Chapter XX: Summary of Results (4)

"The young W. appeared to be a healthy, perfect child; his eyes
in particular were large and rather prominent. About the end of
his first year, a number of persons passing in procession near
his father's house, accompanied with music and flags, the child
was taken to see them; but, instead of looking at the
procession, it was observed that, though he was evidently much
pleased with the music, his eyes were never directed to the
place from whence the sound came. His mother, alarmed by this
discovery, held silver spoons and other glaring objects before
him at different distances, and she was soon convinced that he
was unable to perceive any of them. A surgeon was consulted,
who, on examining the eyes, pronounced that there was a complete
cataract in each. All thoughts of assisting his sight were (for
the present) relinquished. As soon as he could speak it was
observed that when an object was held close to his eyes he was
able to distinguish its color if strongly marked, but on no
occasion did he ever notice its outline or figure. I performed
the operation on the left eye on the 29th of December, 1800. The
eye was immediately bound up, and no inquiries made on that day
with regard to his sight. On the 30th I found that he had
experienced a slight sickness on the preceding evening. On the
31st, as soon as I entered his chamber, the mother with much joy
informed me that her child could see. About an hour before my
visit he was standing near the fire, with a handkerchief tied
loosely over his eyes, when he told her that under the
handkerchief, which had slipped upward, he could distinguish the
table by the side of which she was sitting. It was about a yard
and a half from him, and he observed that it was covered with a
green cloth (which was really the case), and that it was a
little farther off than he was able to reach.... Desirous to
ascertain whether he was able to distinguish objects, I held a
letter before him at the distance of about twelve inches, when
he told me, after a short hesitation, that it was a piece of
paper; that it was square, which he knew by its corners; and
that it was longer in one direction than it was in the other. On
being desired to point to the corners, he did it with great
precision and readily carried his finger in the line of its
longest diameter. I then showed him a small oblong bandbox
covered with red leather, which he said was red and square, and
pointed at once to its four corners. After this I placed before
him an oval silver box, which he said had a shining appearance,
and presently afterward that it was round, because it had not
corners. A white stone mug he first called a white basin, but
soon after, recollecting himself, said it was a mug because it
had a handle. I held the objects at different distances from his
eye and inquired very particularly if he was sensible of any
difference in their situation, which he always said he was,
informing me on every change whether they were brought nearer to
or carried farther from him. I again inquired, both of his
mother and himself, whether he had ever before this time
distinguished by sight any sort of object, and I was assured by
both that he never had on any occasion, and that when he wished
to discover colors, which he could only do when they were very
strong, he had always been obliged to hold the colored object
close to his eye and a little on one side to avoid the
projection of the nose. No further experiments were made on that
day. On the 1st of January I found that he felt no uneasiness on
the approach of light. I showed him a table-knife, which at
first he called a spoon, but soon rectified the mistake, giving
it the right name and distinguishing the blade from the handle
by pointing to each as he was desired. He called a yellow
pocket-book by its name, taking notice of the silver lock in the
cover. I held my hand before him, which he knew, but could not
at first tell the number of my fingers nor distinguish one of
them from another. I then held up his own hand and desired him
to remark the difference between his thumb and his fingers,
after which he readily pointed out the distinctions in mine
also. Dark-colored and smooth objects were more agreeable to him
than those which were bright and rough. On the 3d of January he
saw from the drawing-room window a dancing bear in the street
and distinguished a number of boys that were standing round him,
noticing particularly a bundle of clothes which one of them had
on his head. On the same evening I placed him before a
looking-glass and held up his hand. After a little time he
smiled and said he saw the shadow of his hand as well as that of
his head. He could not then distinguish his features; but on the
following day, his mother having again placed him before the
glass, he pointed to his eyes, nose, and mouth. The young W., a
remarkably intelligent boy (of seven years), gave the most
direct and satisfactory answers to every question that was put
to him, and, though not born blind, certainly had not any
recollection of having ever seen. The right eye was operated
upon a month after the left, but without the least success."

In regard to the other case, Ware writes: "In the instance of a
young gentleman from Ireland, fourteen years old, from each of
whose eyes I extracted a cataract in the year 1794, and who,
before the operation, assured me, as did his friends, that he
had never seen the figure of any object, I was astonished by the
facility with which, on the first experiment, he took hold of my
hand at different distances, mentioning whether it was brought
nearer to or carried farther from him, and conveying his hand to
mine in a circular direction, that we [Ware and another
physician] might be the better satisfied of the accuracy with
which he did it." In this case, as in others of like nature,
Ware could not, "although the patients had certainly been blind
from early infancy," satisfy himself "that they had not, before
this period, enjoyed a sufficient degree of sight to impress the
image of visible objects on their minds, and to give them ideas
which could not afterward be entirely obliterated."

