oP-r : .... Iii··-···-··························· Indiana University : NEWSLETTER OF THE MAY 2 2 f990 • • • • • ~PTOMETRIC HISTORICAL SOCIETY (243 North Lindbergh Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri, 63141, USA) • • .. .. . Library ; *li•••••l'i·····················"·· April 1990 Number 2 A large envelope: The mailing containing this issue of the Newsletter is undoubtedly the largest and heaviest ever done by the OHS. Three items have been enclosed in each envelope: the April 1990 Newsletter, a 1990 OHS dues statement, and a ten year index (volumes 11-20). Readers should be informed that this invaluable index brings the OHS Newsletter indexing up-to-date and that the writing, compiling and editing of this index was done single­ handedly by Henry Hofstetter. On behalf of all readers of the Newsletter, present and future, I want to recognize and thank Henry Hofstetter for a fantastic job! A comment on the dues statement. Since we are wanting to establish an accurate membership list, please respond to this statement. If your balance due includes years previous to 1990, we definitely need to hear from you. We don't want to drop any names from the list. Quite simply, your membership and support is the OHS and we value it! Thanks. D.K.P. 1990 OHS Executive Board Officers: The OHS Executive Board members have elected the 1990 OHS officers from among themselves. Listed below are the 1990 OHS Executive Board members with their respective off ice titles and the year of their term expiration. President: Vice-President: Secretary: Treasurer: Trustees: 1989 Board Meeting: T. David Williams Charles Haine Bridget Kowalczyk Douglas Penisten David Goss Meredith Morgan Alfred Roseribloom (1991) (1992) (1990) (1992) (1993) (1990) (1993) All seven members of the OHS board and your contributing editor met at 7:00 A.M. on December 12, 1989 in New Orleans. Treasurer Penisten reported a moderate excess of 1989 dues over operating expenses and a net asset total of $5, 995. oo, most of 21/ 12 which is invested in Certificates of Deposit. The members include 194 from the u.s. and 36 elsewhere. It was reported also that the last three issues of the newsletter were mailed first class, which, after some discussion, the board recommended continuing. The board also voted not to join the Optometric Editors Association for reasons of the very different role our newsletter plays among optometric serial publications. It was recommended, however, that complimentary copies of our newsletter be mailed to optometric editors expressing an interest. It was announced and approved that in future issues of the newsletter Penisten will be identified as Managing Editor and Hofstetter as Contributing Editor. Also approved was President Williams' proposal that the cumulative OHS executive file which was transferred to him be forwarded to the archives of ILAMO, Inc. Discussed enthusiastically at some length was a suggestion that a two day historical retreat, perhaps in 1992, be planned totally separate from any other optometric meeting, and that its feature keynote and volunteer speakers and displays of collections and hobbies of historical optometric interest. A possible site might be a state park inn somewhat centrally located, perhaps near St. Louis. It was generally agreed that with appropriate publicity such a retreat- could well attract 50 to 100 attendees. Suggestions and comments are eagerly solicited from readers. H.W H. Vision on the plantation: Having editorialized several times on the significance of finding tidbits of historical information in early literature about eyes and vision I pursued such sleuthing in a 1773-1774 colonial diary. The title of the book is "Journal and Letters of Philip Vickers Fithian", with editorial commentary by Hunter Dickenson Fairish, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1968. Fithian was reared in New Jersey, received a degree from Princeton in 1772, was studying for the ministry, and took a job for the year 1773-1.77 4 as tutor for the seven children of the wealthy, distinguished, and prominent Robert carter of colonial Virginia. Treated graciously as a family member he kept a detailed and highly personal diary obviously with no intent, or even thought, of publication, for its punctuation, spelling, and grammar were quite careless and casual, in contrast with the composition of his occasional well-written letters. 