Library Collections: Document: Full Text

"It would be very acceptable to the advocates of braille, if that code could be taken as the basis of the universal code. New York Point supporters would feel the same satisfaction, if that system could be put to the front, and so with each of the five, no doubt. But in such an undertaking nothing can be accomplished unless all are willing to make concessions, cheerfully, and if necessary stand prepared to abandon their own individual choice, and abide loyally by whatever may ultimately be agreed upon by the majority....

"...At present there are a good many books printed in more than one code, which is a needless waste of time and expense but is necessary under present conditions in order that the readers in different systems may have the privilege of reading them. Stereotyping is playing an important part in our printing now and is one of the strongest arguments for a universal code. When once the plates are stamped for a certain book, the additional expense of striking off a few hundred more copies is, comparatively speaking, very trifling. There already exists a most praiseworthy system of exchange of books among our printing houses and libraries. Let this continue and be extended systematically on both sides of the water.... Think what a great increase of literature there would be for the same total expense that is now laid out by the combined presses of England and America, and every book available to every reader, on both sides of the ocean.

"May I not urge upon you my friends, that you give this matter your most serious consideration ... till the end is accomplished? We shall have opposition both from the blind themselves and from some of those in authority over them, no doubt; there will be more or less confusion and perhaps inconvenience for a time to the readers, but what great good was ever yet brought about ... without opposition and sacrifice?... The time is now ripe for action; the English-speaking world, so far as the blind are concerned, is aroused. They are feeling their way toward a solution. If we let this opportunity pass, it may be years before another occasion so favorable will present itself...."

Mr. Holmes also wrote a similar letter to the International Conference on the Blind which was held in Edinburgh the same year, in the hope of interesting British authorities in the subject.

The Tactile Print Investigating Commission was succeeded by the Uniform Type Committee of the American Association of Workers for the Blind which was set up by the following resolution at the 1905 convention at Saginaw, "That we favor the adoption of some one uniform type for use in schools and general reading, and that a committee of five be appointed to communicate with the British Braille Committee, and to continue the work heretofore assigned to the Tactile Print Investigating Commission." This committee consisted of the following, all of whom were blind: Charles W. Holmes, Elwyn H. Fowler, John B. Curtis, Lee N. Muck, Ambrose M. Shotwell. Two of the members were New York Point advocates, two American braille advocates, and the fifth soon became known to be partial to British braille.

The Uniform Type Committee began by stating that linetype was passing from the stage as a competitor. It recognized, however, that Moon type had a certain value for use by blinded aged and hard-handed persons. In this connection it was suggested that a dot system arranged in a cell three dots high and three dots wide and roughly resembling Roman letters might be superior in some respects to Moon type as it would be less expensive to manufacture by movable type, easier to learn, more tangible, and capable of being written by hand. This suggestion, however, never got beyond the academic discussion stage.

The committee decided to concentrate its study on the relative merits of the three point systems, American braille, New York Point and British braille. The problem was broken down into certain characteristic elements of the systems which could be compared one with another. It was hoped that the claims for the various systems were susceptible of scientific testing. For example, New York Point is a dot system in which no letter is more than two dots vertically, while horizontally it might be one to four dots. On the other hand, braille consists of one or more dots arranged within the braille cell, three dots vertically and two horizontally. Which is more legible?

Test sheets were prepared, each containing an equal number of characters. On one sheet these characters were one, two or three dots high; on the other sheet the same number of characters were arranged one, two or three dots in width. These characters were placed in lines as they would appear in an embossed book and grouped in from two to five characters such as might appear in words. Each character, of course, was the equivalent of a braille or a New York Point letter.

In administering the test a blind subject was asked to read the sheets and simply call out the number of dots in the character under his finger so that it made no difference whether or not he knew the letter for which it stood. A stop watch was held by an observer who followed on another copy of the test and the subject was directed to call the number of dots in these characters as rapidly as he could recognize them. It was felt that if the sheets having characters three dots wide (characteristic of New York Point) could be read faster or with fewer errors than the sheets with characters three dots high (characteristic of braille), a superiority for New York Point would be indicated, If, however, the characters three dots high could be read more rapidly than those with the horizontal arrangement of dots, a superiority for braille would be suggested.