.... ND1SLETTEP OF THE OPTOt1ETRIC HISTORIC1'1 snr.rETY Optometry Lt~rar,y Verttcal File (243 t!orth Lindbergh Boulevard, Saint Louis, t'issouri, U.S.A. 63141) Volume 10 July 1979 Number 3 OfiS President Knoll ~<~rites: Tvto of the triumvirate are ~one! John Nei 11, Frank Dickinson, and Hi 1 helm Sohnqes are vtell known to the contact lens fraternity as the triumvirate that developen the micro­ corneal lens and founded the International Society of Contact Lens Special­ ists. John rleill died on Decer'1ber 11, 1979 at the aqe of 76, and Frank Dickinson died on December 25, 1978 at the age of 72. 8oth Here inspiring teachers; lJohn ~·!eill in the fonnal sense as a member of the Pennsylvania College of Optometry faculty, and Frank Dickinson as author and freauent speaker. Both were excellent clinicians. Roth were respected and loved. The people who kne-.·t them honor them in the folloi.•Jinq: Frank Dickinson: OphthalMic Optician, Vol. 19, no. 2, January 20, 1979' ppl 50-51. John Nei 11 : Optician, Vol. 177, no. 4568, January 5, 1979, p. 6. Optician, Vol. 177, no. 4569, January 12, 1~79, p. 37. American f1ptornetric f',ssociation ~!ews, Vol. 18, no. 1, January 1, 1979, p. 9. ,Journal of the /\merica.n Optometric 1\ssociation, Vol. 50, no. 3, t·~arch, 1979, p. 275. The Deutsche Optikerzeitung carried a hrief obituary notice for both men in its February 15, 1979, issue, Vol. 34, no. 2, o. 111. !Jickinson was honored further in the March 15 issue, Vol. 34, no. 3, p. 106. Polynomial expansion by Knoll "Dear Hank: "I don't think there is any question about the date of birth of the originator of the law of refraction. I've consulted {1) Websters unabridged (2nd Ed.) (2) Encyclopedia Britannica (1973), {3) The !'.merican Encyclopedia of Ophthalmology {1919) and (4) t·~eyers Kleines Konversations-Lexikon (1899) and they all give 1591 as his year of birth. When it comes to his name, things are auite different! Here's ho~1. (1) Snell or·Snellius, Hillebrord; (2) Snell (van P.oigen), 1-!illebrord, commonly known as Snellius; (3) Snellius, Hilebrord; (4) Snell ius van Roijen, t·'illebrord. OPTOMETRY LIBRARY JUL 1 61979 INDIANA UNIVERSITY -38- "As you can see my half hour added t\'10 variations to your list, i.e. van Roigen and Hilebrord. "Sincerely, (signed 'Hank') ~~Henry 1\. Knoll, Ph.n." Nominations requested: The fact that our OHS constitution and by-laws require that candi­ dates for election to the Executive Board be nominated by three members may well deter many individuals from nominating anyone. If you person­ ally feel that an OHS member is being overlooked as a potential candi­ date, simply say so in a note to Secretary-Treasurer t1aria Dablement, or to any other officer. An effort \'1/ill then be made to round up two more nominators. It will be helpful to know your reasons for nominating someone. By all means, if you yourself \•loul,d be ,.,illing, you should not hesitate to nominate yourself. It is well to have more than one name on the ballot. Our greatest need: If someone, especially an affluent someone, were to confront me with the qucsti on, "\'.'hat is the qreatest ir.rnediate need to the devel­ opment of ·optometry's history?', T would have a very ready response. Before I declare it, let me explain a bit. . !·'ithout a doubt the most evolutionary period in optometry's seven centuries since the invention of optical visual aid.s, or in the three and a half centuries since Daca de Valdez wrote his book on analytical procedure, has been the three-quarters of a century just behind 'i.ts. What is more, the remarkable details of this highly effervescent era are quite accurately recorded in several serial publications which served the communication needs of the profession well. ~~ore than a gross or two of these thick and heavy volumes, collected, bound, and shelved, are to be found in remarkably good condition in several well­ staffed libraries. The details include names of people, places, and dates, numbers and events, policies and opinions, illustrations and ad­ vertisements, anecdotes and vitae, - in short, a veritable wealth of material which could enable even the less experienced historian or scholar to trace a theme, a mission, a trend, or an oriqin with high re 1 i ab i 1 i ty. The catch is that most, and the best, of these historical treasures are not indexed, or are so inadequately indexed, as to be virtually un­ indexed. To search a one-year volume of a single journal literally means leafing page-by-page throuqh a thousand or more brittle pages. The information could not be more effectively buried were it placed in ':;~~;cr¥Pl;~;1,t1hi~~ly a wax candle for illumination~ -3~- To be sure, we can point our finner of hlame toward the editors and publishers for neglecting to inrlex their annual volumes adenuately. I would prefer, hov1ever, to give them their due credit for having re­ corded the infonnation, \'thich otherwise could not be accessible ~.tall. It sir.1ply has not been customary for publishers of ne,,,s ma'!azines to prepare annual indices as do publishers of scientific journals. Gut therin lie the details of our historv. The need, then,~ to .~the infonnation indexed. .. - -- The cost? Perhaps a aood many thousands of dollars. I do not know. Cut if an affluent inauirer, or an optometrist preparin~ his last will and testament, should sincerely ask me, I shall certainly exhaust every significant resource to oet him or her a reliahle estimate. The actual value of such an undertakinn to the profession at laroe 1.