M 
00 
en -
C) 

1""'"4 _,. 
::::> ..., 

NEWSLETTER 
OF THE 

OPTOMETRIC HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

Optoliletrl!' tibrat'Y 
.lOA File 

(243 North Lindbergh Boulevard, St. Louis, t~issouri 63141, U.S.A.) 

Vol. 14 July 1983 Number 3 

Annual call for nominations: 

The board member whose five-year term will expire at the end of 
this year is James Tumblin, O.D. He informed us last year that due to 
several other long range commitments he could not allow himself to be 
renominated for another term. 

Nominations for his replacement for a five-year term are hereby 
requested for placement on the ballot in October. They may be submitted 
to Henry Hofstetter, 2615 Windermere ~·Joods Drive, Bloomington, Indiana 
47401, U.S.A. 

By all means do not hesitate to include yourself as a candidate 
if such responsibility challenges you. Remember, self-nominated 
volunteers founded the O.H.S., and unpaid volunteers have kept it going. 

Origins of an Association: 

Discovered in the old files of the Indiana State Board of Optometry 
is a carbon copy of a six-page single-spaced typewritten paoer entitled 
A HISTORY OF THE INDIANA ASSOCIATION OF OPTOMETRISTS. Of almost flawless 
grammar, virtually free of typographical errors, and in fine literary 
style, it seems to have been prepared for publication, but where I do 
not know. The author is unknown, as is also the date excent that it 
would not be before 1920. 

Though ostensibly a history of Indiana's Optometric Association, 
it clearly reflects circumstances that must have prevailed throughout 
a large part, if not the whole, of the United States around the turn 
of the century. The full text follows: 

=--,.._ 

I 
5E =:, 

;! 
:s 
~ 

On December tenth, 1896, a number of opticians from various 
parts of the State of Indiana, who had a keen interest, not only 
in their individual work, but also in the advancement of the 
profession as a whole, came together for a meeting at the caoital 
city, Indianapolis. This meeting, which was held in a little 
room at the Denison Hotel, was called to order by John vlimmer, 
of Indianapolis, now deceased. A medicinal bill having been 
introduced into the Indiana State Legislature, which, upon 
investigation, proved to be adverse to the opticians, all of 
the men present felt the need of an organized and effective body 
to advance their profession and disseminate knowledge concerning 
it. After some discussion, a motion was carried to form an 
organization to be known as the Indiana Optical Socie~y, composed 
of the following charter members: John Wimmer, I. M. Rowe, G. W. 
Conner, and H. E. Woodard of Indianapolis, William E. Houston of 



- 38 -

Greenfield, G. M. C. Bartmus of Clinton, Ed Shipley_ of Green­
castle, Eugene Collings of Franklin, J. H. Arnold of Columbus, 
J. D. Taylor of Logansport and D. S. Whitaker of Lebanon. Four 
officers were then elected for the ensuing year: 

President­
Vice-President­
Treasurer­
Secretary-
Assistant Secretary-

John Wimmer 
William E. Houston 
I. M. Rowe 
C. W. Conner 
H. E. Woodard 

After the installation of officers, a motion was carried that 
the executive committee should meet on the following day, December 
eleventh, 1896, at ten o•clock in the morning. At this session 
of the executive committee, a motion was discussed and carried 
that Mr. Albert J. Beveridge be employed as attorney for the 
Indiana Optical Society, and that he be paid fifty dollars as 
a retainer fee. 

Under the direction of the Society, Mr. Beveridge drafted a bill 
defining and regulating the practice of optometry which was 
introduced into the legislature of the session of 1897 by Senator 
Hugg. This bill, as read, was referred by Dr. Newton of Barthol­
omew County to the Committee on Public Health in the House of 
Representatives. Although the bill was favorably reported on 
in both the House and the Senate, because of the similarity of 
the medical bill and the optical bill, it became necessary to 
effect a compromise. Through the efforts of Mr. I. M. Rowe and 
Mr. Beveridge, an amendment was added to the medical bill, which 
amendment read 11 that the said medical bill was not to be construed 
to apply to opticians ... The optometry bill was then withdrawn. 

This was a triumph for the society and a speedy reward and justi­
fication of its formation. Its fame spread abroad and in the 
same year of 1896, announcement was made in the Optical Journal 
that opticians in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York and other New 
England states had met to form state societies for the advance­
ment and protection of their profession. This activity caused 
the following favorable comment by Mr. L. B. Hilburn of New York 
which appears in the Optical Journal in 1897: 

11 lt is very encouraging to observe the number of optical 
societies springing up ... 

A similar society was organized in Illinois on September fifteenth, 
1898. 



- 39 -

Since no business arose after this first meeting of the Indiana 
Optical Society in 1897, which urgently required action on the 
part of the members, the society did not again function actively 
until 1901. Two years before this date, the medical bill had 
again appeared before the legislature to be amended. Without the 
knowledge of the Indiana Optical Society, the clause was left out 
which said 11 that the bill was not to be construed as applying to 
opticians.~~ As a result of this, the society again came together 
on January twenty-ninth, 1901, and adopted the name of the Indiana 
State Optical Society. They were ready for instant and effective 
action. The meeting was well attended, representatives being 
present from all parts of the state. An interesting article 
appeared in the Keystone of March, 1901, giving an account of the 
proceedings as follows: 

11 After a general greeting, the meeting was called to order 
by President Wimmer, who stated its object and invited the non­
members present to join the society. After electing a number of 
new members, the society proceeded with the election of officers 
with the following result: E. Shipley of Greencastle, president; 
J. H. Arnold of Columbus, Vice-President; G. M. C. Bartmus of 
Clinton, secretary; I. M. Rowe of Indianapolis, treasurer; Miss 
Stella Rogers, assistant secretary. The executive committee 
consists of E. 0. Collins, Franklin; C. M. Jenkins, Richmond; 
0. M. Ridgeway, Sheridan; Paul E. Hulsman, Indianapolis; W. H. 
McDougal, Indianapolis. A committee was appointed to revise the 
constitution and by-laws of the society as follows: C. M. Jenkins, 
Richmond; ~·1. C. Klein, Crawfordsville; J. D. Taylor, Logansport. 11 

The medical bill was then discussed at length and a committee 
appointed to confer with and employ an attorney, if necessary. 
The Han. John L. Griffiths was retained to look after the interests 
of the society. 11 

After due consideration, it was deemed urgent to issue a call for 
all the opticians of the state of Indiana to meet on February 
twenty-first, 1901, to enlist in a movement to pass a favorable 
bill through the legislature and to defeat the hostile medical 
bill then up for consideration by the law-making body. This call 
read as follows: 

11 The object of this meeting is to confer with our attorney 
and formulate a plan by which we can defeat the passage of the 
'Medical Bill' now in the legislature. If you are alive to 
your interests, you will be present without fail, as the critical 
point is now here and we must act quickly, or be debarred from the 
practice of our profession by an innocent looking clause inserted 
by the 'occulist'. Would you permit a law to be passed against 
you to save five or ten dollars? If so, remain inactive and it 
is sure to come. 



- 40 -

"Four years ago a very sma 11 per cent of the opticians 
in Indiana saved our necks by prompt action and liberal dona­
tions, while the other ninety per cent of the opticians saved 
their money and time by staying at horne. The magnitude of the 
present danger cannot be described in this letter. Come and 
see for yourself. The comparatively few of us that are trying 
to surmount this obstacle are unequal to the emergency. Will 
you help us defend your interests and ours? This is not a scare 
call, but stern reality. " 

As a result of the splendid and vigorous efforts made by the 
members of the Indiana Optical Society, they brought about an 
amendment by the legislature which again read, "that the medical 
bill was not to be construed as applying to opticians." 

The Society itself continued to actively concern itself in pro­
moting its best interests and at the session of the legislature 
in 1907 a bill favorable to optometrists was passed both by the 
House of Representatives and by the Senate and was signed by 
Governor Hanly. This bill was favorably amended in 1913 and also 
in 1919. 

From the above resume of the early functioning of the Indiana 
Association of Optometrists, known at different times by the 
names of The Indiana Optical Society, the Indiana State Optical 
Society, and The Indiana State Optometrical Society, it can be 
seen how the broad foresight, the clear vision and the tireless 
activity of its founders aided much in establishing optometry 
on its present satisfactory basis in the state of Indiana. The 
members who have come into the organization in recent years do 
not entirely realize, perhaps, what difficult problems had to 
be faced and solved by the society in its early days, handicapped 
as it was by small membership, much opposition, and the general 
ignorance which then prevailed on the subject of optometry, 
but nevertheless upheld and strengthened by unceasing earnest­
ness, and a deep conviction of the real value of the principles 
for which it stood and for which it fought. 

Thirteen persons have thus far held the office of president 
in the association, and have successfully guided it in its 
achievements. These persons are John Wimmer, Indianapolis; 
Ed Shipley, Greencastle, C. M. Jenkins, Richmond; John E. Ellis, 
Plainfield; Margaret J. Erisman, Lafayette; J. W. Thompson, 
Danville; W. T. McCullough, Indianapolis; C. D. Adair, Elwood; 
Omar C. DeSelms, Attica; Clara M. Sweitzer, Richmond. 

On August fifteenth, 1901, the Indiana Association was honored 
by the election of John H. Ellis of South Bend as president 
of the American Optical Association. 



- 41 -

Of the eleven charter members of this society two are deceased; 
Mr. G. M. C. Bartmus of Clinton and Mr. John Wimmer of Indianap­
olis, the first president of the association. 

Mr. Wimmer was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, but came to Indianapolis 
in his early youth. After beginning business as an optometrist 
in this town in 1880, he suffered various reverses which caused 
him to discontinue his business career for a time. When he 
resumed it in the same location where he remained until his death 
at the age of fifty-two years, his business prospered with increasing 
success. By dint of energy, enterprise and business acumen, he 
accumulated a fortune of some two hundred thousand dollars. 
Throughout all of his business career, he worked faithfully and 
unremittingly for the success of the Indiana Association. 

The second president, Mr. Ed Shipley, who was elected in 1901, 
was born near Baltimore, Maryland. He first established himself 
in business as an optician in Philadelphia, but after a few years, 
he moved to Greencastle, Indiana, where he is living at the present 
time. A short time after this move in 1887, he wrote to Doctor 
Bucklin of New York, asking him for his opinion on the establishment 
of ophthalmic schools for the education of opticians. Eleven 
years afterward, in 1898, the Keystone published an article which 
said in part: 

"Dr. Bucklin favored the idea (i.e., ophthalmic schools), 
and .... started his school very shortly after this (i.e., Mr. 
Shipley's letter in 1887), and in less than two years, several 
schools were started, and all have done a good business. Today 
we have in this country no less than a dozen ophthalmic schools. 
Since the different colleges started, Mr. Shipley has attended and 
graduated from several of them. He not only makes his own exami­
nations, but also grinds his own lenses." 

The Indiana Association is indebted to Mr. Shipley for a great 
deal of interesting information concerning its origin and the 
early years of its existence. 

Mr. H. E. Woodard was born February sixth, 1863, in Mannsville, 
New York. He graduated from the common school in 1880 and went 
to work on a farm and in a lumber camp. At the age of twenty-five, 
he met Dr. Allard from Syracuse, New York, who induced Mr. Woodard 
to study optometry with him. The first year he worked for Dr. 
Allard for ten dollars a month, the second year for fifteen dollars 
a month and by the time the third year rolled around, he was 
receiving the princely salary of twenty dollars a month. 

Following his three years with Dr. Allard, Mr. Woodard went to 
New York and took a course in optics, then bought a test case, 
a stock of lenses and started out on the road as a full-fledged 
optician. During the summer months, he worked through northern 



- 4? -

New York, and in the winter, traveled farther south. In the 
fall of 1893, he went to Chicago hoping to obtain a concession 
to sell spectacles at the World's Fair. Being unsuccessful and 
in need of money, Mr. Woodard then worked south as far as 
Danville, Illinois and crossed over into Indiana, living at 
Frankfort for a year and a half, and moving to Indianapolis in 
May, 1896. His first location in this town was with Horace 
Comstock's jewelry store on East Washington Street. Not meeting 
with great success there, he accepted a position with W. T. -
Marcy on West Washington Street and from there, Mr. Woodard 
moved to Massachusetts Avenue, where he established a business 
of his own, remaining there until 1908, in which year he moved 
into his present location. 

At the annual meeting of the Indiana Association of Optometrists, 
Mr. Woodard was elected president. In 1912 he was appointed 
by Governor Goodrich to serve on the State Board of Registration 
and Examination. This oosition he held for five years, being 
secretary each year and at the expiration of his term of office, 
he was elected by the other members, to a life position. Mr. 
Woodard is believed to be the only exempt man in Indiana who 
has taken the State Board examination. 

At the A. 0. A. meeting at Providence, Rhode Island, Mr. Woodard 
was elected president of the National State Board. 

Mr. Charles W. Conner, the first secretary of this society, who 
was the inventor of the one-piece bifocal lens, now known by 
the name of Ultex, was born in Bloomfield, Pennsylvania, in April 
1868. A few years later he moved with his family to Indianap­
olis, where he later went into business as an optometrist. 
After remaining for over thirty years in this town, he moved 
away, continuing his business in Detroit and New York. In 1920, 
he again made a change, moving to his present home in Asheville, 
North Carolina. 

Mr. J. D. Taylor, whom, as in the case of Mr. Woodard, Mr. Wimmer, 
Mr. Conner, and Mr. Shipley, Indiana can claim only as an adooted 
son, was born near Auburn, New York, on July twenty-seventh, 
1860. In the fall of 1871, he came westward to Logansport ancl 
at that time he concluded to learn the jewelry business. In 
1888, having had some trouble with his eyes, he consulted an 
oculist who loaned him a book on refraction. He became so 
interested that he decided to make it his life work. About this 
time the Julius King Optical Company was giving courses in this 
work at Cleveland, and Mr. C. L. Merry, who happened to visit 
Logansport at that time, induced him to attend. In 1896, Mr. 
Taylor took a course in the Chicago Ophthalmic College, then 
conducted by Dr. Martin, and having disposed of the jewelry 
department of his business in 1917, he took a post-graduate 



- 43 -

course with Dr. Needles in Kansas City and became exclusively 
an optometrist. Mr. Taylor, who has been very successful in 
his work, may be quoted as follows: 

"My greatest trouble in my early experience was to get 
people to sit in the chair and use the trial frame. They did 
not want to buy glasses that way. They just wanted to try them 
on. f~y experience is that a jeweler-optometrist is working at 
a disadvantage as he cannot give it the time it should have. 
He has no time to study." 

Another of the charter members, Mr. I. M. Rowe, who was elected 
as first treasurer of the Indiana Association, was born in Grant 
County, Indiana on December first 1854, but spent his childhood 
on a farm in Missouri. In Early life he learned the painter and 
carpenter trade, but he never put it into practical use. He 
was a trader and stock buyer until he was almost thirty years of 
age. Then, because of reverses in this business, he took up the 
spectacle trade. Finding that this business was profitable, 
he continued in it and soon began jobbing spectacles to the 
trade. After four years of this, he began traveling, selling 
from samples, and at the same time took up the subject of refrac­
tion, studying this in all his spare moments. In 1894, he took 
a course at Parsons Polytechnic Institute at Peoria, Illinois. 
After his graduation, he established a business in Indianapolis, 
which he conducted successfully until 1919, at which time, he 
sold his business and retired from active work as an optometrist. 
Mr. Rowe expects, however, to re-establish himself in the business 
in the near future. 

Mr. D. S. Whitaker was born in Scotland, Indiana, on November 
twelfth, 1854. At the time he was six years old, his parents 
moved to Indianapolis for a period of three years. When they 
moved again, this time going to Whitestown in 1863, he spent 
several vacation months working in a stove factory. In 1869 
he and his parents moved to Zionsville, where he obtained a 
position in a dry goods store for a time and, later, in 1874, 
went into the jewelry business with Mr. Warren, father of Miss 
Annie Warren, whom he married. In 1879 Mr. Whitaker moved to 
Lebanon and, after acquiring experience in handling watches, 
he invested in a small stock of watches and other je111elry--the 
nucleus of a business as a jeweler and optometrist which he has 
built up with ever increasing success during the past forty-three 
years. In 1918, he took as a partner Mr. L. S. Sterling, also 
an optometrist and practical watch maker, who had been in his 
employ for fourteen years. 

It is with much regret that biographical sketches of the life 
and work of four other charter members must be omitted, since 
the material was not available at the time of publication. 
Although it is therefore not possible to give detailed information 



- 44 -

concerning these men, it is with much pride that the Indiana 
Association of Optometrists includes in its list of charter 
members such men as William E. Houston of Greenfield; Eugene 
Collins of Franklin; J. H. Arnold of Columbus and G. M. C. 
Bartmus, now deceased, of Clinton. 

John C. Eberhardt of Dayton, Ohio was elected to Honorary 
membership on January 12, 1903, and L. W. Bugbee on January 
13, 1920. 

C. M. Jenkins was born in December 1854, at Dayton, Ohio. He 
was first interested in optics at the age of eight years, the 
subjects being two schoolmates with internal strabismus and 
congenital ptosis. These made such an impression on him that 
he selected for his declamation on the last day of school, a 
four-verse poem by some doctor, the substance of which was: 
Spectacles are made for old people to see to read and write 
and sew with, and near-sighted persons of any age to see with. 

In 1873 he was employed with a firm on Main Street, Dayton, 
Ohio, and there with our friend, John C. Eberhart, delved into 
the mystery of lenses. He is a graduate of the Philadelphia 
School of Optics, the late C. H. Brown, M.D., being president. 

In 1877 and 1878 he was a co-worker with Dr. Culbertson, oculist, 
their subject being eyes and artificial ear drums. 

About 1880 he and Dr. Hobbs, oculist, jointly studied refraction 
and the fitting of eyes. 

He served three years as President of the Indiana Association 
of Optometrist, one year as President of the Indiana State 
Board of Registration and Examination, as many years back as 
the writer recalls as Treasurer of the American Association of 
Optometrists and twenty-five years as counsel for our state 
Association. 

Slit J amp __ bi omi crosco_Q,Y_: 

OHS member Henry A. Knoll has published a brief history of ocular 
biomicroscopy in the February 1983 issue of Contact Lens Forum, Vol. 
8, No.2, pp. 71 & 74-75, under the title "TheTndfspens-ableSlit 
Lamp". He identifies the 20's as the "Golden Age" of slit lamp 
biomicroscopy, with textbooks appearing in German, French, English, 
and Spanish. The various names credited with design contributions 
are Leonhard Koeppe, Manuel Troncoso, Alvar Gullstrand, Czapski-Zeiss, 
Otto Henker, Hugh Binstead, Henry Stockwell, Edgar Fincham, Hans 
Goldmann, and Alfred Vogt. 



