Aogust 20, 1885. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
165 
17, Habenaria chlorantha, or Great Butterfly Orchis, is a singularly 
handsome plant. It has a long ’oose spike of greenish white flowers, is 
well known, and is generally found in damp woods throughout the county. 
It is reported from every district. The larger nocturnal Lepidoptera are 
much attracted by its strong sweet odour and the abundance of nectar 
which it yields. 
18, Habenaria bifolia, or Lesser Butterfly Orchis, is similar in outward 
appearance to the last, though smaller. Bentham and some other botanists 
regard them as varieties of each other. But a close examination reveals 
many permanent differences, and Mr. Darwin observes, “ I cannot doubt 
that the Larger and Lesser Butterfly Orchids are distinct species, masked by 
close external similarity.” It is fount throughout our county, and it is need¬ 
less to particularise localities. Neither of these plants suggests the idea of 
a butterfly, and it is difficult to understand how they ever became so 
designated. 
19, Habenaria viridis, Frog Orchis.—There appears to be even less 
reason for calling this the Frog Orchis than there is for naming the two last- 
mentioned flowers the “ Butterfly.” It is a small plant, and is very incon¬ 
spicuous. Its stem is 0 or 8 inches high. Bach floret has a green helmet’ 
and a greenish brown lip. It is not uncommon on pastures, chiefly in hilly 
districts, but probably its colour prevents its being readily observed. It 
has been reported from almost every district in our county. 
20, Ophrys apifera, Bee Orchis.—There is no mistaking this charm¬ 
ingly pretty flower. The stem varies from 6 to 12 inches in height, and 
generally bears a few distant florets. The ovate sepals, which resemble 
wings, are generally of a delicate lilac tint; the petals are small and narrow, 
sometimes the same colour as the sepals, and sometimes greenish white; 
the lip, which looks so like the body of a bee, is brown, variegated with 
yellow, and is soft and velvety. 
“ The Orchis rare with varied beauty charm, 
And mock the exploring bee, or fly’s aerial form.” 
This plant is not common in our county, and, unfortunately, where it grows 
it is in danger of being exterminated by too zealous or too selfish collectors. 
Hence it is undesirable to mention the localities where it may he found. 
It may be looked for on limestone or cornstone pastures and banks, espe¬ 
cially the latter. It grows in great abundance on the chalk downs of our 
southern and eastern counties. It is a noteworthy circumstance, and 
deserves special recognition, that O. apifera has been, during this season of 
1885, abnormally abundant, and has been found in several new localities in our 
county. From one place alone more than fifty plants were brought tome, 
and the gentleman who found it said be “ could have gathered more than a 
hundred flowers in a space not more than live yards square.” (Numerous 
specim ns were produced). 
21, Ophrys muscifera, Fly Orchis.—This plant is much rarer than the 
Bee Orchis. It has been found on the Great Doward both by Mr. Purchas and 
Mr. Ley. It was found in 1850 upon the Little Doward. Mr. Ley discovered 
it in 1880 on Coppet Hill, and again in 1883. Mr. “Watkins has picked 
several flowers on the Great Doward this year. There are no other well 
authenticated localities for this pretty Orchis in our county. I have 
gathered it frequently, year after year, in Surrey, at the end of May and the 
beginning of June. Its florets are about the size of a common house fly. 
The greenish sepals resemble the wings, and its slender lateral inner sepals 
are not unlike the antennas of an insect; while the narrow brownish purple 
lip, which is two-lobed at it 3 extremity, has a pale blue spot in the 
centre. 
These are, so far a3 I know, all the Orchidaceous plants known in our 
county. .1 have seen it stated in a botanical work that “ 0. militaris is 
common in Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, and Herefordshire.” I think 
that is an error so far as our county is concern ;d. Neither Mr. Purchas, 
Hr. Lees, Mr. Lingwood, nor Mr. Ley have any record of it, and the geolo¬ 
gical formations of the other counties named differ widely from ours. 
