Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-10-29
ABOUT PULLING teeth
4 Case Of Importance to Dentists in Wash
ington.
COnsfdering the Right of Unrcgistered
Dentists to Practice-Did Work
at the Infirmary.


cradle Importance to local dentists. The
case involved a charge of violating the dem
| tai law against DR.. Frank E. Burke, a
graduate Of the National Homeopathic
Medical and Dental College, which is at
present located at No. 625 Massachusetts,
avenue 1t was charged that he was en-
gagged in the practice Of dentistry, not be-
ing regularly registered. Mr.. Mullowny
appeared for the prosecution, while Mr..
Campbell Darlington repre- scented the de-
| PENDANT.
Miss Florence Houck was the first wit
| ness called, and she told the court that she
went to the dental inf1rmary this past
summer, v hen it was located on I street,
and had tooth pulled. DIR. Burke she
said, drew the tooth. and used cocaine, Tor
which he charged her 25 cents. Afterward
she suffered intense pain, and went to an
other dentist, who found that her tooth
had been broken. She said she did not re-
turn to the infirmary when her jaw panied
her because she was afraid to do so.
Miss May Adams testified that she went
| TO- the infirmary and had seven cavities
filled, two with gold. She said she paid
$3.50 for the material used, and if she had
gone to another dentist the work would
have cost her $15
"A good thing for poor people," Mr.. Car
rinston remarked, but bad thing for the
| tooth was not pulled SO well, there was
no charge for it. and the patients take the
chances.
DR.. Henry NJ Schooley, the F street den
| t.st, who is a member of the board of dental
examiners, was called to the stand, and he
produced the defendants application for a
certificate of qualification, which was de-
med because he was not a graduate of a
college Fulfilling the law. He was told that
| If he appeared he would be examined, but
he never appeared His application showed
| that he had studied at the University OF
Maryland, and had been one year at the
local college.
rs this college chartered" Judge Miller
asked.
Yes" was the response.
But it is not registered" added Mr.. Null
| lowry.
Professor E. W. Kirby gave evidence in
which he said the defendant was an able
| dentist. DR.. Burke, he said, was pursuing
an uninterrupted three-years' course.
There's an anfmus back Of this case
| remarked witness. that can be plainly
SEEN"
The defendant also gave evidence. He
| told the court of his experience, and said
| he duty at the dental infirmary
| during the summer. 1t was during the
| summer months that he waited on the two
young ladies who had appeared as wit
nesses When he waited on them there
was no registered dentist about the build
| ing.
did any other students there operate
| during the summer vacation?' Mr.. Null
| lotny asked
| Yes, SIR
| Mention one"
| "Mr. Mullowny."
| "Can he extract teeth?"
| Certainly he can
The defendant said that DR.. Starr Par
| sens was in charge Of the dental infirmary
| at that time. Defendant said he was in
| charge Of the dental infirmary, under the
| supervision of the members OF the dental
| faculty.
The inf1rmary, he said. is conducted the
| same as other intirmaries. The work is
| done by the students. and at certain times
| the professors are present to witness the
| work.
| When cross-examined by the court. de-
PENDANT said that man who had been
| student month is permitted to practice
| On the public. He may extract tooth,
administer cocaine or fill tooth.
| Mr.. Mullowny said that If he was given
| an opportunity he could show that no rep
utable college in the country permitted
| students to act in this way.
| Judge Miller was inclined to the belief
| that the defendant had right under the
| law to act as he had been acting, and re-
| ferring to the law. said it needed amend
| ing. This law. the judge said. is like many
| others. He supposed the dentists went to
Congress and drew up the law, and that
| no lawyer ever had a hand in it.
| Dentists may know how to draw teeth"
| Mr.. Darlington remarked, but they don't
know how to draw law.
| Prof ]. D. Hird who has been connected
| with the college, was called to the stand,
| and he said that under the law the college
| has a right to conduct dental infirmary.
| He had known DR.. Burke for some years,
| and had advised him to register. Witness
| said he had resigned from the college, but
| would not say it was because of anything
| that reflected on those connected with it.
A lengthy discussion followed, during
| which Mr.. Mullowny claimed a conviction,
| and commented on the evidence of the de-
| PENDANT concerning the manner of doing
| business at the infirmary.
| Judge Miller said that the question was
one CT Importance, and he was not DIS
posed to decide it until he had carefully
| considered all the points involved. The
| case will be settled Thursday.