NEWSLETTER Optometry Librar1 OF THE Vertical File {243 North Vol. 12 ~PTOMETRIC HISTORICAL SOCIETY Lindbergh Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri 63141, U.S.A.) October 1981 Number 4 Concerning dues and dollars: One of the editor•s duties is of course to prod the absent-minded members, probably less than a dozen, who have overlooked the paying of their 1981 dues. Five dollars may be a very nominal item in our indi­ vidual personal budgets, but to the O.H.S. it is the lifeblood. It has been the policy of the OHS to send all Newsletters by ordinary FIRST CLASS mail to expedite their delivery, which, in the U.S.A., means well within the week, but e,lsewhere may mean several weeks as surface mail. The mailing costs therefore absorb the main share of the $5.00. Inasmuch as >-this is an international society there is no moral justification to ~harge higher dues to members who do not happen to reside in the country e:Jin which the Newsletter is published. ?- ~ Because history remains eternally history, the delay is probably of ~o consequence except when a reader wou1d like to make comments to the ~ditor before the next issue goes to press. One overseas member•s ballot arrived weeks after our e 1 ecti on returns were counted, but in this ~nstance his vote was for the already declared winner. Had the returns shown a narrow margin we certainly would have waited until even the most remote overseas ~mber had had time to vote. One member in England suggested that overseas members who would appreciate having their newsletters sent AIRMAIL should include with their dues payments several extra dollars to cover the added cost. The AIRMAIL rate is approximately five times the surface mail FIRST CLASS rate. (HWH) Contributors to ILAMO: A recent memorandum from the International Library, Archives, and Museum of Optometry lists 33 contributors during the one year period of June 12, 1980 to June 19, 1981, as follows: Auxiliary to the AOA Bausch & Lomb SOFLENS Division .L. Lester Beacher,.O.D. Jack W. Bennett, O.D. Charles C. Bradley, O.D. Albert A. Bucar, O.D. Colorado Optometric Association A.P. Cullen, O.D., Ph.D. Earl Dablemont Earl B. Elliott Lowell D. Glatt, O.D. James R. Gregg, O.D. Tole N. Greenstein, O.D. John N. Gunning, O.D. Henry W Hofstetter, O.D., Ph.D. Richard L. Hopping, O.D. Lester E. Janoff, O.D. Felix Koetting, O.D. James F. Koetting, O.D. Davin J. Lee E. Joan Miller Ada Ghormley Owens, O.D. Bernard Paley, O.D. Donald G. Pitts, O.D., Ph.D. Darwin Portman Jack A. Potter, O.D. Joseph F. Schmidt, O.D. Elias Shaneson, O.D. Southern College of Optometry Jacob Staiman, O.D. Lois Kent Tweedle, M.D. Wendell D. Waldie, O.D. Saul J. Wiener, O.D. -62- The various donations included books, audiovisuals, periodicals, mu­ seum items, and archival materials. Of the 33 contributors, 11 were mem­ bers, or prompted by members, of the Optometric Historical Society. Another subsequent memorandum reports the donation of the Darell Boyd Harmon collection by the late Charles M. Drain, O.D., with consent of the DBH Resource Center Board. The Center's donated holdings also contained many of the private papers and library materials of Drs. Sol Lesser and A.M. Skeffington. Better Light Better Sight: Many of us older ones recall this phrase as one which occurred fre­ quently in educational-promotional printed matter, and may have wondered what its origin was. It is fully described in a letter to the editor in the November 1979 issue of LD&A (Lighting Design &~plication), Vol. 9, No. 11, pages 4 and 55, entitled ·nLights out for BLBS Bureau" and signed by 11 Ed Campbe 11". Edward A. Campbell was Manager of the Better Light Better Sight Bureau from 1953 until July 31, 1979, at which time its parent, the Edison Electric Institute (the association of electric companies) closed its doors at 90 Park Avenue, New York City, to establish its headquarters at 1111 19th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20036. The Bureau was formed on August 1, 1934, "to foster a better public understanding of the relationship of light and sight, and of the con­ tribution to better vision made by good light in schools, homes, offices and industry." BLBS News (later called Lighting Magazine) was circulated bi-monthly for about 38 years to over 20,000 readers, mostly school administrators and teachers. The Bureau printed and distributed several million dollars worth of educational materials. One of its most effective projects was the promotion of the BLBS Study Lamp Tag Program, begun in 1956. The Illuminating Engineering Research Institute and Illuminating Engineering Society office personnel developed the illumination requirements for the performance of such a study lamp. A million lamps were put in use by August, 1972. (HWH)_ Optometry in the Netherlands: .. The Nederlandse Unie Van Opticiens (NUVO) and its companion organi- zations have been seeking improvement of their legal status for several years.· In the NUVO journal OCULUS for September 1980, pages 9/5 - 9/23, appeared the lead article, Hoofdartikel, by Drs. W. van den Ende, the administrative secretary of the association, in which is included an ex­ tensive history of the legal status of the profession. The article is, of course, in Dutch, making it quite foreign to almost everybody. Mr. van den Ende has kindly translated into English the main part of the currently proposed Opticians Act, but not the historical review. I can supply a copy on request. -63- The present interpretation of optometry's role in the health field, according to van den Ende, is based on the 11 Medical Profession Act 11 of 1865, amended in 1938, which reads as follows (translated): 11 Practising Medicine, by which the law understands providing medical, surgical, or obstetrical advice or assistance pro­ fessionally, is allowed only to those so qualified by law. By providing advice or assistance as referred to in the preceding is to be understood making it one's profession to examine organs or parts of the human body that are de- ficient in their functions or show any other defects, as well as making it one's profession to recommend means to meet such deficiencies or defects. Providing spectacles and spectacle lenses exclusively on a physician's pre- scription or by selecting the required lenses with the aid of letter charts and trial case, inasmuch as such activities should be so regarded under the first and the second subsection of this section, shall not be deemed to be part of practising medicine. 11 The 1938 amendment involved only the last sentence. (HWH) A letter from Dr. Phei ffer: The So-Called College of Syntonic Optometry :and!!.· Riley Spitler While reading on page 4 of the January, 1981, Vol. 12, No. 1 issue of the Newsletter of the Optometric Historical Society, I encountered the phrases 11so-called College of Syntonic Optometry 11 and Spitler having 11 identified himself as having a Ph.D. 11 My reaction was one of indignation over an apparent 11 put down 11 of Spitler. Whether the author meant to imply a purported or dubious designation, or whether sarcasm was intended (Webster) by the use of the term 11So-called, 11 or whether the term was used completely without an attempt to evaluate is not clear. Al­ though the reference to Spitler having identified himself as having a Ph.D. seemed to support the former view, I think I was most disturbed by the failure to recognize that Spitler had been active in optometric affairs for many years and may well have been responsible for the AOA being chartered in Ohio. Seilig B. Kousnetz wrote a tribute to Spitler in the Optometric Weekly, May 23, 1963. He pointed out that Spitler practiced optometry from 1912 until November 11, 1961; was born in Sydney, Ohio, April 1, 1889; his 11 optometric education started with a textbook of the McCormick Medical School, Chicago; and he later studied under Dr. Sheard at Ohio State University. 11 He also attended Ohio Northern at Ada, Ohio, and studied under Bernarr McFadden at Battle Creek, Michigan. -64- In his book, The Syntonic Principle Its Relationship to Health and Ocular Problems, published in 1941, fie is listed as Harry Riley Spitler, D.O.S., M.D., M.S., Ph.D. It is intriguing to note that the only degree for which I find a date at this time is provided by Kousnetz, 11 the Ph.D. was received for his thesis on the Syntonic Principle in 1941, which is on file in the John Crerar Library in Chicago ... On the title page of The Syntonic Principle it is noted that Spitler was 11 formerly Clinician, Mcfadden Sanitorium, Battle Creek, Michigan; Physician-in-Charge, Crab Orchard Sanitorium, Crab Orchard, Kentucky; Past President, State Board of Optometry, Ohio; Past Fi rs·t Vice President, American Optometric Association; accredited teacher of mechanotherapy and physical therapies since 1925 by Ohio State Medical Board; Past Dean, Department of Mechanotherapy, Metropolitan College; Dean, Central State College of Physiatrics; Fellow, American Acadei11Y of Optometry; Fe 11 ow, Co 11 ege of Syntonic Optometry. 