- 45 -

Hirschber9 available in English: ---·------- . --------·-·--- ----- ----~---

_Volume I of Julius Hirschberg•s 11 History of Ophthalmology,~~ 
ment1oned on page 49 of the July 1982 issue of NOHS, is now available 
from Alan York, 0.0., One Main Street, East Hampton, N.Y. 11937, 
the distributor for the U.S.A. Frederick C. Blodi, M.D., translated 
not only the German text but also all quotations which in the German 
edition are in the language of the original source, such as Greek . ' Lat1n, French, and Italian. Volume I contains the history of 
ophthalmology in antiquity in Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Israel 
Persia, India, and Greece. ' 

The first volume by itself is $98.00, but if the entire series 
of about 11 volumes is ordered now, the price of each volume is only 
$78.00. 

OHS member York reports that his talk on 11 Collecting Antique 
Eyeglasses~~ at Optifair East drew an audience of about 30, a mixture 
of O.o.•s, M.o.•s, opticians, aides, and antique lovers. 

In· defense of our role: 

OHS President Leeds kindly loaned me his copy of a 24 page, 
21.5 x 14 em, pamphlet, which I know he did not steal but which 
obviously derived from the British Optical Association Library as 
indicated by a somewhat smudged but still faintly legible rubber 
stamp impression on the front outside cover. Also on the front cover 
is imprinted the price of 1/-, i.e., one shilling. 

The publication was the work of a sp~cial coalition committee 
appointed to respond in behalf of the whole ootical (optometric) 
profession to what was known in England as 11 the Beveridge Report". 
In the British nomenclature of the era the designation optometrist 
was not used and therefore is totally abs~nt from the text, but the 
issue deals historically with optometry in the most obvious sense of 
the word. The document is of course biased in its representation of 
the profession•s role in public health insofar as that is its purpose, 
but its gratifying feature from a histor.ian•s point of vievJ is its 
coverage of meticulously referenced .historical details. 

It therefore seems appropriate that the contents of this now 
rare publication be shared again with others, wherefore it is photo­
graphically reproduced in the following pages with a 25';;, increase of 
size to make the otherwise very small print a bit more legible. 



- 46 -

THE PLACE OF THE 

OPTICAL PROFESSION IN THE 

I-lEAL Tll SERVICES OF THE NATION. 

THIS STATEMENT 
ON 

THE PLACE OF THE OPTICAL PROFESSION IN THE HE~'\LTH 

SERVICES OF THE NATION 
HAS BEEN DRAWN UP BY 

THE MEMBERS OF AN AD HOC COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF 
REPRESENTATIVES Of THE VARIOUS ORGANIS:\TIONS IN THE 

OPTICAL PROFESSION. 

THESE ORGANISl\TIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: 

Examining BoJies 

\VURS!Ill'FUL COMPANY OF SPECTACLE MAI\.t.RS 

llRITISH OPTICAL ASSOCIATION 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF OPTICIANS 

SCUTTISll ASSOCIATION OF OPTICIANS 

Nun-Examining Bodies 

INSTITUTE OF OPHTl!AI.MIC OPTICIANS 

jOINT COUNCIL OF QUALIFIED OPTICIANS 

SOCIETY ·oF OPTICIANS 

QUESTIONNAIRE COMMITTEE 

lsSUI~D UY 

TilE BE\'ElUDGE HEI'ORT (.-lD liOC) COl\ll\llTTFl: 
(OPTICAL PROFESSION), 

t,'i, HI<OOK STREET, LONDON, W.r 

January, II) 1-1 

CIIAJRMA.N: 

W. H. H/\I{KEH, F.B.O.A. (Hon5,) 

Sli.CRliTA Rl': 

\lisa I. PARNUM. 



INTRODUCTION 

SECTION I. 

- 47 -

CONTENTS 

To show that ophthalmic optics has developed as <~ distinct and 

Pa1'a. 

individual field of work . 9 

Evolution of Ophthalmic Optics : 

(i) From Early Times to the 19th Century 

( ii) Modern Period 

(iii) Training, Qualification and Disciplinary Control 

(iv) The wor~ of the OptiCal Practitioner 
(v) Research and Advances in Tcchniljuc 

Conclusions 

SrCTION II. 
To show that in the public intere~t optical practitioners !'hould continue 

9 

23 

34 

46 
47 

53 

as a separate and independent profession 57 

( i) Efficiency of Service 61 

(ii) Public Preference . 6'i 

(iii) Development-Past and Future 68 

Conclusions 3 3 

SECTION III. 
To show that full effect cannot otherwise be given to the three prin­

ciples laid down by the Ministry of Health as those upon which the 
future health service will be based . 87 

(i) Best Services for All 88 

(ii) Personal and Professional Freedom . 96 

(iii) Preservation of Health, not Cure of Disease alnnc lOl 

Conclusions 105 

APPENDIX A. 
Medical Opposition to the Optical Profession. 

APPENDIX B. 
Repreaentative Selection of Re11earch Papers, Text Book11 ilnd ln~tr11 

ment Deaign by the Optical Profu11ion and tht 5taff~ of itr~ Tr:lchHlj:( 
lnetitutiona. 



r 
! . 
! 

- 48 -t 

3 

DEFINITIONS 
APPLYING TO THIS DOCUMENT 

" OPHTHALMOLOGY" means that field of work concerned with 
the structure, functions, pathology and therapeutics 
of the eye. 

" 0PHTHALMOLOGI ST " means one practising ophthalmology; an 
oculist or ophthalmic surgeon. 

" OPHTHALMIC OPTICS " means the field of work concerned 
with the function and conservation of vision, the 
correction of visual anomalies due to anatomical and 
physiological defects and the appliance& used for 
those purposes. 

"OPTICAL PRACTITIONER" means one practising ophthalmic 
optics; also described as a sight•testing or ophthalmic 
optician. 

The place of the Optical Profession .... in the 
Comprehensive Health Service. 

INTRODUCTION. 

1. For many years the optical practi­
tioner has provided an essential part of 
the nation's health services. That he has 
done so efficiently and satisfactorily is 
scarcely open to question, for were it 
otherwise the great majority of the public 
would not continue to resort to him with 
the1r optical troubles (a), nor would he 
have been permitted to take the substan• 
tial part he does in the National Health 
Insurance Ophthalmic Benefit Scheme (b). 

2. ln view of this it might reasonably 
be supposed that the optical practitioner 
could confidently anticipate finding his 
accustomed place in the new and compre• 
hens1ve health service the Government is 
considering as a result of its acceptance of 
Assumption B of the Beveridge Report. 

3. There is good reason to know, how• 
ever, that the just expectations of the 
optical profession in this, or, indeed, in 
any other direction will be most bitterly 
opposed, aa they have always been, by 
organised medicine, which has fur many 
years sought-unsuccessfully despite its 
power-to establish a monopoly of the 
nation's sight-testing work. 

4. For a proper understanding of the 
position, it is perhaps desirable at this 
point to explain shortly the precise reason 
for this opposition, leaving a more detailed 
examination of the contentions of the 

(a) For comparative figures, see para. 66 
(inf,.a). 

(b) It ia estimated that optical praotitioners 

medical profession to a later part of this 
memorandum (c). 

5. According to the medical view the 
optical practitioner should be permitted 
to do no more than make up spectacles in 
accordance with the instructions of a 
medical practitioner and in particular he 
should not be allowed to refract (i.e., test 
sight) or to prescribe for the correction of 
errors of vision. The reason given for this 
attitude is that the optical practitioner is 
likely to overlook a diseased condition of 
the eye, which would not then receive the 
necessary medical attention at the earliest 
possible stage. 

6. For their part optical practitwners 
claim rtot only that they are fully com· 
petent to prescribe for errors of refraction 
--as their past record shows-but also 
that their training is such as to enable 
them to recognise and refer to an ophthal· 
mic surgeon or physician those cases of 
organic deterioration or disease that call 
for medical attention. They add that 
under National Health Insurance arrange· 
ments they are required to refer such· 
cases, which is, of itself, official recognition 
of their ability to detect them. 

7. It has been made quite plain in a 
variety of ways that it is the intention of 
organised medicine to oust the optical 
practitioner altogether from sight-testing 
work or, as an intermediate measure, so to 
contrive matters that he is permitted to 

handle well over three quartera of all 
N a tiona! Health In11urance optical work. 

(c) Set Appendix A. 



- 49 -

4 

c:ury it on only under complete mcdic.d 
control. 

8. It is, therefore, the purpose of this 
memorandum to show that, apart altogether 
from the gross unfairness of such inten· 
tions, neither alternative is justifiable or 
desirable in the public interest and this it 
will seek to do by reference to the follow· 
ing propositions: 

1. That ophthalmic optics has developed 
as a distinct and individual field of 
work. 

11. That, in the public interest, optical 
practitiOners should continue as a 
separate and independent profes· 
SIOn. 

iii. That full effect cannot otherwise be 
given to tl:'te three principles laid 
down by the Ministry of Health as 
those upon which the future health 
service will be based (cc). 

(i.) To show that Ophthalmic 
Optics has developed as a distinct 
and individual field of work. 

EVOI.llTION 01:' 
OPHTHALMIC OPTICS. 

(i.) f<rom Early Times to 19th Century. 

9. There is little doubt that the correc· 
tion of errors of vision developed from 
experiments with lenses in general (d). 
The magnifying properties of convex 
lenses were known from at least A.D. 
150 (e), but the application of them to 
the needs of the old and weak·eyed does 
not seem to have occurred to anyone 
until about the 13th century. 

. 10. The man who was then responsible 
lor this . considerable advance was Roger 
Bacon,. HI whose Opus Majus, published 
in 1268, we find a substantial section 
devoted to optical science. Although he 
certainly possessed the requisite theoretical 
knowledge, he apparently did not get as 
far as the idea of spectacles, for he men­
tions only a lens of glass or crystal to be 
used actually resting on the reading matter 
to be magnified (f) and it is not until the 
end of the 13th c~ntury that we find any 
d1stwct ment1on ot spectacles. · 

I I. The physicians and surgeons of the 
day were then, as now, concerned with 
the relief of disease and illness and spec· 

(cc) T!1ese vrinciple.s are, briefly: (i) best ser- . 
VIces for all; (ii) personal and profes­
SLonal freedom, anJ (iii) maintenance of 
health, not cure of disease alone. 

(d) v,on Rohr, Tl,wm<~.s Young Oration, 1923, 
1 rans. Opt. Soc., xxv.241. 

(t) Ibid., xxv.2.42. 

Ltclcs were n·, <:lvt'd hy tht:lll w!lh .dl!l<>bl 
unanimous dJsL!ppruval Geur g lhrtlsch 
(I 53 5 1607 ), the father of German 
ophthalruology, at a somewlhtl later date 
dismis1>ed them 111 the wost llllCdlllpn•rnr:,­
ing terms as u~cle~s (g) und th<Jsc ocullots 
who did not actively condemn them touk 
no intere.st whatever in their use, at the 
most recornmendlllg pati.:nt~ to v1~1t a 
spectacle maker and obtain the most ,,ull­
able pa1r (h). 

12. In spite of thi~ more and !lllJfC 

people began to discover the benefits of 
spectacles and to use them, espectally alter 
the invention of printing in 1440. 'The 
indifference of the oculists I11.1de it uuly 
natural fur the fitting of spcltacJ.:~ to 
become increasingly the prerogative of 
those_ who sold them and during the yc.tr:; 
that followed a great deal of practical and 
valuable information about !.pe..:tacle.s and 
lenses and their .adaptation to indivrdual 
requirements was accumulated by ,uch 
men (1). 

I 3. It was abuut th1s llllle lh.tl a group 
of London Citizens engaged in the w. •rk 
of making and fitting speclalks to the 
"dim·bightcd" petitioned Charles I fo1 ,, 
charter of incorporatiun Thi,; w.ts July 
granted to them on the 5th 1-.bi, IC>~Y, 
and the body thus creoted wa' k11uWtl as 
The Worshipful Cornp.my ol Sp,:CLHlc 
Makers and was given powers of control 
"throughout the realm ol England''. 

14. The Company forthwith cmb,ul.ed 
upon a full exercise of these power!, .111J 
~s its records show, used them very freely 
mdeed fur about a century·and-a·half ;dtc1 
its incorporation. Persons smpccted ul 
"uttering hurtful wares" were visited by 
th~ Company's officers and, wl1er.: appru 
pnate, were purushed by way of fines ()( 
the smashing t!l the offending spccta .. ln 
or both_ 

I 5. For the ncxt l )() year~ optlCJ,dl'i 
contlllued to rnak.: steady progre"s and the 
development of spectacles and thcrr 
adaptation to v1sual needs remamed, as 1t 
had begun, almu:,t entirely in the hand, 
of non·med1cal men. In l67U Wli!.,lln 
Purter devised his (lptumeter tur the 
more accurate measurement lli viou..tl 
defects, while 111 16~2 Claude Cullli.:rs 
produced the fir::.t English puhlicaiiUll 
devotee! exclusively to the :,ubject of 
spectacles (J). At the same time L11 gcr 

(/) Ibid., xxv.2.42. 
(g) OphthalmoduuleiJ (I S~J) 
(h) Sorshy, Sltort llislul \' "l I !ji:thn/ 111 ,>/ ,;y 

(1933), p.56. 
(i) JbiJ., p.72. 
(i) Spatadt•s /ut .~ liiJ'IIIIJol Si11hl 



Wulk~ of CUII~IJ~r.Jhi..: llll[Hlll,LilU" Wt:IC 
also app~a1ing ( ~)-

In 1777 Benjamiu Franklin de:iigneJ 
and wore the first pair of bifocal spccta· 
des and a few years l.tter similar glasses 
were -made by Benjan1in Weste, th~ thew 
president of the Royal Academy. 

16. Prescribers were, however, cc•nsider­
ably handic<tpped <~.s they did not 
appreCiate the existt:IICe ur nature of the 
condition we now kuow as astigmatism 
and the more ex.tct correction of eye 
defects could not, therdore, be developed 
to the full. It was not, in fact, until 1799 
that W. Cary, an optician, communicatt:d 
to Thomas Young, the e111incnt physicist, 
the results of hi~ oh:iervations on the 
effects of astigm<~tblll, which Young 
developed with Ius custom..try brilliance(l). 
Even Young's genius, however, dues not 
s.:.:rn to have led him to the means of 
remedying the condition and Sir George 
l\iry, Astronomer-Royal, is usually re· 
gardcd as the lirst person to have received 
the benefit of the correction of his astig· 
matiom, which he estimated himself in 
about 1817 and for which the optician 
Fuller of Ipswich subsequently furnished 
appropriate sphero-cylindrical lenses ( m ). 
· 17. For some reason, however, Airy 
did nut publish his discuve1y for about 
ten years ( m) and there are recorded iw 
stances of the relief of astigmatism by 
persons who had no knowledge of his 
investigations. Thus, prior to 1815 -how 
long we do not know--an opician uamcd 
Colborn came ncar to solving the problem. 
The correcti• 111 of astigmatism rcquin.:s 
lenses of irregular curvature and Colborn, 
complaining of the uneven sphericity of 
certain cheap lcnse~ of his time, says: 
.. But I must confess there arc instances in 
whtch we not only tolerate, but are 
obliged to prescribe, such Irregular len~es" 
( ll ). 

In 1828, McAlhtt:r, a Philadelphia 
optician, who also k11ew nothing of Airy's 
wurk, prescribed and supplied cylindric<tl 
lenses for the astigmatism of the Rev. 
Goodrich (o). 

18. The first recorded case of astigma · 
ti~m in Scollaud was in 184 7 at the 
Edinburgh Eye i11firmary. Dr. Allen 
Thompoon of Edinburgh University, 
diagnosed tLc e<•ndition but was 11<>t ahle 

(k) A,, e y., !\llllyncux's Vioptrica Nova 
(16Y2). Smiih's Opti,·ks (173!!) and 
l'orterfLcld'~ Treatise of tile 1-:y.: ( 1759). 

(/) l.edun: o11 the Mcchallism of the bye 
(I HOI). 

(m) "Trans. Camh. Phil. Soc." (IH27l 11.267. 
(n) Cited by T. Wharton Jones, Direases of 

ih<' Eve (I 847). 
(,.) .·lm. hll ,,f !of,•.J. Scienc.·s (IH27) 

- 50 

5 

to mcasuic tb cxtcut 11..:, thadoit:, s.:ut 
tht: patieut to John ;\die, an optiri••n of 
the same city, whu prct.cribed for the 
case, supplying weak cylindrical lenses(p). 
According to Dr. H .unilton ( [l) this was 
only the second recorded ca~e of corrected 
astigmatism in this country ~ince Airy's 
discovery, though Adte hiiw.clf claimed lO 

have supplied cylindrical lenses to a 
woman patient some years previmhly. 

19. In some medical yuartcrs upposi· 
tion to the use of spectacles continued 
almost to the middle of the century. Thus, 
in 1832, we find Weller, Sichel and othc1s 
condemning the use 'of couca ve lenses on 
the ground th<Lt they caused myopta 
(short sight), presbyopia ("old" tiight), 
deformation of the eye and a variety of 
other more "or less unpleasant con:;e­
qucnces ( q). This attitude appears, how· 
ever, to have hecn changing, for opticians 
were bemg definitely recommended both 
for testing and for the supply of spec 
tacles by some of the most en)l!lent oculi~ts 
of the day, as, for example, Fredk. Tyrdl 
( r), senior surgeon at 'tvloorficld~. T. 
Wharton Jones (s), proft:~~or uf Ophthal­
mology at Univcrbity CullcgL:, and Julw 
Walker ( t), of the "tvbnchcstcr Royal 
School of Anatomy illld l-.-kJtcine. 

20. In fact, it is t1 ue to say that pt ior 
to 1869 opcicians prescribed almmt all 
the spectacles worn .tnd even Moorfields 
Hospital sent out their refractive cases to 
opticians fur testing until J. Suclbcrg Wells 
first advocated (u) the exclusive right of 
sight·testing for medical utc 11 

21. As we ha\'e ~ccn (par.t~ 17 18: 
supra), the developments made pos~thlc by 
the discoveries of Y .. ung <•nd r\it y wctc 
not immediate and it was not until I 864 
that their full benefit began t(J be r..:apL'd . 
In that year there appear,·d tlu: da.:~i·.~ 
work of Frans Cornelius Danders, 'flu 
Accommoda.tion tmd ReJr<:rtiun oJ the 
Hye. 

