Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1898-07-08
Case Discharged by Grant of
Writ of Habeas
Corpus. .
Case OF medical society
It Was Alleged That La
chance Practiced Medicine
Without a License.

st. Paul Dispatch (6); Joseph La
chance, the divine healer so-caled, has
not, in the opinion ofJudge Lewis, OF the
district court, been practising medicine
without license. and the writ OF habeas
corpus, issued on his petition, is granted
and Mr.. Lachance is discharged frs
custody.
The evidence in the police court, where
the healer was first examined upon his
arrest. was before the district court
Judge. Lachance's method OF curing or
healing is the acme OF simplicity. He re-
qulres the patient to sit quietly and
''think OF or fix his mind upon the petit
tioner who, during the time OF the
treatment. sits near with face or head
covered by his hands. In this trea tment
there is no rubbing kneading or laying
on OF hands and no drug or medicine is
used or prescribed.
The only question is, does this treat
menr come under the statute prohibiting
the practising OF medicine without first
obtaining a license.
The case turns upon the meaning OF
the words ''practisi1g incidence The
act says that any person shall De re-
garded as practising "who shall, for a
fee. prescribe direct or recommend any
drug or medicine or other agency for the
treatment Of" etc. DO his methods
come within the words ''or other
agency set forth in the statute? The
judge proceeds:
Where particular words are followed
by general words, the latter are re-
stric;ed in meaning to objects OF like
kind to those specified by the particular
words.
Applying this rule, the words ;'or
other agency following as they do the
words drug or incidence are limited
in their meaning, and we think must be
held to describe remedies or treatment of
like character to drugs and medicine,
and would not include and prohibit
treatment OF the form disclosed by the
evidence in the case
Further. if the words cor othe agency"
are not so limited, then they are 80 com
prehensve as to include nearly every
form OF harmless and in some instances
beneficial treatment, such as rubbing,
osteopathy, Turkish baths, massage.
physical training, etc. Such broad con-
struction would leave it in the power OF
every magistrate to say what treatment
was not included in the act, which itself
would be subject to the deserved crit
cism of being void for uncertainty.
It is undoubtedly true that treatment
OF this kind is too often used to impose
and prey upon the credulous public, but
the remedy lies in specific legislation or
by invoking the protection of the law
pertaining to obtaining money by fraud
and under false pretense.
The law seems to make no provision
for an examination concerning any form
of treatment which does not require the
use OF drugs or medic; ne or the skill of
surgeon. Indeed license is not given
unless the person applying for it is
qualified to practice medicine or surgery
in some one of it's branches.
A, drug or medicine or the SURGEONS
knife may be all instrument OF death
rather than a means OF health in the
hands OF an incompetent or unskilled
rractiontioner; but no such danger can
possibly arise in the practice OF the
treatment complained OF here. While it
may be of no benefit, it certainly can re-
suit in no injury, and the necessity for
the license on the ground OF public safety
does not exist
The court suggests that IN such cases
proceedings against a defendant for OBJ
tanning money under false pretenses
might be used.