Ware found, moreover, that, in the case of two children between seven and eight years of age, both blind from birth, and on whom no operation had been performed, the knowledge of colors, limited as it was, was sufficient to enable them to tell whether colored objects were brought nearer to or carried farther from them; for instance, whether they were at the distance of two inches or four inches from their eyes; and he himself observes that they were not, in strictness of speech, blind, though they were deprived of all useful sight.

Remarks on the Second and Third Cases.

It is a surprising thing, in the account of the former case, that nothing whatever is said of the behavior of the patient on the first and on the fourth day after the operation. We must assume that he passed the first day wholly with his eyes bandaged. Further, the boy pointed out four corners of a box, while the box had eight; yet no inference can be drawn from this, for possibly only one side of the box was shown to him. The most remarkable thing is the statement of the patient that he saw the _shadow_ of his hand in the glass. This circumstance, and the astonishing certainty, at the very first attempts to estimate space-relations, in the discrimination of round and angular, and in the observation that the table was somewhat farther from him than he could reach, show what influence the mere ability to perceive colors has upon vision in space. Before the operation, W. distinguished only striking colors from one another; but he could perceive nearness and distance of colored objects, within narrow limits, by the great differences in the luminous intensity of the colors. He distinguished with certainty dimness from brightness. Accordingly, when he noticed a decrease in the brightness of a color, he inferred the distance of the colored object from the eye, regulating his judgment also by touch. Thus the boy had, before the operation, some perception of space with the eye, and it is not much to be wondered at, considering his uncommon intelligence, that he, soon after the operation (probably attempts at seeing were secretly made by the patient on the first day) learned to judge pretty surely of space-relations--much more surely than a person born blind learns to judge in so short a time. Besides, it is not to be forgotten that, while it is true that the cataract had become completely developed at the end of the first year of life, there is no proof that the child was unable to see during the first months. At that time images, as in the second case, may have unconsciously impressed themselves, with which, at a later period, more accurate space-ideas may have been associated, through the sense of touch, than is the case with persons born completely blind. Ware concludes, from his observations--

1. "When children are born blind, in consequence of having cataracts
in their eyes, they are never so totally deprived of sight as not to
be able to distinguish colors; and, though they can not see the
figure of an object, nor even its color, unless it be placed within
a very short distance, they nevertheless can tell whether, when
within this distance, it be brought nearer to or carried farther
from them.

2. "In consequence of this power, whilst in a state of comparative
blindness, children who have their cataracts removed are enabled
immediately on the acquisition of sight to form some judgment of the
distance, and even of the outline, of those strongly defined objects
with the color of which they were previously acquainted."

Both these conclusions are simply matter of fact. It only needs explanation how the distance and outlines of objects can be known after the operation _in consequence of_ the ability described in the first proposition. That distance is actually estimated at once in consequence of this power, is clear; not so with the outlines. How can round and angular be distinguished, when only colors and gross differences of intensity and saturation are perceived? Ware gives no solution of the difficulty, but thinks that, because the colors appeared more intense, the previously imperfect ideas concerning distances might be improved and extended, so that they would even give a knowledge of the boundary-lines and of the form of those things with the color of which the patients were previously acquainted. But this improvement of the ideas concerning distance can not lead directly to discrimination of the limits of objects, and is itself hypothetical, inasmuch as we might expect, _immediately_ after the operation, on account of the enormous difference in the luminous intensity, an uncertainty in the judgment. But such uncertainty appeared only in a slight degree in both the cases, a thing possible only because there had already been sufficient experiences with the eye. But these experiences, as is frequently stated, were absolutely lacking in regard to the limits and the form of objects. Here another thing comes in to help. Evidently, an eye that distinguishes only colors sees these colors always only as limited; even if it saw only a single color that occupied the whole field of vision, the field would still be a limited one. But the colored field may be small or large, and this difference may be noticed before the operation. If the object--one of vivid coloring--is long and narrow, the patient, even before the operation, will see it otherwise than if it is, with the same coloring, short and broad. And suppose he merely observes that not the whole field of vision is colored. If the whole field is colored, there is, of course, an entire lack of angles; on the other hand, if the whole field of vision is not filled by the colored object, then it is--however faintly--divided, and the lines of division, i. e., the indistinct boundary-lines of the objects whose color is perceived, may be either like the natural limits of the entire field of vision, i. e., "round," or unlike them, i. e., "angular." If, now, the obstacle is suddenly removed, the patient (even if he did not before the operation distinguish angular and round by the eye) must yet perceive which of the objects before him resemble in contour the previous field of vision, i. e., are round, and which do not; for the round contour of his field of vision is familiar to him. But W. had learned, through the sense of touch, that what is not round is angular. He would, therefore, even if he could perceive colors when the whole field of vision was filled--a matter on which we have no information--be able to guess the outlines of some objects soon after the operation, merely on the ground of his experiences before it. It was guess-work every time, as appears from the confounding of knife and spoon, mug and basin. The boy must have thought, "How would it be if I felt of it?" and, as he had before the operation frequently observed that whatever had the same contour as his field of vision, or a contour similar to that, was round, he could, after the operation, distinguish round and not round--a thing which a person born blind, on the other hand, and knowing nothing of his field of vision, because he has never had any, can never do.

