City of Kansas City v. Baird

• Decision Date: 21 May 1901
• Citation: 63 S.W. 495,163 Mo. 196
• Parties: CITY OF KANSAS CITY v. BAIRD.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

63 S.W. 495

163 Mo. 196

CITY OF KANSAS CITY v. BAIRD.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 21, 1901.

COURTS — JURISDICTION OF SUPREME COURT — CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION — CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST — VIOLATION OF ORDINANCE.

A conviction of a Christian Scientist, who performs alleged services for the sick, and receives compensation therefor, for a violation of a city ordinance requiring physicians to report all cases of diphtheria to the board of health, is not a violation of Const. art. 2, § 5, guarantying religious freedom, and hence an appeal will not lie to the supreme court on the ground that the cause presents a constitutional question.

Appeal from criminal court, Jackson county; John W. Wofford, Judge.

Mrs. A. J. Baird was convicted for a violation of a city ordinance requiring phycians to report all cases of diphtheria to the state board of health, and she appeals. Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and cause transferred to the Kansas City court of appeals.

The defendant was a Christian Scientist, who was accustomed to receive compensation for tending the sick, and she was called to see a patient alleged to have diphtheria, but failed to report the case to the board of health, either before or after the death of the child.

Witten & Hughes and McDougal & Sebree, for appellant. Frank Gordon, for respondent.

GANTT, J.

This is an action for the violation of a city ordinance of Kansas City, which provides that "every physician who shall prescribe for or treat any case of * * * diphtheria * * * shall immediately on receiving knowledge that the person or persons are afflicted with any of said diseases report the same to the board of health; and any physician who shall fail, neglect, or refuse to so report," etc., "shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction fined not more than fifty dollars." The petition charges that Mrs. Baird did "unlawfully fail, neglect, and refuse to report to the board of health of said city a certain case of diphtheria of which she had knowledge, which said case of diphtheria the said Amanda J. Baird, physician, attended and treated in professional capacity, and had knowledge that said patient was afflicted with diphtheria." The defendant pleaded not guilty, was tried, and fined $50.

This case has been improperly appealed to this court. There is no constitutional question involved in this case. It is true, in her motion for new trial defendant says the judgment is in violation of section 5,...