The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1876-12-28

you have advanced In reference to |
the board being "a machinery per
feet for ostracism on the one hand !
and a complete monopoly on the |
other" The law prescribes what
the board shall do IN the matter
of examinations, and it will have no
discretion or power to go beyond this.
The clause comforting the power to
''make rules for their guidance and
control" will, We presume, scarcely
be subjected to an Interpretation sub
versive of this portion of the act.
Everyone familiar with the appoint
ment Of such quasi corporations by
general enactment will understand that
the power to make rules is intended to
cover simply such parliamentary and
formal regulations as are necessary to
the successful working of the body
created, and cannot be strained to au
thonze violation of specified duties
laid downln the law. 1t may be asked
how, under this literal and circum-
scribed Interpretation of the act, we
propose to protect society from irregu-
lar practitioners who may be able to
pass the required branches? We pre-
sumo, and it is presumption warrant
ed and supported 10y the facts in most
instances, that any person proficient In
the specified topics for examination,
unless he is imbued with the spirit Of
quackery and actuated by the impulses
of knavery, will follow in his practice
those principles whose truth and valid
ity are unquestioned by one familiar
with the elements Of medical scieEce.
OF course there nay be cases the law
will not reach. For these there is no
help; human ingenuity is powerless to
legislate against the possibilities of hu-
man fIallty and depravity. The dis
cussIon of this portion of your argu
ment leads US to notice very remark
able feature apparent not only here,
but throughout your communication.
! We believe 1t is general presumption
| among those who frame laws and those
! who execute them that mankind as L
rule are honest and truthful. Leglsla-
ton has usually been conducted with
reference to this reasonable and neces-
gary presumption, aud judicial proceed
ures especially have always shown a
| sacred regard for the intuitive aud in
herent honesty supposed to character
ize the majority of men. 1t is there
fore a matter of no small surprise to us
that you seem to have acted in your
conduct towards us upon an entirely
different suppositlOn. The whole
thread of your argument and every
position assumed have their origin and
support in the presumption that we are
scuEted by none but corrupt and de-
eigning motives. You begin with the
assertion that we desire q violation OF
the Constitution; you then assume that
VIC are seeking to ostracize clasS OF
citizens by using machinery devised
in the interest of monopoly" We
are further arcaigned as Ishmaelites,
whose hands are against all who do not
subscribe to our ethical belief; we are
next likened to those, the fury of whose
persecution asSailed divinity itself, and
to close the series, you do us the poor
credit to imagine that all this violence
on our part has arisen from ''petty
aversion" which may be laid aside in a
moment to meet the demands Of o
philanthropy whose object seems to be
the special protection of the much
abused and long suffsring devotees of
the "art homeopathic. This is GER
tainly q remarkable train of argument,
and would hardly lead one to suppose
that its author was accustomed to judi
cial procedure which, like the charity
it should exemplify, "thinketh no evil. "
II, as the law assumes and common
reason and justice ought to assume, the
members appointed on the board ba
honorable men, then there will be no
ostraciSm save of those disqualified
under the express provisions of the act
itself. If, as you assume, they will be
corrupt and dishonest, there will be
ostrac;sm, for you propose to give the
control of the board to the regular
practitioners. In either event your pre-
cautions are unnecessary and your
position contradictory.
In contrast with the hostile front
you have shown to US, what has been
your conduct toward the school you
have assumed to champion, or rather
the favorite you have sought to pro-
mote2 You have determined to APP
point a ''homGopath" on the board,
and you will hunt all over the district
to find a physician to serve with him.
Minorities may have rights, but this is
the most extraordinary exercise of them
we have ever known. You have no
trouble in selecting the ''chIef among
ten thousand, and the one altogether
lovely" but it is q matter of seeming
indifference as to who the others may
be. If a conscientious regard for their
honor as men holding to honest opIn-
ions, and thus unaterable convictions
as physicians practicing a science
whose principles cannot be denied
without intellectual suicide, shall pre-
vent the regular practitioners from
serving on the board, you '.can get
on without them," you say, and the
position goes begging among those
whose cupidity or whose ignorance
may tempt them to accept. This may
DO judicial fairness. This may be ex-
ecuting the law for the greatest good
to the greatest number, but the pro-
cess of reasoning by which you arrive
st such conclusion is too abstruse for
our comprehension.
Another very remarkable announce
ment to which you seem to attach
great weight is the fact that there are
homeopathic physicians among US,
and many intelligent citizens desire
their services" A novel guide to cor
rect legislation truly. 1t is a fact
known to US, and to most observing
men, that the greatest humbugs sre Of
ten the most popular and successful /;
the evils attempted to be corrected by
law are often those in greatest favor
among the people. The same process
of reasoning would abolish nearly
all legal restraints imposed to cor
rect prevailing social evils and
vices; and the ignorance, the passions
or the weaknesses of the citizen be-
come the criteria of legislative action.
1t is laid down as fundamental axiom
of political science, by an eminent
writer on law, that ''the people are to
be governed for their own good; aud
that they may be governed for their
own good, they i2ust not be governed
by their own ignorance or their own
appetites." This is peculiarly true IN
matter Of this kind, in which want
of knowledge to discriminate between
right aud wrong is an evil inseparable
from the nature of the subject, and one
against which the law itself was in
1 <