21/ 13 Describing a December Saturday night social gathering in the manor, he wrote: "When the candles were lighted we all repaired ..... into the dancing room; ...... Half after eight we were rung in to Supper; the room looked luminous and splendid; four very large candles burning on the table where we supp'd, three others in different parts of the Room; a gay, sociable Assembly, & four well instructed waiters!" On December 25, he wrote more than 700 words, closing with the note, "Last Night and to night, had large clear, & very elegant Spermaceti Candles sent into my room." On a Sunday in February he wrote, "This day two Negro Fellows the Gardiner & cooper, wrangled; & at last fought; It happened hard however for the Cooper, who is likely to lose one of his Eyes by that Diabolical Custom of gouging which is in common practise among those who fight here." The significance of daylighting in the colonial home is clearly brought out in the following excerpt from his March 18 description of the Carters' 76 x 44 ft. two-story mansion: "On the South side, or front, in the upper story are four windows each having twenty-four Lights of Glass. In the lower story are two Windows each having Sixteen Lights--At the East end the upper story has three Windows each with eighteen Lights; & below two Windows both with eighteen Lights & a Door with nine--The north side I think is most beautiful of all; In the upper story is a Row of seven Windows with eighteen Lights a piece; and below six windows, with the like number of lights; besides a large Portico in the middle, at the sides of which are two Windows each with eighteen Lights.--At the West end are no Windows---The Numbers of Lights in all is five hundred, & forty nine" It may well be visually significant that the word "light" is used instead of "pane". On a very warm sultry day in June, "Mr. Carter ....•• introduced, at Coffee, a conversation on Philosophy, on Eclipses; the manner of viewing them, Thence to Telescopes, & the information which they afforded us of the Solar System;" At a September Saturday morning breakfast following an all night storm he cites Mrs. Carter reporting that, "the Lightning, Rain, & Thunder, disturbed me, & kept me padding from Room to Room all Night; I first had the Girls Beds removed as far as possible from the Chimneys---then had lights placed in the passage; and then but without rest or pleasure, I wandered through the house silent & lonely like a disturbed Ghost!" These, then, are the totality of my vision-related gleanings from an intelligently and diligently recorded 16 month diary of a young man and his daily experiences and observations in close 21/ 14 contact with a large and affluent family and their circle of acquaintances. Not once were spectacles mentioned, though various illnesses, ailments, and remedial measures drew frequent comment. Another Needles Document: Another educationally related item from OHS member James Leeds' collection is a brittle, black, staple-bound, heavy-paper covered, 21 1/2 x 29cm opus, exteriorly imprinted NEEDLES INSTITUTE OF OPTOMETRY and labeled interiorly as a correspondence course. The lessons are as follows: Nos. 1-9, Nos. 10-12, Nos. 13-19, Nos. 20-24, Nos. 25-31, Nos. 32-34, Final Lesson, 34 pages, 12 pages, 24 pages, 16 pages, 22 pages, 7 pages, 4 pages, Physical Optics The Eye Subjective Testing Objective Examinations Ocular Neuro-myology Eye Diseases Clinical Optometry The pages are printed, one side only, and labeled at the head of each lesson, "All Rights Reserved by W.B. Needles", but not copyrighted or dated. Though represented as a correspondence course there is no evidence, such as creases or penciled notes, suggesting that the sheets were originally delivered separately. Nor are there test questions, mailing instructions, or addresses which usually typify correspondence courses. There is no pagination, but the numerous figures are numbered from 1 to 99 throughout the numbered lessons plus Nos. I to IV in the final Lesson. Though clearly and quite correctly written, the course neither cites nor includes any references, which might have given a clue as to at least the latest date of publication. In terms of Needles ' productive career and the years of existence of the Institute it may be estimated that the date of printing was 1909 or soon thereafter. The lesson titles and their contents show considerable but not unreasonable variance from nomenclature of classic texts, indicative that Needles was indeed the author as well as the reserver of rights. Four historical tidbits: Under the categorical heading "Historisches", in the November/December, 1989, issue of Augenoptik, vol. 106, no. 6, pp. 181-183, East German optometrist v. Maxam of Rostock has contributed four concise theses. The first traces the concepts of ocular radiation, the theory that the eye emits sensory rays to the object as expressed by Pythagoras et al. several centuries B.C. and not completely abandoned until the early part of the 17th century by Descartes (1596-1650 A.D.) and his contemporaries. The second deals with the prevailing concepts