The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-06-08
MEDICAL LAW STANDS
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
SUSTAINING THE STATUTE.
Board VIII Meet To-Day-Queer Real
Estate MuddIe-SOuth Bend
Medicine Men.

The Supreme Court yesterday handed
down an opinion holding the law creating
the State Board of Medical Registration and
Examination to be constitutional. Immedi-
ately Secretary Curyear called a special
meeting of the board to be held this MORN
ing. There are pending over two hundred
applications for certificates. In many of
them rather important questions were in
volved, and the board decided to postpone
the hearing Of testimony until after the
Supreme Court should have passed on the
law. On the advice of Deputy Attorney
General Moores the physicians who had
filed applications were permitted to con-
tinue practicing. Mr.. Moores said yesterday
| that he did not think that more than half
| the applications would be ultimately re-
| jected by the board. Those who are re-
| jected will have to quit practicing medicine
in Indiana. AT the meeting to-day it is un-
derstood that the board, with the aid of
Mr. Moores, will arrange time for hearing
| the two hundred applicants.
| In the opinion handed down yesterday the
| court sustained the construction put on the
| law by Attorney General Ketcham and Mr..
Moores. Both were very well satisfied with
| the results. During the day kilograms of
| congratulation were received from ply
| sicians who look upon the law as q. good
| thing.
| The decision handed down was in the case
| of the state ex rel John A Burroughs
| against the State Board of Medical Regis
tration and Examination. DR.. Burroughs
applied to the Marion Superior Court for a
mandate to compel the board to grant him a
| license to practice medicine. Judge Howard
wrote the opinion affirming the action of the
| Superior Court in refusing to mandate the
board. 1t is held that the law is constitu-
tional and gives the board authority to de-
| eide whether a person holding license un-
| der the law of 1856 obtained it in the proper
manner, and whether he is fit person to
receive a certificate under the new law. 1t
| was also held that license might be re-
| voked for good cause after once issued, sub
| ject to an appeal to the Circuit or Superior
| Court. An applicant might mandate the
| board to act, that is, to compel it to dis
| pose of his application one way or the other.
| The court held that the licenses issued I'M
| der the old law of 1856 were revoked by the
law OF 1897, and remained only in force until
the board could act on the application.
Concerning certain objections that were
urged against the law Judge Howard says:
Whether the law is a wise one is not
for the courts to say. 1t may be that as
men are free to choose those who shall min
| lister to the needs of the soul, so also they
| should be free to choose those who shall
minister to the ills of the body. 1t may
| be that such laws repress independent in
| vestigation, and so retard the progress of
| medicine. 1t may be that many of the most
| valuable medical discoveries were made in
| spite of the prejudice and protests of men
learned in the old and time tested lore of
| their day. 1t may be, finally, that such laws
are out of harmony with free institutions,
| according TO which each citizen may pursue
| his own work, his own studies. his own oc-
cupation in so far as he does not trench on
| the equal rights of his fellows and the well
| fare of the community in which he lives.
| These are, however, questions for the Leg
| islature. and so long as the act is not clearly
| in violation of any provision of the Con-
stitution it cannot be held invalid