Volume 5

Treasury of human inheritance / edited by Karl Pearson, R.A. Fisher, L.S. Penrose.

Date:
1909-
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Credit: Treasury of human inheritance / edited by Karl Pearson, R.A. Fisher, L.S. Penrose. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    137/190 (page 253)
    was congenital and remained unchanged after the lens had been extracted. The father of II. 2 was also affected with cataract but nothing was known of his colour vision. II. 2 had two children, a son and daughter, who had normal colour vision. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 77.) Fig. 532. Burckhardt’s Case. Colour-blindness in a male and in his maternal grandfather. III. 1 was an acquaintance of III. 2 of Fig. 534, and the report is taken from him. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 95.) Fig. 533. Hogg’s Case. In a family consisting of four sons and three daughters the eldest and youngest of the sons were colour-blind ; the other two sons and the daughters were free from the defect. The maternal grandfather was colour-blind, but neither the mother nor any other member of the family were affected. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 190.) Fig. 534. BurcJckardt’s Case. Four cases of colour-blindness in males in a small pedigree; the chart is given by the recorder but no details of the family are described and it is by no means certain that all mem bers of the sibships are given. The colour-blindness of III. 2 is described and he is said to have made the same mistakes as IV. 1 in pedigree 579; he divided the spectrum into two parts, yellow and blue, and described a neutral part which might be called either grey or rose-red; the ends of the spectrum were not noticeably shortened. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 95.) Fig. 535. Burckhardt’s Case. Colour-blindness in two brothers and in their maternal grandfather; a step-brother had normal colour vision. Only one of the brothers appears to have been tested, he was red- blind, confused Parisian green with cinnabar and called carmine reddish brown. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 95.) Fig. 536. Wilson’s Case. Colour-blindness in two brothers and in their maternal grandfather. III. 1, Dr S., aged 23 (1855), reported that he had known of his defect for about ten years and that he discovered it through mistakes when entrusted with commissions for coloured purchases; he had been a successful draughtsman and sketcher from nature, but on using water-colours had even painted trees red; he could clearly discern blue and yellow except in the case of light blue which he might mistake for pink; he was uncertain as to the action of acids on litmus and could not at a little distance distinguish red petals or berries from the leaves of the same plants; he was always puzzled with greens and reds and often confused both colours with brown and some greens with drab. He writes: “none of my family are so affected, and some of them are good colourists, but I understand that my maternal grandfather had some similar deficiency.” The recorder however states that he had a colour-blind brother. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 76, pp. 33, 71.) Fig. 537. Wilson’s Case. Colour-blindness in two brothers and in one of their grandfathers. III. 1, Mr R., aged 40 (1853), had since his childhood been totally unable to retain certain colours in his mind; he considered that his defect was most marked with regard to compound colours such as green, purple, orange and brown; he also confused pink and pale blue, reds and yellows, blues and greens, reds and greens; but his appreciation of the various shades of colours (or the weight of colour as he described it) was extremely delicate. Mr R. was an engraver and he considered that his defective vision was to him a useful and valuable quality. He had once bought very bright red in mistake for green baize. He reports that one of his brothers was similarly affected and that his grandfather was very deficient in his knowledge of colours; further Mr R. had deep grey eyes and was able to see very minute objects without assistance from glasses. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 76, p. 27.) Fig. 538. Hocliecker's Case. II. 3, the recorder of this pedigree, was himself colour-blind and could recognise blue and yellow only in the spectrum. His three maternal uncles, I. 3—5, his cousin, II. 5, and his nephew, III. 1, were also colour-blind. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 111.) Fig. 539. Magnus’s Case. Colour-blindness in a grandchild, whose sex is not stated, and in the maternal grandfather. The recorder saw two other similar cases; in each case the parents of the affected child had normal colour vision. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 122.) Fig. 540. Magnus’s Case. Colour-blindness in a grandchild (sex not stated) and in one of its grand fathers; the parents had normal colour vision. In this, and in a similar case seen by the recorder, it was not known whether the affected grandfather was on the maternal or on the paternal side. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 122.) Fig. 541. Magnus’s Case. Two first cousins, the daughters of sisters I. 2 and 4, had each a colour blind son, III. 1 and 3. No further information is given. No consanguinity recorded. (See Bibl. No. 122.) Fig. 542. Cohn’s Case. A single case of colour-blindness in III. 2, a Jew, aged 14, with brown hair and irides and normal fundi; he took blue for rose and saw yellow and blue only in the spectrum, no shortening of the spectrum; his parents were first cousins; his two grandmothers were sisters; his two siblings had normal colour vision; two half-siblings, children of his father by his first, unrelated, wife had normal colour vision. No other case of colour-blindness was known in the family. Consanguinity. (See Bibl. No. 129, p. 39.) B. T. 33