-Jould be ouite immeasureable, hut certainly many times over the cost. The expense of errors of repetition attributable to historical ignor­ ance defies matching. Resides, and perhaos even more importantly, it v10uld enrich our cultural appreciation of ontomet~y· s heritaqe .iust to knovt that a few key words in an infonnation retrieval system could lay open the presently dark recesses of our history. Thanks: Hhile it is not our objective to oain members merely to swell our membership list, \·te do vJish to include any and every oerson, optometrist or not, who enjoys learning all that can be mustered about our profession­ al heritage. He therefore appreciate the occasional "plua" , . ..,e receive in one or another medium which has the attention of a 0rouo to which we othen1ise do not have easy access. Our thanks this time to the editor of I.!J.g Keystoner, a ne·1sletter published by the Pennsylvania 0ptometric f·.ssociation, for calling the attention of its readers to their elioibility to membership in the OHS in their f.oril 1979 issue. Recently added OHS members: Nell.' members as of t1ay 16 include the following.: W. E. Cochran, 0.0. Box 308 Kosciusko, MS 39090 Merton C. Flam, O.D., Ph.D. School of Optometry University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 Wayne E. Gordon, O.D. 12 5 H. t·1a i n St. Clinton, IL 61727 Dr. Narendra Kumar, Editor Optometry Today P.O. Box 2812 Ne\·J Del hi 11060 INDI/\ Dennis M. Kuwabara, O.n. 94-748 'H k1moe St. Waipahu, HI 96797 Flovd D. Mizener, n.n. 1043 Curtiss St. flovmers Grove, IL 60515 Hi 11 i am C . !3 • Payne , J r. South Carolina Optometric Assn. 2730 Devine St. Columbia, SC 29205 Verne E. Petrie, O.D. Optometric Group Inc. Portage Lakes 11ed. /\rts Bldg. 3515 Manchester Rd. Akron, OH 44319 A. John Rose, O.D. 100 Parker Ct. Chardon, Oll 44024 /\ 11 Geneva Glasses .. cabinet: -40- R. Lewis Scott, n.o. 230 \!est ~"ain St. Hartford City, Irl 47348 H. Da v i d S u 11 i n s , J r. , 0 • D • P.O. Box 666 /\thens, IN 37303 Stanley J. Yamane, n.o. 94-748 Hikimoe St. Haipahy, HI 96797 A photograph of an early dravJer cabinet \.<~as sent to Me for identi­ fication. Approximately 60 em wide, 3(1 em deer, and 52 em hiqh (24 11 x 12" x 20"), it consists of 12 small dra,.<~ers stacked in t\·to columns of six each and one \~tide dra\IJer across the top. Each dra\·rer has bto '.-lhite, apparently porcelain, knobs. The ton \oJide rlravJP.r is faced \'lith the t·tords GENEVA GLASSES in silver letters on bluP-painted glass, and the small drawers are respectively facerl \'lith the silver numerals 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 on hlue qlass. 'lther't~ise the cahinet is of handsomely finished walnut. The drawers are divided into 57 x 57 mm (21;::;" x 2~") square compartnents of tongue-and-qroove constructi an. If you can provirle any information ahout t~is cabinet, r·1rs. T. R. Nusbickel, 1206 E. GlemJOod /\venue, Fullerton, California ~2631, would appreciate hearing from you . .'\lso, if you 1vill send me a copy of your letter to her I am likely to cite it in the next issue. Subsequent to penning the above paragraphs I sent the photograph to my brother Carl, a retired watchmaker, and received the follo1·Jinq reply: ~~~le have a five-drawer crysta 1 ca!"li net '.II hi ch '"'e used for years. Every drav.ter is marked GEnEVl\. /\11 their crystals for huntinq-case watches, t·Jhi ch had a snap cover over tl1e thin crysta 1, ~·!ere nade over­ seas and had the \·Jord GP!EVA on each. T!'"Pre is a possi'-1ility that they also made lenses for optical purposes, but I doubt it. If this ''Jere so I believe I Hould have seen one, or even have one from my preclecessor Leon Shute ... Intromission versus extrar.ission: Science historians seer1 often to d1·Jell a rit excessivelv on histori­ cal controversies. Perhaps one of the most celebrated Has that of '·Jheth­ er vision is intromissive or extrar1issive in nature. ThP ouestion 1·1as, does the visual nrocess consist of t~e transfer of rathP.r indefina~le "eidola" or "siMulacra" v1hich leave the ohject and infrinqe on tl,e eye, or does it consist of some vague sort of visual ra.vs or cones of visual flux \·Jhich, like sensitive ff'elers, extenrl fror1 thE' eye to r1eet thE' -41- object bein~ viewed. Sefore we r~alizerl that li~ht is somethina that travels and consumes measureahle time doinq so, rather than somethinn 11hich is instantaneously uhiouitous, li~e athouf'JI"lt or a hope, the · question of primary directionality of the visual rrocess was indeed a bit difficult. The fact that some animals can see in the dark was of no help either. If this and other philosophical eniqmas faced by early visual scientists are of interest to you, you v.rill be absolutely and re,,,,ard­ ingly fascinated by "Theories of Vision from r,l-l~indi to l"epler" hy David C. Lindberg, University of Chicago press, 1976, 324 pages. "One string on 111y fiddle": Russell L. Stimson died on November 1, 1078. 8ut it •.-tas only last t~ay, 1979, that I unkno\'dnqly referred an inquirer to him to get an answer to an historical question ahout spectacles which perhans only he could have ansv~ered from. memory. If I recall correctly, Mr. Stimson once told me that early in his career he had been a member of the American Optometric ,"'ssoci ati on, he­ fore membership ~·las limited to optometrists. He chose instead to qo the dispensing optician route. A vigorous entrepreneur, he headed the Super­ ior Optical Co., a corporation with 2B dispensinq optical stores in Southern Ca 1 iforni a. lie authored several hooks and numerous articles, and played a strong leadershio role in optical dispensinC'I. He counted many optometric leaders amon~ his frienrls and \·tas reciorocally admired and respected by them as a technological as well as orqanizational con­ tributor. I have not vet come across an obituarv or other hioqranhical account of his life except for a very brief entry in one of his ~ooks and in the Who•s Who section of the British anrl International Optical Year Book. In the latter, indicative of his nature, his hobbies are identified mere­ ly as "One string on my fiddle: Optics." He was hath a proud and modest person, one vJhom I thoroughly enjoyed kno\'Jing. Advertising around the turn of the century: (The follovling is a brief observation reported by Daniel r~. Talley, a member of the class of 1980 at the Indiana University School of Optometry) Just 1 ike at present, there "'as very much concern surrounding the advertising of optometric qoods and services around the turn of the century. This concern \'las preva 1 ent enough among optometrists, then called opticians, that several articles appeared in almost eve~y issue of the Optical Journal. The Journal dates all the way back to 1898 and even included a regular section named "Department of Advertisinq".2- The difference between the concern over advertisina in 1978 versus 1902 is that advertisin~ seemed to he accepted by all optometrists of that time. The concern of the optometrists then rPvolved