of cataracts as 21/ 15 described by the surgeon and medical writer Paul of Aegena of the early Byzantine era in the first half of the seventh century. The third topic cites a passage from the German edition of Umberto Eco' s "The Name of the Rose" describing the 14th century monk William and his spectacles. The fourth, under the subtitle (translated) "Were magnifying visual aids around in 1600?", cites passages from Giambattista della Porta ( 1538 - 1615), Italian philosopher, physicist, and alchemist, in which are described the effects of concave and convex lenses and combinations to bring into focus and magnify the appearance of objects. Jack-of-all-trades Franklin: In a previous issue of this newsletter it was mentioned that Ben Franklin had advertised spectacles for sale. In disbelief that he was in any significant sense of the word in the spectacle spelling business I shared my doubts with OHS member Letocha who promptly sent me a copy of the 17 3 8 advertisement l It was essentially a classified advertisement of an odd assortment of imported books and incidental office supplies which included quite incidentally "Spectacles of Several Sorts". Other listed items in his advertisement included "Gilt Paper" 1 "Sealing Wax" 1 "Quilles" 1 "Letter Cases", "Ink Powder", "Stationery Ware", etc. Further, Dr. Letocha provided a copy of page 45 of Ronald Clark's biography of Franklin which included the following two paragraphs: More than a bookseller, newspaper publisher, printer and stationer, Franklin also sold from his shop iron stoves and cakes of the Crown soap that members of his family made in Boston. "It was a shop which defies description, hard by the marketplace in High Street," it has been claimed. "There were to be had imported books, legal blanks, paper and parchment, Dutch quills and Aleppo ink, perfumed soap, Rhode Island cheese, Chapbooks such as the peddlers hawked, pamphlets such as the Quakers read, live-geese feathers, bohea tea, coffee, very good sack, and cash for old rags." In addition, tucked in between Franklin's other multifarious activities was his work as the poor man's moneylender. Carefully marked down in his business books were loans as small as two shillings, others ranging up to pounds, and a loan of twenty-five shillings made to his brother-in-law John Read. It should be obvious from this that merely to assert out of context that Franklin sold or advertised spectacles can be very misleading. In 1783, Franklin was only 22 years old, trying to 21/16 expand his printing enterprise and decades away from the presbyopia that prompted his design of bifocals. Temporarily BY EXEMPTION: Responding to my October Newsletter commenting about the impropriety of labeling the registration certification of pre­ enactment optometrists as BY EXEMPTION, OHS member E. J. Fisher describes a temporary exception that occurred in Ontario, Canada, until a legal opinion eliminated it. Here is his detailed account: We had the grandfather situation here when the Ontario Optometry Act was first passed near the end of November, 1919 - just 70 years ago. The Act was proclaimed about April, 1920, and established the board of Examiners in Optometry. All those who took an affidavit that they were in practice before the passage of the Act were granted a license "by exemption". A number of those who applied were really jewellers or druggists who might have done a little over the counter self-selection dispensing, as was common in those days. The first registration netted about 900 optometrists who were granted a license "by exemption••, and such licenses were issued. We have a number of those early applications and certificates in our archives. There were a few who were refused licenses for various reasons. Some were really wholesale laboratory personnel. Late in 1920, the Ontario Board announced they would set examinations for any who wanted to obtain a certificate which indicated "by examination11 • About 100 took the first examination and those who passed were able to turn in their 11 exemption•• license for one which indicated "Optometrist By Examination11 • We have a photograph of this group, and I have been able to identify a few of the individuals. Some of you would remember J. C. Thompson, w. G. Maybee, Ed Bind. Later examinations were also given. so that about 250 ended up taking the examinations. We have copies of the first question papers, and while they were somewhat simplified, some of the questions were not unlike ·some Optometry and Optics papers today. Photocopies of both types of certificate are enclosed. As a result of the two classes of optometrists, there was much friction and hard feeling. Shortly, the optometrists who passed the examination were allowed to call themselves 