August 6, 1891. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
109 
in the middle of winter. Such growths never can flower, and by 
such treatment it gets the character of being a shy bloomer, but 
which it does not deserve if the plant is carefully handled in the 
autumn and the winter growth is avoided. It enjoys an abundance 
of sun and light, and to ootain this we grow it in a basket, so that 
it may be hung up near the roof-glass, the basket being thoroughly 
■well drained. The soil should be good fibrous peat and a little 
'chopped sphagnum moss, mixing a few medium-sized nodules of 
charcoal with the soil during potting for the purpose of keeping it 
open ; during the growing season it is a plant which likes a liberal 
cupply of water, hence the necessity of providing ample drainage, 
for although Cattleyas like water they cannot long survive or keep 
m a healthy condition if it remains in a stagnant state about their 
roots. Propagation may be effected by division and by cutting 
through the woody rhizome, but this we advise growers to be 
cautious about doing, because more value is attached to a fine plant 
all of one piece than of several small plants which have been 
obtained by propagation ; and these small plants so obtained often¬ 
times do not flower for years, as they cannot obtain the nourishment 
they had when on the old plant. 
CYPRIPEDIUM ENGELHARDTAL 
In part 6 of the English edition of the “Lindenia” plates and 
descriptions are given of the Cypripedium named above ; Odonto- 
glossum Bergmmi, one of the O. crispum group with heavily 
spotted flowers,and similar to 0. luteo-purpureum in habit; Aganisia 
ionoptera, a graceful little plant originally described under Koel- 
lensteinia, but that genus is now sunk in Aganisia ; it has long 
erect racemes of purplish blue and creamy flowers. The last plate 
is of Phalaenopsis speciosa, which represents a fine variety, with 
deep coloured flowers of good size and form. 
Concerning Cypripedium Engelhardtac the following remarks 
are given : “ We announced recently to the readers of the ‘ Lindenia ’ 
the appearance of this new hybrid, and we are happy to be able to 
give them to-day the presentation, because we doubt not that they 
will share the opinion of those amateurs who had the opportunity 
of seeing it in flower in the month of May, and who have deemed 
it worthy to be placed in the front rank of this genus. 
“ That which gives a particular interest to the subject of hybri¬ 
disation in the family of Orchids, the importance of which is not 
yet sufficiently recognised, is that the differences in the varieties 
employed as parents reproduces itself to a considerable extent in 
"the offspring, creating very different forms conformably to the 
varieties chosen. The peculiarity promises to furnish an infinite 
variety among the hybrids, and particularly those of the genus 
Cypripedium, in which the varieties are so numerous that the 
Monograph recently published by M. Angiolo Pucci of Florence 
enumerates up to seventy for a single species—namely, C. insigne. 
dt is pi'ec:sely from this species that C. x Engelhardtce has arisen, 
and the variety which has served as the seed parent is very 
probably the variety Maulei. The other parent is one of the best 
known and most appreciated species of the genus C. Spicerianum. 
This new hybrid is the third issue from this excellent cross, which 
has already produced C. X Leeanum and C. X Leeanum var. 
superbum. 
“ The character which clearly separates it from the other forms 
in the group, and which gives it a particular charm, is the brilliant 
golden yellow colour which covers the petals and the lip, and gives 
to the flower an exceptional splendour. The large dorsal sepal, 
"which is reflexed at the base, as in C. Spicerianum, is finely 
speckled with violet-purple and traversed from base to summit by 
a median band of the same colour ; it bears at its base an extensive 
area of clear green. The rest of the flower recalls rather 
C. insigne Maulei, except the colour, which is unique. C. X Engel- 
.hardtae, like the majority of hybrids, is very robust and floriferous. 
We may also add that the flowers attain a superior size to the 
average of those in the Leeanum group. We have dedicated this 
remarkable novelty to Madame Constantin d’Engelhardt, the wife 
of one of the principal amateurs of Orchids in Russia.’' 
BRITISH FERNS AND WHERE FOUND (THE YOUNG 
COLLECTOR SERIES). 
One might suppose from the title of this little work, by Mr. E. J. Lowe, 
that it would be plain reading, and adapted to the capacity of the young 
in the Fern school, but from what I can gather from its contents it is 
not so. To change the long-existing system of nomenclature, not only 
of individual plants, but also to do away with several of the old class 
names, appears to be its leading object. Although at page 12 it is stated 
(that it is always undesirable to change familiar names, yet in the fourth 
and fifth lines on the same page the names of two classes are changed, 
substituting Aspidium for Polystichum, and Asplenium for Athyrium. 
The aim is said to be to correct the unpalatable names that exist with¬ 
out destroying their identity ; but I would ask, What is there that can 
be said to be unpalatable about the names of the four classes, I ought to 
say five classes, changed ? I, for one, say Nothing, but I do feel that 
there is something very objectionable about the names introduced, and 
I shall never use them. 