around the type of advertising done. The f1ptical \Journal and those optof'1Ptrists \'lho "'rote articles for the journal '"!ere adar1ant ahout cduratinn the public through -42- advertising as opposed to advertising prices and quality of materials. This seemed an important issue because all of the education received by the public up until this time was from traveling opticians who peddled the .. magic of glasses 11 • Optometrists were encouraged to write articles about simple refractive problems to include in their advertisements. It was also stressed than no two people can wear the same pair of glasses, and that the fitting of frames was import­ ant. At this time, newspapers were generally thought to be the most effective form of advertising. Questions arose, such as in which paper, the morning or evening paper, it was best to advertise. The whole family supposedly read the evening paper together, but the morning edition was believed to reach more outsiders.3 Booklets and circulars were becoming popular around the turn of the century. The 11 Department of Advertising .. in the Optical Jour­ nal noted that good paper with good text was needed for booklets, and that the paper used for circulars for direct mailing should be of better quality than the paper for circulars intended for house to house distribution. Many optometrists were sending these booklets and circulars to other doctors, and to lawyers and teachers. The Optical Journal explained that this class of people was hardest to impress, the masses being easier to impress and easier to reach. In 1902, a four page quarterly called Modern Optics was pub­ lished. This magazine had articles written by optometrists about the science of optometry intended to educate the public. Advertise­ ments were in the magazine sponsored by optometrists. This type of advertising at this time was said to be of the highest class ever undertaken by retail opticians.5 References 1. Pancoast, F.R., Optical Advertising, The Optical Journal, Vol. X, No. 2, 1902, p. 202. 2. Davis, R.A. Department of Advertising, The Optical Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, 1902, p. 354. 3. Davis, R.A., Department of Advertising, The Optical Jour­ nal, Vol. X, No. 5, 1902, p. 586. 4. Davis, R.A., Department of Advertising, The Optical Journal Vol. X, No. 6, 1902, p. 744. 5. High Class Retail Advertising, The Optical Journal, Vol. X No. 6, 1902, p. 779-780. -43- The 1920..~Fess bill: (The following is a letter to the Optometric Historical Society from Dwayne D. Young, a member of the class of 1980 of the Indiana University School of Optometry) I am writing this letter about an issue that occurred in 1920, early in organized optometry's history. This event is not of interest because of its uniqueness, but rather because it is typical of many problems that optometry has faced, and, I feel safe to say, will face again. This "crisis" involved an external threat to optometry. This perceived threat was the so-called Fess physical education bill. House bill HR 12652, Senate bill 3950, was submitted by Congressman Fess of Ohio and Senator Capper of Washington. The purpose of tbe bill was to upgrade and encourage the physical education of the nation's youth and to provide for the detection of physical diseases and abnormalities. The need for this was felt from the experience from World War I, when so many young men were unable to meet the armed forces physical requirements. The means of accomplishing this purpose was to be financed by appropriating from the national treasury one dollar for each child aged 6-18 years in the nation. The money was to be used for physical education instructors, in­ struction, and equipment, as well as for examination of the children. Thus far, the bill seemed quite noble in its purpose, with which no good citizen would disagree. The threat came from the manner in which the bill was to be adminis­ tered. The provisions of the bill were to be jointly administered in the Bureau of Education by a newly formed subdepartment of physical education along with the Surgeon General's Office of the US Public Health Service by a newly created Assistant Surgeon's Office. The federal officials were to cooperate with the state education authorities and state health boards, along with the local education authorities and local health boards in implementing the programs of the bill. The bill, in referring to the "medical examination .. , specifically re­ ferred to "school nurses" and "medical examiners ... This was what most upset the optometrists. The optometrists had not had good experiences with school nurses, who generally made a point of trying to send the children to oculists, the medical practitioners, and not to the optometrists. The optometrists felt sure these "medical examiners" would counsel the child and his parents so as to help themselves or their medical brethren. It is important to get a persp~ctive of optometry in 1920. The pro­ fession was legally quite young. It had fought hard to get legislative status, in fact the profession was still not legislatively recognized in two states and had won the milestone Baker case in Texas only the year be­ fore. The Fess bill was viewed, therefore, as an insidious attempt ~Y the medical profession to gain a monopoly on the treatment of the nation s youth. You may be wondering what is my source of information about this bill -44- and optometry's response. The source is The Optical Journal and Review of O~tometry. A nearly complete collection of this journal is located in t e library of the School of Optometry, Indiana University. The Opti­ cal Journal and Review of Optometry (hereafter referred to as the Journal) was a weekly publication at the time. It served as an important means of communication in the young profession. The first mention of the Fess bill in the Journal was in the May 27, 1920 issue. The article is written by P. Scholler of Hancock, Michigan. The article is filled with inflammatory, exorbitant claims as to the ef­ fect of the bill. The editorial of the issue advises the reader to 11 Hatch the Fess Educational Bill". The first evidence of a response by the Ameri­ can Optometric Association is a small item in the October 7 issue, making an urgent plea for