what, the original description is silent, and the figure and history at 
pp. 209, 210, take us no further. It is a fine thing—that the figure shows 
—but there is a significance in that last parhnsaph: 
Speaking of geography, fumins me that the other day I came across a 
paragraph in the Jvish Naturalist entitled ‘“‘Spiranthes Romanzoffiana not 
in Devonshire.” But why announce the fact? It seems that in the 
Country-Side for August 22nd, 1908, a notice appeared that the plant had 
been “ found in plenty in a locality (name suppressed) in East Devon,” and 
the Editor added that the plant had been “ properly identified.” An Irish 
naturalist, jealous for the fame of his native land as being the only spot 
outside the United States where this Orchid is indigenous, succeeded in 
obtaining specimens, and promptly announced, “‘ They belong to Epipactis 
palustris.” I wonder what the plant would have been called if it had been 
improperly identified. 
Another correspondent is sadly troubled about Mendelism, which, he 
Says, seems to mean all manner of things. I am afraid I cannot help him, 
and if the following only adds to his bewilderment let him not blame me, 
for he asked for it, and I am no authority on the subject. Moreover, it is 
not mine at all, and it is only a coincidence that I dropped upon a lecture 
on the subject just after his question arrived. Whether the interpretation is 
Novel or otherwise he must judge. 
