SEPTEMBER, 1903. | THE ORCHID REVIEW. 283 
likely second parent, for such a cross would account for the characters above 
pointed out. Asa matter of fact the plant exhibited bears a considerable 
resemblance to C. X Patrocinii (C. Leopoldi x C. Loddigesii), but the 
characteristic veining of the lip completely excludes it. Hybridists should 
take an opportunity of making the cross suggested, and let us know the 
result. The recovery of a lost plant is always interesting, and although one 
cannot be quite certain from the description only, I cannot help thinking 
that the two plants mentioned above are forms of the same hybrid. It 
would be interesting to know what has become of the original C. X 
Lucieniana. 
R. A. RoirFe. 
RODRIGUEZIA BATEMANII. 
Ar the meeting of the R.H.S. held at the Drill Hall, Westminster, on 
August 18th last, a handsome species. of Rodriguezia was exhibited by 
Messrs. Charlesworth & Co., under the provisional name of R. grandis. 
It had a raceme of large flowers, much resembling those of R. candida in 
size and shape, but lilac in colour, and the segments longitudinally 
striped with purple. A comparison of materials sent to Kew by Messrs. 
Charlesworth shows that it belongs to the very rare R. Batemanii, a 
species almost unknown to modern horticulture. It was figured and 
described in 1835 (Pépp. et Endl., Nov. Gen. et Sp.,i, p. 41, t- 70), from 
Peruvian specimens collected by Péppig in 1830. Lindley afterwards 
changed the name to Burlingtonia rubescens (Bot. Reg., 1837, sub. 
t., 1927): 
It appeared in. cultivation in 1866, when Reichenbach noted it as 
follows :—‘‘ Thirty-six years after its first discovery, we are happy to have 
this plant in our stoves, thanks to Mr. Linden. We owe the possession of 
flowers to him, and have others before us raised in the collection of the 
Lord Bishop of Winchester, under the care of Mr. Lawrence’”’ (Gard. Chron., 
1866, p. 1042). It also flowered in the collection of W. \vilson Saunders, 
Esq., of Reigate, and was figured in the Refugium Botanicum (ii, t. 128), 
when its history was thus given by Reichenbach :—‘ It was in 1830 that 
the late Prof. Péppig discovered this graceful plant, near Maynas, in Peru, 
growing on calabash trees; coming home in 1833 so exhausted that he 
seemed to have but a few months to live, he was appointed to Leipsic ; 
there, having enjoyed the visit of young Bateman, who, no doubt, knew 
Orchids better than he, he dedicated the plant to the young English 
traveller. . . . There is, however, no great hope of keeping the plant 
long in gardens.” 