On the whole, the two Ware cases are by no means so important as the Franz (see below) and Chesselden cases, because the boy, W., had ample opportunity up to his seventh year for learning to distinguish different colors according to their quality and luminous intensity; because he must have known the limits of his field of vision, and could in any case, by means of touch, correct and relatively confirm his very frequent attempts to guess at forms and distances by the eye. Finally, it is not known whether he became blind before or immediately after his birth, or, as is most probable, not till some months after birth. The same is true of the second case.

IV, V. THE HOME CASES.

Everard Home makes the following statement in the "Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society," London, 1807, i, pp. 83-87, 91:

"1. William Stiff, twelve years of age, had cataracts in his
eyes, which, according to the account of his mother, existed at
the time of birth. From earliest infancy he never stretched out
his hand to catch at anything, nor were his eyes directed to
objects placed before him, but rolled about in a very unusual
manner. The eyes were not examined till he was six months old,
and at that time the cataracts were as distinct as when he was
received into the hospital. He could at that time (July 17,
1806) distinguish light from darkness, and the light of the sun
from that of a fire or candle; he said it was redder and more
pleasant to look at, but lightning made a still stronger
impression on his eyes. All these different lights he called
red. The sun appeared to him the size of his hat. The
candle-flame was larger than his finger and smaller than his
arm. When he looked at the sun, he said it appeared to touch his
eye. When a lighted candle was placed before him, both his eyes
were directed toward it, and moved together. When it was at any
nearer distance than twelve inches, he said it touched his eyes.
When moved farther off he said it did not touch them, and at
twenty-two inches it became invisible.

"On the 21st of July the operation of extracting the crystalline
lens was performed on the left eye. Light became very
distressing to his eye. After allowing the eyelids to remain
closed for a few minutes, and then opening them, the pupil
appeared clear, but he could not bear exposure to light. On my
asking him what he had seen, he said, 'Your head, which seemed
to touch my eye,' but he could not tell its shape. On the 22d
the light was less offensive. He said he saw my head, which
touched his eye. On the 23d the eye was less inflamed, and he
could bear a weak light. He said he could see several gentlemen
round him, but could not describe their figure. My face, while I
was looking at his eye, he said was round and red. From the 25th
of July to the 1st of August there was inflammation. On the 4th
of August an attempt was made to ascertain the powers of vision;
it became necessary to shade the glare of light by hanging a
white cloth before the window. The least exertion fatigued the
eye, and the cicatrix on the cornea, to which the iris had
become attached, drew it down so as considerably to diminish the
pupil. The attempt had therefore to be postponed.

"On the 16th of September the right eye was couched. The light
was so distressing to his eye that the lids were closed as soon
as it was over. The eyes were not examined with respect to their
vision till the 13th of October; the boy remained quiet in the
hospital. On this day he could discern a white, red, or yellow
color, particularly when bright and shining. The sun and other
objects did not now seem to touch his eyes as before, they
appeared to be at a short distance from him. The right eye had
the most distinct vision, but in both it was imperfect. The
distance at which he saw best was five inches. When the object
was of a bright color, and illuminated by a strong light, he
could make out that it was flat and broad; and when one corner
of a square substance was pointed out to him, he saw it, and
could find out the other, which was at the end of the same side,
but could not do this under less favorable circumstances. When
the four corners of a white card were pointed out, and he had
examined them, he seemed to know them; but when the opposite
surface of the same card, which was yellow, was placed before
him, he could not tell whether it had corners or not, so that he
had not acquired any correct knowledge of them, since he could
not apply it to the next colored surface, whose form was exactly
the same with that, the outline of which the eye had just been
taught to trace....