11 In the preface to his book, Spitler showed full knowledge of the acceptance his work would probably receive when he stated 11The author is fully aware that there will be criticism of his material, perhaps his conclusions, and he will welcome constructive criticism by informed and qualified critics, yet in extenuation of his conclusions, he wishes to remind readers that the facts speak for themselves, regardless of his attempts at their explanation. 11 He also addressed the old and continuing problem of clinical re- .. search as follows, 11 It has well been said that clinical results prove nothing. That is true. Yet in all of the biological professions, the clinical test is the final test of effectivity. For that reason a clinical effectivity tabulation of over 3,000 cases has been included in the appendix. 11 In addition to the above noted positions held by Spitler, he was secretary of the Ohio State Optometric Association and then president. Gregg, in his A History of A.O.A. lists Spitler a$ having been a mem­ ber of the Executive Council of the A.O.A. in 1922-23 and 1924-25, second vice president, 1925-26, 1926-27 and first vice-president, 1927-28 (pp. 352-354). Gregg also tells us that 110ne of the most spirited discussions and parliamentary tangles 11 of the 30th annual congress ( 1927) was caused by an amendment to the constitution to permit individual mem­ bership for states that were not affiliated with the A.O.A. President Mayer 11 turned the gavel over to Vice President Spitler and urged pas­ sage of the original amendment, telling of his experience in some of the states. His words lead to the defeat of the Armstrong substitute; but the original also lost, failing to get the necessary two-thirds. 11 (pg. 115} During this early period, the A.O.A. was constantly working at changing its constitution and often with such furor that solutions were not reached. The constitutional dilemma of the 1926 convention was resolved by selecting a committee to draw up a constitution for consideration by the 1927 convention thereby enabling adjournment sine die at 1:20 a.m., 11 ••• the late hours showing how difficult the problem had been ... One of the members of this committee was HQ Riley Spitler. (pg. 109} -65- The charter of the A.O.A. received considerable attention during the 1923 convention i·n Chicago. The charter, held in Ohio, required the A.O.A. to meet in Ohio every year. Since this had not been done there was some question as to whether the charter was valid. As Gregg points out, " ••• the Secretary of State could not even find a copy of the original charter." (pg. 93) This all lead to the securing of a charter in Alabama by J.H. Tinder (which is another human interest story in itself) and the endorsement of a new constitution. With the incorporation in Alabama, W.C. Nicum began the necessary steps to dissolve the 1918 Ohio charter. "However, H. Riley Spitler of Ohio had obtained a restraining order from a Dayton court to prevent the charter dissolution." (pg. 101) The conflict was resolved on the advice of Orvel Johnson, A.O.A. attorney, and by President Thomas Martin who favored the Ohio method. Thus, the A.O.A. continued its charter in Ohio even though it had adopted a constitution during the past year to fit the Alabama charter and therein lies still another story. During these days when optometry is so engrossed in the question of drug legislation, it is interesting to note Spitler's position on drugs. "Though qua 1 i fi ed to use drugs, he preferred drugless.healing in his clinic and prescribed drugs on rare oc­ casions. Dr. Spitler was convinced optometry must remain a strictly drugless profession and could be a great help in the battle of preventing blindness." (Kousnetz) It would seem reasonable to conclude that, today, Spitler would be a strong proponent of holistic medicine. As for the "so-called" College of Syntonic Optometry, the 49th Annual Convention was held May 30-June 1,1981, in Kansas City, Missouri. Both basic and advanced courses in the use of the Syntonic Principle were presented. So, to keep the record straight, the College of Syntonic Optometry exists today. Spitler's material is being taught and it is relatively easy to find many optometrists, through the west and midwest at least, who still use the Syntonic Principles. 1926 eye fashion: Chester H. Phei ffer College of Optometry Northeastern State University Tahlequah, Oklahoma On October 19, 1926, two patent applications, Serial nos. 19,412 and 19,414, were filed with the United States Patent Office for designs for lens frames for spectacles. The total descriptive legend for each consisted of the following: I i -66- Be it known that I, Ernest E. Emons, a citizen of the United States, residing at Philadelphia, in the county of Philadelphia and state of Pennsylvania, have invented. a new, original, and ornamental Design for a Lens Frame for Spectacles, of which the following is a specification, reference being had to the accompanying drawing, forming a part thereof. Figure 1 is a front elevation of a lens frame for a spectacle showing mY new design. Figure 2 is an end edge view of the same. Figure 3 is a top edge view thereof, What I claim is: The ornamental design for a lens frame for spectacles as shown. ERNEST E. EMONS #19,412 #19,414 .Ftg.1 ... ~a. '"' "' crt::: 2"; -67- Both patents were granted on July 19, 1927, with the illustrations and abstracts published in the Official Gazette of the U.S. Patent Office, GPO, 1927, Vol. 360, p. 589 as entry nos-. 73,075 and 73,076. One-half of the patent rights of each was assigned to Robert W. Hillier, Akron, Ohio. The 1926 Blue Book of Optometrists & Opticians and the immediately prior editions list Emons as an optometrist in Akron, Ohio. The 1928 Blue Book and the subsequent editions show him at a Philadelphia address corresponding to that of Haussman & Co. Mr. Hillier is not identifiable in the Blue Books of that period. On the same page of the above-cited gazette is shown the below­ illustrated "eyeglass frame" as entry no. 73,077 patented on the same day by John Gaspari, New York, N.Y., and assigned to De Luxe Optical Co., Inc., New York, N.Y. The application for this one had been filed on April 6, 1927 as Serial No. 21,495. Neither Gaspari's name nor that of the optical company appear in the Blue Books of that period. Aside from the fact that these three designs were patented for their ornamental rather than structural and functional features and therefore are indicative of spectacle fashion trends of the day, there is the surprising absence of specifications and description to point up what features of the design were invented or newly conceived. (HWH) A gallery of phoropters? A telephone call from John Geiser, O.D., of Lacon, Illinois, turned out to be a request for advice as to the value of an early DeZeng phoropter as a collectible. It had been suggested to him by an optical company representative that it should be insured because it probably has a value of two or three thousand dollars as a rarity. -68- For the most part the monetary value of a collectible is a function of competetive demand and bidding by two or more collectors. I could not name even one person who makes a determined hobby, or business, of de­ veloping a phoropter collection. Nevertheless the idea is fascinating and, if carried out, could prove of historical, if not monetary, value. (HWH) The Ghost of Aronsfeld Appears: Charles R. Steward, O.D., Ph.D., of the University of Houston School of Optometry, wrote recently: 11 In doing some house cleaning I ran across the enclosed papers by Henry Aron~feld. I think you will recognize their significance. Aronsfeld's practice was continued by Max Levy, who re­ cently retired and works for the College in one of our external clinics ... G. Henry Aronsfeld, O.D., D.D.S., of Houston, Texas, died on July 24, 1947, at the age of 62. A brief obituary appeared in the August 7, 1947, issue of the Optometric Weekly, Vol. 38, No. 32, p. 1232, and an editorial accolade entitled 11Aronsfeld of Texas 11 and two lamenting let­ ters from readers appeared in the August 15, 1947, issue of the Optical Journal and Review of Optometry, Vol. 84, No. 16, pages 49-50. One of AronsfeldTS numerous published articles and letters appeared posthumously in the latter journal. A picture of him, with other members of the Texas State Board, taken at his home, is in the October 21, 1927, issue of the Optical Journal and Review of Optometry, Vol. 60, No. 16, p. 38. Aronsfeld was active and outspoken in professional affairs throughout his career, greatly enhanced by his very sharp and prolific pen. During Augustine's first term in the American Optometric Association presidency in 1918-19 Dr. Aronsfeld served as 3rd Vice President. In the early '20s he was a member of the Truth-in-Print Corrvnittee, and he gave an educa­ tional lecture at the 1925 AOA Congress. A long-time regular attender of national optometry conventions, he was one of the very vocal participants in the 1938 11 Battle of Richmond" convention where he obtained the privilege of the floor as a "credentialed delegate of New Mexico 11 rather than of his own state of Texas. The two very yellowed documents sent to me by Dr. Stewart, one a typewritten carbon copy and the other a typed mimeographed copy, were both 11 PREPARED FOR DISTRIBUTION TO OPTOMETRISTS ( 1938). 