money to help the fight against the bill. The item was written by Stanley C. Gray of Toledo, Ohio, the third vice-president of the ADA. From this issue on through the end of the year the Fess bill is the subject of at least one item, and often many, in each issue. The responses of the optometrists to the Fess bill as appearing in the Journal were of three general types. The first was a general protest of the bill, most often made by state and local societies. The other responses were to support the bill \'lith suitable amendments, and, lastly, to kill the bill. Those wanting to fight to defeat the bill, among others, were Mr. Scholler and Mr. Aronsfelrl, the latter well known from Texas. Many state associations and local societies, especially those from the South, sup­ ported this position. The arqument to kill the bill was based on the feel­ ing the bill violated states rights, interfered with individual rights, and meddled in the family. It was called paternalistic, unamerican, autocratic, and even Kaiser-like: If this measure is not defeated .•• We will be in the hands of State t1edicine, and'this is far more dan­ gerous than State Religion .•• The war is over, and paternalistic, and autocratic measures should not be countenanced, whether under the heading of religion, finance, medicine, or education.! This group also had some extremists who grossly exaggerated the effect and purpose of the law, using the most inflated rhetoric: My closing prayer to our chosen leaders is: "Lead us not into temptation to compromise on the Fess or any other similar bill, but to deliver us, our children, and our children's children from the evils of a medical and any other kind of paternalistic, autocratic or bureaucratic government, and to you shall be given theirthanks, praise and glory by every liberty-loving citizen of our beloved country for ever and ever. Amen!" -45- May the 11 Red, Hhite, and Blue 11 continue to float and waft in heaven-born breezes as the true emblem of freedom. And now, everybody, and all together, 11 Kill the Fess bil1. 11 2 Those who chose the moderate response of modifying the bi 11 so as to make it noninjurious to optometry were J. E. Eberhardt of Ohio, among other well-respected optometrists, and the legislative committee of the AOA. The official AOA response was decided at an open meeting on November 6 in Col­ umbus, Ohio, called by Stanley Gray. Resolutions were drafteg and passed stating support of the Fess bill with appropriate amendments. Frank l Mulholland of Cleveland was retained as attorney to represent the associ­ ation in Congress, if the bill should come up during the special session starting in December. The legislative committee was given the job of ex­ panding the resolutions and preparing the amendments. The reasons for amending the Fess bill, as opposed to killing it, \'/ere that its purposes were laudable, that it would most likely be enacted in one form or another eventually, and that other non-medical health profes­ sions, such as osteopathy and dentjstry, could be expected to join in such an attempt. The committee's amendments proposed to make the Fess bill in­ nocuous to optometry by putting the administration of the program entirely under the Bureau of Education, rep 1 ac ~ r1g the term medica 1 examiner by phys i­ cal examiner, specifying that parents have the right to decide to what prac­ titioners to send their children, and penalizing discrimination in referrals made by the school nurses and physical examiners. The amending approach seemed to be the better, because the sponsors of the bill were more likely to be sympathetic to the profession's concerns if support were promised with amendment than if threatened with the attempt to defeat the bill. The hopes for modifying the bill were increased by reply letters from Congressman Fess and Senator Capper to constituent optometrists that were published in the Journal.4,5 Both were willing to have the bill amended so as to injure no profession or group. In the December 30 issue of the Journal a draft of the entire revised Fess bill as grawn up by the AOA legislative committee and Frank Mulholland was printed. The revised bill kept the original purpose of the bill intact while incorporating the chan­ ges mentioned above. ~!hat was the outcome? The Fess bi 11 did not even come up before the Education Subcommittee during the short session. It was reintroduced in the next two Congresses but never got out of committee. The value of examining this 11 crisis 11 in 1920 is that it shows op­ tometry's reaction to an external threat -- undoubtedly like other threats that happened before 1920 and threats extending up to today. The first part of the reaction is detection followed by sounding the alarm to the rest of the profession. This is followed by a discussion of what optometry's response should be. Finally, organized optometry, the AOA, and the state and local associations, using their members and resources, formulate and implement a well thought out response. A by-product of this reaction of optometry to an external threat is the unifying of the profession. -46- I hope you have found this summary of the Fess bill affair to be of some interest. All the cited references are from The Optical Journal a and Revie\·1 of Optometry, Vo1.46 (1920), 1_, p. 1287; 2, pp. 1588-9; 1, pp. 1515-6; i, p. 1731; i' pp. 1883-4; and~' pp. 1879-81. Where does he find them! Dr. James Leeds sent me three of his recent old book acquisitions to look at, just because they are something different. One is titled COURONNE OLYt1PIQUE DU TRAVAIL on the outside hard 1 i nen cover together with the Roman numera 1 date MCt~XXXV II and the en­ graved gold impression of the face of the medal, La Couronne Olympioue du Travail, awarded to John Hamer Sutcliffe in June 1937. The 81 page extensively assembled volume, compiled by C. S. Flick, and published by the Jaunt Council of Qualified Opticians, is elegantly illustrated \oJith numerous photographs and dignified artv1ork. In addition to many biographical details about the recipient of the coveted cro\Atn there are chapters on the history of the International Optical league and of the Belgian and French optical associations plus numerous hits of information about contemporary