That the Orchidacese are the most interesting of all our native wild 
flowers is almost a truism. No other class has elicited so much study and 
research. None others show so much contrivance and design ; such adap¬ 
tations of means to ends. Some of them are extremely sensitive ; even the 
touch of a human hair is enough to cause an immediate response. Words worth, 
“ The Poet of Nature,” might have been watching an insect visiting a 
Listera ovata or an O. pyramidalis when he wrote the well-known lines — 
“It is my faith that everv flower 
Enjoys the air it breathes.” 
“There are peculiarities in the structure of Orchids which distinguish them 
from all other classes in the floral kingdom. The quaint and curious 
mimicry of natural objects—from which so many of them take their names 
—enhances their singularity, and adds not a little to the rest with which 
the lover of nature searches for them. The most distinguished naturalist 
®f_the present century, Professor Darwin, after twenty years of close, su3- 
tain°d, patient study of them, wrote one of the most fascinating books 
about them. The Duke of Argyll, in his “ Reign of Law,” commenting upon 
Darwin’s discoveries among the,Orchids, observes, “the complication and 
ingenuity of these contrivances almost exceed belief. ‘Moth traps and 
spring guns set upon these grounds,’ might he the motto of these Orchids. 
There are baits to tempt the nectar-loving Ledidoptera with rich odours 
exhaled at night, and lustrous colours to shine by day ; there are channels 
of approach along which they are surely guided so as to compel them to 
pass by certain spots; there are adhesive plasters nicely adjusted to fit 
their probosces or to catch their brows ; there are hair-trigger3 carefully 
83t in their necessary path, communicating with explosive shells, which 
project their polDn-stalks with unerring aim upon their bodies. There are 
un short, an infinitude of adjustments, for an idea of which I must refer my 
leaders to Mr. Darwin’s inimitable powers of observation and description.” 
But the Orchidacese present mysteries as well as wonders. Most of the 
-species which comprise the genus “ Orchis” exhibit a most curious, and, as 
■yet, unexplained anomaly. They all possess well-developed spur-like 
■nectaries, which seem to imply the secretion of nectar, yet in none of them 
has the smallest bead of nectar ever been found, even under the miecroscop. 
They are favourites with insects, especially the Lepidoptera. Darwin gives 
4 list of twenty-three of these beautiful creatures whichJie had observed 
visiting various Orchids. Why, then, do insects visit them so freely ? What 
is the attraction? Sprengel, knowing the absolute absence of nectar, calls 
these Orchids, “ Soheinsaftblumen,” or Sham-honey flowers. That is, he 
believes that these plants exist by an organised system of deception. 
Darwin vigorously combats such a theory, and retorts, “ He who believes in 
this doctrine must rank very low the instinctive knowledge of many kinds 
of moths.” (page 48). He himself suggested an explanation, but his severely 
accurate mind was not quite satisfied with it. It remains a study of much 
interest, and worthy of the study of our entomologists. 
Thus it is not only botanists who are interested in our Orchidaceous 
plants. They possess almost as many attractions for entomologists. Even 
the most casual observer can scarcely fail to be charmed by their beauty ; 
and those to whom mental effort is a pleasure may find the richest delight in 
investigating their wondrous mechanism, and trying to solve the mysteries 
which environ them. But to every lover of nature, and that includes every 
member of the Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club, they illustrate and 
emphasise the truth, so finely expressed by Pope— 
“ All are but parts of one stupendous whole. 
Whose body Nature is, and God the soul. 
-a * * * 
All nature is but art unknown to thee, 
All chance, direction which thou canst not see; 
All discord, harmony not understood, 
All seeming evil, universal good.” 
“FAMILIAR TREES.” 
Under this title Messrs. Cassell & Co. are now issuing a work by Mr. 
G. S. Boulger in monthly parts, and judging by the first part now before 
us it is likely to prove an interesting production. We have little popular 
and reliable literature in reference to our tree flora, and this renders Mr. 