22. Dondcrs, a modcst and una~o;uming 
man, wa~ prof eSS(Jf uf ophthalmology at 
Utrecht and daimcd that he had done no 
more than follow the patb indicated by 
Young, Airy, Brcw~ter and others Btll, 

in fact, his own work W<Ls of such 1111purt­
anLT that it may he truly said of It th,tt 
it pointl'd the w;ty more dearly th.m any 
other of Its time towards the pl;td' that 
----- _L -- - -- --- ------- --- ---------- -·· - --- -- - --·-· -· ---

(fl) Cited by R. lfamilion, Monthly lui. ··f 
filed. ScicuCI's (IR~7). 

(tl) Sorshy, Short fli>tol·y of tJf>hth<Jimolu,/y 
(1933), p.74 

(r) Diseases of the Rye (IH·llll 
(s) Diseases of the i!yc (1!!-12) 
(t) Ocu/i,-t's Vade 1\lectwl (18431. 
(ll) Treatise 011 tl11· Di«·os.·s .•i the r::,. ·(IR!i"L 



- 51 -

6 

the modern practice of refraction now 
occupies and it is largely to his credit that 
modern refractive technique is huilt upon 
a sound and scientific foundation. 

(ii.) Modern Period. 

23. We have given in the preceding 
paragraphs some account--necessarily 
brief-of the sources from which ophthal­
mic optics is sprung. The period covered 
is a long one and the advances made cow 
siderable, but the most intense develop­
ment is that which has been concentrated 
into the last fifty years. 

24. Towards the ~nd of the 19th cen­
tury we find the optiCians of that time 
giving the clearest evidence of that par­
ticular form of professional consciousness 
that demands the regulation of the prac· 
tltiuncr, the proper dissemination of tech• 
nical knowledge and a due appreciation 
by all of their responsibility to the public 
in using that knowledge. 

2 5. In 1895, therefore, the British 
Optical Association was founded and in 
the following year instituted qualifying 
examinations. Almost immediately after· 
wards the Worshipful Company of Spec· 
tacle Makers, whose old powers of control 
had lain dormant for many years, again 
became active and held its first diploma 
examination in 1898. These developments 
were followed by the creation of the In· 
stitute of Chemists-Opticians in 1906, the 
National Association of Opticians in 1910 
and what is now called the Scottish 
Association of Opticians in 1921 (v). 

26. The above are bodies primarily 
concerned with the examination of 
students and the issue of diplomas and it 
is only to be expected that in due course 
optical practitioners should have felt the 
need for some co-ordination in the organ• 
isational and representative sphere. 
Accordingly the year 1905 marks the 
creation of . the Institute of Ophthalmic 
Opticians, followed in 1923 by that of the 
Joint Council of Qualified Opticians. 
Neither is an examining body but both 
are very much concerned-and always 
have been-with the organisation of a 
better and more comprehensive optical 
service through the encouragement of 
local associations (or branches of the 
parent bodies), research .and technical 
imp'rovement. 

(v) It is perhaps interesting to note that no 
medical diploma in ophthalmology existed 
prior to that of Oxford University in 
1910. The Royal College of Surgeons did 
not follow sutt until 1920, and then not 
without some opposition from within the 
profession as the subject was apparently 
not thought important enough to merit a 

For the sa ... .: uf completeness It may be 
added that at the present time matters are 
heing taken a logical stage further by the 
fuston of the Institute of Ophthalmic 
Opticians and the Joint Council of Quali­
tield Opticians into a single represerltative 
body. 

27. On two occasions, namely, in 1lJ06 
and 192 7, optical practitioners have 
sought fuller control of their profes,wn 
in the form of state registration. Draft 
Bills were introduced in Parliament, but 
both failed, the first ow1ng to the gcnnal 
disinclination of the legislature to interest 
itself in the matter and the second 
because of the very strong medical 
opposition i~ engendered. 

28. The Departmental Co m m 1 t. t e e 
appointed to consider the 19 2 7 Bill ad· 
vised against state registration ( w) but in 
doing so was in ll uenced by the med 1cal 
profession's promise (x) that an effiCient 
and comprehensive medical ophthalmic 
service would be available within a 
reasonable time. That was .16 years ago 
and the promised service is still quite in· 
capable of handling more than a small 
part of the country's optical work (y). 

29. All the organisations referred to 
abov_g were, of course, formed purely 
•1oluntarily and are fairly illustrative of 
the earnest desire of the optical practi· 
tioner that his professional work should 
be properly and fully regulated. Another 
example of voluntary co-operative action 
of this sort was that which led to the 
formation of the Ophthalmic Benefit 
Approved Committee, a statutory body. 
reference to which is necessary to make 
complete this part of the memorandum 

30. Optical practitioners had taken 
part in the provision of ophthalmic bene· 
fit under the National Health Insurance 
Acts since its inception in 1921, but the 
absence of any universally applicable pro' 
visions as to the conditions on which they 
did so ultimately led to such chaos and 
divergences in procedure as between the 
different approved societies that a numher 
of optical and approved society organisa· 
tions decided in 19 3 2 to form a joint com­
mittee to investigate and report on the 
whole position. 

31. The resultant body, the Ophthalmic 
Benefit Joint Committee, was of a purely 
voluntary nature, without official standing 

separate dipl()ltl]a. Su "Brit. Jnl. Ophth." 
iv.331 (1920). 

~w) Cmd. 2999 (1927). 
x) Ibid., pp. 18, 21 and 22. 
y) Su para. 61 (inf,.a.); for a fuller discus· 

sion of this and related topicR, se~ Appen-
dix A. 



or recognition and therefore without any 
official mandate, but such, on occasion, is 
the value of voluntary co-operative action 
that the Committee carried its self-imposed 
task to a success£ ul conclusion and the 
recommendations it subsequently sub­
mitted to the Minister of Health in 19 3 4 
were accepted almost in their entirety and 
embodied in statutory regulations (z), 
under which the Ophthalmic Benefit 
Approved Committee came into existence. 

· 3 2. The new statutory body (fonsisting 
of equal numbers of approved society and 
optjcal representatives) was created "for 
the general purposes of the administration 
of ophthalmic benefit" and, apart from 
laying down a variety of standards and 
other wnditions re iative to the service, it 
was required by the regulations to com­
pile and maintain a register of those 
optical practitioners it recognised as quali­
fied to undertake N a tiona! Health Insur­
ance work. This register now includes 
some 7,000 practitioners and constitutes a 
measure of state recognition. No person 
is permitted to undertake National Health 
Insurance work unless his name is m­
cluded therein. 

33. It is, perhaps, interesting to add 
that at the time the Ophthalmic Benefit 
}oint Committee was being formed medical 
organisations were invited to participate. 
They declined to do so. 

(iii.) Training, Qualification and 
Disciplinflry Control. 

34. As already mentioned the recog­
nised examining bodies are: 

British Optical Association. 
Worshipful Company of Spectacle 

Makers. 
Institute of Chemists-Opticians. 
:t-.;"ational Association of Opticians. 
Scottish Association of Opticians. 
3). The examinations vary a little in 

scope, but all conform to the standard 
epecified by. the Ophthalmic Benefit 
Approved Committee, which standard is 
based on the recommendations of Dr. L. 
C. Martin, D,Sc., of the Royal College of 
Science, who in 1934 and 1935 carried 
out an investigation of the examinations at 
the request of the O.B.J .C., having b_een 
nominated for , that purpose by Dr. H. 
Spencer Jones, the Astronomer-Royal. No 
person is now admitted to the Committee's 
register unless he has obtained one or 

(•) N a tiona! Health Insurance (Additional 
Benefits) Regulations, S.R.&O. 1937 No. 
973. 

(a) It should be made quite clear that the 
object is not to· enahle the optical pr01cti-

- 52 -

7 

more of the diplomas mentioned and 1~ 
otherwise of satisfactory standing. 

36. The examination syllabuses cover 
the following subjects: 

(i) Theoretical and practical physical 
optics and the theory of optical 
instruments. 

(ii) Subjective and objective method~ 
of measuring errors df refraction 
and their correction. 

(iii) The principles, construction and 
use of all kinds of apparatus re­
quired for the complete external 
and internal examination of the 
eye, its fields of vision and other 
functions. • 

( iv) Anatomy and physiology and, tn 

particular, that of the organs ol 
vision. 

( v) The abnormal and pathological 
conditions of the eye (a). ., 

(vi) The orthoptic or non-operative 
methods of correcting squint and 
related conditions in conjunction 
with errors of refrac:tion that may 
be present. 

(vii) The design and construction of 
spectacle frames and lenses, the 
assembly of parts and the fitting 
and adjustment of completed 
appliances. 

37. Each of the examining bodies ad· 
mits successful candidates to Fellowship 
or Membership and grants diplomas. Cer· 
tain of them also grant an honours 
diploma at a more advanced examination 
which may not ordinarily be sat until a 
year after the Fellowship examination. 

38. The honours diploma of the 
British Optical Association is accepted by 
the University of Manchester for admis­
sion to a research course for the degree 
of Master of Science in the Faculty of 
Technology. Both it and the honours 
diploma of the Spectacle Makers' Com­
pany are also accepted by the University 
of London for admission to special courses 
at the Imperial College of Science and 
Technology, successful completion of 
which entitles candidates to the Diploma 
of the Imperial College (D.I.C.). In addi­
tion they are approved by the War Office 
in lieu of a university degree in connec­
tion with enlistment for certain scientific 
duties which· may not be more fully re· 
ferred to for security reasons. 

tioner to treat such oonditions, but merely 
to reoognise them so that he may refer 
them to an ophthalmic surgeon or other 
medical practitioner. 



- 53 -

8 

39. Courses of study for the examina· 
tions are provided at many technical col· 
leges in various parts of the country, as 
e.g., the Northampton Polytechnic, 
London, the Manchester College of 
Technology (at both of which further 
facilities for research are provided) the 
Heriot• Watt College, Edinburgh, Cardiff 
Technical Qollege, etc. Full·time courses 
are usually of 2 or 3 years' duration; 
part•time courses ~xtend from 3 to 5 
years. 

40. A number of scholarships are avail· 
able, including ten research scholarships 
tenable at' the University of Manchester, 
the Imperial College of Science and the 
Northampton Polytecbnic, London. 

41. Clinical training and experience is 
provided by clinical classes at the recog· 
nised training colleges and in addition 
optical practitioners have by their own 
activities extended facilities in this direc· 
tion by the foundation of refraction has· 
pitals. 

42. The London Refraction Hospital, 
the first of its kjnd in the world, was 
founded by the Institute of Ophth:tlmic 
Opticians in 1922. The Glasgow Refrac• 
tion Hospital was opened in 1928 and, 
like its London counterpart, provides re· 
fractive and other 'treatment. Both are 
entirely staffed by optical practitioners 
and are supported by voluntary contribu· 
tions and students' fees, together with ' 
such sums as the patients are able to 
afford. The London hospital is now ad· 
ministered under a scheme approved . by 
the Charity Commissioners. 

43. Clinical instruction in anatomy, 
physiology and pathology at the recog· 
nised training colleges is provided by 
medical school staffs or by medical men 
and the examination of candidates on be· 
half of the diploma•issuing bodies is also 
carried out by medical specialists. 

44. Disciplinary control of optical 
practitioners is in the hands of the exam• 
ining bodies and the Ophthalmic Benefit 
Approved Committee. Any departure 
from the code of conduct that has been 
laid down by the optical organisations 
may involve the offender in proceedings 
leading to the removal of his name from 
his examining body's register. 

In the same way all optical practitioners 
who are registered by the O.B.A.C. are re· 
quired to subscribe to certain conditions 
of service, infringement of which may re· 
suit in the withdrawal of recognition. 
This renders a practitioner ineligible .to 
undertake National Health Insurance 
work. 

4 5. The posttwn of the British optical 
practitioner is strangely in contrast with 
that of his professional colleague overseas, 
for while in this country the optical pro· 
fession is subject to no state control (ex· 
cept in respect of National Health lnsur· 
ance work), in almost all other English· 
speaking parts of the world Optometry 
Acts provide for a state register of prac· 
titioners and the due regulation of pro· 
fessional activities. To the lay reader it 
may seem almost unbelievable, but there 
is nothing in English law, as it now 
stands, to prevent any person, however 
ignorant or untrained, from practising 
optics and though the reputable practi· 
tioner is subject to strict control through 
the optical bodies we have already men· 
tioned, this is solely because he has vol· 
untarily submitted himself to it for the 
improvement and good governance of the 
profession as a whole. 

In the U.S.A. Optometry Acts are in 
force in ali 48 states of the Union and in 
the District of Columbia. In nearly all 
parts of the Empire the same is true by 
virtue of the followirtg statutes : 

AUSTRALIA 

N.ew South Wales : 
Opticians' Acts, 1930/8. 

itueensland : 
Opticians' Acts, 19 3 7/9. 

South Australia : 
Opticians' Acts, 1920/2. 

Tasmania: 
Opticians' Act, 191 3. 

Victoria: 
Opticians' Registration Act, 19 3 ,-. 

BRITISH GUIANA 

Opticians· Act, 19 3 3. 

CANADA 

Alberta : Optometry Act, 19 21. 

British Columbia: 
Optometry Acts, l 9 21 I 3 5. 

Manitoba : Optometry Act, 1909. 

N.ew Brunswic~ : 
Optometry Acts, 1921/36, 

Nova Scotia : Optometry Act, 19 21. 

Ontario: Optometry Act, 1936. 

Prince Edward Is. : 
Optometry Act, 19 2 2. 

ituebec: 
Optometrists' and Opticians' Acts, 

1907/37. 
Sas~atchewan : Optometry Act, 19 24. 



NEWFOUNDLAND 

Optometry Act, I 928. 

NEW ZEALAND 

. Opticians' :\cts, 1928/34. 

WEST INDIES 

jamaica: Opticians' Law, 1926. 
Trinidad: 

Opticians' Registration Ordinance, 
1933. 

Perhaps the most striking anomaly is the 
fact that in some parts of the Empire, as, 
e.g., New Zealand, the West, Indies, etc., 
a British diploma entitles the holder to ad­
mission to the state register, thus con­
ferring on him privileges that are denied 
him at home. 

(iv.) The Work of the Optical 
Practitioner. 

46. In view of what has already been 
said on the subject of training and exam­
ination it is, perhaps, not necessary to do 
more than to summarise the present-day 
scope of ophthalmic optics under the 
following headings: · 

( i) Private Practice. This forms the 
greater part of the optical practi· 
tioner's work, the preference of 
the public in this connection being 
well established. 

(ii) National Health Insurance Prac­
tice. As with private practice, 
the greater part of the insured 
population shows a preference for 
the services of optical practitioners, 
notwithstanding that a small num­
ber of approved societies compul­
sorily direct their members to a 
medical service and assume full 
responsibility for the fees thereof. 

As already mentioned, this side 
of the work IS controlled by the 
Ophthalmic Benefit Approved 
Committee and it is worth noting 
that in laying down its standards 
the O.B.A.C. adopted the prin· 
ciples already enunciated and 
applied some 5 years earlier by 
the Joint Council of Qualified .. 
Opticians. These principles volun• 
tarily adopted by the profession 
for National Health Insurance 
work thus later became the ac­
cepted basis of the official scheme. 

(iii) Visual Welfare in Industry. Num· 
bers of large industrial firms in the 
country are using the services of 

- 54 -

9 

optical practitioners m providing 
an optical service for their employ­
ees, thus· enabling industrial eye­
sight to be dealt with against 1ts 
proper occupational and environ­
mental background. 

This service has proved so satis­
factory that it has been adopted by 
the Ministry of Supply for Royal 
Ordnance factories throughout the 
country. Practitioners undertake 
the refraction work, where neces­
sary issuing a prescription to be 
made up by the employee's own 
optician. The fee for the exam­
ination is met by the Treasury. 

In Royal Ordnance factories 
alone more than 30,000 workers 
have been examined by optical 
practitioners, who work in close 
collaboration with the factory 
medical officers. 

Assistance has also been g1ven 
in the protective field and in at 
least one instance a special goggle 
has been designed which must have 
saved hundreds of eyes from in­
jury. 

(iv) In the Fo·rces. Owmg to medical 
oppos1tion the optical practitioner 
is not recognised in his professional 
capacity in the medical branches of 
H.M. Forces. 

In the Army and the Royal 
Navy he is permitted to act only 
as a dispensing optician with the 
rank of sergeant or petty officer. 
In the R.A.F. the scope of his 
duties is a little wider but he is 
graded only as an optician­
orderly with the rank of sergeant, 
if establishment allows. 

In all three serv1ces optical 
practitioners are in many cases 
carrying out refraction unofficially, 
but receive no recognition for this 
work. 

In the non-medical branches of 
the Forces, where, of course, 
medical men are not in control, 
there is a marked contrast, for 
optical practitioners are used in a 
variety of scientific capacities for 
which their training suits them 
and commissioned rank has been 
granted freely to them. 

The treatment of optical practi­
tioners jn H.M. Forces in this 
country is sharply at variance with 



tO 

- 55 -

what obtains in ,the Australian and 
New Zealand Forces, where practi· 
tioners holding "British qualifica­
tions are used in a professional 
capacity and accorded commis­
sioned rank. 

(v.) Research apd Advances ID 

Technique. 

4 7. for the last 40 years the subject of 
research has increasingly occupied the 
minds of optical practitioners. It has been 
encouraged by the provision of scholar• 
ships, by collective efforts organised or 
sponsored by the optical associations and 
to no small extent by individual effort. 

48. It is not possible to give here a 
full list of the published results of such 
research but for those who are interested 
a representative selection will be found 
in a later part of this memorandum (b). 

49. 'In the field of instrumentation 
valuable contnbutions have also been 
made by optical practitioners and a selec· 
tion of these, too, is given (b). 

50. Optical practitioners are particu· 
larly proud of their contribution to the 
correction of squint. During the 18th 
century medical men were helpless to cor· 
rect it (c), though Chevalier John Taylor 
a qualified but itinerant and unorthodox 
practitioner, undoubtedly put squinting 
eyes straight by surgical means, which 
probably involved severance of the 
tendons or muscles of the eye. His 
methods were naturally decried by ortho· 
dox medicine, yet in another 100 years 
tenotomy and myotomy, which he prac• 
tised, had become the normal medical 
procedure. 

51. Surgical measures alone are not, 
however, as a general rule, a true remedy 
arid the first moves in the diagnosis and 
treatment of squint as we now know them 
came from Emile Java! (d), whose work 
was developed in England by Claud 
Worth, a surgeon (e). This technique 
was practised by medical men but in most 
cases with little or no improvement on 
the teachings of thirty years ago. 