institutions. Another is a 48 page pamphlet entitled the Seventeenth Annual Re­ port of the Manhattan Eye and Ear Hospital HITH THROAT AND NERVOUS DEPARTr1ENTS, 1886. Included is an etched illustration of the five­ story hospital and a statement that "the hospital is designed for the indigent only, all others are excluded ... " For the 12 months of the report 9,134 patients representing 34 nationalities made 54,246 visits. Types of eye affectations are classified, and names of donors of cash and articles are listed. Among the more than 100 donated articles are such gifts as 7 pairs spectacles, 1 barrel of pears, 4 turkeys, 6 flan­ nel skirts, 2 dozen glasses of jelly, 1 bottle of Jamaica rum and sugar, and 6 washers for faucets. The third is a hardbound 112 page volume entitled TRANSACTIONS OF AN OPTICAL CONVENTION MARKING THE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FIRST EXAMINATION IN VISUAL OPTICS BY THE HORSHIPFUL C0t-1PANY OF SPECTACLE HAKERS, 3rd and 4th November, 1948. It happens to be a complimentary copy once owned by the late C.S. Flick, as indicated by his ink-stamped name and address and the legend on a pasted-in insert. The calibre of the meeting is well documented by the therein published lectures of Sir Hilliam Champness, A. J. Philpot, VI. Swaine, .fl.. G. Bennett, Lord Charn­ wood, H. D. Wright, 11. C. Cinstead, C. S. Flick, H. Hartridge, and H. S. Stiles. One can wonder indeed whether we have added to the prestige of our profession during the subsequent few decades. -47- The meaning of the adjective 11 blind 11 : t~y Webster's 3rd New International unabridged dictionary identifies the derivation of the word 11 blind 11 through ~1iddle English, Old English, nld High German, Old Norse, and Gothic. Etymologically it shares its origin vdth 11 blend'', meaning to mix. Hebster's lists more than a dozen variations of meaning ranging in a visual sense from thP presently familiar 11 lackino the sense of sight 11 and 11 nOt having the faculty of dis'cernment 11 to its more archaic connotations of 11 lacking in sight or briqhtness 11 , 11 dark11 , 11 Unl iqhted 11 , 11 dul1 11 , 11 lacking in lustre11 , and 11 0bscure11 • The equivalent, and in fact identical, German word 11 hlind 11 , pronounced blint, is translated in The Ne1<1 Cassell's German r)ictionary as 11 blind; false, sham; hidden; dim, tarnished, dull; blank; without judgment; daz­ zled. II It is quite tempting to suspect that the ohoneme 11 b1 11 has a primordial onomatopoeic origin as VJell, as may he sugf}ested hy such farnil iar expressions as blurb, blab, blithering, and blah, all of which connote confusion, mix­ ture, and indistinctness, not necessarily a total sensory loss. In only an extreme sense does the adjective 11 bl ind" pertain exclusive- ly to sightlessness or complete absence of any trace of vision. This explains why we resort to such expressions as stone-blind, totally hlind, and complete­ ly blind, for if blindness meant only the absence of any trace of vision these expressions would be inherently redundant. nn the contrarv \'le even have a number of classic terms like form blind, colorblind, night blind, day blind, and snow blind, VJhich identify categorical anomalies of visual capabilities in no sense complete losses of vision. Further we employ rather conveniently definable and readily understood phrases like legal blindness, vocational blindness, economic blindness, and educational blindness, which suggest that for a variety of purposes visual capabilities which are markedly less than typical, average, or normal are not necessarily impairments or handicaps. In short, it is difficult to find a simpler and less unambiguous adjec­ tive or phrase which categorically and imprejudicially includes all levels and kinds of variances of visual capability from broadly accepted norms than the mi 11 eni ally persistent woi·d 11 b 1 in d. 11 Earliest accreditation? A directory of 11 Reputable nptical Colleges 11 ""as published in the Feb­ ruary 15, 1899, issue of The nptical Journal Supplement ( a magazine for students), Vol. 5, No. 2, paqe 63. This serial publication was issued as volume 5 of The Optical Journal during the same year that The Optical Journal itself \Jell-known ophthalmic optical school in Jena, Germany (noltJ Fast C";err.~any). Upon returning to Japan he started practicinq optometry at Ginza, Tokyo, -49- where he, like Dr. Ogawa, met with bitter ophthalmological opposition forcing his closure. He then moved to Chiba, Japan, and began practicing there, where he again met with opposition. Then, 11 Being disappointed he lost his health and regrettably passed away ... Or. Morie adds, 11 At my last meeting with him, he left his words to me representing his severe bitter feelings against the Japan Ophthalmologists' Association. His words are still ringing in my ears. He must be still mortifying, under the ground, the fact that his ideas to serve people of the nation with the theory and technique which he learned \'las destroyed in cold blood ... The Committee on Vision: The National Research Council Committee on Vision, an instrument of the National Academy of Sciences, was first constituted in the early part of 1944 as the Army-Navy-OSRD Vision Committee in response to national defense requirements for advice to the armed forces in areas of visual science. The OSRD was the Office of Scientific Research and Development. The Committee's recognized wartime usefulness in the coordination of basic science efforts with the needs of government agencies resulted in its con­ tinuation and sevelopment to its present status. At present the Committee on Vision is sponsored by the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and five agencies: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA}, the National Eye Institute (NEI), the National Science Foundation (NSF}, and the United States Postal Service (USPS}. Each of these p~esently contributes a fixed sum per year through a contract administered by the Office of Naval Research (ONR}. Agencies also contract with the National Academy of Sciences for specific projects under the auspices of the Committee. The Committee's parent organization, the National Research Council (NRC), is the principal operating arm of the