Boulger’s work the more acceptable, especially a3 it is well known that 
he has given much attention to the subject for some time past. It h 
essentially of a popular character, but much matter of technical interest is 
also introduced. Two coloured plates are given with the first part, re¬ 
presenting an old Oak, and two acorns and Oak apples, the second plate 
being much more satisfactory than the first, though both are rather 
better than the majority of these small chromo-lithographs. 
The following extract will give an idea of the style adopted :—“ Few 
of our trees have a wider geographical range than the Oak. Whilst the 
great order of broad-ieaved trees to which it belongs, the Cupuliferm — 
those, that is, that have thair nnt-like fruits enclosed in a more or less 
leafy husk, ‘ involucre,’ or cupule (the cup of the acorn)—is distributed 
throughout the temperate regions of both hemispheres, the Oaks, of which 
there are nearly three hundred species, are almost confined to the northern. 
Many forms are well known to us in our plantations, or by their pro¬ 
ducts, such as the Turkey Oik (Quercus Cerris), the Evergreen Oak (Q. 
Ilex), the cork of Q. Suber, the galls of Q. infectoria and other Levantine 
species, the kermes from Q. coccifera, the cups of Q ASgilops imported as 
valonia, the quercitron bark of the American Q. tinctoria, and that of 
many other species used in tanning. But as a native of Great Britain 
we have but one distinct species, though two, if not three well-marked 
varieties are generally recognised. The English Oak (Q. Robur) ranges 
from the Urals and the Caucasus, from Mount Taurus and Mount Atlas, 
almost to the Arctic Circle, growing at an altitude of 1350 feet in the 
Highlands of Scotland ; its limit nearly coinciding with that of successful 
Wheat cultivation. Vast forests of Oak covered the greater part of 
central Europe in the early ages of history. It was the favourite timber 
of the Greeks and Romans ; with it the Northmen built their long ships, 
and the Anglo-Saxons such churches as that at Greenstead in Essex ; and 
with it was smelted the Sussex iron which supplied the cannon of 
Elizabeth’s navy. When in sheltered situations, or massed together in 
forests, it may reach a height of from 60 to 100 feet, with a straight stem of 
from 30 to 40 feet, and a girth which is commonly 8 or 10 feet, though 
many fine old trees are from three even to seyen times that circumference. 
In exposed situations it is generally shorter and less straight in its growth, 
and then also has the hardest wood, though this may be rather a charac¬ 
teristic of one of the three varieties than the effect of situation. 
“ Of these varieties, the White Oak, the Chene Mane of the French (Q. 
Robur pedunculata), is the most abundant in the southern and midland 
counties. Its leaves have no stalks, and are only downy on the under 
surface when young ; while its flowers, and consequently its acorns also, 
are generally two or more together on long peduncles. It reaches a less 
height, but is said to be less liable to the defects known as 1 cup ’ and 
‘ star-shake ’ than the sessile-fruited varieties. 
“ These last are commonly united under the names Durmast Oak and 
Q. Robur sessiliflora, which should be applied to distinct form=. They 
agree in having stalked leaves and stalkless acorns ; but the true Q. sessili¬ 
flora is most abundant in the north and west, its fine straight stems being 
seen at the best in the Forest of Dean ; whilst the true Durmast Oak 
(Q. pubescens) is a dark-fruited variety, occurring in the New Forest, the 
under surface of the leaves of which remain downy, and stay longer on 
the tree, hanging in melancholy russet late into the spring. Its timber is of 
inferior quality, and resembles chestnut in appearance, and, it is said, in 
being distasteful to spiders. Parts of the roof of Westminster Abbey are 
said to be of this cobweb-proof material.” 
THE TAUNTON DEANE SHOW. 
It was in no spirit of flattery that one who has perhaps as great a know¬ 
ledge of provincial flower shows as anyone in England said at the luncheon 