11 Apparently neither was published. It is very probable that he handed out copies at the memorable Richmond convention. In any case they pointedly reflect from one point of view the most burning politico-professional issue of that era for American optometry. They are therefore both reprinted in full here, as follows. (HWH) LET'S CONSULT THE RECORD In the Optical Journal on page 19 of the issue for June 1, 1938, in the editorial "False lssues, 11 the editor has epit­ omized the s i tua ti on con fran ti ng optometry in a few we 11 chosen words. There can be no dispute as to the accuracy of the statements made, nor can there be any doubt as to the correctness of the analysis or the soundness of the conclusion which the editor has reached. -69- It had been mY firm intention not to discuss the Extension Program any further, but very recently there have appeared in different magazines articles which are definitely in­ tended to confuse the reader and to becloud the very im­ portant issues with which optometry, optometrists, and, particularly, the A.O.A. are now faced. These issues cannot be avoided. They must be faced squarely, honestly and with finality. It seems to be the evident intention of those who see the much vaunted Extension Program as a vehicle for personal aggrandizement, optometric fascism, and the utter destruc­ tion of all reasonable and logical thought, to make the casual reader believe that they are carrying the fight against those who would plunge Optometry into the field of limited medical practice. IN OTHER WORDS, THEY ~~OULD TRY TO MAKE US BELIEVE THAT THE CONFLICT IS BETWEEN EXTENSIONISTS, ON THE ONE HAND, AND EXPANSIONISTS, ON THE OTHER. THAT THE STATEMENT ON THIS PREMISE IS AS FALLACIOUS AS THE POLITICAL AND SO CALLED EDUCATIONAL PROPAGANDA PUT OUT BY THE OPTO­ METRIC EXTENSION PROGRAM, THE WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE WILL ATTEMPT TO PROVE. First, let me make mY position absolutely plain. I stand for square dealing with optometrists and with mem­ bers of other professions. I believe, with every fibre of mY being, that Optometry must, should, and will ultimately have exclusive rights in the fields of refraction and orthoptics. I believe that these rights will be won by pre-eminence in these fields and that, eventually, they will be recognized by legislative en­ actment. I am unequivocally opposed to any excursions into the field of medical practice, irrespective of whether such methods are known by the name of syntoni cs, chrome-orthoptics, or limited medical privileges. They are, in most cases, honest and sincere, but I also believe that they are mistaken and misguided. This is mY own opinion, humbly expressed, and must be taken as that, no more, no less. I definitely dispute the sincerity of the Extension Program political dictators and I believe that they realize that their Waterloo is. at hand and, in an attempt to delay the fatal day, they are trying to make us believe that they want to save us from the Expansionists. The first time that I ever heard Dr. Skeffington lecture he used a tongue depressor in a child's mouth and said, "These tonsils are bad". I asked him if he would have been able to tell about tonsils if they had looked n(}rmal to him but were, in fact, filled with pus which only the pressure of an instrument would have revealed. His answer was that he would not have gone that far. At -70- the subsequent lecture, I heard him say, "Only the optometrist can de a 1 with pos t-neuri tic atrophy." He is the author of the so-called slogan, "To Optometry shall be allocated all eye diagnosis", and the merest tyro knows that this would throw us right into the field of ophthalmological practice. He was summoned before a member of the Texas State Board of Examiners in Optometry because he had said in an interview that, in the future, eyes would be treated with hypnotism and not with glasses. The certified copy of a Court Reporter's steno­ graphic notes are illuminating and informative as to many phases of his activities. He used the words, "treatment" and "diagnosis" to the point of nausea in his literature, and only a warning that the continuance of such law violations would make him subject to Board action caused him to desist. His reply to those who were trying to keep optometrists within the legal)y and educationally accredited field of Optometry was that they were destructive minded. I could go on citing incidents, for every one of which I have authentic documentary proof, but what I have written should suffice for any except those who are wedded, body and soul, to the progenitors of the new Optometry at $34.00 each. The business head of the Extension Program was once arrested in Texas and charged with a violation of the Texas Medical Practice Act, and the Texas Optometric Association spent badly needed funds to have him released from the custody of a Texas sheriff, as we could not have a violation of this kind published. AND THESE ARE THE MEN WHO NOW STANO FOR OPTOMETRY, PURE AND UNDEFILED, AND PLEAD WITH US THAT THEY CONTINUE AS OUR LEADERS IN ORDER TO PREVENT OUR BEING TAKEN OVER BY THE EXPANSIONISTS. The day has come for Optometry to assert i tse 1 f. We have had enough of s 1 ogans , "Education and Legis 1 a ti on", "All opposition to us must be stilled", and "The rest of Optometry can go to smash but the Extension Program must continue". At the 1934 Convention of the Texas Optometric Association, after Alexander had made an impassioned speech (He was granted the floor, as a courtesy, on ll1Y motion), the T.O.A. defeated a resolution which would have made it impossible for officials of organized Optometry to have anything of any nature to sell to their brother optometrists. I had a similar resolution prepared for submission to the A.O.A. at Toronto, but those who had promised it support found that they had to withdraw their promise. The reason for such withdrawal I leave to the thinking readers of this article. Several of those who disagreed with ll1Y views then have come out with definite statements that the principle of no fi­ nancial interest on the part of A.O.A. and State Officials is the only honest, ethical, and proper principle and the one that must be adopted if Optometry is to survive. The control or attempt to control the thoughts of men must be stopped. -71- The tyranny which is being exercised over schools and state boards must be ended. Optometric education is needed and needed badly but it must and will come from those who are qualified and, preferably, from those associated with optometric institutions of learning. I believe that the future will show that the Expansionists are wrong. I KNOW THAT NO PROFESSION CAN SURVIVE UNDER THE CONDITIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN FORCED UPON IT BY THE INANE SOPHISTRIES AND THE MEANINGLESS TAUTOLOGY OF THE MOUTHPIECES OF THE EXTENSION PROGRAM. To mY brother and sister optometrists, I offer this final plea: Do not be misled, because at this juncture of Optometry's progress mistakes may be costly and irremediable. The fight is not between extensionists and expansionists. It is most decidedly between the extensionists and those who see in Optometry something fine and something good and who wish to use it as a vehicle for the protection, conser­ vation, and improvement of human vision and not as a means of victimizing and fleecing their fellow practitioners or the public whom they serve. Yes, LET'S CONSULT THE RECORD AND, REMEMBERING THE GREAT LESSON OF HISTORY THAT COMING EVENTS CAST THEIR SHADOW BEFORE THEM, LET US STRIKE THE SHACKLES OFF THE HANDS AND FEET OF OPTOMETRY AND LET OUR PROFESSION GO FORWARD, HONESTLY, FEARLESSLY, AND ETHICALLY TO HER PROPER AND ULTIMATE DESTINY. I have in mY heart bitterness toward no optometrist who does not happen to agree with me but the time is past for soft words and placating gestures. We need action, " ••• virile, constructirve and intelligent action,~· ••• and it is mY sincere hope and fervent prayer that we may get it here at Richmond. WANTED- A PILOT. "God gives us men. A time 1 ike this demands Strong minds, great hearts, true faith and ready hands! Men whom the 1 us t of office does not k i 11, Men whom the spoils of office cannot but, Men who possess opinions and a will, Men who love honor, men who cannot lie. J.G. Holland- WANTED." -72- Early this year, I lectured at the Los Angeles School of Optometry and also at the University of California at Berkeley, and one of IT\Y lectures was 11Wanted - A Compass for Optometry ... Another optometrist suggested, as a title for a future address or paper, 11Wanted- A Pilot 11 , and