His opposition to the knife-needle incision of Cheselden arose from the fact that the pupil either did not open, or if it did open would not remain permanent, chiefly because of the single iris incision. His antagonism to the more successful procedure of Adams was the result of a caustic personal controversy[16] with that skilful surgeon, who ably parried his charges.[14] His great influence with the profession of that day, however, served to check the sentiment in favor of Adams’ procedure, and when the weight of his indorsement was cast in favor of Maunoir’s operation the scales were decisively turned toward the side of the scissors method. Mackenzie,[26] in 1840, practiced Maunoir’s operation with considerable success, but in certain cases found it necessary to employ a slight modification of this procedure. He reversed Maunoir’s incision by making the same divergent V across the radiating fibers of the iris instead of parallel with them (Fig. 22), thus securing a triangular pupil (Fig. 23), which Lawrence[27] thought might succeed in some cases where Maunoir’s method would not be available. [26] Mackenzie, William: Diseases of the Eye, 3rd. ed., London, 1840, p. 746, American edition, edited by Hewson, Philadelphia, 1855, p. 815. [27] Lawrence, Sir William: Diseases of the Eye, American edition, edited by Hays, Philadelphia, 1854, p. 478. [Illustration: Fig. 22.--Mackenzie’s incision in cornea and iris-membrane (Mackenzie).] [Illustration: Fig. 23.--Resulting triangular pupil from Mackenzie’s incision (Mackenzie).] Bowman,[28] in 1872, proposed a method which, though surgically difficult to execute, was quite ingenious, and may have been the initial suggestion that stimulated DeWecker to write his monograph in the following year. I will quote his description as follows: “We make a double opening simultaneously on opposite sides of the cornea. It is more convenient, of course, to make these two openings in a horizontal than in a vertical direction. I then run a pair of scissors in two diverging lines (V) from each incision, thus enclosing between the incisions a large square or rhomboidal portion of the iridial region including the pupil, and all the structures there. You then withdraw the portion thus cut out. There is no drag on the ciliary region; whatever is withdrawn has been cut away from its connections beforehand” (Figs. 24, 25 and 26). [28] Transactions, Fourth Int. Ophth. Cong., London, 1872, p. 179. [Illustration: Fig 24.--Plan of Bowman’s first iris incision. Divergent V.] [Illustration: Fig. 25.--First incision completed. Plan of second, showing double V.] [Illustration: Fig. 26.--Rhomboidal pupil, resulting from Bowman’s iridotomy.]