11registered optometrists11 , while the exempt optometrists could not so designate themselves. A legal opinion was received on this matter. Naturally this created further hard feelings. Finally, by 1925, both phrases were dropped from the licenses, and all were designated uniformly as 11registered optometrists 11 • It 21/ 17 is also interesting to note that of the approximately 900 who were licensed initially, only about 700 retained their licenses until 1925. The rest dropped out because they really were not practicing at all, and were unaware that an annual license fee would be required. The fee was $15.00 at first, later reduced to $10.00 and then in a few years increased again. There was further political trouble here in 1936, and the Optometry Act was repealed. This was brought about because the Board of Examiners had been strictly enforcing certain clauses and had annoyed Ritholtz. He came here and got the ear of certain politicians and we lost the Act. For two weeks there was no Optometry Act at all. This was about the time of the infamous "Readers Digest" article which did Optometry no good. Then a new Act was passed with considerably less power included for the Board. The new Act also included a grandfather clause, and again we "gained" a number of new optometrists - about 200 who had not been licensed two weeks before. It took Ontario optometrists more than a decade to have improvements made in the Act and recover some stability for the profession. By 1960, many of the older, former "exempts" had disappeared from the scene. A reduced, approximately half-size, example is shown here. PROVINCE OF ONTARIO ilnuril nfJExumhttr.a- ht ®ptnurerry -CERTIFICATE- To Practb_ O~tDmotry lA the Pnwlnu of Ontario l>ll' EXEMPTION FROM £XA/.liNAT~ON By ;irtue o(the provisjons of an act of the Legislative Assembly of . the Province of Ontario known as the "Optometry Acf 1919" ~ .. --~- ·:·. : . }:: 1kto\llai-()~kalt5 . . : . ·-:· :.. . . ·. Is hereby·· entitled to continue the ~ractice ·of Optometry. GiveU: under our hand and se~ this. fflrs_Lday oLilttalJ--A.D. 19z.cL. ".' ' ' . . .... ~- . .. .~:4-au.~ Certificate No._2i)l._ ~~,a -- --~~ dkzu:~ =y 21/ 18 Zeiss memorialized in stamps: Three colorful interconnecting postage stamps on the envelope of a recently received magazine from East Germany commemorate the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the Carl Zeiss Foundation at Jena. one, a 50 Pfennig stamp and another an 85 Pfennig stamp each show a modern elaborate optical viewing instrument. The third, middle, stamp shows a portrait of Zeiss but no denominational value. Each of the three includes the words, "100 Jahre Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung Jena." Carl Zeiss Foundation anniversary: The inside front cover page of the July/August 1989 issue of Augenoptik features commentary on the 100th anniversary of the founding of the carl-Zeiss-Stiftung on May 19, 1989. Proposed by Ernst Abbe and supported by Otto Schott and the management and staff of the Zeiss and Schott firms and members of the Jena (East Germany) community and the Friedrich Schiller University, the foundation was named after Carl Zeiss, who had died on December 3, 1888. In its charter its purposes are very broadly stated in terms of public, professional, and commercial ideals. Its benefits to the community include a university children's hospital, a museum, a planetarium, and a school of optometry. Hirschberg's history: Vol. II of Julius Hirschberg's magnificent "History of Ophthalmology", translated from German by Frederick c. Blodi, M.D., and published by J.P. Wayenborgh Verlag, Bonn, West Germany, 1982, covers two separately identified periods. Part I, pp. 1-280, identifies with the Middle Ages and Part II, pp. 281-345, with the Sixteenth and Seventh Centuries. The full page frontispiece, interestingly, is labeled "First Printed Illustration of Spectacles" and credited "from Schedel/Libes Chronicarum - Niirnberg 1493," without further comment. Part I is presented in three chapters, the first of which, Arabian Ophthalmology, 240 pages, includes four pages on concepts of vision and optics according to Ibn Al-Haythem (965-1038 A.D.). Variously spelled Alhazen and other ways, the great visual SiCientist is credited with having reversed the earlier Greek theory that perceptive rays were emitted from the eye to the object. The second chapter, European Ophthalmology in the Middle Ages, is only 17 pages long! The third chapter, entitled the History of Spectacles, adds another 17 pages and provides a delightful and thorough assembly of historical notes and clues relating to the invention of spectacles. Part II, pages 281-345, devotes four pages to Anatomy of the Visual Organ, 19 to Optics and