I am here trying to carry out that suggestion. During the course of IT\Y talk I mentioned the fact, in IT\Y opinion, •we have suffered from those who have given us an Optometric Ku Klux Klan because with it there ~has come the same inef­ ficient leadership which the Ku Klux Klan gave to those sections where it had power. We should elect to optometric leadership only those who have the courage, ability, and integrity which leaders must have. Only disaster can result when we vote for city, county, state or national officers on the basis of religion, social status, or any­ thing else except ability and integrity, and the same is true of Optometry•. Let us now analyze this statement and see what a close re­ semblance certain conditions, now existing in Optometry, bear to conditions which existed in those sections of the country which suffered from the blighting influence of the Klan after the great war. Those who wear the square and compass and who have been taught, as Kipling says, 11 To meet upon the level and to part upon the square 11 , know what internal dissension was brought about within the ranks of that order, and how, in many instances, disaffection and loss of influence resulted. It is a known fact that, from Constable to U.S. Senator, we had to suffer under a type of political office holders the like of which had not been seen since the days of the 11 Carpet­ baggers11 after the Civil War. The Klan had a unique way of doing its work. They posed as the protectors of womanhood and, yet, one of their outstanding leaders - in fact the second-in-command - was sent to the penitentiary for violating the Mann White Slave Act. It preached 100% Americanism and yet denied large classes of Americans the rights guaranteed to them under that immortal document, the Constitution of the United States. It threatened wrong-doers with persecution unless they joined, and then it covered up misdeeds of its members. Some of its leaders had been dismal failures in other walks of life but they waxed fat in fees and on commissions on regalia. In short, it was a disorganizing influence calculated to benefit only those who received hard earned cash for memberships, uniforms, and the like. And now let us see what has happened to Optometry since we have had our Optometric Ku Klux Klan. Professionalism has been shouted from the house-tops, and among the leaders in this movement we see employees of corporations -73- conducting the most questionable kinds of practices and engaging in nauseating paeans of self praise in their paid advertisements. Legislative campaigns have been hindered and crippled because those who were selling so-called education stressed the slogan, 11 Al1 education but no legislation or litigation 11 • So offensive and intolerable did this condition become that the President of one of our 1 arges t state optometric associations was cofl1)e 11 ed to issue a vitriolic statement in which he showed exactly what was going on and exposed the nefarious work of those who were 11Saving Optometry .. (?) so that their own pockets might be lined with easy money obtained from optometrists and who made no secret of their creed that, 11 0ptometry can go to smash but our work must go on 11 • A campaign of vilification, slander, and abuse was directed and carried on against not only those who opposed but those who, acting well within their rights as American citizens, simply refused to participate in something which they could not, in conscience, support. Another slogan coined, and frequently used in print, was 11 all opposition must be stilled11 , and this in the America of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, where free speech and a free press ARE GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION! Seeds of suspicion have been carefully and widely sown, and optometrist was arrayed against optometrist. Susceptible and easy-going individuals were told that unless they joined this great 11 Uplift movement 11 they would soon be unable to continue in profitable practice but IF THEY DID JOIN t~ey would soon be classed amant THE GREAT ONES OF OPTOMETRY. In one case a complaint was made to the president of a state board that the law was being violated in the office of a state board member, who was at that time in a hos­ pital and at DEATH'S DOOR. The complainant stated, without shame, that this violation could have been overlooked if this board member had not been opposing the movement. HOW VERY MUCH LIKE THE KLAN! Unethical, improper, and reprehensible efforts were made to FORCE colleges, schools, and universities to fall in line and some of them did. State board members and others were threatened with POLITICAL EXTINCTION if they would not agree to bow meekly to the dictates and mandates of the higher-ups. At the Rochester convention a committee, headed by one of the country's leading educators, was almost destroyed by the 11 leader 11 , of the movement, supported by proxies, because this committee wanted Education to be in the hands of Educators. Certainly a heinous crime~!! Fortunately, the A.O.A. Directors had the courage and the good sense to over-ride the delegates and the Com- mi ttee was kept a 1 i ve. -74- And what has been the total result in terms of Optometry? It is true that much expensive equipment has been sold- the supply house will testify to that- and it is also true that many men have been urged to study, but only that material which was sent to them. The use of modern instruments - if such use is intelligent and proper - can only result in good, but when study courses con­ sist of the READING OF PREPARED PAPERS, which neither the reader nor his listeners understand, then this falls far short of what normal individuals believe to be true education. Also let us remember that some of those who started out as SINCERE STUDENTS became hopelessly confused and thoroughly discouraged - if not entirely disgusted - and some of them began to believe that ALL EDUCATION WAS OF THE SAME KIND and that further efforts would prove to be equally useless and devoid of any benefit. Some of those disillusioned individuals have decided that their old ways were best, and this is most unfortunate as much room for improvement existed and now exists and this could have been met by REAL EDUCATION GIVEN BY REAL EDUCATORS. Pontifical advice has been given about every phase of Optometry by those who have never been able to make a success of Optometric practice or of other endeavors. Those who presumed to argue a point, now or then, - even though they were graduates of some splendid university -were hushed by supercilious 11 leaders 11 who told them that they simply did not understand the 11 New Optometry.. (?). Many are there who have privately and secretly confessed that 11This thing works much better on paper than it does in the examination room 11 and yet some of those same men and women - no doubt under pressure ~ have signed flowery testimonials as to the great good which they were experiencing and the lavish benefits which they were receiving. AND NOW THE GREATEST WRONG OF ALL IS THE SERVILE LEADERSHIP (?)WHICH THE OPTOMETRIC KU KLUX KLAN GAVE TO OPTOMETRY. Men were selected ONLY because of their affiliation and because of their wTTTlngness to take orders and FOR NO OTHER REASON. Of course, there were exceptions, but they were few and far between, and mostly THEIR SELECTION WAS A POLITICAL DEFEAT FOR THE SELF-STYLED 11 GANG 11 • AND WHAT HAS BEEN THE NET RESULT? In many cases we have been an aimless drifting and in others we have seen VITAL, URGENT, BADlY NEEDED, AND CONSTRUCTIVE activities side-tracked and neglected just because 11 the powers that be 11 wanted their own PRIVATE AND HIGHLY REMUNERATIVE ACTIVITY TO REMAIN THE ALPHA AND OMEGA OF AMERICAN OPTOMETRY! -75- And now what should be the qualifications which should fit one for Optometric Leadership? Let us carefully study them. To leadership in Optometry we should select those and those ~who possess at least a majority of the following quaTifications, and each and every leader should possess them: - He or she should be old enough to be mature, and young enough to possess the boundless energy required; He should be well trained optometrically and academically and, if possible, he should be one who has made a success of his practice; He should be well balanced, mentally, and acceptable, socially, and should have the ability to think straight and to reason logically; He should be honest. to a fault and should be willing to forget and forgive the drab past in favor of the roseate future; · He should be the 11 Captain of his own soul" and the master of his own opinions and have the courage of his convictions and the ability to voice them when Optometry demands that he do so; He should be firm in his convictions, willing to listen to advice and able to judge its worthiness and should be neither stubborn nor vacillating; He should be sure of himself and convinced in his own mind that Optometry is a profession which offers a broad