186 THE ORCHID REVIEW. [June, 1908. 
have been taken for a form of it, though the lip is more acuminate. The 
ground colour is light yellow, with large irregular dark brown blotches on 
the sepals, smaller ones on the petals, and the lip has a large red-brown 
blotch in front of the crest, with a few smaller spots. The column wings 
are broad and toothed, and thus most like O. Hunnewellianum. It will be 
interesting to watch this hybrid, as it might appear as a wild plant. 
ODONTOGLOSSUM X HIBERNICUM.—A striking hybrid, raised by Messrs. 
Charlesworth & Co. from O. Hallii @ and O. hastilabium ¢, and which 
received an Award of Merit at the Temple Show. It is most like the latter 
in shape, and has the sepals and petals heavily barred with dark brown, 
leaving little of the ground colour beyond the yellow tips. The lip is 
pandurate, brown at the base, and white in front. It should develop into a 
fine thing. 
CYPRIPEDIUM THUNBERGII. 
THERE is a handsome hardy Cypripedium in cultivation under the name of 
C. macranthum which has puzzled me greatly, as the flowers are invariably 
veined and mottled with light rose and white, not deep rose-purple as in the 
well-known Siberian species. Plants now flowering at Kew were obtained 
from the Yokohama Nursery Co., Japan, as C. macranthum, and a fine lot 
exhibited by Messrs. Cutbush & Sons at the Temple Show were, I under- 
stand, from the same locality. Curiously enough, the true Siberian plant, 
which was also exhibited in quantity, received a First-class Certificate 
from the Orchid Committee as C. ventricosum. On looking up the subject 
I find a coloured figure in the old work, Honzo Zufu (xxxix. t. 18), under 
the name “Ats’ mori so,” which has flowers of a similar shape with 
a white ground, striped on the sepals and petals and spotted on the lip 
with light rose, and this I think must represent the plant now under dis- 
cussion. These facts seem to fix the habitat as Japan. Franchet and 
Savatier enumerate C. macranthum as a native of Japan, but they include 
C. ventricosum, Sw., C. Thunbergii, Blume, and C. Calceolus, Thunb., as 
synonyms, while excluding the one now under discussion, leaving it as a 
doubtful plant, because of the differences pointed out. There is evidently 
some confusion here, for Pfitzer regards C. Thunbergii, Blume—based on C. 
Calceolus, Thunb.—as distinct, and says that Blume’s type exists in the 
Leyden Herbarium. C. ventricosum, Sw., we know to be distinct, and it 
now appears that the Japanese C. macranthum is not identical with the 
Siberian plant of that name. The only species of this affinity given by 
Matsumura in his Nomenclature of Japanese plants is (p. 63) C. macranthum 
yar. ventricosum, but in his later (1906) Index Plantarum Japonicarum 
(p. 242), it stands as €: Thunbergii, Blume; with the synonyms above 
mentioned, and several localities, while he is only able to include Ge 