Physiology of the Visual System, and 37 to Practical Ophthalmology, thus reflecting the limited advances 21/ 19 in medical ophthalmology during the 16th and 17th centuries. The absence of discussion of the relatively thriving spectacle industry of that era, or of the opticians' art of fitting glasses, illustrates the virtually complete diverging of ophthalmological and optometric roles of that era. As with all of Hirschberg's historical writings and Blodi's excellent translation and footnoting, this volume is another superb historical resource. In a previous issue of this newsletter it was suggested that the printing of the whole series was complete. The Indiana University Library has the complete set on order but to date only volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8A, 8B, and Part II of 11 have been delivered. Volumes 9, 10, and Part I of 11 have not yet arrived. J. Hirschberg's Vol. 5: As with previous commentary on Vols. I, II, III, IV, and XI (Part 2) of this emerging translation of a most magnificent ophthalmic history, this is an optometrically slanted mini-review of Vol. V of Julius Hirschberg's "History of Ophthalmology", Bonn, 1985, translated by .Frederick c. Blodi. If one opens this volume without reference to volume 4 one will be confused by the subtitles of its contents. They show, first, "Part Three" of the Renaissance of Ophthalmology in the Eighteenth Century and, secondly, "Part One" of the First Half of the Nineteenth Century. Apparently the bound volumes are simple chronological divisions to make the books of approximately equal physical size rather than representative of purely eral periods of categorical significance. The chapter subdivision on the other hand are more topically organized in terms of individual persons, processes, developments, and areas for easy comprehension. Thus, the first 18 pages deal almost exclusively with the visual contributions and scholarly pursuits of Thomas Young. completing the 18th century are the next 23 pages on the history of perimetry and of 18th century concepts of the anatomy of the visual system. The remaining 340 pages are identified with the first half of the 19th century and include details of ophthalmological developments in Austria and Germany plus the period histories of intracapsular extractions, iritis care, ocular forceps, bloodletting for eye diseases, anesthesia, and blepharoplasty. While all of the material is fascinating to the visual science oriented reader, the more optometrically related portions of the volume are the Thomas Young and blepharoplasty sections for their visual science and strabismus coverage respectively. This fairly major absence of any details describing the relatively well established optician guilds, sight-testing 21/ 20 skills, spectacle fitting techniques, frame designs, and exploitation of eyewear fads and fashion of that era illustrates the then complete bifurcation of medical eye care and optometry. Or will this aspect be dealt with in Vol. 6? Yet more on Hirschberg's history: Translated by F. c. Blodi and published by J.P. Wayenborgh Verlag, Bonn, 1986, volume 6 of the "History of Ophthalmology" is labeled as part 2 of the first half of the 19th century in Germany, an era in which, according to one citation, contemporary German ophthalmology "reached a height which exceeds that of all other nations or of any other medical specialty". This volume almost exclusively deals with the medical and surgical aspects of ophthalmology and their involvements at numerous German universities with virtually no coverage of visual science per se. The topical subdivisions in this part include diabetes, pupillary reaction, glaucoma, and staphyloma in great factual detail. Volume 7, published in the same year and place, is part 3 of the same half century in France, an era which made its entree following the french Revolution of 1792 with a law under which, according to a contemporary quotation, "all universities, faculties, medical schools and surgical colleges were disbanded without that any replacement was provided. ·Complete anarchy reigned in education." Whether the impact was favorable or unfavorable to ophthalmological advancement is variously interpreted. Analogous to volume 6, the coverage of volume 7 relates quite entirely with the medical, surgical, educational, and personal aspects of ophthalmology and to a large extent with the German influence, especially that of Dr. Julius Sichel (1802-1868). German born and educated, Sichel went to Paris at age 27 and there became "the greatest ophthalmologist in France" with "the largest private practice in the world." He published more than a hundred papers in French, only a very few of which dealt with refractive errors and which are regarded