"2. John Salter, seven years of age, was admitted into St.
George's Hospital on the 1st of October, 1806, with cataracts in
both eyes, which, according to the accounts of his relations,
had existed from his birth. The pupils contracted considerably
when a lighted candle was placed before him, and dilated as soon
as it was withdrawn. He was capable of distinguishing colors
with tolerable accuracy, particularly the more bright and vivid
ones. On the 6th of October the left eye was couched. The eye
was allowed ten minutes to recover itself; a round piece of
card, of a yellow color, one inch in diameter, was then placed
about six inches from it. He said immediately that it was
yellow, and, on being asked its shape, said, 'Let me touch it,
and I will tell you.' Being told that he must not touch it,
after looking for some time, he said it was round. A square,
blue card, nearly the same size, being put before him, he said
it was blue and round. A triangular piece he also called round.
The different colors of the objects placed before him he
instantly decided on with great correctness, but had no idea of
their form. He saw best at a distance of six or seven inches. He
was asked whether the object seemed to touch his eye; he said,
'No,' but when desired to say at what distance it was, he could
not tell. The eye was covered, and he was put to bed and told to
keep himself quiet; but upon the house-surgeon going to him half
an hour afterward, his eye was found uncovered, and he was
looking at his bed-curtains, which were close drawn. The bandage
was replaced, but so delighted was the boy with seeing, that he
again immediately removed it. The house-surgeon could not
enforce his instructions, and repeated the experiment about two
hours after the operation. Upon being shown a square, and asked
if he could find any corners to it, the boy was very desirous of
touching it. This being refused, he examined it for some time,
and said at last that he had found a corner, and then readily
counted the four corners of the square; and afterward, when a
triangle was shown him, he counted the corners in the same way;
but in doing so his eye went along the edge from corner to
corner, naming them as he went along. Next day he told me he had
seen 'the soldiers with their fifes and pretty things.' The
guards in the morning had marched past the hospital with their
band; on hearing the music, he had got out of bed and gone to
the window to look at them. Seeing the bright barrels of
muskets, he must in his mind have connected them with the sounds
which he heard, and mistaken them for musical instruments.
Twenty-four hours after the operation the pupil of the eye was
clear. A pair of scissors was shown him, and he said it was a
knife. On being told he was wrong, he could not make them out;
but the moment he touched them he said they were scissors, and
seemed delighted with the discovery.

"From this time he was constantly improving himself by looking
at, and examining with his hands, everything within his reach,
but he frequently forgot what he had learned. On the 10th I saw
him again. He went to the window and called out, 'What is that
moving?' I asked him what he thought it was. He said: 'A dog
drawing a wheelbarrow. There is one, two, three dogs drawing
another. How very pretty!' These proved to be carts and horses
on the road, which he saw from a two-pair-of-stairs window.

"On the 19th the different colored pieces of card were
separately placed before his eye, and so little had he gained in
thirteen days that he could not, without counting their corners
one by one, tell their shape. This he did with great facility,
running his eye quickly along the outline, so that it was
evident he was still learning, just as a child learns to read.
He had got so far as to know the angles, when they were placed
before him, and to count the number belonging to any one object.
The reason of his making so slow a progress was, that these
figures had never been subjected to examination by touch, and
were unlike anything he had been accustomed to see. He had got
so much the habit of assisting his eyes with his hands, that
nothing but holding them could keep them from the object.

"On the 26th the experiments were again repeated on the couched
eye. It was now found that the boy, on looking at any one of the
cards in a good light, could tell the form nearly as readily as
the color."

From these two instructive cases Home concludes:

"That, where the eye, before the cataract is removed, has only
been capable of discerning light, without being able to
distinguish colors, objects after its removal will seem to touch
the eye, and there will be no knowledge of their outline, which
confirms the observations made by Chesselden.

"That where the eye has previously distinguished colors, there
must also be an imperfect knowledge of distances, but not of
outline, which, however, will be very soon acquired, as happened
in Ware's cases. This is proved by the history of the first boy,
who, before the operation had no knowledge of colors or
distances, but after it, when his eye had only arrived at the
same state that the second boy's was in before the operation, he
had learned that the objects were at a distance and of different
colors.

"That when a child has acquired a new sense, nothing but great
pain or absolute coercion will prevent him from making use of
it."

VI. THE WARDROP CASE.

James Wardrop reports ("Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society for 1826," iii, 529-540, London, 1826):

"A girl who was observed, during the first months of her
infancy, to have something peculiar in the appearance of her
eyes and an unusual groping manner which made her parents
suspect that she had defective vision, had an operation
performed on both eyes at the age of about six months. The right
eye was entirely destroyed in consequence. The left eye was
preserved, but the child could only distinguish a very light
from a very dark room without having the power to perceive even
the situation of the window through which the light entered,
though in sunshine or in bright moonlight she knew the direction
from which the light emanated. In this case no light could reach
the retina except such rays as could pass through the substance
of the iris. Until her forty-sixth year the patient could not
perceive objects and had no notion of colors. On the 26th of
January I introduced a very small needle through the cornea and
the center of the iris; but I could not destroy any of the
adhesions which had shut up the pupillar opening. After this
operation she said she could distinguish more light, but she
could perceive neither forms nor colors. On the 8th of February
the iris (a portion of it) was divided. The light became
offensive to her. She complained of its brightness, and was
frequently observed trying to see her hands; but it was evident
that her vision was very imperfect, for, although there was an
incision made in the iris, some opaque matter lay behind the
opening, which must have greatly obstructed the entrance of
light.

