The copper country evening news. [volume] (Calumet, Mich.) 18??-1907, 1897-06-04
DR.. Blankner Tried In
Justice Curtis Court
Yesterday.
Number of Doctor. Testify
For the Prosecution-Dr. Biankner
AIso GA tne siand-He VIII Have
New trial

There was mote Interest taken IN ID
trial % Dr. Fred Blsnkner. which cam
Of vest, day afternoon before Justic
Curtis. than has been shown at a jusuc
trial for many day and the halls al,
corridors Of the Borgo block wert
crowded more or less ali day.
a jury was not selected until the alter
noon when the following gentlemen were
chosen: Messrs. Lawrence Nelson, james
c. Smith, James Mcclure, John +. John.
son, John p Roberts and J. b. Taylor,
Prosecuting Attorney A. L, Streeter ap.
peared for the People and Attorney
W. j. Macdonald for Dr. rlankner.
When the case opened the attorney for
the defense moved TO admit no testimony
because there was defect in the com.
plant, but this was oyerruled. The pro-
secutor then began examining his Wit
nesses. Mr.. Streeter stated that be was
to prove that DR.. Blanknpr was practic-
ing dentistry in violation OF the State
law. Charles Koch and James Lamp
shire both testified that they had teeth
pulled by Dr.. Blankner. Joe Schroeder
testified that he Saw the doctor pull
teeth on the stand in the street, but he
did no work for him.
DR.. Albert Mills, OF the Calumet and
Hecla medical staff, testified that pulling
teeth was the practice Of dentistry and
not medicine. His testimony was lengthy
and went into detail in regard TO the
study OF medicine and dentistry az the
University Of Michigan and the distInc-
tion between the two DR. Whistler next
testified in regard 20 the same subjects
DR.. Holt testified, among other things,
that il was not the business OF pbysi.
clan to pull teeth. This ended the testi-
mony for the prosecution.
The defense showed that Dr. Blankner
was a graduate physician and qualified
as such. The line of defense all the way
through was TO show that az a physician
DR.. Blankner had a right under the law
10 pull teeth. DR.. Law baugh was the
first witness called. He refused TO give
expert testimony unless paid for it and
there was some trouble in regard to this
but the doctor decided to go ahead and |
answer the questions anyway. He, DR.. |
Pompsroy and De- Bobb we're all exam !
med, but little information was secured
IA they declined To- answer some of the |
questions put. They were asked il they |
considered themselves competent TO pull |
teeth, but the prosecutor objected TO the
question and the court sustained he oh |
lection.
Joseph Decker swore that he had been
prescribed for by Dr. Blankner and then
The doctor himself was called. He grew
excited az he testified and rather drama
tic in his actions az be told about his
ability IS physician. He claimed that
he was physician by nature; God made
him doctor, but he had graduated
from reputable college in order TO give
him legal standing and had practiced
several years. Eight years ago he dis
covered a means OF extracting teeth with.
out pain and was helping suffering hu.
mainly. He did not get a certificate as
a dentist az it was below his dignity.
The case went to the jury at $50 and,
after being out an hour, they could not
agree on verdict A new trial will take
place in few days,