52. Optical practitioners have, however, 
been able to make considerable advance· 
ment. The London Refraction Hospital 
provided orthoptic' treatment from its in· 
ception, but originally as part of the or· 
dinary clinical arrangements. By 1926, 
however, the demand for this treatment 
(b) See Appc:ndix B. 
(c) Sorsby, Shot·t History of Opllthalmology 

( 1933), p.61. 
(d) Mant.,l Throretique n Pratique du Stra· 

bism11 (1896). 

had become such that <t separate urthup· 
tic clinic was established--the first in any 
hospital in Great Britain 

Originally, the Worth technique wa» 
largely employed, but in about 19H 
Walter Green introduced into this 
country the newer methods of Cantonnet 
and Filli02;at, which, conjoined with the 
Worth teaching, were developed by Green 
and his colleagues at both Refrac;tion 
Hospitals, where the modern psychological · 
techniques have been practised with great 
success. From the clinical experience 
gained at these hospitals two textbooks 
(f) have been compiled and are used by 
medical and optical men alike. At the 
same time valuat-.le research has been car· 
ried out at the Northampton Polytechnic's 
Orthoptic Clinic, some of the results of 
which may be found in H. H. Em~ley's 
Vistu1l Optics. The design of a number 
of the latest instruments (g) and their 
associated techniques have been developed 
largely from experiments carried out by 
optical practitioners. 

CONCLUSIONS. 
53. It will be ~een from what has been 

said that ophthalmic optics has developed 
from the physical sciences. 

54. It has developed on d1stinct and 
separate lines from quite early times be· 
cause it is primarily conCerned with the 
adequacy of healthy eyes, thus differing 
from ophthalmology which is traditionally 
occupied with dibease. These constitute the 
essential differences between the two pro· 
fessions in their fundamental outlook and 
fields of work, which make it impossible 
to combine satisfactorily their respective 
functions within the same profession. It 
should be noted that for centuries nearly 
all medica) men regarded glasses a~ Clther 
useless or definitely harmful. 

55. The present high standard of effici· 
ency has been achieved by means of vol­
untary action on the part of the optical 
profession and without the assistance of 
the State except insofar as certain of the 
training colleges are state· aided. 

56. The field of ophthalmic optics is 
linked with that of medicine only where 
the detection of pathological conditions is 

·studied, but this is done, not fat the pur· 
pose of purporting to treat such condi­
tions, but solely for that of recogni~ing 
them so that they may be referred for the 
necessary medical attention. · 

(e) Squmt, 1ts Causes, JJatl1•loyy a·nd Treat· 
met1t ( 1903). 

(f) Giles, Manual of Ptactical OrthopHc• 
( 1938) and Practice of Orthoptics (1943). 

(g) e.v., tho3e of Cole, Skewes, Green, etc. 



(11.) To show that In the public 
Interest Optical Practitioners 
should continue as a separate 
and Independent professslon. 

57. As already indicated (paras. 3-7, 
supra) official medicine has for many 
years opposed the development of the 
optical practitioner with every force at its 
disposal, repeatedly urging that the dan• 
ger. of his Q':'e.rlooking a diseased or patho· 
logtcal condttJOn of the eye is so great that 
he ought not to be permitted to carry out 
a sight-testing examination in any case or 
to prescribe for the correction of errors of 
refraction. 

58. It is not proposed to dwell at this 
stage upon the weight of this argument 
which is considered elsewhere (h), but a~ 
a corollary to it, it has long been the 
proposal of organised medicine that the 
optical practitioners should be reduced to 
th~ level of fl dispensing optician, i.e., one 
who '~oes no sight-testing and who only 
supplies spectacles in accordance with a 
prescription. 

59. Notwithstanding such opposition it 
is an incontrovertible fact that ophthalmic 
optics has developed to a remarkable ex• 
tent, particularly in the last half century 
and, perhaps because of this, a new or 
alternative attitude seems, more recently, 
to have been engrafted on to what we 
may term the traditional medical view. 
This is to the e !feet . that if, as a temper• 
ary measure, optical practitioners are to 
W allowed to continue I sight-testing and 
prescribing, then they should do so only 
under full medical control. 

60. It is, therefore, the purpose of this 
part of the memorandum to shew that, 
quite apart from the question of equity, it 
would not be in the public interest that 
either alternative should be permitted and 
the matter is approached from the points 
of view of: 

( i) Efficiency of Service. 
( ii) Public preference. 

(iii) Development, past and future. 

- 56 -

1 l 

bee~ permitted to participate in the 
Nat10nal Health Insurance Ophthalmic 
Benefit Scheme to the extent they do, 
nor would the legislature have been pre· 
pared to grant the limited measure of 
state registration that is implied in the 
List maintained by the Ophthalmic Bene• 
fit Approved Committee. 

62: ~o.reover, examples are not lacking 
of ~ndtvtdual op.hthalmologists having 
publl~ly sta:ed the~r. ~wareness of optical 
practitiOners capabthttcs. Thus, Sir George 
Berry, surgeon·oculist to His Majesty in 
Scotland, has stated ( i), ". . . 9; % of 
cases of eye trouble are of only optical 
defect. . . . In point of fact, the skt1Ied 
optician is perfectly competent to under­
take the correction of optical defects" ( j). 

63. The question of the efficiency of a 
se~ice is to no small degree bound up 
~Ith that of. its availability, particularly 
~ a geographical sense. From this point of 
view the optical practitioner provides a 
truly nation•wide service. 

64. As further evidence of the fact 
that optical practitioners are officially re· 
garded as performing a vital service satis· 
factorily it may be mentioned that their 
liability for military service under the 
National Service Acts is subject to a 
special scheme agreed between the Minis· 
try of Health and the Ministry of Labour 
and National Service, tht! object of which 
is to ensure that no man shall be enlisted 
for service in the Forces if the optical 
facilities in the area he serves would 
thereby be reduced below what is regarded 
as a reasonable minimum. These arrange· 
ments are exactly similar to those apply· 
ing to the medical and dental professions. 

(ii.) Public Preference. 

65. It has already been stated (para. l, 
supra) that the majority of the public 
consult optical practitioners in the first 
place in relation to their eye troubles. 
Unfortunately it is not possible to prove 
precisely the extent to which this is done 
since no figures showing the number of 
refractive cases dealt with by the medical 
and optical professions, respectively, can 

(i.) Efficiency of Service. be produced. 
61. It is submitted that it cannot 66. It is known, however, that there 

reasonably be doubted that the service are about 1,000 ophthalmic surgeons and 
provided by optical practitiot:~ers is ade· ophthalmic medical practitioners now avail· 
quate and satisfactory. If it were not, then able (~) (but see para. 91). As against 
there would scarcely be some 7,000 of this there are some 7,000 optical practi­
them in practice, nor would they have tioners and, assuming for the moment 
(h) S "' A ppenrlix A~ ·----------~.(J"') -S<"'e=-=e:-:-alr.::s-=-o-A'p:-:p:-:e::::n-;rl.,-ix-.A:.....-p=-=a-r-as-.-:9;;-·-:cl 0;;-.---
(i) Optical Practitioners' (Registration) Bill, (k) Per N. Bishop Harman, Annual Meetinc. 

1927: Dehate on Second Reading, Han· B.M.A., lOth September, 1942. 
sard, 206.826. 

• 



- 57 -

1 2 

that medical and opt1cal men handle on 
the average the same number of refraction 
cases each, we are led to the conclusion 
that medical ref ractionists deal with about 
one-eighth and optical practitioners about 
seven-eighths of the total amount of re­
fraction work carried out. This does not, 
however, take into account that the 
medical men are required to deal with 
surgical and pathological work which 
naturally reduces the time available for 
purely refractive cases. Probably, there­
fore, medical men handle no more than 
one-tenth of the refr;Jctions done, the rc· 
maining nine-tenths being dealt with by 
optical practitioners, 

6 7. It will thus be seen that the prefer­
ence of the public is very marked indeed, 
notwithstanding the intensive publicity 
that has been carried on for nearly 13 
year¥ on behalf of medical intere~;ts and 
d~llplte th~ { 4Ct that in the arhere of 
National Health ln~Jurance a smal number 
of approved societie~ compel their mem­
bers to undergo a medical eye examination 
as a condition of their receiving benefit. 

(iii.) Development-Past and Future. 

68. It is submitted that the field of 
public health is now too wide to be 
covered adequately by a single profession 
and that so great is the knowledge needed 
in this sphere that its successful applica­
tion has required, and must in the future 
require. the development of separate anc.l 
Ctllllplt'nH·ntilry prnl\:~11ionK within the 
g~twtal f 11brlc of the hrulth llct·vice. 

69. This is obviously appreciated in 
official circles for Sir Wilson Jameson, 
Chief Medical Officer of the Ministry of 
Health, • in his speech to the Industrial 

- Health Conference in 1943 (!), indicated 
the necessity for joint efforts by all con­
cerned in the field of public health and 
said that in any planned effort to raise 
the standard of public health service, 
medicine had an important but by no 
means the only part to play. 

70. In the two fields of ophthalmic 
optics and ophthalmology both the ap­
proach and outlook are fundamentally 
different, fot while the former is based on 
the science of physics and its application 
to visual needs, the latter is primarily con­
cerned with pathology. That is to say, 
ophthalmic optics is concerned with 
healthy eyes and the correction of their 
anomalies of vision; ophthalmology is con­
cerned with unhealthy eyes and the treat­
ment and cure of disease. 

71 .. '\ rcu:nt ,tatemo:nt •Jt Prutt"··"r 
John Ryle ( m) S•trports this: 

"The maJ••nty of doctor' h,t\T i·een 
compdled to the beltd that thea tlr~t 
funcllun 1s the treatment uf diseaso: <)r 

inJury and nut the mainten:tnce of, or 
education fur, health. MeJ1cal student~ 
are still largely b1ed m this belief, they 
learn little of the foundatiOns, rnearom); 
or measurement of health and r.ucly 
examme a healthy ''1bject The public 
for the must part tlnnk ot the dul1••r 
as someone to consult 111 t1me., of -ick· 
ness only." 

72. J\1orcover, 1t is psy.:hu!c:gJcallv "" 
sound to bring unde1 the Jr.tlucncc of 
rnedicine the la~ge numbers ot the public 
who are healthy subjects and whuse vp;ual 
efficiency has been, and can be, looked 
after by the optical practitioner. It is, of 
cour~>c, neceliliary that there should be ade­
'!Uate safeguards to ensure that cases of 
di11ea~e are "ent forward for medical atten­
tion, hut these safeguardR a-lready exist. 
Optical practitioners arc tr;uned and ex· 
ami ned m the rccog nition of diseases by 
medical men and the fact that under 
National Health lmurance arrangements 
they are required to refer such cases surely 

· comtitutes offi Cia! recognition that they 
are capable of identifying then, 

7 3. Optical practitioners could. inded, 
have reached proficiency in the recognJtit)n 
of abnormal conditions more cc~sily if or­
ganised medicine had a~sisted i11 proviJmg 
(uciliticll. Aa it i11 the optical prnfessinn 
acknowlcd~cs wnh !<pedal gratitude the­
public spirit of those individual opkh. 
mologists who have helped it to become 
efficient in th1s sphere. 

74. It is certainly true that no pr' •tes­
sion can live on its past but there <U~ 
valuable lessons to be learnt from Jt ,nJ 
it has been thought expedient to g1,·,: ill 
earlier paragraphs some account nf the 
history of ophthalmic optics to show the 
manner of and reason for its develupm~.·nt 
as a separate field of \\'•>rk. 

That development, de::-pllc mcdJ<·:d 
oppositiOn and indifference !rom the 
earliest times, has con tmucd lllll·heckec. 

75. The prr~ent btage of advanu'nll.:nt 
has been attained under the system of 
domestic professional control that ~till' 
exists and which has amply justified 1tdf 
by the fruit it has borne. The substitutlun, 
of medical control--and, it must be rc· 
membered, this would mean control not. 
only of practice, but also oi training, ex-

(f) Reported in The Lancet, 17th April, 1943, (m) Brit. Mrd. htl., Editorial. 7th A11;:u,t. 
p.SOO. 1943. p.l74. 



am1nation and research -would, it is 
suggested, hamper continued development 
along the present very satisfactory lines 
because of the fundamentally different 
outlook and approach of the two profes­
sions. 

- 58 -

sional not to ~ay ~cltish--- point of 
view." 
82. It may also be mentioned that 

although dentists and pharmacists are now 
poth state-registered by virtue of thur 
own acts of Parliament. medicine has 
nevertheless clung to its right to dispense 
and to practise dentistry notwithstanding 
that training in either now forms but a 
negligible part of medical school curricula 

76. Although ophthalmic optics is of 
early origin, the most intense period of its 
development has been the last 50 years; 
the major techniques of refraction are, 
therefore, modern and capable of vigor-
ous growth and scicntifi,.: extension so long CONCLlJSIONS. 
as they are not stifled by an unsuitable 83. It is submitted that the continued 
form of control. existence of the optical profession as a 

77. Moreover, it would seem illogical tQ separate entity is justified on grounds alone 
hand control of the techniques optical of its prov"Cn efficiency and of the very 
practitioners have largely developed and marked preference that the public shews 
are still developing satisfactorily to a pro- for its services. 
fession which has not only aggressively 84. It is necessary, however, also to 
opposed the just claims of the optical pro- safeguard future development as a public 
fession for many years but. which did not health service along the best possible lines. 
see fit itself to cater for a public need · So far as this is concerned it should be 
which apparently "orrly became pressing noted that its growth so far has been 
when there was a probability that this natural and has produced satisfactory re· 
field of practice would escape from the suits, but the substitution of some alterna· 
grasp of its members" ( n). tive or artificial form of control vested in 

78: In general the relationship of the another profession would militate against 
British Medical Association to allied pro· further development along the same bene· 
fess10ns is a grave reflection on organised ficial lines. 
medicine itself, since its present activities 85. To maintain the standards of a pro· 
and past history shew it to be much more fessional technique and to foster the re· 
fully concerned with its own interests quisite sense of corporate and individual 
than with those of the public as a whole. responsibility, control of its work must 

79. It will be recalled that in 1911 or- rest with the profession itself, subject 
ganised medicine opposed in every way only to the over-riding supervision of the 
possible the introduction of the National state. 
Health Insurance ALl- . a measure which, 86. Broadly speaking, the meJi.:al and 
with all its admitted anomalies, it cannot opticaf professions should provtde com· 
be doubted has been to the great and plementary services, relative respedively 
lasting benefit of the public as a whole. to the fields of pathology and refraction. 

~0. Again, in 19 3 7, there was the most Once ophthalmic optics is fully regulated 
intense medical opposition to the National by the state as a separate profession it 
Health Insurance (Additional Benefits) would be a simple matter to provide suit· 
Regulation.s of that year. The object of able links with medicine within the 
these regulations was to improve and general structure of the health services of 
unify the administration of ophthalmic the nation. Both the public and the pro· 
benefit to the advantage of the insured fessions-and, therefore, the state-must 
population and the necessity for such im· benefit if a sound relationship IS estab· 
provement was strongly urged by all lished. 
approved societies and was fully recog· 
nised by the Minister of Health. (iii.) To show that full effect can-

81. More recently, Lord Latham, Chair- ·not otherwise be given to the 
man, London County Council, referring three principles laid down by the 
to the Government's fon;nulation of a com· Ministry of Health as those upon 
prehensive health scheme based on h h ~ H 1 h S 1 
Assumption. B of the Beveridge Report w ich t e I uture eo t erv ce 
said (o): wl/1 be based. 

"Unfortunately, there are not want- 87. It is now proposed to consider with 
ing indications that many of the official particular reference to the optical profc~· 
spokesmen of the doctors are approach· sion three basic principles which, it is to 
ing the matter from a narrow· profes- be gathered from statements on behalf oi 

(n) Carr·Saunders and \Vilson, 1'/tc- JJ·:-,..-,f-:-e-S·--(-o-) R~porterl in Tk~ 1'ime;~·6~-h-(-lcf.~:-19-4J:­
rion.ll (1933). p.474. 



-- 59 -

14 

the Ministry of Health, are those upon 
which the nation's comprehcmive health 
service will be built. These principles are 
in substance as follows: 

the medical profession was given an 
opportunity (at the expcmc of the optical 
profession) to provide what it then said 
was the best service ( q), 16 years have 
passed and medical men are still dealing 
with only about one-tenth of the people 
requiring refractive attention ( s ). 

(i) To provide the best services and 
provide them for all. 

(ii) To ensure personal and profes· 
sional freed om. 

(iii) To aim at the preservation of 
health as well as the cure of 
"disease. 

93. The general position is fully appre· 
ciated in medical circles, a-; witness a re· 
cent editorial m the British Med1cal 
Journal which said, " ... Doctors simply 

(i.) Hcst S•:rviccs for oil. have not the time nece.;sary to do their 
88. The C;-trdinal requirement of this job with satisfaction either to the cornmu· 

principle is that the service should he efli· nity or themselves" ( t) The ,s:Jme article 
cient, and full consideration of what is quotes and supports Sir Farquhar Buz.z.ard 
efficient, in turn, requires that there should (u) in saying, "The number of doctors 
he taken into account the accessibility of must be increased or their work decreased. 
the service, the established preference of The first alternative is a melancholy and 
the public and the best use of existing defeatist attitude; the second deserve& 
facilities, providing always that they are more careful consideration than it has yet 
technically adequate. received." 

