The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-12-02
TOSTOP ILLEGAL DENTISTRY
Dr.. J. B. RaVSOn Acquitted and Rear
rested On The Same CT are.

The Indictment Charged Illegal Prac-
tiee, but Did Not Make Sufficient ALE
cations Under the Law-After a Pre-
liminary Examination He Gave Fond
for $500 and Was Released.
DR.. J. 3. Rawson was tried in the city
court yesterday on a charge Of illegal
practice Of dentistry, and after being &C
quilted on account Of a technical error
In the indictment, was arrested at once on
another warrant and after a preliminary
examination, gave bond in the sum OF
500 TO answer 10 the charge.
DR.. Rawson was indicted on this charge
last August, the case being pressed by DR..
H. S. Colding and DR.. A.G. Bouton, officers
Of the state dental association. In the in
dietment It was charged that he practiced
dentistry illegally. in that he had no IL
cense from the state board Of examiners
to do so. DR.. Rawson, it seems, has been
anxious to leave Savannah to accept a
position in st. Louis and for this reason he
consented to waive trial by jury and have
the matter settled before Judge Mac
DoneIl.
Drs. Colding and Bouton appear
ed against him, and the case
was prosecuted by Mr.. F. P. salas
for the state. Maj. P. W. Mel
drim appearing for the defense. In
the evidence it was stated that Dr. Raw
son had twice stood an examination before
the state board of examiners and had fail
ed 70 pass on both occasions. DR.. Cold
ing stated that DIR. Rawson had made
affidavit to the fact that he had prac-
ticed dentistry prior to Aug. "a 1872 which
would have relieved him from the opera
tions of the law, but this he did not be-
heve could be true as DR.. Rawson, by his
own statement, was only l6 years of age
at that time.
Maj. Meldrim made the point that the
indictment did not set forth the fact or
the allegation that DR.. Rawson had not
practiced prior TO 1872, and on this techni-
cal ground he was acquitted by the
court. Judge MacDoneI in his decision
stated that it was not also alleged and
proven that he was not in the practice
of dentistry prior to Aug. "a. 1872. He
suggested, however, that If Dr. Rawson
had practiced since the indictment was
found another warrant could be sworn
out and the defect in the indictment or
accusation thus remedied.
Messrs. Colding & Bouton at once swore
out another warrant before the solicitor
charging Dr. Rawson with the illegal
practice of dentistry alleging this time
that he had not practiced prior to 1872.
The warrant was served in the court
room by Deputy Sheriff Rogers, and Mai.
Meldrim asked for a preliminary examl-
nation at once.
The defects in the accusation having
been remedied the preliminary examina-
ton was held, and similar testimony was
taken. Solicitor General Fraser made an
argument for the state in which he
showed that it was incumbent on the de-
PENDANT to show that he had practiced
dentistry prior to 1872 This, he said, was
had no means of proving that it was not
true, when such facts were claimed by
the defendant.
Mai. Meldrim took up DR.. Rawson's
statement. showing that his father and
grandfather had been dentists before him,
and that it might be very probable that
he was practcing at his home in New
York when he was Is years of age. He at
tackled the cOnstitutionality of the law
which requires a dentist to have license
from the state board of examiners, and
prescribes a penalty for failure of COM
pliance, on the ground that the body of
the act contained matter different from
that in the caption
The court refused to pass upon the con-
stitutionality of the act at a preliminary
hearing, and decided to hold DR.. Rawson
for trial The defendant gave Dail in the
sum of $500 and was released.