June 24, I486. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
507 
of which an English translation was prepared by Dr. H. A. Weddell’ 
and published by L. Reeve & Co., Covent Garden. The rules given 
in this treatise were adopted at the International Botanical Congress 
in Paris, August 1867, when there were about 150 botanists present, 
and they, therefore, represent the opinions of the principal European 
authorities. Commenting upon the necessity for some recognised 
system, M. De Candolle refers to the enormous number of synonyms 
which had gradually accumulated. Thus in Steudel’s “ Nomenclator’’ 
for 1821 “ there were 55 synonyms for every 100 admitted species. 
The second edition of 1840 gives the proportion of 75 to 100,” and 
the index to De Candolle’s “ Prodromus ” a few years later gives 102 
synonyms for every 100 accepted species. This is alarming, and 
affairs are not much better amongst the Orchids ; but it will be beyond 
the power of the committee to rectify evils of this character, though 
•they could impose some restrictions upon the names to be given to 
new species or varieties. Two introductory rules in the treatise already 
mentioned are the following, and are well worth attention :—“ The 
rules of nomenclature should neither be arbitrary nor imposed by 
authority. They must be founded on considerations clear and 
forcible enough for everyone to comprehend and be disposed to 
accept. The essential point in nomenclature is to avoid or to reject 
the use of form or names that may create error or ambiguity, or 
throw confusion into science.’’ The former of these rules all will 
accept, and the latter as applied to Orchids will probably constitute 
the chief subject of discussion. Sometimes in making alterations 
with a view to rectify previous errors the difficulties are only increased, 
and it behoves all who propose the abolishment of names that have 
been generally accepted, to have good reason for the course advocated. 
“ No one,” says M. De Candolle, “ ought to change a name or a com¬ 
bination of names without serious motives derived from a more profound 
knowledge of facts,” and again, “ No one is authorised to change a 
name because it is badly chosen or disagreeable, or another is prefer¬ 
able or better known, or for any other motive either contestable or 
of little import.” In the bestowal of names upon new species or 
■varieties, however, the matter is different. All these points should be 
borne in mini. The name selected should not be too long or difficult 
to pronounce, it should not be adopted “ from a barbarous tongue,” 
and it should “ in general indicate something of the appearance, the 
characters, the origin, the history, or the properties of the species. 
If derived from the name of a person it usually calls to mind the 
name of him who discovered or described it, or who may have been 
otherwise concerned with it.” A glance at any list of Orchids will 
show how little these rules have been regarded in their nomenclature. 
Such names as Vrydagzenia and Wullschlaegelia have little to recom¬ 
mend them, though happily that is of no consequence to horti¬ 
culturists, as the plants bearing these titles are at present confined to 
the care of botanists. The desire to honour various persons by bestow¬ 
ing their names upon Orchids appears also to have become very 
general, for we find that over 600 species and varieties of the Orchids 
in cultivation bear the names of individuals who have possibly dis¬ 
tinguished themselves in some way, though not always by discovering, 
describing, figuring, or studying the plants with which they are 
associated. Yet M. De Candolle considers one or more of these 
qualifications necessary to render a person worthy of the honour. 
The Conference might well give some attention to this matter, and a 
decision restricting these honorary designations within reasonable 
limits would be a valuable service. 
The species must, in a great measure, be left to the botanists. 
Only those fully competent, with ample material for reference, should 
attempt to bestow new specific names upon fresh introductions. 
Horticulturists have, however, to deal with a great number of varie¬ 
ties, and it is in regard to these that the chief difficulties are 
now experienced in naming Orchids. Botanically, many species 
admit of several sub-divisions, each bearing its proper title, but in 
horticulture this is ocasionally inconvenient, and leads to a multiplica¬ 
tion of names that is almost overwhelming, as is seen in the titles of 
some varieties of British Ferns. Amongst such plants as Roses, Pelar¬ 
goniums, Dahlias, Carnations, Auriculas, &c., which have been very 
popular in British gardens, and are increased in numbers from seed, 
botanical names have been discontinued, and English or local desig¬ 
nations adopted instead—a plan well adapted to their case, as it is 
also to the garden forms of Daffodils and any other plants that are 
similarly leadily increased from seed. This is quite in accord with 
the “ Laws of Botanical Nomenclature,” for it is there stated that 
“Seedlings, half-breeds of uncertain origin, and sports, should receive 
from horticulturists fancy names in common language, as distinct 
as possible from the Latin names of species and varieties.” Of late, 
however, an attempt has been made to use the “ fancy names ” for 
varieties of Orchids, and it requires very careful consideration before 
giving support to a practice that is open to several objections under 
euch different circumstances. The Cattleyas, the Lselias, the 
Odontoglossums, and the Masdevallias are the most prolific of these 
puzzling varieties, but it must be remembered that all these are intro¬ 
ductions, none is of garden origin except the home-raised hybrids, 
concerning which there is no difficulty. Take for example Cattleyas 
Mendeli, MosBiae, and Trianse, every importation of these contains 
forms differing in some points from others, and it is almost impossible 
to find two plants precisely alike. Sometimes the differences are 
considerable, and then a really distinct variety is worthy of a name 
which has previously been bestowed in accordance with botanical 
usuage, mostly Latin adjectives indicating some particular quality of 
si.ze.or colour. In some trade collections only the choicest are thus 
distinguished, and the relative merits of other forms not sufficiently 
well marked to merit a name are indicated by crosses on the labels. 