89. It is at least doubtful whether the 94. A rather different point, but one 
most efficient service can be provided by that bears strongly on the question of what 
a single profession that attempts to cover is the best service, is that the division of 
too wide a field, especially when that field responsibility between the prescriber and 
falls naturally into two parts springing the dispenser of glasses under medical 
from different technical sources. arrangements is fundamcnLdly unsnund 

90. Pure ophthalmology is already wide A patient with an error of refractHJ!l 
and rapidly developing. The same is true needs to be supplied with an optical aprli· 
of ophthalmic optics and separation of ance that will correct that e1 ror and it 
the two techniques is, it is submitted, in ;Jwuld be the responsibility uf the pcr~'ln 
the bc~t interests of the public. The v.~ho carries out the examination to prtl\:Jde 
medical p10fe~·irll1 is not in a position to him with it. 
pn)vide the bc,t, or even an adequate, 95. In this connection it is rertincnt to 
service in refraction if only through sheer quote the opinion of Dr. W. H. Cnsp, 
lack of numbers, since accordinD' to the the eminent American ophthalmologist(v): 
Briti,<h Medical Association (p) there are "Nor should it he forgotten that an 
now b11t 1,000 ophthalmic surgeons and important p;u t of refractive technique 
ophth:-drnic medical practitioners to deal lies in the proper adjustment of fnme 
with the requirements of 45,000,000 and lenses, and that a g•Jod rdractive 
people, including surgical and pathological diagnosis may he spoiled, :;o far as the 
wo1 k. result to the patient is concerned. by 

91. 1v1oreover, of this 1,000 a suhstan- neglect as to centering and angltn~: ,,f 
tial proportion consists merely of general the lenses or as tel the di,Ltnc-e ! 1 nn1 
practitioners whn have been persuaded to the eyes .. " 
work under the B.M.A.'s medical ophthal· Moreover, any tiubsequent ;tdju,tiHrnts 
mic service, which was initiated in 1927 that may he needed can he ct1.:(·tfd hy the 
to block the Optical Practitioners' (Regis• refractionist wllh full knowlnJ~~e of tht• 
tration) l3ill (q). In 1938, Mr. F. E. condition shewn hy his examinatHl11. 
Preston, president of the Association of SeparatiOn of the practice anJ the arrlica· 
British Ophth;-tlmologists, said at a con· tion of refraction is artifie~al and ill<lJ:lCal. 
fnence of the /\ssoci;-ttion at Oxford that, Nor is it in the best int,:rcsts ol the 
of a tot;-tl of Y02 medical men working patient. 
the scheme, only 342 were consultants, the 
remainder heing general practitioners (r). (ii). l'crsonol and Profcs~ional 
It seems fair to assume that the propor- Freedom. 
tion is not now materiJlly different. 96. By the expressiOn ·"p•·J·.,•tul :tc•· 

92. Thus, despite the fact that in 1927 dom" is presum;tbly meant tl .. · lt,·!'\l<>r~' ol 
(ri--h~:r;,;r-"t----or-~\ilil-it;r· Kt;;-:t~n~;----folh"- seP!~---(:!T- su-i.at--a-:--66 -(;upili):----- -- -· 

1042, cited in para. 66 (supra)_ (I) Issue of 7th August, 1943, p 174 
(q) Sn para. 28 (su{'ru). (u) Writing in I hi' Times of 2ht Jtdl', 1'1·11 
(r) Reported in Tltl' Ophthalmic Bu/ktin, (v) Am. Jul. 0('hth., .'\Uf.(U:>I, J<~4:J. 

Jamwq•, 1930 



~the individual member of the public to 
-obtain attention in the manner that most 
-commends itself to him and from a prac· 
titioner of his own choice. 

97. Organised medicine, in opposing 
the suggestion of a state salaried medical 
service, has already laid stress on the im· 
portance of this principle. The optical 
profession agrees that it is vital and has 
nothing to add save to point out that the 
public already enjoys in large measure 
freed om of choice in respect of optical 
facilities and that this freedom is exercised 
in a very marked manner in favour of 
-optical practitioners ( w). 

98. In relation to professional freedom 
Mr. Erne5t 13rown, then Minister of 
Health, speaking at the Westminster Hos· 
pita! Medical School (x), said that the 
•true liberty of the professional man was 
freedom to exercise his knowledge and his 
skill according to his conscience and 
ability, without fear or favour. 

99. It would be difficult to find better 
words for what the optical profession is 
claiming. 

100. Professional freedom, it is evident, 
1s closely connected w1th the provision of 
the best service. The greatest stimulus to 
advancement must always come from 
within the profeEsions themselves and to 
this end it is important that each indepen· 
dent profession should be encouraged to 
retain the fullest measure of self-govern· 
ment, subject only to the over·riding 
.authority of the state. 

iii.) Preservation of Healtl\, not Cure 
of Disease alone. 

I 0 l. In any health service that pur· 
ports to be comprehensive the need of 
-ensuring the preservation of the health of 
the individual is obvious. 

Many human ills are due to working 
<:onditions and environment and most of 
them arc therefore avoidable and there is 
amrk evidence of the economic losses 
HJstained by industry and by the nation 
as a whole owing to the lack of a com· 
plete complementary social service of this 
kind 

102. The optical practitioner's work is 
largely preventive· in nature, for by cor· 
rccting refractive defects he is remedying 
a condition which, if unchecked, leads to 

- 60 -

the all·too·familiar type!! of fatigue and 
inefficiency. The optical practitioner has 
not only recognised his share of responsi· 
bilil y in this direction but has also made 
positive. attempts to neutralise the ill· 
effects of occupation on eyesight. 

103. This is shown by his work in fac 
tories, which first began some 10 years 
ago and which is so satisfactory as to 
have been adopted by the Ministry of 
Supply. So far, however, only the fringe 
of the problem has been touched and the 
work of maintaining optical com fmt and 
efficiency is capable of extension to an 
almost unlimited variety of visual tasks. 

104. A wide sphere of development in 
this particular direction is therefore open 
and the optical profession will be found 
willing and anxious to co-operate' loyally 
in whatever demands may be made of it 
in this or in any other phase of hs pro· 
fessional work. 

With regard to these wider issues we 
feel certain that the opportunity exists to 
establish an ophthalmic service which 
would be an outstanding model and which 
might favourably influence associated de· 
velopment in all parts of the world. 

CO:'IICLUSIONS. 

105. It is submitted that the "best ser· 
vice" cannot be given to the public except 
by utilising to the full the existing facili· 
ties provided by optital practitioners. This, 
in turn, calls for the State regulation of 
the professiOn at the earliest possible 
moment, together with the provisi(ln of 
suitable liaison arrangements with the 
medical profession within the gener;d or· 
ganisation of the comprehensive health 

·service. 
106. The optical profession IS already 

State regulated to some extent through the 
Ophthalmic 13encfit Approved Cornmittee. 

The optical practitioner earnestly de· 
sires that State regulation shall extend to 
the complete protection of his professional 
title and function and although the present 
N.H.I. arrangements are gerhaps not ideal 
for this particular purpose there can be 
little doubt that the experience gained 
under them would be found of the utmo~t 
value in setting up a full State register for 
the profession. 

·--------·------ . -·-----·-·-·-·--·-····----
(w) See para. 66 (supra). (x) Reported in The 1 imes, 5th Octohl:'r, 1943, 



- 61 -

16 

APPENDIX .A . 
. Medical Opposition to the v.:ith the Board. 

OpticHI Profession. The Board, whtch comt~h ot represcn 
I. The attttude of organised medicine tat1Ves .appomteJ. hy the B.M.A. and hy 

towards the optical practitioner has already the
1 

Gmld of Britt<;h Dispensing Opticians, 
been refencd to in various parts of the dtd. not, however, commence operation.> 
preceding memorandum and the essential unul 1930, that is, until three years after 
nature of the di !Terences between the two the Optical Practitioners' ( Regi<tration) 
professions has hcen explained briefly. It Bill had been rejected. This seem.~ to make 
ts now proposed to examine a little more it quite certain that the negutiations men· 
fully th~ contentions of the medical pro· tioned had as their express object the 
fe,5'ton tn thts connection. blocking of the Bill, but for which thr 

2. Before doing so however it would be anxiety of the British Medical A<sociation 
as well to give some account of certain to make the servtces of oculisth readily 
medical activtttes contemporary with the available to the public at fees within their 
~rc~erHation. in Parliament of the Optical reach might not have found expression. 
J ractttJOners (Registration) Bill, 1927 . 5 · In relation to medical opposition 

3. That llil! was referred to a Depart· generally it will be remembered that the 
mental ~ommtttee, whose majority report view put forward is that the optical prac· 
(a) advtsed agamst State registration, the titioner should not be allowed to do more 
reason for thts recommendation being in than make up glasses ordered by a medical 
the Committee's own words: ' man and that, in particular, he should not 

" ... we are sat1sfied that there exist~ be permitted to test sight or to prescribe 
a movement on the part of the medical for the correction of errors of refraction 
profession to provide treatment by 6. The principal reason given for this 
oculists on terms which will make that is the danger--said to be a senous one- --
treatment much more readily accessible that an optici!ln is likely to overlook a 
to the public. We are assured, for ex· diseased or abnormal condition This ha~. 
ample, tha't so far as insured persom however, been enlarged upon and supplr 
are concerned, negotiations are at mented, as follows: 
pre~ent being conducted by the British (i) That though optical pr;lWtionct !I 
Medical AssociatiOn with a view to the may claim to be trai11ed •.n detect 
establishment in all the more populous abnormal conditions. such training 
di~tricts of clinics . . . The setting up is utterly inadequate for the pu: 
of a State register of opticians would pose. 
not rncourage and might indeed retard ( ii) That the examination of eyes and 
these movements" (b). " ... we desire the prescribing of treatment, 
to emphasise that one of the principal whether in the form of corrective 
reasons on which we base this opinion lenses or otherwise, are matters ex 
(i.e., against a State register) is our elusively within thl' sphere <1! 

view that it is possthle and prohable that . medicine, and 
the medical profession will be able to (iii) That it is not desirable tu cornhtti\' 
provide insured persons ... with the in one person the profes~ion.d 
~ervices of oculists at an early date . . . function of prescribing with tL•: 
\Vc hope also that such a service will be commercial one of ,eJling :-p._., 
extended to the nowinsured population. taclcs. 
!f, however, 1hese hopes are not ful· 7 It is not proposed to comment on 
filled within ;1 reasonable time we do the bare assertion that the optical pral, 
not wish our report to preclude the titioner should not be allowed to test 01 

possibility of oa reconsideration of the prrscrihe, except to say that his ability to 
question in the light of the circum· do so is fully recognised by the public a11cf 
~tances then existing" (c). aim by the Ministry of Health and the 
4. The negotiations referred to in due Government, by virtue of the part he take• 

course resulted in the formation of the in National Health Insurance and Royal 
National Ophthalmic Treatment Board, Ordnance factory work. It is very nece:; 
an organisation which, under the name of sary, however, tn deal fully with th,· 
the National Eye Service, provides exam· grounds upon which the ass!'rtion is sup 
ination by medical men and the supply of posed to he based. 
any necessary glasses through a numher of 8. The first such ground j, the sug 
~:m~ ~~--di:~pcnsing optici~1n~ as~9ci~ted __ B:stcd inadequacy of the opti, a\ pt .tcti 
(n1 l'ni<L 2<Jq'l (l<l:!7). (h) Ibid., p.l7 -----(c-:)-ji~i./.~-~; JR. 



tioner·~ trainmg. to detect disease. But any 
allcgatton of th1s sort by the medical pro­
fession in fact amounts to no less than a 
condemnation of the abilities of certain of 
its own members, for, as has already been 
stated, the training and examination of 
optical students in pathological subjects is 
carried out by medical men. 

9. In this connection it is interesting to 
quote the views of Mr. Sydney Tibbles, 
the ophthalmic surgeon (d): 

" In all fairness to the optician I 
must say that if they meet with any 
abnormality they are only too pleased to 
send the patient to someone . . . For 
years I have examined in one section 
out of five on abnormalities and diseases 
of the eye for the Institute of Chemists­
Opticians. Last week I could only find 
one candidate out of six whom I could 
conscientiously mark below 70% in my 
section. I do not set the papers, which 
are under the supervision of officials of 
the University of London." 
10. The opinion of Mr. G. Lindsay 

Johnson, another ophthalmic surgeon, is 
even stronger (~:): 

"Perhaps it may come as a surprise 
to many of your readers when I assure 
them that the examinations held by the 
Spectacle Makers' Company and the 
British Optical Association (at any 
rate, for honours) require quite as much 
hard study as is necessary to pass the 
M.B. or Conjoint examination at any 
of our medical universities and schools 
in Great Britain." 

" I speak from personal knowledge, 
as I was one of the four examiners for 
10 years for the Spectacle Makers' ·com· 
pany, in conjunction with Prof. 
Silvanus Thomp5on, F.R.S., Prof. Glaz.e· 
bro(;~. F.R.S. and Dr. Smith, F.R.S. 

" On one occasion I handed the list 
of questions I had just set for the can· 
didates of the Spectacle Makers' Com· 
pany to the entire senior staff of the 
Royal London Ophthalmic Hospital 
and not a single one of the ten sur· 
geons there could answer more than 
one or two or, at the most, three of the 
questions set." 

In fairness to both sides, however, it is 
desirable to make two comments. The first 
is that Mr. Lindsay Johnson is referring 
to the papers of the examination as a 
whole and not merely to the "diseases" 
papers. The second is that since he wrote 
(d) Brit:--Medical Jnl., 26th Nov., 1937. 
(e) South Africcm Medical Jnl., Feb., 1932. 
(f) South African Med. h1l., Feb., 1932; also 

'confirmed by authorities cited at page 5, 

- 62 -

17 

the above 11 years ago all the optic.d ex· 
aminations have been made of equal 
standard; moreover that standard has been 
appreciably raised. 
- 11. To the above it is only necessary 
to add what has already been said, viz., 
that as, under National Health Insurance 
arrangements, optical practitioners are re· 
quired to refer pathological cases for other 
attention, their ability to recognise them 
is implicit. 

12. The second ground referred to in 
paragraph 6 (supra) is that the examin· 
ation and ~r~atment of the eye, including 
the prescnbmg of spectacles, is wholly 
within the medical sphere. So far as treat­
ment of disease pure and simple is con· 
cerned, the optical profession is in com­
plete agreement and it has, in fact, never 
attempted to trespass on what it regards 
as exclusively medical territory. 

13. But whether prescribing for errors 
of refraction alone is a wholly medical 
conc~r~, is a matter of opinion. Optical 
practtttoners have been doing it for some 
hundreds of years longer than medical 
men and we have it on the authority of 
Mr. G. Lindsay Johnson, M.D., F.R.C.S., 
that, save in isolated cases, the latter have 
done so for no longer than 70 years (f). 
Thu.s, though there is apparently a sug­
g.e~twn that the activities of optical prac· 
t1t10ners constitute an attempt to surplant 
me~ical m.en, the facts are the very op· 
postte. Th1s has already been shown in the 
short historical survey in Part I of the 
memorandum. 

14. The third ground relates to the 
i~appropriateness of combining the profes· 
swnal work of prescribing with the corn· 
mercia! activity of selling spectacles. But 
this hardly seems to differ from the supply 
of medicine by a doctor or dentures by a 
dentist; moreover, it is by no means un· 
~nown for doctors to provide glasses and, 
mdeed, their right to dispense their own 
optical prescriptions has been asserted on 
many occasions (g). Presumably, in this 
respect, medical and non·medical refrac­
tionists are deemed to be subject to differ­
ent rules and what is "commercial" in an 
optical practitioner becomes a right in the 
hands of a medical man. 

l f. The point is sometimes put by 
medical interests in a slightly different 
way, viz., that because the optical practi· 
tioner provides glasses, then he will gener· 
ally take care that patients have them, 

(g) 
para. 19 (supra). · 
As, e.g., Ophthalmic Bulletin, Jan., 1939: 
Medical Practitioners' Union's circubr tG 
members, 25th Nov., 1937. 



- 63 -

18 

whether strictly they need them or not. 
The presumption is a purely gratuiGous 
one and even the MaJority Report of the 
Departmental Committee on the Optical 
Practitioners' (Registration) Bill (h): 
which was preponderantly pro-medical in 
tone, s<tid of this ( i) : 

" We pass over any suggestion that 
in practising his craft he may be unduly 
in 0 uenced by the fact that a prescrip· 
tion of glasses involves a sale of his 
own goods, since that temptation only 
differs in (kgrce from that which neces· 
sarily operates in almost all profes· 
sions." 

It is also to be remembered that persons 
who wear glasses generally do so uriwill· 
ingly. Unnecessary prescribing by optical 
practitioners in the past would therefore 
have invited--and deserved-public dis· 
approval. But no such disapproval exists. 

16. In connection with a general 
charge of commercialism against optical 
practitioners, it is material to mention that 
ever since its creation the National Eye 
Service ha.~ been the subject of publicity 
of the most intensive type. Leaflets have 
been showered on approved societies 
a n d full·page advertisements h ave 
<~ppeared in the national daily papers. The 
most recent circular supplied to approved 
societies ior distribution to members con· 
tains, after the usual claim that only a 
medical man can properly examine eyes, 
the following : 

" The work of the optician is of the 
utmost value. We look to him to pre· 
pare the lenses and frames that are 
necessary; he has the skill of grinding 
the curvature of the glasses to the pre· 
scribed degree and the capability of 
making metal into convenient and com• 
fortable frames. 

" But hi~ work begins and ends 
there. To expect him . to 'test eyes 
scientifically' would be like expectmg 
the oil and colourman to be an artist 
just because he has skill in stretching 
canvases and mixing paints." 

It seems that the National Ophthalmic 
Treatment Board's anxiety to press home 
its point is leading it into misrepresenta· 
tions and errors of taste unworthy of a 
great profession. 

17, The following observations on the 
National Eye Service may also be quoted 
from The 0[1hthalmic Bulletin (j), a 
medical journal and organ of the Associa· 
tion of Briti~h Ophthalmologists,: 
---·-- -----------------.... --~---· ___ ... ___ _ 
(~J CJ!Id. 2999 (1927). 
(t) lb•d., pp.lS-16. 
(j) lasue of January, 1939. 

we are tonrerncd that the· 
N.O.T.B. has either failed or never 
attempted to achieve the objects for 
which it was formed . . . We maintain 
... that this scheme which was initiated 
for the purpose of providing an efficient 
industrial ophthalmic service . . . has. 
degenerated into a purely commercial 
concern." 
18. The attacks upon the optical prac· 

titioner's ability to detect abnormal con· 
ditions of the eye have not, however, heen 
confined to mere assertions of incompet· 
ence. Attempts have been made to produce 
concrete evidence to show that the per· 
centage of eye cases rcquinng medical 
attention is, in fact, very much higher 
than the percentage of cases referred for 
medical attention by optical practitioners 
and thus to infer either that the optical 
practitioner failed altogether to detect the 
condition, or that, having detected it, he 
failed to refer it. 

19. To this end Mr. N. Bishop 
Harman, then Chairman of the Ophthal· 
mic Group Committee of the B.M.A., 
caused to be made annually analyses of 
straight runs of 10,000 ca~cs from the 
records of the National Eye Service and 
the published results for the five years 
1934-1938 were (~): · 

Errors of refraction :\2,29~ 63 6)% 
Errors of refraction 
and other eye con· 
ditions . . . . . 14,04 7 2 7.68% 
Other eye conditions 
only . . . 4,008 7.90% 
No appreciable 
defect 391 0.77% 

50,741 100.00% 

It will he observed that the total percent­
age of cases with "Other eye conditions" 
amounts to 35.58%. 

20. Mr. Bishop Harman then ascer· 
tained from a group of approved 
societies having a membership of several 
millions that of all their members seeking 
ophthalmic benefit an average of only 
3 % was referred by optical practitioners 
for medical .attention and, on comparison 
of this with the above figure of, 3S' .l 8%, 
drew the inference he was seeking. 