and ample field of human service and which needs no appendages of a non-optometric nature; He should have nothing to sell to his brother optometrists and should be willing to give generously of himself and his knowledge; He should be a man of broad vision who looks beyond the expediency of the moment and considers the needs of the future. He should have neither friends to reward nor enemies to punish and should know the needs of Optometry and how to meet them. God grant that we may find many such men (and women) because if we do we can say with Kipling, when we need constructive leadership in our own councils or in meetings with other, and perhaps antagonistic, groups: 11 But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed nor Birth When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth! 11 1915 optometry .Q!!. di sp 1 ay: A replica of an optometry office of 1915 vintage is an exhibit feature at the new nine million dollar Heritage Center on the grounds of the state capitol at Bismarck, North Dakota. The Heritage Center serves as the home of the state historical society, museum, and archives. The display includes a life-size model of an optometrist and of a patient, both in period attire. The equipment and furnishings -76- are those which were in use in 1915. The assembler and designer of the project was William Austin, O.D., a past president of the North Dakota Optometric Association who spent many days on the road to collect authentic material and ideas from his fellow optometrists. A full page description with illustrations is in the July 1, 1981 issue of the American Optometric Association News, Vol. 20, no. 13, page 5. Incidentally, word has it that Dr. Austin (Box 876, Bismarck, North Dakota 58501, telephone 701-255-0186) is quite willing to present a slide show and oral repo~t on the project. A tribute to ILAMO: On North Dakota Optometric Association letterhead Immediate Past President William G. Austin, 0.0., has written to ILAMO Archivist Maria Dablemont a glowing essay on the role of history, obviously prompted by his stimulating experience with the Optometric Period Room in the Herit­ age Center on the North Dakota Capitol grounds. Three paragraphs of the totally heartwarming ten-paragraph letter are as follows: This is the only Optometric Museum incorporated in a state museum in the United States, to mY knowledge. When this $100,000 exhibit is turned over to the State of North Dakota, it will be an important step in the general history of Optometry. With the emphasis the last 15 years on education, third party care, government action and reaction, the various drug and legislative programs, and anticipating future challenges, it becomes easy to overlook the necessity to look back, place the history of Optometry in proper perspective to learn from it, and to perpetuate and pre­ serve not only historical memorabilia, but today's history, for future generations to build upon. Scant attention has been paid to ILAMO, and the important role it was formed and created to fulfill. It is with this in mind that I want to thank you for the help you and ILAMO have supplied us here in North Dakota with, but to encourage you to continue, aggressively, to do more of this for other groups, states, and organizations. 75 years of lighting: 1981 is the 75th anniversary year of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, the IESNA, more familiarly known as the IES, known in turn to optometry students as a part of the title of the IES Lighting Handbook, now in its 6th edition. Included in the August 1981 issue of LOA (Lighting Design & Application), an IESNA publication, Vol. 11, No.8, pp. 54-63, is an article entitled "Guiding lights- the IES past presidents, .. consisting of letters expressing the thoughts and remembrances of most of the living past presidents. The earliest is from Julius Daniels, president in 1931-32. Supplementary to the article are photographs of 75 of the 76 presidents since the founding of the Society. Many of their names are well established in the field of visual science. -77- More on der Meissner: ____ .:...;..;;...;..,;~;.;:;..;._ In the April 1974 issue, page 22, I asked who Meissner was, as someone named Meissner had been suggested to me years earlier without explanation as the first optometrist in a letter from the late Gordon L. Walls. Later in the October 1977 issue, pages 62-64, I had re­ ported researching the literature a bit methodically and satisfied fi\YSelf that 11 the Meissner .. was a minstrel so identified as a resident of the German town of Meissen who had made poetic reference to a simple hand held reading glass. I remarked that 11 English-writing authors ••• treat the noun Meissner as though it were the surname." What I then did not ascertain was who initially and authori­ tatively presumed that Meissner was the name of a person and there­ by lured subsequent English-writing authors, including Walls and me, into the same error. I rather think now that I have identified the responsible party, a writer of considerable stature in the optical literature, none other than Frank Twyman, 11 F.R.S., Managing Director of Adam Hilger Ltd. from 1904 to 1946 and Past President of the Optical Society and of the British Optical Instrument Manufacturers• Association", and author of the entry entitled 11 Lenses 11 in the Four­ teenth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1929. His statement in the 1929 article reads as follows: We must come to the end of the 13th century for the first authentic mention of the use of lenses, which appears to be that of Meissner (1260-80) when he expressly states that old people derive advantage from spectacles (see E. Bock, DIE BRILLE U. IHRE GESCHICHTE 1903). The precisely identical statement appears in Twyman's 1952 edition of PRISM AND LENS MAKING and in his 1955 edition of OPTICAL GLASSWORKING. It is of course possible that Twyman derived the statement from a prior English-writing author, but his specific reference to Bock suggests merely his grossly inaccurate reading of Bock's German. (HWH) History of Australian Optometry: On page 18 of the January 1980 issue of this newsletter I very briefly called attention to an article in the June 1979 issue of the Australian Journal of Optometry entitled 11Sixty Years of Optometry .. by Charles Wright. -x letter of appreciation from historian Charles made me aware that this was only one of a series of five installments, the last of the series in fact. Because both Penisten and I have been peripatetically inconvenienced this past year we were unable to get our hands on all of the installments, especially since the 1979 issues, Vol. 62, were in the bindery at the time of one home visit. At last, however, the complete series can be listed as January, No. 1, pp. 20-23; March, No. 3, pp. 108-113; April, No. 4, pp. 158-160; May, No. 5, pp. 203-209; and June, No. 6, pp. 252-255. Altogether the series, under one title, covers a wide range of phases, the publications, the politics, education, organizational development, and personalities, with numerous illustrations and docu- mentation. (HWH) -78- Recalled about Dean Alpheus Smith: Following up Howard Haines• comments on Alpheus Smith in the last issue Henry Knoll wrote to mention one of his own remembrances of Smith. While enrolled in Graduate School at The Ohio State University and work­ ing toward his Ph.D. degree in Physiological Optics in the middle '40s, reports Knoll, 11 I do remember one afternoon he and David Volk came into the physiological optics lab with the intent of identifying the entoptic colors associated with Professor Smith's macular degeneration. That's as much as I can recall. I'm sure that Professor Smith understood the con­ sequences of his macular disease, but he was willing to add to our knowl­ edge -- if that was possible ... Yes, and I too am reminded that I may have been the first to record the deterioration of Dr. Smith's acuity in perhaps the fall of 1948 when he came to me to report the acuity loss which he suspected to be due to solar fixation damage from driving into the setting or rising sun on a just completed trip to California and back. Then in the spring of 1949 after I had been Dean at the Los Angeles College of Optometry for only a few months he dropped in for a visit, probably the most important person in mY career checking on mY progress! As I showed him around the institution I was apparently a bit apologetic about my limited accomplishments to date. He then took me aside to advise that I should not try to measure my progress from day to day, month to month, or even from year to year, as it would be so discouraging. Rather I should merely make note of the conditions upon mY arrival, compare them years later with the condition upon mY departure, and then take credit, or blame, for the changes! On another occasion, during his retirement, I, with Glenn Fry, visited him at his home in Columbus, Ohio. I asked him his views on some current controversy of whether or not a