The same may be said of Odontoglossums crispum, Pescatorei, 
cirrhosum, and others, the very finest forms of which are only honoured 
with names. If this were adopted there would be no danger of names 
becoming too cumbrous or troublesome, and it is quite within the 
province of the Floral Committee of the Royal Horticultural Society 
to refuse to award certificates to plants bearing objectionable names. 
On the other hand, if these “ fancy names ” are admitted there is a 
danger that we shall be flooded with personal designations, 
“ Souvenirs,” &e., like those applied to Roses and Chrysanthemums, 
and which will be given to varieties of quite a different classificatory 
value. As regards the last named plants, for instance, Chrysan¬ 
themum Mrs. George Rundle is sufficient, so is Rose A. K. Williams ; 
but Orchid Duke of Marlborough is not sufficient to distinguish the 
plant, and we have to say or write the full title Cattleya Mendeli 
Duke of Marlborough, for which at least the merit of brevity cannot 
be claimed. Further, the “ fancy names ” indicate that the plants are 
of garden origin, whereas the Orchids are simply wildings, and as 
much entitled to be considered botanical varieties as many other plants. 
There is another point to be considered, and that is that some scores 
of varieties have already received botanical names @f the ordinary 
character. If the “ fancy name ” system be adopted, to render it con¬ 
sistent these ought to be abolished and others substituted, otherwise 
we should have a strange mixture of titles applied to forms of one 
species of equal value. 
Hybrids are usually indicated by a cross placed before the generic 
name, but the method advocated in “ The Laws ” is far the best for 
showing the origin of the plant when this is known ; thus Amaryllis 
vittata-reginre, which indicates that it has been raised from A. reginm 
fertilised by A. vittata. — L. Castle. 
At a general meeting of the Royal Horticultukal Society j 
South Kensington, S.W., held June 22nd, Charles Noble, Esq., in the 
chair, the following candidates were unanimously elected—viz., Hamilton 
Gordon, Luigi Ricci, and Robert Thomson. 
- A correspondent writes in reference to the Provincial Show 
of the Royal Horticultural Society “ Those of your readers 
who intend visiting Liverpool next week and desire to see some of the 
grandest railway scenery in England should, as far as may be convenient 
try the Peak route through Derbyshire, the Midland Company’s line 
and gardeners who desire to see Chatsworthjwill find Rowsley station the 
most convenient. 
- We have received from Mr. Laxton of GirtEord, Bedfordshire 
(the successful originator of many fruits and vegetables) fruit of Noble, 
an early Strawberry remarkable for size and excellence. The fruit is 
very large, 2 j inches in diameter, ovate in shape, and slightly corrugated. 
The skin is smooth, strewed with small seeds cn the surface, shining and 
dark red in colour. Flesh deep crimson, rather soft in texture, briskly 
flavoured, and of good quality. This is a very handsome fruit. It was 
raised by Mr. Laxton from Forman’s Excelsior, is very early, coming in 
three days after King of the Earlies, is a vigorous grower, hardy, and a 
free bearer, producing few small fruit. 
- It appears that though the season is so late, Rhododendrons 
flowered about their usual time—at least, such was the case with Mr. 
M'Intosh’s great collection at Duneevan. Calling there a week ago, 
practically all the flowers were faded, the freshest of all then remaining 
being Warrior. Nor has there been the usual marked difference between 
the early and late sorts as to time of expansion, but all seem to have 
practically opened together, and the display has been on the whole excel- 