21. He did not, however, make any 
allowance for the important fact that a 
medical eye service would naturally re· 
ceive a high percentage of cases calling 
for medical attention and, indeed, it is 

(k) Brit. Med. Jnl. Suprl~nunt, 11th F~b., 
1939; allw circulated In pamphlet form to 
approved societies. 



only surprising that the figure is not more 
than 3 5. 58%, because it would include: 

( i) Persons sent for medical examin­
ation by their approved societies or 
general ·practitioners because of 
known or suspected disease. 

( ii) Persons who themselves knowing 
of or suspecting disease chose to 
be medically examined. 

(iii) Cases which because of injury, 
pam or sudden diminution of 
vision were obviously medical 
cases. 

22. The figures quoted in para. 19 
1'.'ere accompanied by an analysis classify· 
ing the cases under the various conditions 
encountered and though it is obviously not 
possible to make any full criticism with· 
out access to individual case records, cer• 
tain conclusions may be drawn from the 
figures themselves. These conclusions and 
the figures extracted from the analysis to 
which they relate are as follows: 

Cases % 
(i) Injuries or effects thereof 503 .99 

Diseases of the conjunc· 
tiva 
Diseases of the cornea 
(In all three categories 
the conditions, being as 
a rule visible and/ or 
painful, would auto· 
matically be taken to a 
medical man). 

(ii) Myopia over 5 dioptres. 
(Myopia, or short sight, 
is ne1ther a disease nor 
a condition requiring 
medical att.!ntion, save 
in those rare cases where 
it is either ni.pidly pro• 
gressive or malignant.) 

(iii) Constitutional diseases . 
(i.e., ocular manifesta· 
tions due to affections 
of other parts of the 
body. But the causative 
complaint would nor• 
mally be receiving the 
attention of a general 
practitioner who would 
naturally send the patient 
to an oculist for any 
necessary specialist oph· 
thalmic treatment.) 

(iv) Bad conditions of work 
(This involves no ques· 
tion of disease and the 
remedy is certainly not 
exclusive to the medical 
profession.) 

{I) 1/ansard 206, 826. 

3717 
1140 

1616 

2273 

238 

7.33 
2.25 

3.18 

4.48 

.47 

- 64 -

IY 

(v) Squint 3726 7.33 
(Of these cases only a 
comparatively s m a II 
number would be para· 
lytic or would for other 
reasons demand medical 
attention.) 

(vi) Other material conditions 18 3 3 3.61 
(Of the nature of these 
no information is given. 
It seems somewhat 
strange, however, that a 
miscellaneous category 
should--relative to the 
others-contain so many 
cases that did not justify 
more exact classification.) 

It will be observed from the above that 
(i) and (iii), totalling 7,633 cases (or 
15.05%) may fa1rly be regarded as cases 
in which an optical practitioner would not 
normally be consulted at all; while ( ii). 
(iv) and (v), totalling 5,580 cases (or 
10.98% ), are for the most part conditions 
that do not require medical attention and 
with which an optical practitioner can 
quite properly and efficiently deal. One 
further point is that the quoted figures 
make no allowance for old or congenital 
conditions for which treatment is likely to 
be ineffective. 

23. Mr. Bishop Harman's figures arc: 
not, therefore, fairly relevant for the pur· 
pose of proving what he set out to estab­
lish, for notwithstanding his assertion that 
"there has been no selection of cases" the 
very method of collecting these statistics 
automatically weighted the evidence in 
favour of the medical view. 

In confirmation of this it is pertinent to 
refer again to the remarks of Sir Geor~e 
Berry, surgeon-oculist to the Kmg tn 
Scotland, during the debate on the seco~d 
reading of the Optical Practitioners' 
(Regtstration) Bill, 1927. He sa1d (l), 
" ... 95% of cases of eye trouble are of 
only optical defect .... " .This figur~ is 
in substantial agreement w1th that gtven 
b'y the group of approved so~ieties men· 
tioned in paragraph 20 and 1!1 . any. case 
it is hardly credible that a dtsttngutshed 
ophthalmic surgeon woul.d place before 
Parliament figures of whtch he was not 
reasonably certain. 

24. In most medical dissertations on the 
shortcomings of the optical practitioner it 
i3 customary to quote copiously from the 
Report of the Departmental Committee on 
the Optical Practitioners' (Registration) 
Bill, 19 2 7 ( m ), and to a lesser degree 

(m) Cmd. :1999 (1927). 



- 65 -

20 

frum the Final Report of the Depart­
mental C .. ommittcc on the Causes and Pre· 
vention of Blindness, 1922. It is not pos­
sible in the sr,are at our disposal to re· 
produce all the usual quotations, but as 
the former Report sa1J in a variety of 
ways what may, in fact, be reduced to two 
propositions it will perhaps be sufficient 
merrly to give the sense of them. They 
.1re: 

( i) That as an optical practtttoner 
cannot treat d~;;ease he can at best 
provide only <t partial service and 
that it would therefore be prefer· 
ahle fnr an oculist to be employed 
in all cases. 

( ii) That the training of optical prac­
titioners in the recognition of ab· 
normality is inadequate. 

2 5. The second proposition has already 
heen dealt with in paragraph 8 et seq. 
(supra). In relation to the first it is neces· 
sary to point Ottt that the service provided 
by optical practitioners is "partial" to the 
extent of about 5 /~ of cases only. More· 
over, there ts nothing inherently and 
necessanl y bad about a partial service 
provided it is not so circumscribed as to 
he inadequate and provided its scope is 
reasonably clearly defined-conditions 
which, it is contended, are satisfied in the 
present case, thus enabling 95% of cases 
to enjoy all· the benefits of a specialised 
service. 

26. The sphere of medicine itself is sub­
divided in a score of ways and specialisa­
tion in pat ticuhr branches of the work is 
so common as tu call for only passing 
mention. Such specialisation is only 
natural and is of the essence of efficiency. 

27. The Report to which such frequent 
n:ferencc is made by medical men is, in 
fact, a majority report only and there 
were, in addition, two minority reports, 
both of which supported the State regis· 
tration of optical practitioners. In view of 
this the deci~ion of the signatories to the 
Majority Report not to publish the evid­
ence taken has been the subjt>ct of the 
following criticism ( n): 

•• Since the committee failed to agree 
among themselves it is much to be re· 
gretted that they declined to recom• 
mend the publication of the evidence 
they took, for it is impossible to judge 
how far the different opinions had the 
weight of evidence behind them." 
28. The following extract from the 

First Minority Report ( o ), coming as it 
does from persons who heard the whole 

of the evidenu~ hdure the Committee, is 
an interesting comment on the prin.cipal 
ground (ue p;tragraph 3, .mpra, for full 
otaternent thereof) on which the Majority 
Report considered a State register un­
desirable: 

•· Evidence was suhmilted by medical 
witnesses that the numbers and distri· 
bution of members of the medical pro­
fession specially trained to deal with 
the eyes are quite inadequate for the 
needs of the public . . . " 

"We do not consider tl1at the estab­
lishment of clinics, staffed by medical 
practitioners along the lines indicated by 
medical witnesses, is l1kely to alford any 
practical solution of the main problem 
before us. . . . The Majority Report 
specially stres~es the fact that this fresh 
proposal from medical orgatmations has 
largely determined its opinion that a 
State register would not he, at the 
present time, in the public interest: we 
submit that the whole idea of these 
potential clinics has received an entirely 
false emphasis, since ... such a scheme 
... could only hope to affect a small 
proportion of the population. . . ." 
We consider it, therefore, unreasonable 
for the Majority Report to conclttde 
that a State register i~ almu't inevitable, 
and then to ride off from this conclu· 
sion on the strength of an unexplored 
promise from one of the interested par­
ties (traditionally jealous of subsidiary 
professions bordering upon it:; own). " 

29. The second official d<J, umcnt re-
ferred to in paragraph 24, the hnal 
Report of the Departmental C:.ummittee on 
the Causes and Prevention of Blindnt•,s, 
was concerned only to a small degree (and 
that outside its terms of reference) with 
the State registration uf optical practi· 
tioners, but it expressed the opinion: 

". . . that it would be undesirable 
and a positive danger to the public for 
Parliament to pass any measure which 
might convey the idea that an optician. 
who is a person qualified to provide 
glasses prescribed by medical men, is 
further himself competent to examine 
the eyes of patients and to prescrihr 
glasses for the correction of errors of 
refraction" (p). 
But optical practitioners do ex.tmlrtr 

eyes and they do prescribe for the con ec­
tion of errors of refraction and thm, ;n 
these words the Report committed it.,df 
to the extraordinary vJew that, ~o far a• 

( 11) C;~rr.Satlnderc ~ncl \Vilson, The Profes. (o) pp. 21-22 . 
. <ions (J'J.3J). p.l42. ({') pp. J(l<; q 



the welfare of the public is concerned, a 
"posttive danger" tbt is not controlled by 
the State is greatly to be preferred to one 
that is; and despite the horror with which 
the Committee viewed the prospect, Parlia· 
rnent subscquendr did pass a measure that 
recognised the right of the optical prac· 
titioner "to examine the eyes of patients 
and to prescribe glasses for the correction 
of errors of refraction," namely, the 
National Health Insurance Additional 
Benefits Regulations, 1930, and later con· 
firmed it in the amending regulations of 
1937. 

30. The Committee next delivered itself 
of the opinion that if a register were es· 
tablished it would probably be difficult to 
prevent. unscrupulous persons who might 
succeed in obtaining admission to the re• 
gister from posing and advertising them· 
selves as experts competent to treat dis· 
eases of the eyes and the danger to the 
public would be increased as they "would 
regard the register as an official guarantee 
that those whose names were included in 
it were competent not only to provide but 
to prescribe glasses, and generally to deal 
with defects of vision from whatever cause 
arising" (p). 

31. But this seril·~ of suppositions al· 
together ignores the fact that "unscrupu· 
lous persons" may well exist whether there 
is a State register or not and that once 
·hrr~ is such a register-and they are on 
.t · they immediately become subject to 
the same measure of control as other 
practitioners. It is when these people are 
not registered that their supervision is a 
matter of such difficulty. 

32. It is to be regretted that this part 
of the Report showed such obviops marks 
of bias, but its presence is not surprising, 
hearing in mind that a large number of 
the Committee's members were medical 
practitioners, that it included no optical 
representatives and that it dedinl'd al· 
together to hear any evidence from optical 
~>r~.:anisations ( q). 

3 3. Such then, is the opposition of or· 
f!,tllised medicine to the nptical profession 

( f• l l•P· 105-9. 
(</) Cm<l. 2(}Q<J (1927), p.S. 

- 66 -

21 

and such arc the rca~ons officially givc11 
for it. It is submitted, however, that the 
real reason-or at any rate the most im· 
portant from the medical point of view-·­
is one that is never given officially, but 
which can be clearly seen in the following 
quotation from the Ophthalmic Bulletit1 
( 1"): 

"It is a fact, however unfortunate 
for the surgeon and the optician, that 
approximately 80 to 90 percent. of the 
former's professional time is engaged 
upon this routine exercise of merely one 
facet of his professional skill (i.e., re­
fraction) and he, therefore, is compelled 
to rely upon it for the main source of 
professional income." 

34. It would appear that antagonism 
has developed principally from economic 
rivalry and instincts of self-preservation 
and there is ample evidence that in pur• 
suit of the main object medical organisa· 
tions have frequently shown scarcely any 
regard to the public interest. The follow· 
ing quotation from the 1938-39 Annual 
Report of the Council of British Ophthal· 
mologists n:quires no comment in thili 
respect: 

"The North London Association ol 
Ophthalmic Opticians approached the 
Medical Officer of Health of Kensing· 
ton with an offer to train opticians to 
act at first•aid posts, casualty clearing 
hospitals, etc., for A.R.P. work. The 
opticians will be in charge of the eye 
cases. Action by the British Medical As· 
sociation resulted in the offer being 
refused. It is felt that if opticians are 
recognised as being capable of giving 
these services the fact will not be lost 
sight of by their organisations, should 
they agitate again for recognition by 
Parliament." 

35'. It is now submitted and strongly 
urged that the medical and optical profcs 
sions should work in harmony within the 
general structure of the nation's health 
services. Both profe5sions and the publll· 
could not fail to bcnefit from ~uch a re 
lationship. 
-----------··-··- ------··-·····- ---·--
(,) Issue of January, 1942. 



- 67 -

22 

APPENDIX H. 

RepresentAtive Selection of Resetlrch Papers, Text Bool{s 
und Instrument Design by the Opticul Profession 

llnd the Stuffs of its Tc~tching Institutions. 

k.bSEAKCH PAPER~. 1LX l IJUUKS. E I<: 

D ,, a 

llJl.'. 

l '}I 2 

l \) I 4 

IYIY 

jl) 211 

I 9 2 I 

I 'J 2 ·I 

I'J2'i 

I '.1 2 {l 

I 'J 26 

I 'I "'J 

l ') 2 7 

I 'J 2 i) 

,\u ll!UK 

L. Laurance 

H. L Taylor 

L. Laurance and 
H. 0. Wood 

L. Laurance 

0. A\·c-, 

II. 11. bmlcy ;tnJ 
E. F. Fincham 

\\'. Swaine 

Vv'. If :\. hncham 

\V. B. ll;u h...: 1 

H. L. Taylor 

U. W. Col elnuok 

A. J Prest,,n 

P. Frccma11- Lee 

J. R. Hamblin and 
T. H. Winser 

TITLI 

'''Vi~ual Optics and Sight Te~ting 

[' lil1l I o,f {I h 

School <Jt Ut11ic·s Lt,i 

The Ophthalmic ~i1gndicance "' Proc Opt 1. ·"nvcntt<>ll 
facial Asymmetry 

·~General and Practtc..tl Opt1o 

The True Action of Lcll'ics 111 

:\metro pia 

School ()f Optics Ltd 

ln~t. Ophth. Opticians 
( Ettles Mcnwrial Lecture) 

Hyperphmia-lts EstunatiOfl, rll'.tt Refractionist 
ment and Correctwn 

Dillraction Halos 111 1\urtual .111d TrJn,; UptH:al Suctely 
Glaucomatous Eyes 

:ophthalmo-Optical Manual liattun P1o~ Ltd. 

Vertex Power and Ib 1v1ca,urcmcnt Tran:, Optical So(t\ly 

The Problem of the .-\lll,u!llctt~p. Proc Upt Conventt- 11 

1 Bi f ucal Lenses J & rL T.tylor LtJ 

Stcr coscupic Vision Dioptric Bullctm 

''Physiologic Chemistry fo1 Kelr.tc LonJ,>B ReiiJCttun liu>plldi 
tionists 

i\ New Theory and Mcthud ul DlUptnc Uullet111 
Neutralising and Tran.~pos111g 
Oblique Cross Cylinders 

Resolutwn of Grating' hy 
1\stigmatic Eye 

I <}21) J-L H. Emslcy and 't )phthalmic Lenses 
W. Swaine 

Hatton Prr.ss Ltd 

llJ2'J ). C tl'icadlcy 

I 'J 2Y H. Lowery and 
N. Taylor 

I <J30 N. Taylor and 
G. S. Evenden 

An lnvcsttgation into the l'("ture o! 
the Eye 

Retinal FJtrguc and 
Flicker 

ScnsttJ\lty to P1 uc Opt. Conventl"ll 

Fundamental Colour Scnsattnns <tJH..i Dioptric Bulletin 
Chromatic Sensitivity 

1931 L. A. Swann 

1Y32 J. Adamson 

*Ocular Muscles Hatton Pre~· Ltd. 

Cyclo·Rotattonal Power of th,· Eyt> Refractiormt 

« Tt•xt Booh. 



- 68 -

RESEARCH PAPERS, TEXT BOOKS, ETC. 

AUTHOR 
K. Smith 

A. P. Turvillc 

W. Green 

E. F. Fincham 

1934 C. Richards 

TITLE. 
I ntcrpretation of Persistency Cmvr• 

with respect to the Factor of 
Fatigue 

The Value of Refraction in tlw 
Treatment of Migraine 

Orthoptic Treatmen·t of Concomi· 
tant Strabismus 

PUBLISHER 
Brit. Jnl. Physiolof{ical Optic~ 

lost . .Ophth Optician~ 
( Ettles Memorial Lecture) 

Trans. Opt. Congre~s 

Observations on the 
Refraction of the Eye 

Dynamic lnst. Ophth. Opticians 
(Ettles Memorial Lecture) 

The Microscopic Structure of the Refractionist 
Eye 

!9H W. H. A. Fincham •Optics Hatton Press Ltd. 

19H E. F. Fincham Study of Accommodation by Photo· Trans. Ophthalmological So.: 

19H D. B. Barker 

19V-, H. H. Emsley 

I<)'(, W. R. Coates 

1936 H. H. Emsley 

19~7 E. F. Fincham 

1937 A.W.S. Raxworthy 

1938 E. W. Jones 

1938 G. H. Giles 

19~8 D. G. Mackenzie 

1?~9 J. Adamson and 
E. F. Fincham 

If)~() \V. Swaine 

19~9 L. A. Swann 

1940 G. H. Giles 

.1940 H. B. Marton 

1941 C. D. Barrett 

I '>4 2 F. E. Martin 

graphy of the Living Lens and 
Ciliary Body 

Eye Dominance and its Association Brit. J nl. Phy!\inlogical Optic' 
with Hand Dominance 

Problem of Unequal Ocular Images Inst. Ophth. Opticiam 
(Ettles Memorial Lectme) 

Visual Acuity and Test Letters lnst. Ophth. Opticiam 

"'Visual Optics Hatton Press Ltd. 

The Mechanism of Accommodation Brit. Jnl. Ophthalmolo!!y 

The Stereoscope in Diagnosis and Refractionist 
Practice-a New Approach 

Microscopic Examination of Gold· Brit. Jnl. Physiological Optio 
filled Spectacle Frames 

•Manual of Practical Orthoptic~ Hatton Press Ltd. 

Heliotropism and the Eye Brit. J nl. Physiological Opt1c6 

The Effect of Lenses and C.onver· Trans. Ophthalmological S•K. 
gence upon the State of Accom· 
modation of the Eye 

The Sagittal and Tangential Errors Refractioni~t 
of Ophthalmic Lenses 

*Objective Refraction Raphaels Ltd. 

Modification of Standards of Colour Brit. J nl. Physiological Optics 
Vision 

' 
Observations on Refractive Coover· Brit. J nl. Physiological Optics 

gent Strabismus 

The Reflex and its Inftuence on Brit. Jnl. Physiological Optics 
Accuracy in Retinoscopy 

The Measurement of Angle Alpha Brit. J nl. Physiological OptiC! 

II) 4' r.. l f. Giles "'The Practice of Orthoptics 
• Trxt Book,;. 

Hammond, Hammond & Co , 
Ltd. 