"On the 17th of February a third operation. The opening was
enlarged and the opaque matter removed. The operation being
performed at my house, she returned home in a carriage, with her
eye covered only with a loose piece of silk, and the first thing
she noticed was a hackney-coach passing, when she exclaimed,
'What is that large thing that has passed by us?' In the course
of the evening she requested her brother to show her his watch,
concerning which she expressed much curiosity, and she looked at
it a considerable time, holding it close to her eye. She was
asked what she saw, and she said there was a dark and a bright
side; she pointed to the hour of twelve, and smiled. Her brother
asked her if she saw anything more. She replied, 'Yes,' and
pointed to the hour of six and to the hands of the watch. She
then looked at the chain and seals, and observed that one of the
seals was bright, which was the case. The following day I asked
her to look again at the watch, which she refused to do, saying
that the light was offensive to her eye and that she felt very
stupid, meaning that she was much confused by the visible world
thus for the first time opened to her.

"On the third day she observed the doors on the opposite side of
the street and asked if they were red, but they were, in fact,
of an oak-color. In the evening she looked at her brother's face
and said that she saw his nose. He asked her to touch it, which
she did. He then slipped a handkerchief over his face and asked
her to look again, when she playfully pulled it off and asked,
'What is that?'

"On the sixth day she told us that she saw better than she had
done on any preceding day; 'but I can not tell what I do see. I
am quite stupid.' She felt disappointed in not having the power
of distinguishing at once by her eye objects which she could so
readily distinguish from one another by feeling them.

"On the seventh day she observed that the mistress of the house
was tall. She asked what the color of her gown was, to which she
was answered that it was blue. 'So is that thing on your head,'
she then observed, which was the case; 'and your handkerchief,
that is a different color,' which was also correct. She added,
'I see you pretty well, I think.' The teacups and saucers
underwent an examination. 'What are they like?' her brother
asked her. 'I don't know,' she replied, 'they look very queer to
me, but I can tell what they are in a minute when I touch them.'
She distinguished an orange, but could form no notion of what it
was till she touched it. She seemed now to have become more
cheerful, and she was very sanguine that she would find her
newly acquired faculty of more use to her when she returned
home, where everything was familiar to her.

"On the eighth day she asked her brother 'what he was helping
himself to?' and when she was told it was a glass of port wine,
she replied, 'Port wine is dark, and looks to me very ugly.' She
observed, when candles were brought into the room, her brother's
face in the mirror as well as that of a lady who was present;
she also walked for the first time without assistance from her
chair to a sofa which was on the opposite side of the room and
back again to the chair. When at tea she took notice of the
tray, observed the shining of the japan-work, and asked 'what
the color was round the edge?' she was told that it was yellow,
upon which she remarked, 'I will know that again.'

"On the ninth day she came down-stairs to breakfast in great
spirits. She said to her brother, 'I see you very well to-day,'
and came up to him and shook hands. She also observed a ticket
on a window of a house on the opposite side of the street ('a
lodging to let'), and her brother, to convince himself of her
seeing it, took her to the window three separate times, and to
his surprise and gratification she pointed it out to him
distinctly on each trial.

"She spent a great part of the eleventh day looking out of the
window, and spoke very little.

"On the twelfth day she went to walk with her brother. The clear
blue sky first attracted her notice, and she said, 'It is the
prettiest thing I have ever seen yet, and equally pretty every
time I turn round and look at it.' She distinguished the street
from the foot-pavement distinctly, and stepped from one to the
other like a person accustomed to the use of her eyes. Her great
curiosity, and the manner in which she stared at the variety of
objects and pointed to them, exciting the observation of many
by-standers, her brother soon conducted her home, much against
her will.

"On the evening of the thirteenth day she observed that there
was a different tea-tray, and that it was not a pretty one, but
had a dark border, which was a correct description. Her brother
asked her to look in the mirror and tell him if she saw his face
in it, to which she answered, evidently disconcerted: 'I see my
own; let me go away.'

"On the fourteenth day she drove in a carriage four miles, and
noticed the trees, and likewise the river Thames as she crossed
Vauxhall Bridge. At this time it was bright sunshine, and she
said something dazzled her when she looked on the water.

"On the fifteenth day she walked to a chapel. The people passing
on the pavement startled her, and once when a gentleman was
going past her who had a white waistcoat and a blue coat with
yellow buttons, which the sunshine brought full in her view, she
started so as to draw her brother, who was walking with her, off
the pavement. She distinguished the clergyman moving his hands
in the pulpit, and observed that he held something in them. This
was a white handkerchief.