university should include vocational courses among its offerings. He replied simply that he saw no reason why the boy learning to cut meat and the girl enrolled in Shakespeare shouldn't stroll down the 11 long walk 11 (on the O.S.U. campus) together and study in the same library. (HWH) Pleasant reading: If you read German you will be delighted to read a cardback booklet entitled 11 KONKAV-KONVEX: Zur Geschichte der Brille 11 (on the history of spectacles) recently loaned to me by mY colleague Clifford Brooks who received it as a memento of the Zeiss plant in Oberkochen, West Germany. Only 80 pages, 188xll5x5 mm in size, illustrated with numerous classic­ seeming line cuts, authored by Gunter Doderlein, and imprinted by Optisches Museum, Zeiss Oberkochen, West Germany, 1978, it treats the history of spectacles in a pleasantly light but reliably informative vein. For example, (translated) 11The spectacle peddler was soon some­ thing special, bringing forth the marvel that one could again read his song book. 11 -79- In what may be the world's shortest preface, the author says (trans­ lated), "To want to set forth the history of spectacles in a small volume borders on frivolity. But sometirres even frivolity leads to fortune." The chapter headings themselves tell a story, as follows (translated): Kaiser Nero - A Spectacle Wearer? Concerning Eyes and ·Seeing "Berille-Parillen-Brille" (Evolution of the German word Brille for spectacles from the early German word Berille for beryl) At First the "Nietbrille" (rivited joint spectacles) The Discovery at Wienhausen (near Celle, West Germany) The Spectaclemaker The Spectacle Merchant Spectacles and Vanity Then the "Bligelbrille" (nose-bridge spectacles) An Alchemist's Glasses The "Mutzenbrille" (headband supported glasses) Spectacles and the Plastic Arts Spectacles in the far East Linked, Hinged, and Folding Glasses The Pi nce-nez Goethe supported his Glasses by a Handle The Monacle Browband Spectacles Then over both Ears Concerning Pince-nez or Oxfords Raging young Men and the Inquisition 'The Zeiss Optical Museum at Oberkochen (HWH) History of an Australian ~hospital: The May 1976 issue of the Australian Journal of Oehthalmology, Vol. 4, No. 2, pages 116-121, carried an art1cle by S. Gill1s, W. Deane­ Butcher, and E.J. Donaldson entitled, "Sydney Eye Hospital - the wider view" tracing the history of the hospital back to the establishment of an Ophthalmic Department of Sydney Hospital in 1879. In 1882 it became a Branch Establishment at Moorecliff in three attractive houses on the promontory of Miller's Point opposite Balmain, a suburb of Sydney. One of the three houses had been the residence of Dr. William Bland, "the first private practitioner in Sydney and a pioneer in Australia." The eye hospital is presently located in Woolloomooloo in a building constructed in 1971. In connection with the eye hospital's early history the authors state, "This was a period of enormous developments in ophthalmology, which was emerging as a specialty in the nineteenth century from the .era, delineated by Fabricius• recognition of the lens and Kepler's advances in optics in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, and Brisseau•s discovery of the nature of cataract and Daviel's in­ vention of cataract in the eighteenth". Girolamo Fabrici (ca. 1533-1619): The preceding reference to Fabricius as the person responsible for -80- establishing the position of the crystalline lens prompted the checking of his identity. Girolamo Fabrici, or Fabricius ab Aquapendente, or Geronimo Fabrizio, was born in Aquapendente, near Orvieto, about 60 mi1es (90 km) northwest of Rome, Italy. His interesting biography rates five full pages in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, 1971, in which he is identified with anatoll'\Y, physiology, embryology, and surgery. (HWH) Precision judgment: The passing of a Benefit and Accident Insurance Law in 1884, in Germany, prompted the publication of a series of essays by Hugo Magnus, M.D., 1842-1907, Professor of Ophthalmology at the University of Breslau, leading to his mathematical formulation of damages sustained in eye in­ juries. His efforts were contemporary with the formation of mathematical expressions for sustained visual efficiency by German authors Groenouw, Zehender, and Heddaeus. The large circulation of Magnus's 1894 Manual, and its 1897 revision, induced an American ophthalmologist, H.V. Wurdemann, M.D., of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to translate and re-write the material in English to be published as a book in 1902 with the title 11 Visual Economics 11 by H. Magnus and H.V. Wurdemann, C. Porth, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The authors credited Zehender with the concept of giving the intact eye twice the arithmetical weight of the lost or injured eye, whereby one-eyedness would represent two-thirds the visual faculty of two eyes, i.e., the loss of one eye would be equal to one-third total blindness in terms of the economic evaluation of earning power. They attributed to Groenouv1 the inclusion of the loss of peripheral vision as a multiplicand in the formulation. To Heddaeus they ascribed the suggestion that the loss of earning power is equal to the square of the loss of vision, where­ by a 25% loss of vision would be appraised as a 6.25% loss of earning power, a 50% loss of vision would be a 25% loss of earning power, etc. The Magnus and Wurdemann formulation then took the prize for co~ plexity. Here it is, as published: in which E =earning ability C = the acuity factor to be obtained from a prepared table or formula which takes into account the Snellen acuity before and after the injury and a numerical adjustment factor assigned by the authors to the injured person's vocation according to its presumed need for vision. C1 and C2 are the factors calculated for the two eyes separately, and Cmax is the higher of the two. P =the visual field factor derived from a schematic diagram of a multizonal visual field in terms of the number of subdivisions affected. M = m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 small m represents ocular muscles. -81- I I I I I I • h • h h m6 m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 m6 1n w 1c eac the motility function of one of the 12 extra- X= 10, 7, or 5, to be selected by the examiner on the basis of several stated criteria involving the severity of impairment and the vocational classification of the injured person. The appendix includes 24 "Tables for Estimation of the Different Forms of Damage to the Visual Earning Ability" calculated to the nearest tenth of one per cent. In a footnote it is pointed out that in the German editions of Magnus's work the calculations were carried out to the thousandths of a per cent! (HWH) Numismatic optics: OHS Member Alan York, O.D., sent us a copy of an article entitled "Farthings of Opticians, Jewellers and Watchmakers in Victorian England" which appeared on pages 20-21 of the January 1981 issue of Coins and Medals, a magazine published in London for numismatic buffs like Dr. York. The author of the article is George Berry, a leading expert on British trade tokens, Fellow of the Royal Numismatic Society, a graduate in history of London University, one-time Senior Lecturer in Education at Whitelands College, London, and now Headmaster of Elmhurst Middle School, Aylesbury, residing in Beaconsfield, Bucks County, about 40 kilometers northwest of London. Assuring us that he has no qualifi­ cations in optometry he has graciously given us permission to reprint much of his interesting and well documented article here. The following are excerpted paragraphs, minus the illustrations, which deal with tokens and farthings issued by early opticians. Opticians; jewellers and watchmakers of early Victorian England had a great deal in common. They were all skilled craftsmen, ready to acc~pt the challenge of making small, sometimes minute, instruments of every kind, requiring precision of the highest order. Opticians in those days really did make the actual spectacles themselves. R. Campbell, writing a century earlier in 1747, observes of the spectaclemaker's trade, 'he grinds his convex glasses in a brass concave sphere, of a diameter large in proportion to the glass intended, and his concave glasses upon a convex sphere of the same metal. His plane-glasses he grinds upon a just plane, in the same manner as the common glass grinder. He grinds them all with sand and polishes them with emery and putty. The cases are made by different workmen, and he adjusts the glasses to them. It is a very ingenious and profitable business and employs but a few hands as masters ••• •. It is significant to note that there is no reference in Campbell's notes to scientifically devised eye tests. What tests that were carried out would have been of the crudest nature. The term optician was not then invented. Spectacles seem to have been a Chinese invention. The first glasses were merely framed magni­ fying glasses, and appeared in tenth-century China. Two hundred -82- years later spectacles were introduced to Europe. Roger Bacon records their use in Italy in 1268. The first known portrait of a man wearing spectacles is that of Hugh de Provence by the Italian Da Modena in 1352. Domenico Ghirlandaio painted Saint Jerome sit­ ting at a desk, from which dangled an eye-glass, and as a result Saint Jerome became the patron saint of the spectacle-makers guild. The wearing of glasses was still fairly uncommon in England, even by the seventeenth century. In fact only one optician's token is known throughout the massive seventeenth century series. It was issued at St. Katherine's by the Tower by John Heaward, reading Obverse: JOHN HEAWARD IN S Reverse: KATRNS SPECTELE-MAKER I.M.H. and depicts a crude pair of spectacles. We may surmise, however, that the issue of the following London token of 1668 was also an optician, although he does not actually say so on his token. Obverse: JOHN RADFORD AT YE GOVLDEN Pair of spectacles Reverse: WITHOUT TEMPLE BARR 68 HI~ HALFE PENNY L.L.R. By the nineteenth century the wearing of spectacles, especially by older people, was a fairly common sight. Several farthing-size advertisement tokens of opticians are known, all appearing in the period circa 1840-70, including those of John Cameron of Liverpool, F. West of Drury Lane, London, James Gargory of Birmingham, John Brown of Chichester and - Philip of Brighton. John Cameron issued two brass farthings at the same address in Liverpool. The first reads CAMERON 54 SOUTH CASTLE STREET LIVERPOOL HIRON BIRM (.in small letters) CHRONOMETER WATCH AND NAUTICAL INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURER As is usual with quite a number of these pieces, the die sinker who, incidentally, has signed his name, succeeded in cramming in a sur­ prising amount of information about the issuer, considering the small fl an. The second farthing is similar, but the obverse contains Cameron's initials, and the reverse described his trades in a slightly different way: OPTICIAN, CHRONOMETER AND WATCHMAKER. Searching through Liverpool street directories I have found John R. Cameron to be trading at 54 South Castle Street between the years 1851 and 1868. In 1851 he is described as a chronometer and nautical instrument maker. By 1868 his business embraces also the making of spectacles and an agency for Swedish insurance societies. -83- R.C. Bell points out that South Castle Street was situated in the heart of dockland, known as Sailortown, frequented by the multiracial crews of the celebrated clippers such as the Lightning, Marco Polo or James Baines. I was not surprised, therefore, to discover that John Cameron resided far away from his dockland premises. A directory of 1868 mentions his private residence at 155 Up Parliament Street. A rare London farthing advertises an optician's profession in these telling terms Obverse: TO ALL WHO VALUE THEIR SIGHT - SPECTACLES ON SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES Reverse: MADE BY F. WEST 17 RUSSELL COURT DRURY LANE LONDON A large pair of spectacles is featured on the obverse. Unfor­ tunately I have been unable to glean any information about Mr. West. James Gargory, a Birmingham optician, issued no less than three farthings during the early years of Queen Victoria's reign. The one ••• , albeit rather corroded, reads Obverse: DISTINCT VISION (with a spectacle front on center) Reverse: 41 BULL STREET J. GARGORY BIRMINGHAM A second token is very similar, whilst a third uses the word OPTICIAN and puts his address as 5, BULL STREET- street directories describe James Gargory as a working optician and spectacle-maker and mathe­ matical instrument maker. From 1839 until at least 1842 he worked at 4 Bull Street. In 1850 his address has changed to 5 Bull Street, as on one of the tokens. Either he moved next door, or the system of street numbering changed. He must have been trading at 41 Bull Street before 1839. Thus the token I have illustrated was probably his first. It is strange that the only two known Sussex farthing tokens of the period are both of opticians, one at Chichester and the other at Brighton. The Chichester piece reads Obverse: J.W. BROWN OPTICIAN AND JEWELLER CHICHESTER Reverse: CHICHESTER CROSS 1840 Bishop Storey's cross is the chief feature of the reverse. The issuer is described in an 1839 directory as J.W. Brown, silversmith of North Street. An 1851 directory provides the clue to his initials. He appears as John Williams Brown, jeweller and agent to Professional Life Office. Neither directory refers to his spectacle-making ac­ tivities! It is interesting to note that this Chichester optician, like his counterpart in Liverpool, indulged in insurance work. The Brighton token is described only briefly in R.C. Bell's book but it -84- is clear that the issuer named Philip, practised no less than three crafts as watchmaker, optician and jeweller. I have not, so far, been able to trace him in contemporary street directories. The remainder of the article describes similar tokens issued by jewel­ lers and watchmakers who did not so declare themselves as opticians, which Mr. Berry summarizes by writing, 11We have seen that some opticians were also jewellers and that some jewellers were also watchmakers ... He gives as references R.C. Bell, Unofficial Farthings 1820-1870 (1975) and R. Campbell, The London Tradesman (1747). Another optometrist memorialized: A Greenville South CarolinaPiedmo.nt Chapter of the Reserve Officers Association has honored B.B. Parks, O.D., the Executive Director Emeritus of the South Carolina Optometric Association, by renaming itself the!·!· Parks Piedmont Chapter No. ~· B.O.A. history: Miss J. M. Mi tche 11 ,. M.A., F. B .O.A., who served for many years as the Librarian and Curator of the British Optical Association as well as Assistant Director of Examinations, has written 11A History of the British Optical Association .. covering the period from its foundation in 1895 to the formation of its successor, The British College of Ophthalmic Op­ ticians, in 1980. The price of the book is£ 7.50 and is available from The British Optical Association Foundation, 10 Knaresborough Place, London SW5 OTG. "God said, Let Newton Be! and there was light": With a headline like that a reader would have had a hard time passing up a book review in The Sunday Times (LONDON) 10, 1981. Although a bit flamboyant, it worked. 11Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton" by R.S. Westfall (Carrbridge J. 25, pp. 908) was favorably reviewed by Simon Schaffer. "Westfall's biography, a work of twenty years• painstaking scholarship ••• expertly summarises and places each of Newton's works ••• " The book covers Newton's broad pursuits including optics. 11The well­ known report of his early experiments with prisms and coloured spectra is carefully scrutinised and Newton's testimony questioned". Although I have flipped through this massive book on a recent bookstore jaunt, I quickly replaced it on the shelf for fear of a compulsive bibliophilic attack. From what I saw, it will definitely provide excellent reading for a more lucrative date in the near future. Richard Westfall, incidentally, is Professor of History and Philosophy of Science at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. (DKP) -85- Necrology: William Albert Hugh Rushton (1901-1980), a name well-known to all involved with vision, died in June 1980. A full length article de­ tailing Rushton's researches appeared in the January 17, 1981, issue of the Ophthalmic Optician, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 52-53, and a shorter ac­ count appeared in the February 1981 issue of the American Journal of OptometrY and Physiological Optics, Vol. 58, No. 2, p. 186. Dyslexia: "Dyslexia •••• past, present and future" was the title of the 1980 Eric Culver Memorial Lecture given by D.A. Gauntlett at the City Uni­ versity, London on November 18, 1980. It's printing in the January 17, 1981, issue of The Opthalmic Optician, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 33, 35, and 36, was a worthwhile venture since this article presents a readable account of a very commonly misunderstood problem. Particularly in­ teresting was the author's historical survey of writings on what is known today as dyslexia. He points out that "The history of dyslexia lies in aphasia, since it is only in recent years that there has been an alternative term to describe someone who has difficulty with written language, but who has not suffered brain damage". It is interesting to note some of the people mentioned in the "Dyslexia- past" portion of the article, as follows: Several outstanding personalities had difficulty with speech in the latter stages of terminal illnesses; these in­ cluded William Harvey and Thomas Hobbs as well as Dean Swift. Although Morgani (1762) pointed out that patients who could not talk still retained the ability to understand language, ' and amassed considerable