- 69 -

2·1 

INSTRUMENTS 

DATP. DI'.SlCNrR JNSTRUMENf 

1920 ]. H. Sutcliffe Micru·Kcratometcr 

1924 E. F. Fincham Corneal Microscope wtth cumhirH·J 'llt·Lllnp. 

192 5 A. J. E.<dailc Myophoriagraph. 

1926 0. Aves Deviograph. 

1927 A. E. Turvillc & D. S. Stewart Ophthalmoscope with combined ~lit L11np and rctino 
scope. 

1929 A. W. S. Raxwortlw Phoria~copc. 

1929 E. F. Fincha!n Steren·fixation apparatus for usc wllh Bjcrnrn1 Sc1ccn 

1929 W. Green Improvements to the Synoptt•plwrl' .tnd otht'J Ortl 
optic Instruments. 

1930 H. H. Emsley & E. F. Fincham "Amrmhra" ophthalmoscope. 

1930 ]. A. Linfield Kerascopc. 

193 2 H. Courhnder Direct hxation ~cotometer. 

1932 ]. Cole & n H. nL,ckh11rn Clinometer. 

1932 J. Rosen Foriagraph. 

1932 W. Green Diploscope. 

193 3 E. F. Fincham Coincidence optometer. 

1933 A. E. Turvillc Stereo-cinematograph apparatus f,>r <•rtlwpt,, tr.l!f<ii'L: 

1933 J. E. Skewc~ Myoscope. 

1933 H. Freeman Scotometer. 

1933 i\. E. Tun·illc & J. Pascal Dynascope 

19 3 3 J. Cole & L. A. Swann Comparator for ucar vision test. 

1934 C. R. Crofton Focal line retinoscope. 

1934 A. j. Esdailc '& A. E. Turville Equilibrium balance te,t. 

1934 D. B. Barker 

1935 G. H. Giles . 

1935 w. n. I3arkcr 

1936 G. H. Gilc" 

1936 J. Rosen 

1937 G. D Hunt fi G. H. Giles 

1938 C. D. Barrett 

1938 A. E. Turvillc 

1938 G. Collins 

194:\ E. W. Goddinc 

Projection apparatus for lllC..tSIIICI!lClll of rupill.ll )' 
distance. 

Colour perccptio11 unit, 1938 -irnproVl'd R ;\ l' nH>drl 

Eikonometer. 

Near Point Rule with acc.essottcs. 

Ophthalmo·retinoscope. 

Infinity far point test. 

Subnormal vision te~ting appar.ttus and lit• Ill"' 11 ''' 

attachment. 

Infinity balance test. 

Electronic refractionometcr. 

Adaptometer. Apparatm for te~ting nrght ,.,, '' "1 



- 70 -

A German reader writes: 

New OHS member Dr. Gunter Ueberschaar of Jena, East Germany, 
wrote a brief note acknowledging receipt of the January issue of 
NOHS. He says (translated) 11 It pleased me very much, and I am most 
appreciative. I was especially pleased that our professional journal 
Augenoptik was reviewed so generously. Its editor of course deserves 
the great share of credit. 11 

History sans documentation: 

In a 50 page, 11 x 17 em paperback booklet entitled INTRODUCTION 
TO OPHTHAL~10SCOPY by G. E. Arrington, Jr., M.D., dated August 1964, 
but copyrighted 1966 by the Propper Manufacturing Company, Inc. 
and printed in Germany, appears the following chronology without 
any supplementary comment or detailing of references. 

I till() 
lt;oo 

1/()-/ 

I i IJ9 

1196 
1800 

18/ti 
!:ill 

18·/i" 

!8SJ 

186:.! 

1862 

18til 

/81).1 
Tsu.? 

HISTORICAL 
CHRONOLOGY OF 

THE OPHTHALI\tiOSCOPE: 

.Jnhaltll!'' Kt•plt•r: Studit·d tlw optics of the eye. 
Chri~tupht•r Sdwi11Pr: Studied the optical image on 
tht· retina through a sdt>ral window . 
. /,•an l\Iery: Ohst·rved fundus of cats eves under wa­
tt•r. Bt>lievl'cl that the water filled in :.unevenesses" 
on t hP t'OriH·~tl -;u rfal't.'. 
dP Ia Hire: Correctly t.•xplaiJlt•d that the water elim­
matt·s tlw refraction of tht· cornea so that li"ht 
Pnwrging from a point 011 the fundus leaves the ;ye 
divt·rgent, not parallt·l. 
Fermin: NotPd luminosity in albino's eye. 
Thomas Young: Studied astigmatism and accom­
modation. 
Scarpa: Nott>d reflection from retina. 
Beer: Ternwd tlw disease producing this rcflt·dion 
.. an1aurotic eat's eve". 
Purkinje: Noted his observation of the "beautiful 
orang<' color of the pupil" when light cast from his 
concave spectacles entered a dog's eye and returned 
into his own. 
Bahhage: Invented a plane mirror with a peep holt• 
scraped in silver backing. 
l-Il'lmholtz: Description of WI Eye Mirror Berlin 
18;)1. The most precise description to that datt• of ~ 
means to study the interior of the eyP. (This work 
was not published until 1854) 
Czermak: Invented orthoscope for viewing fundus 
under water. 
~uete: Used a. co!1eavp mirror with a dear portion 
111 the center (mchrect ophthalmoscopy) with a eon­
vex lens. 
Rt>koss: Invented an inslrurnPnt consisting of a 
plane mirror and lens in a variable frame. 
Giraud-Teulon: Introduced the demonstration oph­
thalmoscope and the binocular stPreo ophthalmo. 
scope. 
HPymann: Introduced auto-ophthalmoscopy. 
Liebreich: Invented ophthalmoscopP with clip to 
hold corrPding IPnsPs for rPfracting. 



/81i9 

1874 

1883 

188.) 
/886 

1886 
1899 
1902 

1903 
1910 

1912 

1913 
1915 

1928 
1.969 

- 71 -

Loring: lnventecl tht~ first practical ophthalmoscop.­
designt-d for refraction for glasses. 
Loring: Invent<>d refracting ophthalmoscope with 
hinged tilting mirror and Hekoss disks containing 23 
lPnses in one disk on 2 concentric circles, thus ex­
panding the instrument's usefulness. 
Morton: Substituted a continuous chain holding the 
series of lenses. This is said to make the instrument 
fit th(• examiner:S orbit better. Morton modified 
<;:.?.~£t::'s_ ( 1883) ophthalmoscope. 

Marple: Introduced a metal mirn.r with a U-.,hapt·d 
segment. cut out of the top to dirninate the black 
shadow 111 the lower portion of th.- fundus. 
De~nett: E_lectrified the hand ophthalmoscope. 
Reid: Designed an electric ophthalmoscope with 
pnsmabc rdlPctor and a micromder scale. 
Juler: Dev1sed an electric ophthalmoscope. 
Thorner: •nve~ted a reflexless ophthalmuscupe. 
Ophthalmoscopic photography: Denimer 1902 

Wulff 190:3 
Thorner 1909 

Wolti: Introduced the microophthalmoscope. 
Gullstrand: Perfected the large reflexless ophthal­
moscope. 
Ohm_: Invent~d ophthalmoscope for viewing both 
fundi at one time (binophthalmoscope). 
Crampton: Introduced the battery handle. 
Charles May: Subs!ituted a total reflecting prism in 
the form of a rod w1th a condensmg lens ground into 
the lower end over an electric bulb. 
Friedenwald: Introduc,~d reflex less ophthalmoscope. 
Heme: Invented the bifocal ophthalmoscope for al­
termg the focal distance of the ophthalmoscope to 
VIew the fundus (at infinity) and the surface and 
antPrior portions of the eye (at near). Also intro­
duced the hemi-spot to eliminate reflections. 

Yellow but useful: 

Research into low-pressure sodium gas discharge lamps started 
in the 1920s. The first commercial application was a road lighting 
installation that was put into service on a section of road in the 
south of The Netherlands on l July, 1932. 

So starts an article on "Low-pressure sodium lighting--the past, 
present and future" by S.H.A. Begemann and W.J.M. van Bommel in the 
June 1983 issue of Lighting Design~ Application, vol. 13, no. 6, 
pp. 25-33. 

Not a kind of illumination to be used where color rendition is 
important, it nevertheless has a more than 50 year history of increasing 
use for a variety of other reasons with which this article deals in 
technological and pictorial detail. 



- 72 -

Apotropaic tritanopia: 

From Jerusalem via Mount Scopus, "we drive through Arab villages 
where flat-roofed houses are trimmed with blue to ward off the evil 
eye, past Bedouin camps, and within half an hour we had dropped 
3,900 feet to the shimmering, pale green Dead Sea. An hourly bus 
service covers that route. 11 

So \'/rote Pam Hobbs in the February 26 Globe and Mail of Toronto, 
Canada, excerpted in the May 1983 issue of World Press-Review, page 
63. 

How or why blue wards off the evil eye is not explained in 
the article. However I was told by a young American rabbi who spent 
some months in Israel that the blue above the front door symbolizes 
heaven, which evil spirits are presumed to avoid, and that this 
tradition dates back centuries among both Arabs arid Jews of the 
area. 

Rainbow theory and the I.O.O.L.: 

"Le mystere de 11 arc-en-ciel" is the title of an article in 
French in the April 1983 issue of Der Schweizer Optiker/L 1 0pticien 
Suisse/L 1 0ttico svizzero, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 51-55, about the 
historical attempts to explain the rainbow. Among the theorists 
were Aristotle, Descartes, Newton, Keppler, and very recently, Hans 
Pauly, who included the phenomenon within the domain of the atom. 

Also in this issue is an article in German by F. Buser entitled 
"Die Grundung der IOL" (the founding of the International Optometric 
and Optical League) on pages 14-16, with special emphasis on the 
role played by Herr Ecker, the first Swiss delegate. 

~~_j_y South African optometry: 

The March 1983 issue of The South African Optometrist/Die 
Suid-Afrikaanse Oogkundige, vol. 42, no. 1~ includes two items of 
hi story. One, on page 1 and 7, is a commentary entitled "Voice from 
the past" in which editor D.H. Reynolds reports having unearthed 
an advertisement by optician I.H. Noble (or J.H. Noble) in the 
February 28, 1862 issue of The Natal Mercury of Durban, South Africa. 
The advertisement showed Mr. Noble's first initial to be "I." in 
one part and "J." in another. It included the information that he 
had had 15 years experience with Dolland of London, and that he had 
received a shipment of merchandise by way of the barque "MARIETTA". 
He offered for sale, "Binacular (sic) Field or Night Glasses; Pocket 
Telescopes; Reconnoitring Telescopes, with Sling Laces; A 3.5 ft 
Telescope, with Table Stand and Rack and Pinion Motion; Microscope 



- 73 -

and Objects; Hydrometers, Saccharometers, & Thermometers; A few 
choice Stereoscope Slides; Pocket Sun Dial for Natal; A large 
Assortment of Spectacles". 

He also offered Neutral Tint Spectacles and Goggles "as recom­
mended by the London Oculists 11 • He further begged 11 to caution the 
public against using improper spectacles or purchasing spectacles 
from inexperienced persons. 11 

In a subsequent advertisement, says Reynolds, Mr. Noble offered 
11 pocket magnifiers for Botani ca 1 and Cutaneous purposes, sugar boiler 
thermometers, and double joint gold spectacleS. 11 He also included 
the fact that a recent rifle competition had been won by a Mr. Newling 
who was wearing his spectacles. 

The other historical item in the same issue of the South African 
Optometrist is a detailed article entitled 11 The legal and educational 
history of Optometry in South Africa 11 by Selwyn Super on pages 21, 
23, and 27-28, reprinted from the March 1974 issue. Included is the 
establishment of the South African Optometric Association, initially 
as the Optometric Association of the Transvaal, in 1924. 

The Theunissen museum: 

OHS member Irving Bennett, O.D., calls our attention to a museum 
item on page 53 of the February 1983 issue of Vedere Contact Inter­
national, the International Journal of Contactology, val. 7, no~, 
a bimonthly serial in four languages published in Milan, Italy. 
Described is the museum owned by Jan Theunissen on the floor above 
the Theunissen-Reyner optical firm at Rechtstratt 61, Eindhoven, 
Holland. The collection of a wide variety of items of optical interest. 
chiefly from the 18th and 19th centuries, includes some 10,000 spectacles. 

A unique feature of the museum is that most of the exhibited 
items are for sale. Also, Mr. Theunissen, who speaks German, is 
most likely to show visitors around personally. 

History of an optometry school: 

Illinois College of Optometry traces its or1g1ns to three insti­
tutions. The earliest was the Chicago College of Ophthalmology and 
Otology in 1872. The second \'las the Needles Institute of Optometry 
in 1907 in Kansas City. The third was the Monroe College of Optometry 
in 1938 in Chicago. Following a series of name changes and mergers 
the present institution and title became effective in 1955. 

A chronology of these and numerous other landmarks in its history 
appeared in the Spring 1983 issue of IMAGE, the ICO Alumni Newsletter, 
val. 4, no. 2, page 3. 



- 74 -

Soft lenses have ~history too: 

In response to a brief acknowledgement to Robert Morrison, 
O.D., I received the following comment from his Office Manager Peggy 
Drewett: 

"I saw your nice note to my boss, and I thought I would take 
the liberty of writing. 

"It often occurred to me that the history of optometry should 
include the unusual work that my boss did with the Czechs. I don't 
think that it's commonly known that in the early days of soft lenses 
in America every lens was made in our laboratory here in Harrisburg. 
This was before Dr. Morrison and National Patent sold the patent 
rights to Bausch and Lomb. There is lots of interesting history 
here, and I think it is good for optometry to have it properly 
acknowledged. 

"If I can help further, please let me know." 

Early ophthalmological papers: 

On page 3 of the April-May 1983 issue of National Library of 
Medicine News the Library's History of Medicine Division reports 
two unusualacquisitions as follows: 

"Dominique Anel's Suite de k nouvelle methode de guerir les 
fistules lacrimales Turin, 1714. This is a supplement to his original 
work on the subject, an ophthalmological classic acquired by the 
Library more than 100 years ago. Anel developed the first lacrymal 
syringe which influenced the development of other small syringes in 
the twentieth century." 

"Another work of ophthalmological importance is an Arabic 
manuscript written by an Egyptian probably in the last half of the 
fourteenth century. An extensive analysis of the work was made in 
1905, but apparently the text has never been published. It has been 
described as 'remarkable for its comprehensiveness and relative 
originality.'" 

Librarian Carol Tullis thoughtfully called our attention to 
these. 

J\!lQ_!her spectacle collection_: 

Two complementary articles on spectacles appeared in the February 
1983 issue of MD, val. 27, no. 2, an elegantly composed monthly 
publication of!MD Publications, Inc., New York. The one entitled 



- 75 -

"The Perpetual Spectacle" is by Allen J. McGill on pages 275-277 & 
280. The other, "The Pollacks' Spectacular Spectacle Collection" 
is by Jessica Klein on pages 281, 284, & 287. 

Mentioned in the first article are contributions to optical 
history by Aristophanes, Pliny, Seneca, Nero, Alhazen, Bartisch 
(credited with the term "four-eyes"), Franklin, Harold Lloyd, P.G. 
Wodehouse, Dorothy Parker, and even the 1760 optician Benjamin 
Martin who is credited with saying "No further progress is possible. 
We've reached the peak of perfection." 

The second article describes the hobby of cardiologist Albert 
Pollack, M.D., and his wife Ruth, who works in university and 
hospital administration. They started collecting spectacles in 1960. 
Their collection now includes more than 200 spectacles as well as 
antique optical testing equipment, glass eyes, opticians' signs, 
and posters and prints about eyeglass history. 

Ignis fatuus: 

In a sepia-colored paperback of 150 standard 6" x 9" (15 x 23 em) 
pages, opticist and history buff Harold S. Stewart tells 36 anecdotes 
in yarn-like style. The book is titled OPTICAL ANECDOTES and published 
in 1981 by the Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, 
405 Fieldston Road, Bellingham, Washington 98225, USA. The anecdotes 
have such fascinating chapter titles as "The Greatest Authority on 
Optics in the Middle Ages," "A Seventeenth-Century Concept of Liqht," 
"The Napoleonic Influence," "Young and the Rosetta Stone," and 
"Brewster's Optical Toy," to mention a fev.J. The numerous illustrations 
include Ibn al-Haitham's experiment with the camera obscura, a Germari 
etching of Galileo in prison in 1638, Newton's cottage, and Marcel 
Minnaert sketching some manifestations of light and color. The antics, 
idiosyncrasies, and legends, as well as the strengths, accomplishments, 
and contributions of perhaps two hundred or more persons whose names 
are familiar in optical history are woven into the anecdotes. Exemplary 
of the author's entertaining style is his review of the nature of 
light as understood in the 1780 edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica, 
citing the observations of the "poor old woman" of ~1ontpelier in 
1641 that a cut of putrescent meat in her room at night emitted a 
(phosphorescent) light. Supplementing this anecdote is a cartoon 
depicting the phenomenon of ignis fatuus in a cemetery. 

One more makes eleven: 

Responding to an item in the January NOH~, Dean Frederick W. 
Hebbard of The Ohio State University has written as follows: 

I wish to point out that Ethel Jean Babbitt, among the 
people listed as having something to do with the Dartmouth Eye 
Institute, is also an optometrist. I believe that she is a 



- 76 -

Columbia graduate. She is a Fellow of the American Academy 
of Optometry, and lives at 852 Arlington Avenue, Berkeley, 
California 94707. I have not been in touch with her since I 
came to Ohio State more than 26 years ago, but, as far as I 
know, she did not practice optometry after coming to California 
in the early 195o•s. I am not even sure whether she obtained 
a license in California, but I believe that she may have been 
a part-time clinical instructor at Berkeley for a brief period. 
In any event, Dr. Stoddard had at least visited the Dartmouth 
Eye Institute, and told me of Ethel Jean•s former association 
with it. So I was not surprised to see her name when Ogle•s 
book came out in the 195o•s. 

She was married, and I believe that her husband was a 
physicist at the U.C. Radiation Laboratory. He had a Ph.D., 
at least, and she was the mother of at least several children. 
However, she used to attend the quarterly or somewhat irregularly 
scheduled meetings of the Bay Area Chapter of the American 
Academy of Optometry, which were usually held at the School 
of Optometry Building at Berkeley. 

