The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-29 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-MAY 28.

Sittings in Banco.--(Before Lord Chief Justice Erie and
Justices Williams and Byles.)
PIDGRTET r. CRIVALUER.—THE TINDICAL REGISTRATION ACT.
The appellant in this case had practised as a surgeon in
the country, and he had been summoned before the local
magistrates, and convicted, under the 21 and 22 Viet., cap.
90, sec. 40, of having wilfully and falsely represented that
he was a surgeon; The magistrates, in the case sent up,
stated that their grounds for convicting were that the
appellant had his name on his door as a surgeon, whilst his
name was not in the register formed under the above.
mentioned act.

Mi.Luscappeared in rapport of an appeal against this
conviction, and submitted that the name of the appellant
not being on the register did not prove that be was
not a surgeon duly qualified to practise, for it was not obli-
gatory on every duly qualified surgeon to be on the register.
The act simply said, that any person who was not registered
should not have the power to recover his fees by locus of
law ; and, as he understood, there were h of duly
qualified practitioners who had not registered themselves.
The act imposed penalties only for falsely pretending to be
duly qualified or falsely pretending to be on the register.
Before this act passed any person might legally practise as
a surgeon in any part of England except within seven miles
of London, over which district the powers of the R
College of Surgeons extended; and he apprehendedZ
there wan no limit to this liberty now. Any man could call
himself a surgeon.
The Lord Chief Justice—You might call yourself Emperor
of China, but the law would not recognise you as such.
Mr. Lush—But until this act the law did recognise any
person who chow to practise as a surgeon.
Mr. Justice Williams—Before this act any person who
did not violate the act of Henry VIII could practise as a
surgeon and recover his fees.
Mr. Lush—Yes. Before the statute of Henry VIII. the
terms " barber" and "surgeon" were identical. He sub-
mitted that the statute now in question could never have
been intended to take away the livelihood of hundreds of
gentlemen simply because they did not think fit to register,
and this, too, without any express words pointed to that

object.
No person appeared to support the conviction.
The Lord Chief Justice said this lase rental upon •
statute of extreme importance, and one to the provisions of
which every court would desire to give effect according
to the intention of the legislature. The statement of
facts in the case was extremely scanty, and the court
was bound not to rapport the conviction unless they could
see facts sufficient to maintain it. There was nothing to
show that the appellant was not in practice as a surgeon
before the act in question pawed, and there was nothing to
show that he did not hold • diploma or qualification from
some body which would confer the right to use the term
"surgeon" He thought. that the proposition could not be
sustained, that every person who called himself • surgeon
without being on the register might be fined 20/. ; and
therefore be felt bound to say that the conviction must be
quashed.
Appeal allowed.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-Miy 28.
The court at in Loco to-day, and heard arguments in
cases in the special paper involving dry points of law.
Mr. Baron Wilde sat at Nisi Prins for the Sittings in
Term at Guildhall. The list contained 13 new and two old
causes. Those disposed of possessed no interest to the
public.