Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-03-29
ISTHELAW ATFAULT?
FLOWERS COUNSEL QUESTIONS THE
CONSTITUT ONALITY OF AN ACT.
The Physician Arrsigned in the Husfings
Court-ArKued BY Able Lawyers,
But Not Decided.


first having obtained certificate from the state
Board Of Medical Examiners and having 1t re-
corded as required by law. Among the mem
bers OF the medical profession present were Dr'
W. ". Parker who was one OF the hrst 70 'ake
steps TO prosecute the accused; Dr. hugn NJ.
Taylor, president OF the State Board OF Medical
Examiners; DR.. George Ben. Johnston Dr. NJ
ID. Hoge, Jr., DIR. Edward Mcclure, DR.. Benjamin
Harrison, DR.. Jacob Micheaux, and DR.. stuart
Mcclure.
The Commonwealth 3 Attorney was assisted py
Messrs. f. II. McGure and X. @. Pegram' OF
Richmond, and Major r. 7. Barton, OF winchester.
Tho Boston healer entered the courtroom win
his counsel. He wore little green cravat, be-
meath which sparkled huge diamond. Ine
tnrong looked upon the accused with great curl
osity.
THE TRIAL BEGUN.
Upon the roll-call by the Clerk IL was ascer-
tAined that tho jury was complete.
Mr.. Mcclure introduced Major Barton "a
member OF counsel for the prosecution, ana the
latter qualified at once.
Judge Christian, for the defendant stated
that he would present q plea raising the point
"a to the c0ns,ituiionality OF the laws on the
question. This was sTorn TO and signed IN inc
presence OF the Court by DR.. Flower. The plea
was read by Judge Christian. He said in
opening that he thought the accusers had taken
unusual and unwsrranted liberties in thus
moving against DIR. Flower, and had taken
equal privileges In regard 10 the laws OF the
commonwealth.
The Judge then read the amended informa-
tion, which sets forth that DR.. Flower not being
a physician called In for consultations by any
patient or resident doctor, commenced the prac-
tce OF medicine and surgery In the Common
wealth of Virginia without having secured GER
tilcate from the Board Of Medical Examiners, as
required by law.
ADENURRER TO THE PLEA.
Tho Commonwealths Attorney demurred Is
tho plea entered by the defendants counsel.
The question arising from the plea was discuss
ed by Judge Christian. He said the aim and object
~ the statute In regard 10 the furnishing OF the
certificate was 20 guard against the practice OF
young and unqualified physicians ave say
that this discrimination against the non-reei-
dents OF this State is contrary 70 tho Constitu-
tion Of the United States and therefore The act
ts null and void" said tho speaker. number
of authorities on constitutional limitations were
cited. Judge Christian asserted that this was
void law and that the sooner IL Ia established NJ
such the better II will be for the people OF Nir-
gnia.
"The language OF the act IL thnt any person
who sh all have commenced the practice OF medi-
cine and surgery &c, yet tue information says
that X. G. Flower, since the 18th day OF Febru-
ary, 1892, did commence tho practice OF medi-
zine and surgery In the state OF virginia" The
words "in the State Of Virginia Just interpo-
lated In tho information were not in the act.
He said he proposed TO show that DIR. Flower
could not possibly comply with the terms OF the
act under discussion, and that 1t was Tor failure
TO DO what the law itself did not allow him 20 do
that he was brought before this court. The
statute only provided that persons living within
ten miles OF the border Of the State could obtain
the certificate spoken OF.
A CASE OF FIRST IMPRESSION.
Mr.. II. NJ. Smith. Jr., spoke briefly upon tho
case He said II was one Of fret impression In
this or auy other court Of Virginia. He said the
rnaIfcal a wall the GOmmOn-
weaith's-Attorney has the right 10 swear out
these warrants. They were sworn out before
any point TO the oonstitutionality OF this ques-
tion was brought up. lie thought he had done
his duty in stopping this Boston doctor from
raking in hundreds of dollars from poor
and deluded patients. Reference was made TO
the fact that several years ago a similar law waa
passed In regard 20 tho legal profession. lie
said that n 10 could be proven here that this act
accorded 10 resident physicians privileges which
were not granted 20 physicians nom other
States, he presumed that his Honor would de-
clare that the law WAS unconstitutional
NO SUCH PROVISION.
There was no provision In this law, asserted
tho CommOnwealth's Attorney, by which cti-
zen Of sny other State could not come hero and
obtain just such privileges as our own people
enjoy.
