than it is when under the influence of atropin; that
is by the contraction of the pupil the iris-surface filtration is
increased and consequently the pressure is reduced. We all know that
Thomas Henderson maintains that the results of iridectomy are beneficial
because the raw edges of the coloboma, which do not cicatrize, permit
access of the aqueous to the iris veins, and that myotics, inasmuch as
they contract the pupil, open the iris crypts and therefore act, less
efficiently, perhaps, but act none the less like an iridectomy. The
normal intra-ocular pressure is uninfluenced by myotics because this
pressure represents the lowest circulatory pressure in the eye, and
further contact between aqueous and veins cannot reduce it below this
level, another point which is made by Thomas Henderson in support of his
contention.

The clinical fact remains that either by mechanical means, as it were,
in the liberation of a plugged filtering angle, or by the increasing of
iris-surface filtration, the myotics markedly reduce the abnormal
intra-ocular pressure.

_Methods of Administration and Indications._ With the methods of
administration of the myotics we are all so familiar that time need not
be wasted in their reiteration, except to refer to a few practical
points. In acute glaucoma, and every one knows that in this disease
their action is often prompt and sometimes curative, eserin in a
strength of one to four grains to the ounce may be instilled with
sufficient frequency to establish myosis, and its action in this respect
is enhanced if the congestion of the eye is lowered by measures to which
I shall refer later. There is a good deal of clinical evidence to
indicate that in this type of glaucoma, as well as in the so-called
sub-acute varieties, myotic activity is increased by a mixture of
pilocarpin and eserin in the same solution, exactly as a mixture of
arecalin and eserin is more potent than either of the drugs in separate
solution.

Prior to the happy advent of technically correctly placed filtering
cicatrices, a large number of surgeons depended almost exclusively on
the use of myotics in so-called simple, chronic or non-inflammatory
glaucoma. This is not the place to introduce a discussion of the
comparative value of iridectomy and myotic treatment in simple glaucoma
as based upon statistical records. We must wait now for a sufficient
period of time and then compare the value of myotic treatment with that
of opera