Not a few orchids are "lost"—have been described that is, and named, even linger in some great collection, but, bearing no history, cannot now be found. Such, for instance, are Cattleya Jongheana, Cymbidium Hookerianum, Cypripedium Fairianum. But there is one to which the definite article might have been applied a very few days ago. This is Cattleya labiata vera. It was the first to bear the name of Cattleya, though not absolutely the first of that genus discovered. C. Loddigesii preceded it by a few years, but was called an Epidendrum. Curious it is to note how science has returned in this latter day to the views of a pre-scientific era. Professor Reichenbach was only restrained from abolishing the genus Cattleya, and merging all its species into Epidendrum, by regard for the weakness of human nature. Cattleya labiata vera was sent from Brazil to Dr. Lindley by Mr. W. Swainson, and reached Liverpool in 1818. So much is certain, for Lindley makes the statement in his Collectanea Botanica. But legends and myths encircle that great event. It is commonly told in books that Sir W. Jackson Hooker, Regius Professor of Botany at Glasgow, begged Mr. Swainson—who was collecting specimens in natural history—to send him some lichens. He did so, and with the cases arrived a quantity of orchids which had been used to pack them. Less suitable material for "dunnage" could not be found, unless we suppose that it was thrust between the boxes to keep them steady. Paxton is the authority for this detail, which has its importance. The orchid arriving in such humble fashion proved to be Cattleya labiata; Lindley gave it that name—there was no need to add vera then. He established a new genus for it, and thus preserved for all time the memory of Mr. Cattley, a great horticulturist dwelling at Barnet. There was no ground in supposing the species rare. A few years afterwards, in fact, Mr. Gardner, travelling in pursuit of butterflies and birds, sent home quantities of a Cattleya which he found on the precipitous sides of the Pedro Bonita range, and also on the Gavea, which our sailors call "Topsail" Mountain, or "Lord Hood's Nose." These orchids passed as C. labiata for a while. Paxton congratulated himself and the world in his Flower Garden that the stock was so greatly increased. Those were the coaching days, when botanists had not much opportunity for comparison. It is to be observed, also, that Gardner's Cattleya was the nearest relative of Swainson's;—it is known at present as C. labiata Warneri. The true species, however, has points unmistakable. Some of its kinsfolk show a double flower-sheath;—very, very rarely, under exceptional circumstances. But Cattleya labiata vera never fails, and an interesting question it is to resolve why this alone should be so carefully protected. One may cautiously surmise that its habitat is even damper than others'. In the next place, some plants have their leaves red underneath, others green, and the flower-sheath always corresponds; this peculiarity is shared by C.l. Warneri alone. Thirdly—and there is the grand distinction, the one which gives such extreme value to the species—it flowers in the late autumn, and thus fills a gap. Those who possess a plant may have Cattleyas in bloom the whole year round—and they alone. Accordingly, it makes a section by itself in the classification of Reichenbachia, as the single species that flowers from the current year's growth, after resting. Section II. contains the species that flower from the current year's growth before resting. Section III., those that flower from last year's growth after resting. All these are many, but C.l. vera stands alone.

We have no need to dwell upon the contest that arose at the introduction of Cattleya Mossi? in 1840, which grew more and more bitter as others of the class came in, and has not yet ceased. It is enough to say that Lindley declined to recognize C. Mossi? as a species, though he stood almost solitary against "the trade," backed by a host of enthusiastic amateurs. The great botanist declared that he could see nothing in the beautiful new Cattleya to distinguish it as a species from the one already named, C. labiata, except that most variable of characteristics, colour. Modes of growth and times of flowering do not concern science. The structure of the plants is identical, and to admit C. Mossi? as a sub-species of the same was the utmost concession Lindley would make. This was in 1840. Fifteen years later came C. Warscewiczi, now called gigas; then, next year, C. Trian?; C. Dowiana in 1866; C. Mendellii in 1870—all labiatas, strictly speaking. At each arrival the controversy was renewed; it is not over yet. But Sir Joseph Hooker succeeded Lindley and Reichenbach succeeded Hooker as the supreme authority, and each of them stood firm. There are, of course, many Cattleyas recognized as species, but Lindley's rule has been maintained. We may return to the lost orchid.

As time went on, and the merits of C. labiata vera were understood, the few specimens extant—proceeding from Mr. Swainson's importation—fetched larger and larger prices. Those merits, indeed, were conspicuous. Besides the season of flowering, this proved to be the strongest and most easily grown of Cattleyas. Its normal type was at least as charming as any, and it showed an extraordinary readiness to vary. Few, as has been said, were the plants in cultivation, but they gave three distinct varieties. Van Houtte shows us two in his admirable Flore des Serres; C.l. candida, from Syon House, pure white excepting the ochrous throat—which is invariable—and C.l. picta, deep............