evidence in support of an associ­ ation of paralysis of one side of the body and the presence of disease in the opposite cerebral hemisphere, he failed to make any formal association between these observations. Other cases were reported where the patient showed pro­ nounced memor,y impairment, which affected their ability to read although their vision was unimpaired. Doctor Samuel Johnson's personal account of a language disturbance which followed his stroke in 1783 was vividly described in a letter to a friend where he recalled that when attempting to write 'I had some difficulty, mY hand, I know not why, made the wrong letters. Gradient Index Optics: An article with the above title by W.N. Charman appeared in the January 31, 1981, issue of the Ophthalmic Optician, Vol. 21, No.3, pp. 72, 74, 75, 78, and 80-84. The article is illuminating because of its clear presentation of gradiant index optics especially with the possible uses in ophthalmic optics, but it also mentions his­ torical work on gradient index optics. The names Maxwell and Wood -86- were prominent in the article. The many contributions to visual science by the 19th century physicist James Clerk Maxwell are well known, but Wood was new to me. MY scant article files revealed only that Professor R.W. Wood made significant contributions to the mechanics of producing diffraction gratings. The following entry in~ Bio~raphical Dictionar of Scientists edited by Trevor Williams (A and Black Ltd., 1969 tells the rest. (DKP) WOOD, Robert Williams. Born at Concord, Massachusetts, 2nd May 1868; died Amityville, New York, 11th August 1955. Noted experimenter in physical optics. After stuqying at Harvard and Berlin, Wood taught physics at Wisconsin from 1897 until 1901, when he was appointed Profes­ sor of Experimental Physics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. Here most of his notable work was done. Wood became interested in the problems of diffraction and interference, and initiated production at Baltimore of blazed echelette gratings for infra-red radiation. In spectroscopy, he observed the Zeeman effect on band lines, and showed that atoms could give rise to continuous spectra. He obtai ned fluorescence and resonance spectra of sodium vapour at low pressures, and of iodine. He described experiments for ob­ serving anomalous dispersion; proved that high temperatures are not attained in vacuum discharge tubes; and helped to dis­ credit the imaginary 'N-rays' postulated by some. Photographs taken of landscape and lunar subjects by both ultra-violet and infra-red light demonstrated strikingly the greater clarity resulting from use of the latter, and experi­ ments with a pinhole camera yielded interesting results. He introduced 'Wood's filter' for ultra-violet work, cutting off most of the visible radiation. An experimenter of great ingenuity, Wood introduced many instrumental improvements; originated an electrical method for thawing frozen water-pipes; and (while serving as a major in World War I) developed several secret signalling devices. Wood was also a talented artist, musician, and writer. In addition to his Physical Optics, he produced a volume of satirical poetry. He travelled extensively and received many honours, including Foreign Membership of the Royal Society, whose Rumford Medal he was awarded in 1938. U.S. presidents: The lives of the U.S. presidents have always drawn wide interest as demonstrated by the warm reception of a recently published book Presi­ dential Anecdotes by historian Paul F. Boller Jr. (Oxford; 410 pages; $14.95). Therefore, it might be worth your while to store the fol­ lowing information in the ole memory bank for conversation starters at your next party, reprinted from the Secretary's Page by John Schoen in the April 1981 issue of the American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics: I j l l I l l ! ! l ' -87- THE PRESIDENT'S EYES Reports indicate presidential v1s1on problems as follows: John Adams (1797-1801) -probable hyperopia, weak, watery, red eyes. James Madison (1809-1817) - chronic blepharitis. Zachary Taylor (1849-1850) -divergent strabismus. James Buchanan (1857-1861) - antimetropia, and one eye placed higher in the head than the other. Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) - left hyperphoria (DKP) Book collection: I must admit I had never taken the time to clarify for myself exactly who the Finchams were; all I knew was that there were at least two, and possibly related. Janet Voke in her article "The Walter Fincham Optical Book Collection" in the June 20, 1981, issue of the Ophthalmic Optician, Vol. 21, No. 13, pages 434 and 436, cleared it up for me. . · (DKP) The books were donated to the City University Library (London) from the estate of Walter H.A. Fincham. l!l memory of Ha ro 1 d Kohn: The Harold Kohn Vision Science Library and Learning Resources Center of the State College of Optometry, State University of New York (SUNY), 100 East 24th Street, New York, New York 10010, is written up in detail in the Spring 1981 issue of FOCUS, Vol. 3, No. 1, pages 1, 4-5, and 10, a publication of the Optometr1c Center of New York Foundation. An accolade to the late Harold Kohn, who devoted the better part of his law career as a representative of the optometric profession, is included on page 5. Optometric Center of New York: A chronology entitled "The First Fifteen Years" listing the high­ lights of the Optometric Center of New York, 1956-1971, appeared on pages 6-7 of the above cited issue of FOCUS. A footnote suggests that the next issue of FOCUS will help us distinguish between what apparently are three different but interrelated organizations with identical or nearly identical addresses, namely, the State College of Optometry, the University Optometric Center, and the Optometric Center of New York Foundation. Optometricana from Staiman: Member Jacob Staiman last June marked his 55th year since graduation from optometry school. He continues to donate items from his collection to ILAMO as well as to the local municipal museum in Baltimore. His most -88- recent gifts to ILAMO have included some of his college class notes and lessons as well as books and eyewear. Origin of Essel: The name Essel came originally from the initials S.L., which stood for the Soci~~ des Lunetiers, one of the earliest workers' cooperatives, founded in 1849 by a group of spectacle makers. Operating for a long time under the company name Essel, in 1974 it merged with Silor to form the parent company under the combination title Essilor, best known to optome­ trists as the manufacturer of the Varilux lenses. The branch company, Essel Optical Company, Thornbury, England, is presently celebrating "A hundred years of Essel in the UK" according to an article by that title in the June/July, 1981, issue of MOl (Manufacturing Optics International), Vol. 34, No. 8, p. 40. Accoi11Tl0dation: There seems to have been a recent emphasis in optometric journals to publish refresher or continuing education articles. The benefits of these articles are obvious, but I was pleasantly surprised to run into the article "Accommodation" by Janet Voke first published in The Optician (date not given) and reprinted in the June 1981 issue of The South African Optometrist, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 75, 76, 78, 80 ana-83. Dr. Voke 1s historical summary of the investigations into the accommodative theories makes clear what can often be a confusing subject for the student and reader. -Her chronological presentation of accommodative theories includes lucid and concise descriptions of Helmholtz's theory (1855), Tscherning's theory (1896) and Fincham's capsular theory (1925 and 1937). (DKP) Appeal: Since becoming a co-editor of this publication I have often pondered what the actual role of an editor includes. At times it encompasses everything from "censorship" to indexing, but mostly writing inclusions. Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy this work; but mY mind seems to wander a lot to you readers. I get a bit jealous knowing that you have literally thousands of stories, anecdotes, news items, and historical accounts that would be perfectly suited for this Newsletter. So why don't you share this with everyone? All you need to do 1s to jot down your inclusion(s) in some type of narrative form and send it (them) to: H.W Hofstetter 2615 Windermere Woods Drive Bloomington, IN 47401 I give Hank's address only because postage to Indiana for most of you is a bit less than to South Africa. Hope to hear from you. (DKP) H.W Hofstetter O.K. Penisten, Editors 1981-12-04-001 1981-12-04-002 1981-12-04-003 1981-12-04-004 1981-12-04-005 1981-12-04-006 1981-12-04-007 1981-12-04-008 1981-12-04-009 1981-12-04-010 1981-12-04-011 1981-12-04-012 1981-12-04-013 1981-12-04-014 1981-12-04-015 1981-12-04-016 1981-12-04-017 1981-12-04-018 1981-12-04-019 1981-12-04-020 1981-12-04-021 1981-12-04-022 1981-12-04-023 1981-12-04-024 1981-12-04-025 1981-12-04-026 1981-12-04-027 1981-12-04-028