as "the weakest of his scientific papers." He "dedicated one day a week to refractive errors and <;:oncerned himself personally with glasses," though he practically never wore his own spectacles of about -2.50 diopters. His theories and advice generally contraindicated spectacles except as a very last resort. The four short paragraphs from which these citations are derived are essentially the visual science coverage of this volume. Additionally, the text includes substantial but brief histories of eye bandages, cortical cataracts, scleritis, keratitis, and the influence of the Italian School. About 30 pages are devoted categorically to the contributions of a group of Parisian surgeons who were extremely hostile to the foreign ophthalmologists and who also opposed the division of general 21/ 21 surgery into various specialties. True and false issues: Commenting on my October 1989 NOHS review of an article by John Young which appeared in the July/August 1989 Optical world OHS member Charles Letocha writes, I get the impression that you doubt some of his statements in the article. Some are true and some are false. Marco Polo never mentioned eyeglasses in his "Travels". This is a widely held false notion; those who believe it should produce the evidence. Of course, Spina is not the first to fabricate glasses; we don't know who is. In 1804, John McAllister charged $6 for a pair of coin silver spectacles. The iron and brass ones of the 18th century were cheaper than that. I have a copy of Benjamin Franklin's 1738 ad aad he does indeed mention spectacles in it. The McAllister gold register is correct (it's in the Hagley Museum in Delaware). The Chamblant McAllister ad is also correct. John Levene mentions it in his long discussion of the Chamblant lens in his book. I also have a copy of the ad. In any case, I'd enjoy reading the entire article. I sent him a photocopy of Young's article. H.W H. Brewster's invention: It may come as a surprise to many that Sir David Brewster not only invented the kaleidoscope but also wrote a twenty-three chapter book about it entitled "The Kaleidoscope, its history, theory, and construction." A further surprise may be that the 19th-century original was reprinted in 1987 by Van Cort Publications, Inc. of Holyoke, Massachusetts as a 194 page 12 x 19cm. Leatherette bound volume with more than 50 figures. Of special historical interest is the inclusion of an appendix consisting of opinions of "four of the most eminent mathematicians and natural philosophers" as to whether Brewster's kaleidoscope was indeed original. Among them Mr. James Watt (1738-1819) wrote, "It has been said here that you took the idea of the Kaleidoscope from an old book on gardening. My friend, the Rev. Mr. Corrie, has procured me a sight of the book. It is Bradley's Improvements of Planting and Gardening. London, 1731, Part II, Chap. I. It consists of two pieces of looking-glass, of equal bigness, of the figure of a long square, five inches long, and four inches high, hinged together upon one of the narrow sides, so as to open and shut like the leaves of a book, which, being set upon their edges upon a drawing, will show it multiplied by repeated reflections. The instrument I have seen in my father's possession seventy years 21/ 22 ago, and frequently since, but what has become of it I know not. In my opinion, the application of the principle is very different from that of your Kaleidoscope." The testimony of the other three similarly supported the opinion that Brewster's invention was an original concept. The 1987 reprint, incidentally, is a gift of OHS member Jack M. Weber, O.D. In memory: The American Optometric Foundation awards William c. Ezell. 0. D. . Fellowshios to graduate students working toward advanced degrees with funds to support their thesis research. Reviewing the McAllisters: Because he had acquired several pair of McAllister spectacles for his collection, OHS member Charles Letocha became interested in the McAllisters themselves as they seemed to be the only makes known to antique dealers. Gathering information from numerous sources he put together a talk with slides to give at the Ocular Heritage society meeting in st. Louis in 1988. Starting with the birth of John McAllister, Sr., in Glasgow in 1753 he traced the almost 200 years of ophthalmic optical involvement by the five consecutive generations of McAllisters up to and including the posthumous granting of the honorary Doctor of Science degree to the forerunner of the lineage, John McAllister, Sr., by the Pennsylvania College of Optometry in 1976. The original draft of Letocha's paper is in the archives of the Ocular Heritage Society together with the slides. A copy of the draft is being filed also with ILAMO. Dr. Letocha