"On the sixteenth day she went in a coach through the town, and
appeared much entertained with the bustle in the streets. On
asking her how she saw on that day, she answered: 'I see a great
deal, if I could only tell what I do see; but surely I am very
stupid.'

"On the seventeenth day, when her brother asked her how she was,
she replied: 'I am well, and see better; but don't tease me with
too many questions till I have learned a little better how to
make use of my eye. All that I can say is, that I am sure, from
what I do see, a great change has taken place, but I can not
describe what I feel.'

"On the eighteenth day, when pieces of paper one inch and a half
square, differently colored, were presented to her, she not only
distinguished them at once from one another, but gave a decided
preference to some colors, liking yellow most, and then pale
pink. When desirous of examining an object, she had considerable
difficulty in directing her eye to it and finding out its
position, moving her hand as well as her eye in various
directions, as a person when blindfolded or in the dark gropes
with his hands for what he wishes to touch. She also
distinguished a large from a small object when they were both
held up before her for comparison. She said she saw different
forms in various objects which were shown to her. On asking what
she meant by different forms, such as long, round, and square,
and desiring her to draw with her finger these forms on her
other hand, and then presenting to her eye the respective forms,
she pointed to them exactly; she not only distinguished small
from large objects, but knew what was meant by above and below.
A figure, drawn with ink, was placed before her eye, having one
end broad and the other narrow, and she saw the positions as
they really were, and not inverted.

"She could also perceive motions, for, when a glass of water was
placed on the table before her, on approaching her hand near it,
it was moved quickly to a greater distance, upon which she
immediately said: 'You move it; you take it away.'

"She seemed to have the greatest difficulty in finding out the
distance of any object; for, when an object was held close to
her eye, she would search for it by stretching her hand far
beyond its position, while on other occasions she groped close
to her own face for a thing far removed from her.

"She learned with facility the names of the different colors,
and two days after the colored papers had been shown to her, on
coming into a room the color of which was crimson, she observed
that it was red. She also observed some pictures hanging on the
red wall of the room in which she was sitting, distinguishing
several small figures in them, but not knowing what they
represented, and admiring the gilt frames. On the same day she
walked round a pond, and was pleased with the glistening of the
sun's rays on the water, as well as with the blue sky and green
shrubs, the colors of which she named correctly.

"She had as yet acquired, by the use of her sight, but very
little knowledge of any forms, and was unable to apply the
information gained by this new sense, and to compare it with
what she had been accustomed to acquire by her sense of touch.
When, therefore, a silver pencil-case and a large key were given
her to examine with her hands, she discriminated and knew each
distinctly; but when they were placed on the table, side by
side, though she distinguished each with her eye, yet she could
not tell which was the pencil-case and which was the key.

"On the twenty-fifth day after the operation she drove in a
carriage for an hour in the Regent's Park, and asked more
questions, on her way there, than usual, about the objects
surrounding her, such as, 'What is that?' 'It is a soldier,' she
was answered. 'And that? See, see!' These were candles of
various colors in a tallow-chandler's window. 'Who is that that
has passed us just now?' It was a person on horseback. 'But what
is that on the pavement, red?' It was some ladies who wore red
shawls. On going into the park she was asked if she could guess
what any of the objects were. 'Oh, yes,' she replied, 'there is
the sky; that is the grass; yonder is water, and two white
things,' which were two swans.

"When she left London, forty-two days after the operation, she
had acquired a pretty accurate notion of colors and their
different shades and names. She had not yet acquired anything
like an accurate knowledge of distance or of forms, and, up to
this period, she continued to be very much confused with every
new object at which she looked. Neither was she yet able,
without considerable difficulty and numerous fruitless trials,
to direct her eye to an object; so that, when she attempted to
look at anything, she turned her head in various directions,
until her eye caught the object of which it was in search."

Remarks on the Sixth Case.

This case has been adduced as a proof that the sense of sight is sufficient, without aid from the sense of touch, to perceive whether an object is brought nearer the eye or carried farther from it. But John Stuart Mill rightly observes, in opposition to this ("Dissertations and Discussions," ii, 113; London, 1859), that the observation we are concerned with was not made "till the eighteenth day after the operation, by which time a middle-aged woman might well have acquired the experience necessary for distinguishing so simple a phenomenon." Besides, she was very uncertain in her judgment of distances, and, in her attempts to seize with the hand new and distant objects, she frequently acted exactly like an infant.

VII. THE FRANZ CASE.

J. C. A. Franz, of Leipsic, communicates the following to the "Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society" (by Sir Benjamin C. Brodie), (London, 1841; i, pp. 59-69):

"F. J. is the son of a physician. He is endowed with an
excellent understanding, quick power of conception, and
retentive memory. At his birth, both eyes were found to be
turned inward to such an extent that a portion of the cornea was
hidden by the inner canthus, and in both pupils there was a
yellowish-white discoloration. That the strabismus and cataract
of both eyes in this case were congenital is evident from the
testimony both of the parents and of the nurse. The latter held
a light before the eyes of the child when he was a few months
old, of which he took no notice. I ascertained also from her
that the eyeballs did not move hither and thither, but were
always turned inward, and that but rarely either the one or the
other was moved from the internal canthus.