Two slightly hazy phenomena: 

In part two of his article on "The sesquicentenary of Wolfgang 
von Goethe" (actually Johann l~olfgang von Goethe) in the April 16, 
1982, issue of The Optician, Vol. 183, no. 4736, pp. 23-24 & 26,. 
OHS member Colin B. Fryer cited a passage from Goethe describing 
the so-called "Elizabeth Linnaeus phenomenon". Fryer reports the 
phenomenon to have been "discovered by the daughter of the famous 
botanist and subject of a whole series of learned treatises, which 
unti 1 then had been thought electrical in origin. 11 In the cited 
passage Goethe describes strolling in the garden with a friend at 
dusk on June 19, 1979, and observing that immediately subsequent 
to fixating a brilliant flower, e.g., an oriental poppy, and upon 
fixating elsewhere, such as on the gravel walk, a momentary after­
image of complementary color would be induced. 

Mr. Fryer 1 s source for some of this information was M. Minnaert 1 S 

1954 book entitled "Light and Colour in the Open Air," Bell & Co. 
Ltd., page 128. 

The original German passage may be found on page 55, section 
54, of "Goethes Farbenlehre," published by Im Insel-Verlag, Leipzig, 
1937. It is also included in the classic translation entitled 
"Goethe 1 s Theory of Colours" by Charles Lock Eastlake,. London, John 
Murray, 1840, page 23. I have checked both the German and English 
versions and find no mention of Ms. Linnaeus by Goethe himself. 
Also Goethe 1 S "with a friend" phrase in the original German is "mit 
einem Freunde," the masculine form, rather than "mit einer Freundin," 
the feminine form. 



- 77 -

In Mr. Fryer's above-mentioned article he also described the 
"Verdun phenomenon" which Goethe is said to have discovered in 1792 
near Verdun in northeastern France while talking to a squad of soldiers 
resting beside a fresh water pond. It seems that Goethe noticed that 
the fish in the pond exhibited a series of changing colors as they 
swam about, blue and violet towards the sun, red and yellow away from 
it. Mr. Fryer's source in this instance was \~. Emmott in an article 
entitled "Goethe as a Physical Scientist" in the September 5, 1964, 
issue of }he Ophthalmic Qptician, Vol. 4, no. 17, pages 907-910. 
Unfortunately, author Emmott did not identify any of his several 
references as his source for this phenomenon. 

Wishing to write reliable definitions for these two phenomena 
for the Dictionary of Visual Science I scanned the two above-mentioned 
Goethe books page after page for the terms "Linnaeus" and "Verdun" 
with no luck. I also searched the American edition book entitled 
"Goethe's Color Theory" arranged and edited by Rupprecht Matthaei and 
translated and further edited by Herb Aach, Van Nostrand Reinhold 
Co., New York 1971. All I gained from it was a genuine appreciation 
of a comment by Aach that some of Professor Matthaei 's editing "is 
to compensate for Goethe's longwindedness"~ 

If I write any more on this I may well be accused of the same, 
but I cannot refrain from appealing for help from anyone who reads 
this. I hesitate to help perpetuate the existence of two namesake­
identified phenomena whose origins and interpretations are so vague. 

The devil \'[a~ !!_9_1 an optometrist: 

"Watch Out for the Devil 's Work" is the title of a Sunday feature 
article by O.H.S. member Arol Augsburger, O.D., in the April 17 issue 
of Jhe Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch. The "Devil's \IJork" in this instance 
refers to the early fears that anything like spectacles must surely 
be the work of the devil. Dr. Augsburger cites numerous other early 
superstitious fears and remedies for visual defects, but concludes 
that, "We know that the improvement in vision with today's complex 
spectacle lenses is far from being the devil 's work. Indeed, it is 
merely the natural outgrowth of what Roger Bacon told us 700 years 
ago." 

b~cill~- tv1_:. ~abcoc~ (1911-1983): 

The above clipping was sent to us by Mrs. Joseph M. (Lucille) 
Babcock only a few weeks before her death on May 30. She was a long­
time member of OHS and the contributor of the extensive organizational 
files of Joseph M. Babcock, O.D., to ILAMO. These files are the 
nucleus of the Babcock Archives of ILAMO. 



- 78 -

~spectacle spectacular: 

No less than four persons called my attention to the March 1983 
issue of Smithsonian, Vol. 13, no. 12, in which appeared two histori­
cal articles involving spectacles. The first "Around the Mall and 
Beyond," by Edwards Park, pp. 28, 30, 32, & 34, related a "moment 
of theatricality" employed by General George Washington when he met 
with the discouraged officers of the Continental Army in March 1783. 
Washington had been almost desperately trying to quell a movement 
from within his army to take over the reins of government, which 
included even the suggestion that Washington become king--George I 
of America--to "start running a proper government with the power 
to tax." Washington feared the possibility of military dictatorship. 
In his talk to more than 600 officers he hammered at the ideal of 
separated military and civil powers, with little effect on his 
audience of war-toughened faces. Then: 

"The general digs in a pocket to produce a letter from 
a member of Congress. This, he says, will indicate what they're 
trying to do down there in Philadelphia, and how hard it is to 
do it. He starts to read. He stumbles over a word or two, 
and then stops. The officers suddenly hold their breaths: 
What can be wrong with their old commander? 

"Then Washington goes for another pocket and pulls out a 
pair of spectacles. He had them made recently in Philadelphia, 
and few people have seen them before. Now he puts them on, 
explaining quietly, 'Gentlemen, you must pardon me. I have 
grown gray in your service and now find myself growing blind.' 

"He reads the letter, but he doesn't have too. For years, 
these officers have known their general and honored him as a 
sort of father figure, an iron man who never gave in to weak­
ness, who held their impossible enterprise together against 
all odds, and finally won. Now, seeing him suddenly aged and 
mortal, they cannot keep the tears from welling; they cannot 
break old bonds of loyalty and affection. 

"General Washington walks out, tucking his spectacles back 
in a waistcoat pocket. This moment of theatricality has turned 
the trick. His officers quickly repudiate the plan and express 
renewed faith in the shaky Congress." 

The second article "What a spectacle! Eyeglasses, and how they 
evolved" by Dora Jane Hamblin, pp. 100-102, 104, 106-108, 110-lll, 
and 188, is a delightfully readable and entertaining anecdotal account 
of incidents, persons, things, and attitudes associated with spectacles, 
their design, wear, and fashions. The numerous illustrations, most 
in full color, could well be cut and mounted as a collage for an 
optometrist's reception room. 



- 79 -

The article offers no new information on spectacle history, but 
it does provide something of a kaleidoscopic review of centuries of 
development. 

42 years of Auxiliary effort: 

In April 1983 the Indiana Optometric Association acknowledged 
the often taken for granted organizational role of its members' spouses 
by honoring the Auxiliary to the Indiana Optometric Association, Inc. 
with the "OUTSTANDING SERVICE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST" award. The 
documents in support of the nomination of course emphasized the public 
interest aspects of this organization of a very few hundred spouses, 
and among the documents was a chronology of its "Public Information 
Highlights." There is every reason to presume that this interesting 
history has its parallel in dozens of other organizations of optome­
trists' spouses, but it also seems likely that nowhere is such an 
example recorded in the public literature, if only to illustrate an 
easily overlooked phase of optometric history and its identification 
with the circumstances of the times. Here it is. 

The Women's Auxiliary to the Indiana Optometric Association 
had its beginning on Sunday, January 5, 1941--during the 44th 
annual convention of the Indiana Optometric Association at the 
Severin Hotel, Indianapolis, Indiana. 

1941 - Their first activity was a motorists' visual testing 
--clinic in Indianapolis. Their first state wide project, in 

August, 1941, was a campaign to make parents realize the 
importance of an eye examination before children returned to 
school in the fall. 

1942- During "Save Your Vision Week" the Auxiliary sponsored 
-a-poster contest "Guard Your Eyes." It was open to high school 

students in Marion county. Prizes were three War Savings 
Stamps--$15, $10, and $5. In August, their campaign was "Send 
Your Whole Child to School"--again publicly stressing the 
importance of a visual examination. 

1943 - This year, the "Save Your Vision" poster contest included 
-----:rc>ur cities, and nine high schools participated. Again, War 

Savings Stamps were the prizes. 

1944-45 - The Auxiliary set up a gold scrap fund to be used for 
Optometry in Indiana. 

1946 - Auxiliary state dues were raised from $1 to $2. The gold 
--scrap fund was continued. 



- 80 -

1948 - The Auxiliary set up a fund of $300 to be used in estab­
--rlshing a Library in the anticipated School of Optometry at 

Indiana University. On March 11th, during "Save Your Vision 
Week," Mrs. Roy Denny and Dr. John O'Shea spoke to the nation 
on a 15 minute program given by Columbia Broadcasting System 
on "The Visually Handicapped Child. ,, 

1950-52 -The Auxiliary distributed the pamphlet "What is School 
Doing to Your Child's Eyesight." 

1953 - Increased the Library fund for Indiana University to 
~00. 

1955 - Started the project to send used eyeglasses to the 
--rhilippines through a missionary there. 

1956 - Auxiliary spent $600 to furnish the clinic waiting room 
--rn Jordan Hall at the Indiana University School of Optometry. 

Sponsored a state-wide Highway Safety Proqram in Indiana. 

1957- Established a $1,000 Emergency Loan Fund for students 
--at the Optometry School. 

1958 - $200 scholarship for an Optometry student was established. 
~tional added $50 to increase it to $250. Distributed the 

pamphlet "Your Baby's Eyes." Donated a file cabinet to 
Indiana University. 

1959 - The Auxiliary supported a research project in a diabetic 
camp. 

1961 - Northeastern Society distributed the pamphlet "Do You 
-mow These Facts About Vision and School Achievement." 

1963 - Gave $300 towards the purchase of a desk and chair in 
~e Dean's office at Indiana University. 

1967 - Annual Scholarship was increased from $250 to $300. The 
~xiliary gave $1,000 toward the furnishing of the new Indiana 

Optometric Association central office. The Auxiliary gave 
$2,000 to help furnish the lounge at the School of Optometry. 

1969 -The Auxiliary purchased its first film "Miracle of Vision" 
~be shown to schools, organizations, service clubs, etc. 

1970- Established an Eye-Education Poster Project. Posters 
--were distributed throughout the state. Voted to start a film 

library, and a second film "Eyes on the Road" was purchased. 



- 81 -

1971 - Scholarship was increased from $300 to $500. "Let's See" 
--activity books were distributed to first and second graders 

throughout the state. Purchased the film "0.0. Vision Care 
Specialists." "Eye Opener" safety bookmarks were distributed. 

1972 - Auxiliary members volunteered to help man the Indiana 
-----university Eye Mobile. "Seymour Safely" flyers and "Let's See" 

activity booklets were distributed throughout the state. 

1973- The theme this year was "Highway and Pedestrian Safety." 
Every third grader in the state received a folder and two inches 
of reflective tape pinned to "Ha 11 oween Tips for Trick or Treaters." 
This was timed for Education Week and Halloween. The Auxiliary 
made three TV appearances on children's TV programs and there 
was extensive newspaper coverage. "Bike Basics" and "I Didn't 
See" pamphlets were distributed. The film "Step Lightly'; was 
purchased for our film library and was shown in local societies, 
schools, and service organizations. 

1974 - $500 was given towards new furnishings at the Indiana 
--optometric Association central office. This year the Auxiliary 

took on the "Seymour Safely" puppet show project. 144 puppet 
shows, which stressed "protect your eyes, take care of your 
vision," reaching approximately 4,000 children were given during 
the year througho~t the state. There were TV appearances and 
newspaper publicity on the project. $500 was given to help 
defray the cost of a postage meter for the central office. 

1976-1977 - Seymour Safely was expanded to several different puppet 
shows and was continued in Indiana. 5,000 children saw the 
puppet show "Hush Puppies Bright Ideas." Farm Bureau women 
from 82 counties and Women Highway Safety Leaders saw both 
"Hush Puppies Bright Ideas" and "Seymour Safely's Bike Basics." 
Seymour Safely appeared on Cowboy Bob's Children's TV show as 
well as other TV and radio programs around the state. A booth 
was set up for Indiana State Teachers Institute with handouts 
to teachers for ordering Optometric Brochures for their classes 
and "Teachers Guide to Vision Problems". "Hush Puppies Bright 
Ideas" film was shown continuously. A booth was set up for the 
Children's Festival at Lafayette Square Shopping Center with 
Seymour Safely posters shown and bookmarks distributed. The 
Governor of Indiana signed a Proclamation for Save Your Vision 
Week as did the Mayor of Indianapolis and mayors of other cities. 

1977-1978- The Auxiliary funded the Emergency Contact Lens Removal 
project to a sum of $2,000 and emergency posters reached all 
counties and at least one Emergency Medical Technicians unit in 
each county in Indiana. Subsequent training programs were held 
in several local locations for emergency medical technicians. 



- 82 -

Through the county health nurses via the Indiana State Board 
of Health, Emergency Contact Lens Removal Posters were placed 
in over half of the schools in half of the counties in Indiana. 
2,000 posters were placed in Indiana. 

1978-1980- Outreach to Older Americans was adopted as a state 
project. $2,000 was initially spent for slides, literature, 
and presentations. The Auxiliary reached all 92 counties 
in Indiana through coordination with the Governor's Commission 
on Aging. Presentations were given at nutrition centers, 
senior citizens clubs, nursing homes, etc. We were invited 
to be participants at the Governor's Conference on Aging where 
we were able to reach 50 area agencies as well as participating 
senior citizens. Approximately 8,000 in all. The Outreach 
program was televised via WIPB in Muncie. Reached a potential 
viewing audience of l/2 million people in east or central 
Indiana and west central Ohio. Jay County was the pilot project 
for 4-H Eye Care education in Indiana, and as a result of 
continued implementation, the Indiana 4-H council adopted Eye 
Care Education as a state project. The Auxiliary provided 
awards to champions at the county fair and awarded a $175 
stipend to send a 4-H person to a specialized Health Awareness 
Leadership Forum in Washington, D.C. The Auxiliary also helped 
apply for an Eye Care Education Grant which is given through 
the 4-H Council by the American Optometric Association. It 
was not received at this time, but Indiana continued to apply 
and in 1982, received a grant for $1,200. 

1981 - First year for the billboard project during Save Your Vision 
-----week. Limited to Marion County. 100 copies of the book "Arthur's 

Eyes" were sold to Optometrists for use in their office, schools, 
libraries, etc. Outreach to Older Americans was continued. 
OD's were invited to do glaucoma testing through the Salvation 
Army and the 82 State Fair booths. 

1982 - The billboard project for Save Your Vision Week was ex­
panded state wide. 83 billboards were posted at a cost of 
$3,298.84. The scholarship was increased from $500 to $1,000. 
7,000 Halloween Safety fliers were distributed to elementary 
students at a cost of $75. 150 Drug Abuse posters were 
distributed to Junior High and High Schools at a cost of $150. 
5,000 In-Office Promotional Items have been sold to OD's for 
use in their office. Outreach to Older Americans, Seymour 
Safely, and 4-H Eye care are being continued at this time. 



- 83 -

Few remember how dark it was: 

Some of us older ones who may have visited Buffalo, New York, 
in our youth will recall the peripheral flicker of the electric 
lights powered by the hydroelectric generators of low frequency 
alternating current at Niagara Falls. Fewer can recall the ubiquitous 
prevalence of darkness before the advent of electric lights. A 
reminiscent paragraph by Herman B Wells (born June 7, 1902) in his 
autobiography, "Being Lucky," Indiana University Press, 1980, page 5, 
is a rare statement of this experience, as follows: 

Niagara Falls was an especially strong magnet for honeymooners 
in 1901 because of the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo. The 
feature of the exposition was millions of small, twinkling electric 
light bulbs illuminating the fairgrounds. Most of the visitors 
had not seen electric lights before, nor would they soon again 
see them used on such a scale. The memory of that occasion remained 
vivid in the minds of my parents throughout their lives. In her 
later years, when we would drive through the countryside at night 
and could see the electric floodlights in the barnyards of brightly 
lighted houses in between the glare of passing automobiles, my 
mother would frequently remark on how much lighter the world was 
then than it had been when she was young. In her youth the country 
roads had been pitch-black at night, the darkness broken only by 
an occasional feeble glow from a farmhouse or by the light of a 
swaying lantern on a buggy. 

What _:!2 oral his tory? 

From time to time the term "oral history" pops up in the NOHS 
and elsewhere without explanation. Oral history is not a case-history 
recorded by a dentist, nor is it the oral reading of a history book. 
You will not find it in old dictionaries~ nor in some new ones. If 
you do not happen to be active in a community with strong academic 
leanings you may well not be quite certain what the expression entails. 
Here then is an easy to read, plagiarized, and adapted paragraph which 
defines it briefly and precisely: 

Oral history is a method of research which attempts to probe 
human memories and retrieve information not usually documented 
anywhere else. Relying on the informed interviewer and the tape 
recorder, oral history is more than an attempt at recording 
memories. The best oral history results from a combination of 
trained interviewers who have thoroughly researched the backgrounds 
of their subjects and respondents who are willing to peel back 
the layers of their own memories. The interview is ideally a 
shared project of historical research and conceptualization and 
human recollections about events personally experienced. During 



- 84 -

the past decade, oral history has emerged as a useful method 
not only in traditional history subjects, but as a means of 
generating a unique historical perspective in fields such as 
business, medicine, sociology, and optometry. 

H.W Hofstetter, Editor 

CONSIDER 

Whether you are an optician in Soochow, an ophthalmist in Irkutsk, 

a retiree on Pitcairn Island, or an optometrist in Huntsburg, Ohio, 

or even Middlefield, it is your privilege to join the Optometric 

Historical Society, for whatever reason. The phenomenal cost is 

five U.S. dollars per year, or free for the rest of your life if you 

amend your will to provide a one thousand dollar legacy to the Society. 

If you are not already a member, give this a moment's thought. 

* * * * * 


	1983-14-03-001
	1983-14-03-002
	1983-14-03-003
	1983-14-03-004
	1983-14-03-005
	1983-14-03-006
	1983-14-03-007
	1983-14-03-008
	1983-14-03-009
	1983-14-03-010
	1983-14-03-011
	1983-14-03-012
	1983-14-03-013
	1983-14-03-014
	1983-14-03-015
	1983-14-03-016
	1983-14-03-017
	1983-14-03-018
	1983-14-03-019
	1983-14-03-020
	1983-14-03-021
	1983-14-03-022
	1983-14-03-023
	1983-14-03-024
	1983-14-03-025
	1983-14-03-026
	1983-14-03-027
	1983-14-03-028
	1983-14-03-029
	1983-14-03-030
	1983-14-03-031
	1983-14-03-032
	1983-14-03-033
	1983-14-03-034
	1983-14-03-035
	1983-14-03-036
	1983-14-03-037
	1983-14-03-038
	1983-14-03-039
	1983-14-03-040
	1983-14-03-041
	1983-14-03-042
	1983-14-03-043
	1983-14-03-044
	1983-14-03-045
	1983-14-03-046
	1983-14-03-047
	1983-14-03-048