BOWMAN LECTURE. 



-CLXXV 



3 unmarried ; III, 4 affected at 17, and seen then ; III, 5, 12 who died 

 young. No consanguinity. 



1895. Case 145. E. N. (unpublished), Moorfields Hospital, 1891. 

 (Booty.) 



I, 1 affected, " nearly blind/' has children, but no details ; I, 2 similarly 

 affected, and has an affected son (II, 2) ; II, 7 affected at 12, seen at 49, 

 no recovery, married, no issue ; II, 8 also affected, unmarried ; II, 9 un- 

 married. No consanguinity. 



1907.* Case 146. Gunn (E. Marcus), T.O.S., xxvii, p. 221. 



Incomplete, and cannot be completed. I, 1 affected in childhood, 

 married a first cousin (kind of cousinship not recorded), and had (up to 

 1907) two children ; II, 1 affected at 5, seen at 8 ; II, 2 affected at 3, 

 seen at 4. 



1887.* Case 147. Lawford, St. Thomas's Hospital Reports, xvii, p. 158. 

 Author's Case 1. 



I, 1 and 2 sisters; I, 1 had at least three children, of whom II, 1 

 certainty got the affection at 19, and 2 and 3 probably suffered; I, 2 had 



seven children, of whom all the sons suffered ; II, 7 at 31, seen at 32 ; 

 II, 8 (4 years younger than 7) at about 18 ; and II, 9 (3 years younger 

 than 8) at 19 ; eldest, II, 4, set. 39 years, and youngest, II, 10, 22 at 

 record ; II, 7 was also congenitally colour-blind. 



1887.* Case 148. Ibid. Author's Case 2. 



I, 1 good sight, but epileptic fits, husband good sight ; II, 1 affected 

 at 18 ; II, 3 living and normal; II, 2 died at 2, " consumptive bowels" ; 

 II, 4 still-born ; II, 5 at 1 year ; II, 6 and 7 at 1 year of diarrhoea. 



1875.* Case 149. Schilling, Inaug. Dissert., Berlin. 



I, 2 married twice, by first husband (I, 1) three sons ; II, 1 affected at 

 14, seen at 38 ; II, 2 affected at 10|, seen at 36 ; II, 3 began at 29, seen 

 at 34 ; by second husband (I, 3) 2 sons ; II, 4 affected in eleventh year, 

 26 at record ; II, 5 affected in twentieth year, 24 at record ; one daughter 

 II, 6, who at 20 became extremely amblyopic of both eyes (.fingers 12 in.) 

 with contracted Fs. but no ophthalmoscopic changes, and recovered 

 perfectly ; no note about her pupillary reaction ; probably hysterical 

 amblyopia. No positive information about vision in parents, nor as to 

 consanguinity. 