"Toward the end of the second year, as was stated to me, the
operation of keratonyxis was performed on the right eye, upon
which a severe iritis ensued, terminating in atrophy of the
eyeball. Within the next four years two similar operations were
performed on the left eye without success. The color of the
opacity became, however, of a clearer white, and the patient
acquired a certain sensation of light, which he did not seem to
have had before the operation.

"At the end of June, 1840, the patient, being then seventeen
years of age, was brought to me. I found the condition of things
as follows: Both eyes were so much inverted that nearly one half
the cornea was hidden. The left eye he could move voluntarily
outward, but not without exertion; it returned immediately
inward when the influence of the will had ceased. The left
eyeball was of the natural size and elasticity. The patient had
not the slightest perception of light with the right eye; the
stimulus of light had no effect on the pupil. The pupil of the
left eye, which was not round, but drawn angularly downward and
inward, did not alter in dimension with the movements of the eye
nor from the stimulus of light. On examining the eye by looking
straight into it through the pupil, the anterior wall of the
capsule appeared opaque in its whole extent, and of a color and
luster like mother-of-pearl. On looking from the temporal side
in an oblique direction into the pupil, there was visible in the
anterior wall of the capsule a very small perpendicular cleft of
about one line and a quarter in length.

"This cleft was situated so far from the center of the pupil
that it was entirely covered by the iris. With this eye the
patient had a perception of light, and was even capable of
perceiving colors of an intense and decided tone. He believed
himself, moreover, able to perceive about one third of a square
inch of any bright object, if held at the distance of half an
inch or an inch from the eye, and obliquely in such a direction
as to reflect the light strongly toward the pupil. But this, I
am convinced, was a mere delusion, for all rays of light falling
in the direction of the optic axis must have been intercepted
and reflected by the opaque capsule. By these rays, therefore, a
perception of light, indeed, might be conveyed, but certainly no
perception of objects. On the other hand, it seems probable that
the lateral cleft in the capsule permitted rays of light to pass
into the interior of the eye. But as this small aperture was
situated entirely behind the iris, those rays only would have
permeated which came in a very oblique direction from the
temporal side. Admitting, then, these rays of light to pass
through the cleft, still on account of their obliquity they
could produce but a very imperfect image, because they impinged
upon an unfavorable portion of the retina. Moreover, I satisfied
myself by experiments, that the patient could not in the least
discern objects by sight. My experiments led me to the
conclusion that his belief that he really saw objects resulted
solely from his imagination combined with his power of
reasoning. In feeling an object and bringing it in contact with
the eyelids and the cheek, an idea of the object was produced,
which was judged of and corrected according to the experience he
had gained by constant practice.

"The patient's sense of touch had attained an extraordinary
degree of perfection. In order to examine an object minutely he
conveyed it to his lips.

"On the 10th of July, 1840, I performed an operation on the left
eye. The light was so painful to him that I could not try any
experiments immediately after the operation. Both eyes were
closed with narrow strips of court-plaster, and treated with
iced water for forty-eight hours. The patient suffered from
_muscae volitantes_, and could not bear even a mild degree of
light falling on the closed lids. After the lapse of a few
weeks, the _muscae volitantes_ were greatly mitigated, and the
intolerance of light ceased.

"On opening the eye for the first time on the third day after
the operation, I asked the patient what he could see; he
answered that he saw an extensive field of light, in which
everything appeared dull, confused, and in motion. He could not
distinguish objects. The pain produced by the light forced him
to close the eye immediately.

"Two days afterward the eye, which had been kept closed by means
of court-plaster, was again opened. He now described what he saw
as a number of opaque watery spheres, which moved with the
movements of the eye, but when the eye was at rest remained
stationary, and then partly covered each other. Two days after
this the eye was again opened. The same phenomena were again
observed, but the spheres were less opaque and somewhat
transparent; their movements more steady; they appeared to cover
each other more than before. He was now for the first time able,
as he said, to look through the spheres, and to perceive a
difference, but merely a difference, in the surrounding objects.
When he directed his eye steadily toward an object, the visual
impression produced by the object was painful and very
imperfect, because the eye, on account of its intolerance of
light, could not be kept open long enough for the formation of
the idea as derived from visual sensation. The appearance of
spheres diminished daily; they became smaller, clearer, and more
pellucid, allowed objects to be seen more distinctly, and
disappeared entirely after two weeks. The _muscae volitantes_,
which had the form of black, immovable, and horizontal stripes,
appeared, every time the eye was opened, in a direction upward
and inward. When the eye was closed he observed, especially in
the evening, in an outward and upward direction, an appearance
of dark blue, violet, and red colors; these colors became
gradually less intense, were shaded into bright orange, yellow,
and green, which latter colors alone eventually remained, and in
the course of five weeks disappeared entirely. As soon as the
intolerance of light had so far abated that the patient could
observe an object without pain, and for a sufficient time to
gain an idea of it, the following experiments were made on
different days.

