[Skip to Navigation]
November 1991


Arch Dermatol. 1991;127(11):1654. doi:10.1001/archderm.1991.01680100054003

This paper was a reply to certain criticisms made by M. Diday, of Lyons, of Dr. King's previous paper on this subject, read to this Association in May, 1888.

In reply to Dr. King's paper, Dr. Taylor stated that he was sorry to see that Dr. King had again rehabilitated his case of syphilis in the third generation. He did not want to go on record as indorsing that case. The speaker said that of all the cases he had seen of syphilis in the third generation not one, upon investigation, was able to hold water. Atkinson's was a fairly good case, but it fell through. The full requirements must be fulfilled. The author must establish, by a personal examination, that syphilis existed in one of the grandparents; he must establish a clear syphilitic history in the woman, and he must prove conclusively that the man who marries the woman is not syphilitic, because the father is a potent agent in syphilis. Unless these factors are fulfilled, the case is void.

J Cutan Genito-Urin Dis.

November 1891;9:427-428.

Add or change institution