Nelson v. State Board of Health
Decision Date | 20 June 1900 |
Citation | 108 Ky. 769,57 S.W. 501 |
Parties | NELSON v. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. [1] |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county, law and equity division.
"To be officially reported."
Action by Harry Nelson against the state board of health for an injunction. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
E. E McKay and T. L. Edelen, for appellant.
Kohn Baird & Spindle, for appellee.
Appellant Harry Nelson, a citizen of this state, filed his petition in equity in the court below in which he alleged that, after he had taken a regular course of studies at the American School of Osteopathy at Kirksville, Mo., for a term of years, he became a graduate thereof on September 15, 1897; that since that date he has been practicing this system of healing for his support to the great comfort and relief of disease and sickness, having adopted it as his vocation in life; that osteopathy is a perfect system, having the approval of skilled and scientific men, and schools and colleges in which its doctrines are taught; that appellee was about to have him arrested for practicing osteopathy, or prosecute him therefor, under the act entitled "An act to protect citizens of this commonwealth from empiricism," approved April 10, 1893, and the amendment thereto approved March 18, 1898; that this act is in violation of the bill of rights, and is unconstitutional, or, if valid, that under it appellee is discriminating against the system of medicine known as "osteopathy," refusing to recognize his diploma, or to give him a certificate; that the school referred to at which he graduated is a reputable medical college chartered by the laws of Missouri, with a large body of learned professors, and a large patronage of pupils, and as such is entitled to be recognized and indorsed by the appellee. He prayed that appellee be enjoined from molesting him in his business or profession as an osteopath, or pursuing him criminally therefor, and, if he was not entitled to this relief, then that a writ of mandamus be awarded him compelling appellee to recognize and indorse the American College of Osteopathy at Kirksville, Mo., and issue him a certificate entitling him to follow his calling in this state. Appellee answered, denying the allegations of the petition, and pleading specially that the school referred to was not a reputable medical college, and that plaintiff, as a graduate of it, was not entitled to a certificate from it. On final hearing the court below dismissed the action, refusing the complainant any relief, and the correctness of this judgment is the question to be determined on this appeal.
The proof shows that osteopathy is a new method of treating diseases, which is said to have originated with Dr. A. T. Still, of Kirksville, Mo., about the year 1871. He practiced it more or less from that time until about the year 1890, when he opened a school for the instruction of others. In 1892 he obtained an imperfect charter for his school under the laws of Missouri. This was perfected in 1894 by a charter in regular form, under which the school has since been operating. At the time the proof was taken in this case there were in attendance at the school something over 500 scholars from 29 states of the Union, and several from Canada. In connection with the school was an infirmary, at which from 300 to 500 patients were regularly treated. There were 12 or 13 professors in the school. Of these four were regularly graduated physicians, besides Dr. Still, who was a surgeon in the army during the Civil War, and is said to have been a college graduate; but the proof as to this is not clear. Another of the professors is a fellow of the Royal Society of England, and still another was for many years the circuit judge of that district. The buildings of the school are shown to be commodious, and suitable for its purposes. While its equipment at first was meager, it has gradually increased from time to time until now it would seem in some respects to compare favorably with other colleges. The patients treated at the infirmary, as well as those treated by appellant, appear to have been satisfied with what they received, and many of them to have been materially benefited. There are four or five other colleges of osteopathy, which, with the one at Kirksville, form an association, and in five states of the Union osteopathy has been recognized by statute. The testimony of the witnesses, the character of the professors, and the evident sincerity of their statements, leave no doubt in our minds that the school at Kirksville is a reputable school of osteopathy; but whether it is a reputable school of medicine, within the meaning of our statute, or what are appellant's rights if it is not, are very different questions, depending upon the proper construction of the act itself. The purpose of the statute, as shown by its title, was to protect the people of this state from empiricism. Its material provisions are as follows (Ky. St. §§ 2611-2618):
Empiricism is defined as "a practice of medicine founded on mere experience without the aid of science or the knowledge of principles." The above act is therefore "an act to protect the people of this commonwealth from the practice of medicine founded on mere experience, without the aid of science, or a knowledge of principles." To secure this it requires a medical register to be kept by the county clerk of each county, and makes it unlawful for any person to practice medicine in any of its branches within the limits of the state until he has registered in the county of his residence. Authority to practice medicine under the statute can only be conferred by a certificate from the state board of health issued to a reputable physician having a diploma from a reputable medical college legally chartered under the laws of this state, or, if chartered under the laws of some...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Fite
... ... Siler, 169 N.C. 314, 84 S.E. 1015; ... People v. Ellis, 162 A.D. 288, 147 N.Y.S. 681; ... Board of Med. Ex. v. Freenor (Utah), 154 P. 942; ... People v. Ratledge, 172 Cal. 401, 156 P. 455; ... Herring, 70 N.J.L. 34, 56 A. 670, ... 1 Ann. Cas. 51; Smith v. Lane, 24 Hun 632; ... Nelson v. State Board of Health, 108 Ky. 769, 57 ... S.W. 501, 50 L. R. A. 383; Martin v. Baldy, 249 Pa ... ...
-
State v. Smith
...(2) The statute contemplates nothing but medicine and surgery. State v. Biggs, 133 N.C. 729; State v. Liffring, 61 Ohio 30; Nelson v. State Board, 22 Ky. L. Rep. 438; Hayden v. State, 88 Miss. 281; State McKnight, 131 N.C. 717; State v. Mylod, 20 R. I. 632; Smith v. Lane, 24 Hun 632; Bennet......
-
Board of Medical Examiners of State of Utah v. Freenor
... ... That he had no license or certificate is, on the ... record, not in dispute. He is what is termed a chiropractor ... As defined by Nelson's Ency., chiropractic is: ... "A ... system of therapeutic treatment for various diseases, through ... the adjusting of articulations of ... the statute. Perhaps an exception to this is the case of ... Nelson v. Board of Health , 108 Ky. 769, 57 ... S.W. 501, 50 L. R. A. 383. Under the evidence we think it ... indisputably shown that the defendant diagnosed, treated, and ... ...
-
State ex rel Ladd v. The District Court in and for Cass County
... ... health. Palmer v. State, 48 Am. Rep ... 429; Shivers v. Newton, 45 N.J.L. 469; State v ... Smyth, 51 ... the liberties of the people. State v. Nelson Co., 1 ... N.D. 88, 45 N.W. 33 ... It is ... not a writ of right, its ... Ry. Co. v. Archer, 6 Paige, 262; Belknap ... v. Belknap, 2 Johns C. R. 463; Schuster v. Board of ... Health, 49 Barb. 450; Jewett Bros. v. Smail, ... 105 N.W. 738; Sweet v. Holbert, 51 Barb ... ...