wishes to rewrite the paper in more publishable form to submit to a periodical with wider circulation than this newsletter can offer. Blind editor bids adieu: The last issue of Hoosier Star-Light, a four-page monthly tabloid in large print, appeared in December 1989 concurrent with the retirement of its all-time editor Chet Perkins. The periodical was sponsored and fully subsidized by the Indianapolis Star's Fund for the Blind beginning with its first issue in July, 1954. It was given its name by Mr. Perkins. Funds for its support were derived from the proceeds of the annual Indiana-Kentucky All-Star Basketball Game. The printing was by the presses of The Indianapolis Star, and the distribution was free to all identifiable blind people throughout the state plus others concerned with the blind. 21/ 23 While the discontinuation of the periodical was prompted by Perkins's retirement, the decision involved awareness that in these 35 years broad improvements have been made in other avenues of communication with and among the blind through library services, radio, cassettes, talking machines, and low vision aids, for which Hoosier Star-Light can undoubtedly take much of the credit. Perkins was suddenly blinded during World War II by a land mine explosion. He subsequently earned a degree in journalism and for a couple of years edited two community newspapers. In 1954, he took on the editorship of the HSL in addition to his full-time employment as public relations director of the American Lung Association of Central Indiana. A noble venture: A 24-page 13 x 19cm bulletin of the New York Institute of Optometry printed in 1909 gladly cost OHS member James Leeds only $30.00 for his collection. He then kindly loaned it to us for commentary. According to the contents the school was organized as a one­ year course in 1907 and soon incorporated as the Institute in New York. With the enactment of the New York State optometry law in 1909 it included a two academic year curriculum in compliance with the new state licensure requirements and was registered by the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York under the administration of which the State Board of Optometric Examiners functioned. Listed in the bulletin are all of the 11 members of the board of Regents, the Commissioners of Education, and the five Examiners in Optometry with Charles F. Prentice as president. On the faculty are listed A. J. Cross as Dean, E. LeRoy Ryer as Registrar, R.M. Lockwood, E. E. Hotaling, S .H. Brooks, and Frederic A. Well, all of whom except Lockwood plus a Richard W. Ryer being also listed as the Board of Trustees. The address is given as 38 East 23rd Street, New York City. A three-page statement describing optometry as a career and another three pages describing the history of the Institute are written in flowing terms resembling LeRoy Ryer's style of authorship. Offered are a two academic year curriculum for students wishing to meet the New York requirements and a one academic year curriculum for others. The courses include ' ~rigonometry, physics, anatomy, physiology, pathology, theoretic, physiologic, and practical optics, and theoretic and practical optometry. Among the requirements for graduation is the attainment of the age of 21. Entrance requirements for the two-year curriculum included two years of high school or the equivalent. Tuition for the two years total $350.00. Clinical and laboratory training facilities are declared to be complete and thorough. Listed are 90 graduates, more than half from outside the State of New York. 21/ 24 From the printed word: If, in your meandering through a used-books store, you come across a copy of c.s. Flick's "A Gross of Green Spectacles", a 1951 publication of Hatton Press, London, buy it. It is a slender 12 1/2 x 19cm. green-bound 106+ix page book not yet rare but promising soon to become so. Its contents are of interest to only a small audience. What's in it? It is an anthology of quotations from both the public and professional literature. They all relate to spectacles, dating chronologically from Roger Bacon's 1268 comment about the use of a lens for reading to a 1949 satire on the provision of spectacles through the British National Health Service by columnist "Urbanus" in The Church Times. Collator Flick derived his selection almost entirely from English language sources and added commentary for clarification of the attending circumstances. The title of the book is taken from Oliver Goldsmith's 1766 novel "The Vicar of Wakefield", in which the Vicar describes his son's selling their colt and buying "a gross of green spectacles with silver rims and shagreen cases." Just as early paintings of subjects wearing glasses give us historical insight as to