57 
Bostom, Mass., October 17th. 1922. 
My dear Mr. Powell: 
Your letter of October 4th, Is at hand. Many 
thanks for the additional material of Habanaria petalod.es and for 
your remarks regarding its origin. It would be well to make com¬ 
plete specimens freely of this puzzling thing as it is quite impossible 
to study its peculiarities from incomplete plants. I admit myself 
baffled by the variation exhibited. It is true that there may be sev¬ 
eral species under observation, but knowing Habanaria as I do, I 
must refraih from expressing definitive opinions until after I have 
seen more material, preferably several plants from each locality. 
It is such case3 as this that make me impatient when Iwwitness the off¬ 
hand manner in which some systeraatists toss off undigested species. 
One does not advance science when one refuses to take time to contemp¬ 
late perplexities. I noted the variation in the termination of the 
lip of the right hand flower. This variation mi^ht be expected^ but 
to understand its significance several flowers from a single naceme 
should be examined. 
I have been unable to discover, as yet, how Bpidend- 
rum lorifolium differs from B. palpigerum Relchb. f. Furthermore I 
have been unable up to the present time to differentiate between 1. 
palpigerum and B. imatophyllmn Lindl. Lindley's type, of course, came 
from farther south, but that does not necessarily mean specific dis¬ 
tinction. I wonder if Schleohter has overlooked Bpidendrum palpigerum 
in his determination to recognize the Central American species here¬ 
tofore referred to a. fmatophyllum as a distinct thing? I have com¬ 
pared your material with the Reichenbachian type and I have as yet 
failed to detect differences. 