corporate institution, often known simply as 11 the Academy .. , that includes the National lkademy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The origin of this complex '"'as an Act of Congress in 1863 incorporating the National Academy of Sciences as a private body to concern itself with science and technology and to advise federal agencies upon reouest. The National Research Council was created in 1916 to serve as the opera­ ting instrument of the Academy. It has eight major operating elements, one of which is the Assembly of Behavioral an~ Social Sciences within which the Committee on Vision is a unit. Please do not ask me to clarify this. I derived the above painstakingly from an undated 23 x 10 em, eight page pamphlet entitled .. Committee on Vision .. which I received in April, 1979, as an invitee to a symposium sponsored by the Committee. Throughout the years optometrists of academic, research, governmental, military, and clinical practice affiliation have variously been included on the Committee as members, associates, and correspondents. -50- About ~1ach: Ernst Haldfried Joseph Henzel ~1ach, 1838-1916, v.,ras born in Chirlitz, Moravia (now Czechoslovakia). His physics and metaphysics became a recurrent influence on every turn-of the-century scholar from Vladimir Lenin to Albert Einstein. Though he was profession­ ally a physicist, much of his work centered on the peculiarity in visual perception now knovm to us as ~1ach bands. His appointments variously included professorships in mathematics, physics, and philosophy, and for some time he served as rector of the Universi­ ty of Prague. These and many more biographical tidbits are included in an article entitled "Sensation, Shock \11aves, ancl ~ach" by Steven Janke in the March, 1978, issue Number 34 of Better Teaching hy Design, a newsletter published by Pasco Scientific. Noted in passing: T\'10 articles of historical nature appeared in successive is­ sues of the Journal of the American Optometric Association while I v.,ras out of the country in 1975 and were therefore overlooked by me until now. In the August issue, Vo •. 46, No. 8, pages 831-834, t·1r. O.R.M. Sebag-t·1ontefiore wrote quite authoritatively on "The development of the training and qualification of the nritish Op­ tician." In the September issue, Vol. 46, No. 9, pages 900-904, five third-year students at the Southern Co 11 ege of Optometry, rAes­ demoiselles Rosalind Overton, Billie Parks, Becky Rodgers, nonna Rodgers, and Deborah Halter, co-authored "Reginald C. Auqustine: Apostle of optometry." They listed 24 references. Augustine, 1873-1924, was the president of the American ~pta­ metric Association from 1919 to 1921. The article includes a areat deal of personal information about him but, as in so many other men­ tions of him, his middle name is not divulqed. Intriguing. Early honorary AOA members: Mr. Frederick Boger, Editor of the Optical Journal, appears to have been the first person to be named an honorary member of the Ameri­ can Association of Opticians, the founding name of the American Opto­ metric Association. This was in 1910. That the honor was not without substance is indicated by the inclusion of a $100 check in apprecia~ tion of his past services (the e~uivalent of the combined annual dues of 50 members ! ) Others v1ho v1ere named honorary members prior to 1916 included Charles F. Prentice, Earl J. Brown, Frederick A. Wall, and Auaustus A. Downing. I f l l l I l -51- These bits of information 1:1ere uncovered in old journals in which minutes of meetings were published. This search was undertaken in recent months under the direction of the AOA Judicial Council as part of an as­ signment to review all prior policy declarations of the AOA. Other early AOA actions: The same search uncovered some interestino expressions of optometric concern and policy prior to 1916, examples of 1~hich follm'l: 1903: ..... that it be recommended that such steps he taken throuqh our different boards that will disseminate this subject in all its details as we have discussed it through our optical journals and that also an effort be made to have our various optical puhlications carry prominently in some part of their publications a fac simile of Opto-r~etrist with the definition under it and supply the electro plates to the opticians of the countrv at a price which will be a fair nrice to the opticians and yet will cover the ex­ pense of same. 11 1904: 11 The definition of 1 0ptonetrist 1 is '0ne skillec:i in the practice of physiolo!)ical optometry'". 1907 "Resolved, That as the legitimate practice of optometry is beino gradually encroached upon by unscrupulous and incompetent persons hold ina fraudulent diplomas issued by disreputable correspondence schools, and the public wronged and injured by incompetent and unsatisfactory service, and the profession is injured and "Hhereas, Certain trade papers, knm-1ingly or unknm·linf)ly, and certain disreputable persons conducting such schools, by publishing their advertise­ ~ents; therefore, be it "Resolved, .•• that we deplore this state of affairs, and appeal to the legislatures of the several States to enact such legislation as shall put a stop to the methods enployed by disreputable schools, and that \'/e further appeal to all optical trade papers to stop advertisinq such schools •.• " 1907: "Be it resolved, That it is the sense of the A.A.O, that its members shoula not use the title 'Doctor' unless they have obtained that degree from some recognized medical college". 1911: "Resolved, It is the opinion of this association that medical societies would do themselves much greater credit by encouraginq Columbia and other enterprising universities in their efforts for the advancement of science rather than by belittlinq these efforts through giving any fur­ ther publicity to the notoriously false claim that 'the practice of optometry is the practice of medicine.' .. 1915: "Hhereas, r~any optical publications contain advertisements -52- quoting specific prices vvhi ch may cause unnecessary annoyance to the optometrist in relation to his patrons; 11 Resolved, That it is hereby recol!1fllended that this practice be discontinued. 