The next thing I would refer to is the fault-finding with descriptive 
and compound names, such as are and have been used by the most noted 
pteridologists of the past and present day, such men as Messrs. Barnes, 
Jones, Moore, Stansfield, Wollaston, and others. The above gentlemen 
have established a descriptive and intelligible nomenclature that is not 
likely to be superseded, and especially when we find such names as the 
following in this book. At page 50, cladodesteron (Lowe) ; page 51, 
echnomocladon (Lowe); page 52, kephalobares (Lowe), I think the above 
are not to be accepted as preferable to the descriptive system, and what 
young collector could understand them ? A word next about the classes. 
Suppose a young collector to become possessed of the works of Messrs. 
J. Smith, T. Moore, T. L. Druery, or others we might name, and in 
looking over the classes of our native Ferns he found there are nineteen 
referred to, but in his young collector’s series he can only find seventeen. 
He will be puzzled ; and further, when he finds that in his “ Young 
Collector” the Aspleniums are said to number eleven, while the other 
works he has consulted give nine, I think it will be likely many will 
proceed no further. 
At page 50 of this work the reason for change is thus given, as it 
refers to the Athyrium. Mr. Lowe says :—“ It is most nearly allied to 
the Asplenium fontanum, only the curved sori seems to be the main 
distinction between Athyrium and Asplenium.” The above is against 
the change, and nothing else is produced in favour of it. Now what 
does Asplenium derive its name from 1 If we a’e correctly informed it 
is from the supposed virtue it possessel when used for the affection of 
spleen, and from this the class were called Spleen worts. Now who ever 
heard of the Athyrium being possessed of such virtue, or supposed 
virtue 1 Further, the Athyrium is a deciduous Fern, while all our nine 
Aspleniums are evergreen, and most of them are found on limestone or 
in the mortar of old walls, while the Athyrium could not exist under 
such conditions. All our Aspleniums, too, are of dwarf habit, while the 
Atby r rium grows from 30 to 50 inches high according to the situation 
in which it is found, and it must take a stretch of imagination to see 
anything in common between the two classes of plants any nearer than 
that they are both Ferns. Distinct they are and must remain both in 
class and character. There is another reason, and a very forcible one, 
why they should be kept separate. The Aspleniums with their varieties 
number thirty or more, while the Athyrium with its varieties is supposed 
to reach 500 or more; therefore I think the Athyrium class is a very 
important one, and should not be merged into another, for it is strong 
enough to stand on its own merits. 
There are other classes the names of which are changel which 
needed no change, nor will the change be accepted, for lon^ before the 
author took pen in hand the names he is trying to do away with were 
firmly established—such as the names of Athyrium F.-f., Roth; Ceterach, 
Linnceus; Lastrea F.-ni , Presl ; Polystichum, Presl and Roth; and 
also Blechnum spicant, Smith. I know many persons who do not 
approve of this change, which they consider neeiless.—J. Eadon, 
Sheffield. 
Events of the Week. —The Royal Horticultural Society’s Fruit, 
Floral, and Orchid Committees will meet at the Drill Hall, James 
Street, Victoria Street, at 12 noon, on Tuesday, August 11th. On 
Wednesday, August 12th, the Cardiff Horticultural Society’s Show 
will take place, and in conjunction with it ihe British Fruit Growera’ 
Association will hold a Conference at 4 P.M., at which several important 
papers will be read, including one by Mr. E. J. Baillie on “ Fruit 
Growing as an Industry,” and another by Mr. A. Pettigrew on “ Hardy 
Fruits for South Wales.” The Maidenhead Horticultural Society’s Show 
will be held at Curtisfield on August 13th. 
- The weather in the metropolitan district during the 
past week has been distinguished by frequent severe thunderstorms and 
torrents of rain, which in some cases have done much damage to garden 
and field crops. On several nights the temperature has been unusually 
low, resulting in a marked check to vegetables and fruit. 
- Gardeners’ Orphan Fund. —At the Committee meeting, held 
last Friday evening, the following sums were announced :—Miss Ford 
Richmond, flower stall at the Show, £6 10s. 6d. ; Mr. G. W. Cummins, 
by sale of flowers at Croydon Show, £11 5s. 61.; Mr. R. Dean, by sale of 
Roses at Westminster Aquarium, £13 15s. 6d ; the Secretary, for flowers 
sold at the Wimbledon Show, £11 Os. 6d. Amongst amounts from 
collecting boxes were £1 from Mr. H. Cannell, £1 11s. 6d. from V are 
Show (per Mr. Dean), and 12s. Id. from Mr. H. W. Divers. Mr. D. T. 