"_First Experiment._--Silk ribbons of different colors, fastened
on a black ground, were employed to show the complementary
colors. The patient recognized the different colors, with the
exception of yellow and green, which he frequently confounded,
but could distinguish when both were exhibited at the same time.
He could point out each color correctly when a variety was shown
him at the same time. Gray pleased him best; the effect of red,
orange, and yellow was painful; that of violet and brown not
painful, but disagreeable. Black produced subjective colors, and
white occasioned the recurrence of _muscae volitantes_ in a most
vehement degree.

"_Second Experiment._--The patient sat with his back to the
light, and kept his eye closed. A sheet of paper on which two
strong black lines had been drawn, the one horizontal, the other
vertical, was placed before him, at the distance of about three
feet. He was now allowed to open the eye, and after attentive
examination he called the lines by their right denominations.
When I asked him to point out with his finger the horizontal
line, he moved his hand slowly, as if feeling, and pointed to
the vertical; but after a short time, observing his error, he
corrected himself. The outline in black of a square [six inches
in diameter], within which a circle had been drawn, and within
the latter a triangle, was, after careful examination,
recognized and correctly described by him. When he was asked to
point out either of the figures, he never moved his hand
directly and decidedly, but always as if feeling, and with the
greatest caution; he pointed them out, however, correctly. A
zigzag and a spiral line, both drawn on a sheet of paper, he
observed to be different, but could not describe them otherwise
than by imitating their forms with his finger in the air. He
said he had no idea of those figures.

"_Third Experiment._--The windows of the room were darkened,
with the exception of one, toward which the patient, closing his
eye, turned his back. At the distance of three feet, and on a
level with the eye, a solid _cube_ and a _sphere_, each of four
inches diameter, were placed before him. I now let him open his
eye. After attentively examining these bodies, he said he saw a
_quadrangular_ and a _circular_ figure, and after some
consideration he pronounced the one a _square_ and the other a
_disk_. His eye being then closed, the cube was taken away, and
a disk of equal size substituted and placed next to the sphere.
On again opening his eye he observed no difference in these
objects, but regarded them both as disks. The solid cube was now
placed in a somewhat oblique position before the eye, and close
beside it a figure cut out of pasteboard, representing a plane
outline prospect of the cube when in this position. Both objects
he took to be something like flat quadrates. A pyramid, placed
before him with one of its sides toward his eye, he saw as a
plane triangle. This object was now turned a little, so as to
present two of its sides to view, but rather more of one side
than of the other; after considering and examining it for a long
time, he said that this was a very extraordinary figure; it was
neither a triangle, nor a quadrangle, nor a circle; he had no
idea of it, and could not describe it. 'In fact,' said he, 'I
must give it up.' On the conclusion of these experiments I asked
him to describe the sensations the objects had produced,
whereupon he said that immediately on opening his eye he had
discovered a difference in the two objects, the cube and the
sphere, placed before him, and perceived that they were not
drawings; but that he had not been able to form from them the
idea of a square and a disk, _until he perceived a sensation of
what he saw in the points of his fingers_, as if he really
touched the objects. When I gave the three bodies, the sphere,
cube, and pyramid, into his hand, he was much surprised that he
had not recognized them as such by sight, as he was well
acquainted with them by touch. These experiments prove the
correctness of the hypothesis I have advanced elsewhere on the
well-known question put by Mr. Molyneux to Locke, which was
answered by both these gentlemen in the negative.

"_Fourth Experiment._--In a vessel containing water to about the
depth of one foot was placed a musket-ball, and on the surface
of the water a piece of pasteboard of the same form, size, and
color as the ball. The patient could perceive no difference in
the position of these bodies; he believed both to be upon the
surface of the water. Pointing to the ball, I desired him to
take up this object. He made an attempt to take it from the
plane of the water; but, when he found he could not grasp it
there, he said he had deceived himself, the objects were lying
in the water, upon which I informed him of their real position.
I now desired him to touch the ball which lay in the water with
a small rod. He attempted this several times, but always missed
his aim. He could never touch the object at the first movement
of his hand toward it, but only by feeling about with the rod.
On being questioned with respect to reflected light, he said
that he was always obliged to bear in mind that the
looking-glass was fastened to the wall in order to correct his
idea of the apparent situation of objects behind the glass.