11 Ophthalmic opticians memorialized: The Harrv t~arton L ibrarv has been created in the Department of Ophthalmic Optics of the University of ~ 1anchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST). The J. Stephen Dawson f1emori a 1 l\\·Ja rds have been estab 1 i shed at the London Refraction Hospital. Sutcliffe and the BOA museum: --- flargaret t·~itchell, the first honorary mer1ber of the nntometric Historical Society, has authored a report in a series intitled 11 The BOA f1useum: its origin and development. 11 in the Jl.ugust 29, 1975, issue of the Optician, Vol. 170, number 4397, pages 4, 6, and 7. She takes none of the credit for her m•m career-lonQ years of 1 ibrarv and museum service to the GOA (British Optical Assoc~a~ion). Instead~ she attri­ butes the splendid grovtth of the institution largely to the persistent efforts and drive of J. H. Sutcliffe, founder of the collection. Then in a subseouent issue of the saPlP volume, no. 4399, SPptemher 12, pages 33-34, she describes in Part II some of the museum's hi~h­ lighted acquisitions. Illustrated is the carved statuette of St. nctila from 15th century t,ermany, vJho •,.Jas born h 1 inrl in 650 and becamP the ne1tron saint who gave protection against eye ciisease, and 1·1hose name-sake was the Roman Catholic optical guild of St. Odila. Part III appears in the Sentember 26 issue, no. ~-4~"1, ram~s 33 anrl 35, dealing especially with some amusing curios such as, for example, the 11 jealousy" spyglass, miniature spectacles for dolls, anrl a soectacle frame hewn out of toothbrush handles by an entomologist in a Jananese prisoner-of-war camp. Einstein on liqht: This being the centennial year of AlbertEinstein's birth, articles about him have been appearing in a great variety of science journals. Perhaps the one closest to optometric interest is that which appeared in the I·Jinter 1979 issue of Qptics r!ews, Vol. 5, No. 1, pages 24-39, by Emil Wolf. The title is 11 Einstein's r.esearches on the Nature of Liqht." nr. Half includes theories, researches, and photographs of numerous other opticists as well, in order to fit Einstein's role into proper perspective. -53- Nore on G. H. Giles ---- 11 The George Giles story. Outline of a remarkable career•• by Claude Lyons appears in the October 4, 1975, issue of the Ophthalmic Optician, Vol. 15, no. 19, pages 859-863, 868-870, and 874-875. Supplementary reminiscent comments by six other close associates of Giles follow on pages 875-880. Candid photographs of George in action, recollections of some of his quips and philosophical gems, and personal accounts of many of his accomplishments make this a touching revie\'1 of his life only 10 years after his untimely death. The thousand or more American optometrists Nho became acouainted with r1r. Giles during his whirlwind tour of American optometry schools and colleges in 1954 would find much nostalgia in this article. Local society history: The ~1idland Optical Society, representing the Ophthalmic Opticians of the central counties of England, The Midlands, mainly Birminqham and vicinity, v1as formed in the first decade of this century. The various society secretaries over the years recorded and maintained detailed in­ formation in the minutes book. Roberts S. Green has reviewed these min­ utes in an article entitled 11 t1idland flptics, with special reference to Birmingham and district .. in the August 9, 1975, issue of Ophthalmic Optician, vol. 15, no. 16, pp. 733-734. A special historical value of local society minutes is their inclu­ sion of details and issues very unlikely to be considered in the larger policy-making organizations. Such information, often very personalized and individualized, can permit greater understanding of the events and actions of the time in the same way that we can appreciate a tasty dish better if we know its ingredients. History of color description: ..... philologers have found out that, in their early stages of devel­ opment, all languages have a dearth of color names, .. said navid L. ~1acAdam in his talk given in response to receiving the Frederic Ives Medal from the Optical Society of ,L\.merica in 1974. He also suggested that the first color name occurs in Chapter 25 of Genesis, where Esau is reported to have been born all red and hairy, and that blue, purple, and scarlet are first mentioned in Exodus 26:30. (In my Jerusalem Bible, edited by Alexander Jones, purple, violet, red, and crimson are the colors mentioned in the cited passages.) r·1cAdam's paper then takes us through the use of color terms and formu­ lations by Homer, Aristotle, et al, right up to Herbert Ives, son of Fred­ eric and donor of the medal, who also did significant color research in the thirties. The talk was published in the f·1ay, 1975, issue of the Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 483-493, under the title of 11 Color essays. 11 -54- Public health optometry in Australia: Australian optometrists became officially concerned with the pos­ sible influence of national health insurance legislation on their pro­ fession more than 50 years ago. Brian Layland describes developments, controversies, and manifestations of optometric interest during the half century in a detailed article entitled "Optometry and national health" in the November 1975 issue of the /\ustralian Journal of noto­ metry, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 402-408. T\·lo organizations are mentioned frequently, one the ft.OA, v1hich is of course the Australian Optometrical Association, and the other the Bf'1A, obviously a medical association, but what does the "B" stand for? About Turvi 11 e: Professor G. V. Ball of the University of Aston, Birmingham, remi­ nisces about the late t·1r. Turville in "A. E. Turville remembered" in the July 11, 1975, issue of The Optician, Vol. 170, ~!o. 4390, pages 31-32. He recalls their cooperation in the '30s to provide vision screeninq of freshmen at the university and their many discussions of the use of the "infinity balance" and other ingenious techniques as oarts of the test procedure. Eleven supporting references are listed. Tribute to Feinbloom: "Hilliam Feinhloom: pioneer in plastic contacts" is a ':Jell earned accolade by Henry Knoll in the Jl.ugust 1977 issue of Contact Lens Forum, Vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 29 and 31-32. Evaluations of the role Feinbloorn was playing by such early contemporaries as th~ late Carel Koch and .James P. C. Southall are included. t1uch of his oersonal character is rev~:~aled by this rather brief account. A toast to dear old Maine: If my memory is correct it was Harry Pine who said that 1.