eral modes and acceptance, so do literary allusions reflect contemporary attitudes toward, and concepts of, visual aids. This booklet is only a modest attempt to prove this, and perhaps too early to have included Ogden Nash's "Girls who are bespectacled never get their necks tickled". On spectacles: "Die Brille" is the title of a new book by Frank Rossi, a former Jena (Zeiss) curator, a history of visual aids with photography by Ulrich Windoffer 1 published by Edition Leipzig Verlag fur Kunst and Wissenschaft, 7010 Leipzig, Postfach 30 1 East Germany. OHS member Dr. Eric Muth has received a copy, in which he is cited as a contributor. He reports that the book is being translated into English by Dr. Frederick Blodi of Iowa. Hurry, hurry, hurry!: Millions of volumes on bookshelves (and elsewhere) all across ~erica (and elsewhere} are in various stages of disintegration because the paper on which they are printed is gradually becoming brittle, crumbling from within, and turning to dust over the period of our own lifetime. Residual acids introduced during manufacturing processes, which were originally developed in the mid-nineteenth century, and are still being used today 1 are the cause of the destruction. Environmental factors are also involved. What can we as individuals do about it? For one thing we can check the storage conditions of the books and periodicals we own personally, or assign them to archival libraries that care. We can 21/ 25 also offer our financial support to archival institutions that are taking all possible measures to minimize the destruction. Of most immediate importance is to help establish the awareness of the problem in the public mind. Numismatic spectacles: The depiction of spectacles on coins, tokens, and medals traces back to the 16th century, according to ophthalmologist Jay M. Galst, whose hobby is collecting them and obtaining photographs from others' collections. A couple years ago Dr. Galst gave a presentation with slides at a meeting of the Ocular Heritage Society. His paper not only described the items in detail but also included a bibliography of 15 sources of information. His commentary included considerable language translation, interpretation of the objectives and significance of the inclusion of spectacles, and conjectures of symbolism. Such analyses certainly contribute meaningfully to our appreciation of the role of spectacles in earlier society. For supplementary reading: Professor, Librarian, and OHS member Patricia T. Carlson surprised us with seven Southern California College of Optometry quarterly database printouts of lists of current articles dealing with historical aspects of visual science as reviewed in periodicals received by her college library. The lists for the four quarters of 1988 and the first three of 1989 total 114 articles, an average of more than one item per week. Requests for copies of the lists should be submitted to her at the southern California College of Optometry, 2563 Yorba Linda Blvd., Fullerton, California 92631 U.S.A. To supplement her lists she also included printouts of three searches of "History of vision science" (1976-1982, 1982-1985, and 1986-1988) from the Southern College of Optometry databases which included a total of more than 300 articles. These are directly available from Librarian Nancy Gatlin, Southern College of Optometry, 1245 Madison Ave., Memphis, Tennessee 38104. These marvelously developed lists are of course derived from the current acquisitions of the respective libraries and therefore do not include the library holdings of prior years. Solex vs. P.C.L.: OHS member Muth has sent us a copy of Judge Ben Harrison's opinion in the case of Solex Laboratories, Inc., plaintiff, vs. Pacific Contact Laboratories, Inc. et al., defendants, Number 12460-Y in the District Court of the United States Southern District of California Central Division filed Sept. 14, 1951. The action involves the validity of Patent No. 2,510,438 (a copy is 21/ 26 included) covering Tuohy's contact lens invention and the defendants' use of the term "cornea" as unfair competition with the similar term "corneal" to identify the lens under adjudication. The rationale of the judge's opinion in favor of the plaintiff on both counts makes interesting reading. The copy will be forwarded to ILAMO. Contributing Editor: Managing Editor: Henry W Hofstetter 2615 Windermere Woods Drive Bloomington, IN 47401 USA Douglas K. Penisten College of Optometry Northeastern state University Tahlequah, OK 74464 USA 1990-21-02-001 1990-21-02-002 1990-21-02-003 1990-21-02-004 1990-21-02-005 1990-21-02-006 1990-21-02-007 1990-21-02-008 1990-21-02-009 1990-21-02-010 1990-21-02-011 1990-21-02-012 1990-21-02-013 1990-21-02-014 1990-21-02-015 1990-21-02-016