IL a citizen OF Massachusetts, comes into this
city for few weeks ~ practice his profession. u
no not called in for consultation! said Mr. Smith.
He has tho same right TO go before, and should
be required 10 go before, the Board OF Medical
Examiners Just ne much 40 "a young graduate
from Richmond College or tho University OF Fir-
ginia. lie argued that any physician who comes
here to practice medicine for even two days
makes Richmond his residence during that
length OF time.
VERY SIMILAR LAW.
The Commonwealths Attorney referred 70 a
recent decision I'm the Supreme Court OF Appeals
Affirming tho constitutionaty OF the act In the
State OF West Virginia, which IL very similar to
the measure upon which the Flower case hinges.
The Comnonwealths Attorney asserted that be-
cause n man gives satisfaction In one state was
no reason that he would give satisfaction In an
other II said tho law laid down test when II said
that man who had boon assessed with license
prior 10 January 1, 1892, would be taken as
having commenced the practice prior 70 INA,
time, but that any one who had been assessed
since that time would be considered TO have
commenced practice since that time.
Mr.. INQUIRIES ADDRESS.
Mr. +. II. McGuire in his address said he had
not the slightest bit OF doubt % the c0nstifu-
tiOnality OF every provision OF the act, AM that
he appeared before the court 10 defend iis con-
stitntlonality and not as prosecutor. lie stated
that DIR. Flower, without any court having passed
upon this act, came here and deliberately violated
II. "Until this law is declared unconstitutional
Il is the law IN Virginia." the speaker declared.
Other States require people from foreign states
60 10 before their boards. 10 Is for this board
TO say who shall come here and practice that
high, and learned, and dangerous profession
The speaker referred to two opinions which were
quite pertinent to the case, and quoted from
numerous opinions and went into very elabo-
rate exposition OF the law on the questions agi-
tating the counsel.
He said that the medical men Of this city were
not prosecuting DR.. Flower rs matter OF spite
or Jealousy, but 20 establish precedent in such
cases in this Commonwealth.
CONSTITUTIONAL oRAroRY.
81 ~ Major RartOn. oi
Winchester, who made q magnificent speech
without going so much into the dry technique o'
| the law. He seemed 20 have the very Language
| of every able opinion rendered which bore upon
| the case opon his tongues end. His argument
was considered one Of the finest pieces OF const
tutonal orAtory ever listened 10 Ia the Hustings
Courtroom.
Mr. Frank ". Christian, for the defence, took
| up the argument In a very effective aud forcb bic
| address. lie said the Law should have read mat
citizens from other States shall Dc entitled V
stand this examination and obtain the certincatt
| from the Board Of Medical Examiners" instead
| ~ giving then, no right 10 stand this examina
| ton. He referred 10 the Discretionary power
| given 10 this board In section l147 VI ths Code
| He also took the ground that the act was in
| senslble and that II Dr. Flower had stood thii
| examination and secured tho certificate IRON
| the Board of Medical Examiners be colld not
have had II recorded according to the provisions
| OF this law. He said the supreme Court oil th'
| limited States has never decided just exactly
| what those privileges and immunities are thai
a ,,tizen OF one state is entitled 10 In othel
States.
THAT AMENDED INFORMATION
Mr.. Christian stated that he was surprised tC
| nnd that his aiversaries had paid 10 little az
tenton 20 The poiat raised by the counsel for th'
| accused as to the Interpolation In tho inforna'
| ton OF language which was not prescribed BY
/ the act The clause referred 70 by hr. Chris
| tian was "in this State" He asserted that nc
| person who commenced the practice OF medi
! cine after January ], 1892, was subject TO tn
| terms Of the act. Mr.. Christian affirmed sha
| a Young man who may have commenced tn'
rractice OF this profession on December 81
| 1881, would not be subject 10 the act
| The craftsman OF the act. Mr.. Christian said
/ did no. contemplate the coming into this Stat
| OF non-resldents 10 pursue the medical profes
| sion. where IL prescribss that any person wh'
may have been assessed with llcense-taxe'
prior to January ], 1892. shall be taken as hay
| log commenced the practice Of medicine snt
surgery ia this State prior 10 shat time, and ma
! any person vino may have been Assessed Will
this iicsnss-tsx since that time II will be takeI
that he commenced this practice since that time
| Mr. Christian closed by saying that TIL
| efec, OF this act WIS that, although
! man might have prartlced medicine and surger,
| here In Virginia prior 20 January i, 1892, an
could prove that fact II he had not been assessc'
| with this license he would DO subject 10 the pen
| altv of this measure.