·1hen opto­ metry is injured in t·1aine it bleeds in California. l!ell, the ~~aine Optometric Association has survived its injuries ouite well, for in 1976 it celebrated its 75th anniversary. It v1as on the last day of 1900, Dec. 31, that a \1/arrant was issued to a Justice of the Peace whereby a meeting could be called for the purpose of organizing the Maine Association of Opticians early in 1901. Ten years later, on ~1arch 22, 1911, the organization renamed itself the t1aine Association of Optometrists. It assumed its present name on January 14, 1946. These and other details are reported anonymously as the "1'istory of the ~1aine Optometric Association" in the January 1976 issue of the Nev1 England Journal of Optometry, Vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 12-13. -55- A brief visual science chronology: A different way to make a point is undertaken hy R. E. Tina of Vienna in an article entitled "Zeittafel der Sehlehre" (A chronology of visual science) in the December 10, 1978 issue, of Neues Optikerjournal, Vol. 20, No. 12, pages 17-19 & 21. !le lists in their order of occurrence 44 inventions, developments, discoveries, and contributions in visual science beqinning with Helmholtz's ophthalmoscooe in 1850 and concluding vlith r~eynert • s study of the morpholOIJ.Y of the visual cortex in 1868. Each of the 44 entries is summarized in a sentence or a paraqraoh or so, as if to assume that the reader is already reasonably familiar with the scientific fact but might not know its place on a time scale. The effect is moderately startling, almost suqqestinq that the invention of the ophthalmoscope itself was the conception of an explosive era in visual science. Wells a rebel? Yes and no: --- At the age of 18, in 1775, Hilliam Charles Hells sailed from South Carolina, his place of birth, to England, because he would not subscribe to the colonial movement that led to the Har of Independence. Yet his whole personal life seemed to be a series of passionate and violent events fitting his impatient and impetuous nature. He acquired a medical education, but he is chiefly remembered for his 1792 publication of his Essay on Vision. t~any personal details about the man are fascinatingly described hy Simon Behrman in an article entitled, "Hilliam Charles Hells, 1757-1817" in the February 1976 issue of the British Journal of Ophthalmolooy, Vol. 60, No. 2, pages 79-83. Gonioscopy and library tracer elements: Starting with the etymology of the word oonioscopy and the mention of two clinical events that rendered it "an everyday office examination", A. Dellaporta, M.D., then credits Alexios Trantas with the first examination of the angle of the anterior chamber in the living eye in 1899 in an article entitled "Historical Notes on Gonioscopy" in the Septeml:>er-flctober, 1975, issue of Survey Qf Ophthalmology, Vol. 20, ~!o. 2, paqes 137-149. The article is supported by 118 references, numerous illustrations, and interesting bio­ graphical commentary. An interesting sidelight to the author's search for biographical clues was his tracing of the bibliophilic adventures of one of his subjects, Dr. Otto Barkan, through the cards attached to the inside hack covers of Lane Stanford Library books on which were the dates and signatures of the persons who had checked them out! "Father of American Ophthalmology": Such is the accolade given George Frick, t·tD., 1793-1870, who \'Jrote the -56- book entitled 11 A Treatise on the.Disease of the Eye; includinq the doctrines and practice of the most Eminent Modern Surgeons, and par­ ticularly those of Professor Beer, .. published in Raltimore in 1823. The book is reviewed by James s. Kelley, r1.D. in the January­ February 1975 issue of Survey of Ophthalmolog~, Vol. 19, No. 4, pages 255-~60, under the title 11 A Treatise on the D1seases of the Eye: First Amer1can Ophthalmic Textbook (1823) 11 Of Drs. Hermann and Arnold Knapp: 11 The Hermann Knapp r·1enorial Eye Hospital .. is the title of an article by Gordon M. Bruce, M.D., in the January-February 1975 issue of Survey Jrf Ophthalmology, Vol. 19, No. 4, pages 240-247. Dr. Herman Knapp died in 1907 and was succeeded by his son Arnold as Director of the New York Ophthalmic and Aural Institute which later was renamed The Hermann Knapp Memorial Eye Hospital. ~1uch of the article is a deliqhtfully reminiscent account of the related exper1ences of the author and of other persons who knew either or both of the Knapps. The Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers: This is the title of an historical article by Colin J. Eldridge in the April 1979 issue of the Journal of the American Optometric Associ­ ation, Vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 481-483 and 485-487. The trio from Jena: 11 Wie kamder 'Dreiklang Zeiss-Abbe-Schott' in Jena zustande? 11 (How the Zeiss-Abbe-Schott triad of Jena came about) is the title of an article by an anonymous colleague in East Germany which apreared in Neues Optikerjournal, Vol. 20, No. 11, November 10, 1978, pages 33, 35 and 36. It consists primarily of illustrated biographical accounts of Dr. h. c. Carl Zeiss, Ernst Abbe, and Dr. Otto Schott. 90 years of tonometry: Oftal'mologicheskii Zhurnal has an article in Russian by M.E. Vurgaft on (translated) the 90-year usage of applanation tonometry after t1aklakov, Vol. 29, no. 8, 1974, pp. 620-622. The reference is listed by the Visual Science Information Center, 2155 Hehster, San Francisco, California 94115. If an OHS member, or any other volunteer, can read Russian and give even a brief review of this article, the rest of us 1-'lill appreci­ ate it indeed. H. w. Hofstetter, Editor 1979-10-03-001 1979-10-03-002 1979-10-03-003 1979-10-03-004 1979-10-03-005 1979-10-03-006 1979-10-03-007 1979-10-03-008 1979-10-03-009 1979-10-03-010 1979-10-03-011 1979-10-03-012 1979-10-03-013 1979-10-03-014 1979-10-03-015 1979-10-03-016 1979-10-03-017 1979-10-03-018 1979-10-03-019 1979-10-03-020