The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-03-27
PTERSON WRONGLY CONVICTED.
FAILED TO CURE HIS CHILD BY
PRAYER. =


Department, Brooklyn, handed down a
decision yesterday afternoon reversing the
Judgment Of conviction In the case Of j..
Luther Pierson Of Valhalla. Mount Pleasant,
Westminster county. who. when his sixteen
mont hs-old child lay sick unto death In
January, 1901, would not call In O physician,
but endeavored to effect cure by prayer.
The child died and Person was prosecuted
under Section 2ss of the Penal Code, which
provides that "a person who wilfully omits.
without lawful excuse, to perform q duty
by law imposed upon him to furnish food.
shelter or medical attendance to q minor
Ii guilty of a misdemeanor. The
punishment for a misdemeanor ID fine Of
$500 or q years imprisonment or both.
The case was tried before Judge Lent
Smith. Robert E. Farley. counsel for Pier
son, argued that the Legislature had no
power to enact q law to compel q person
to obtain medical attendance; that medicine
was not an exact science and that eminent
physicians had so admitted; that the law
was unconstitutional that the Legislature
could not by enact ment compel the recog-
milton Of one system of treatment OF the
sick as superior to another that Pierson be-
lieved In the efficacy Of prayer In case Of
illness and had constitutional right to act
upon that faith without calling In other
aid
j. Addison Brown, for the prosecution.
brought out the result Of Coroner Sharf-
masters investigation Of the child's death.
The Coroner had been informed by Pierson
that his. Persons. religious belief did not
permit him to summon medical aid In case
Il Ill. -
Christian Scientist he was member Of the
Christian Catholic Church Of Chicago.
which healed by PRAYER: that his creed ac-
cepted the fact OF disease but had abso-
lutte faith In prayer AZ a cure for all disease;
that Pierson had said to the Coroner: Il
prayed with her the child OF 10 months I.
but there must have been something lack
ing in my ownself something insufficient
in my standing before God. ! cannot tell
how this would reach the child am no t
God
On March 20, 1901. Pierson was convicted
and was sentenced by Judge Smith to pay
a fine Of $500 and to stand convicted until
the Emo was paid. Mr.. Farley appealed the
case, and the same line Of argument ~
presented at the original trial was again
gone over by counsel on both sides. The
opinion handed down by the Appellate
Division yesterday was written by Justice
Bartlett and was concurred in by Justices
Hirschberg and jerks. Presiding Justice
Goodrich did not concur, and he handed
down an opposing decision, Justice Wood
ward did not take part in the consideration
OF the case.
just ice Bartlett in his decision touches
only indirectly upon the question Of the
of the law requiring medi-
cal attendance. He argues upon whether
LII. Il
he charge TO failure TO allow the child &c
be trea ed by a regularly licensed physician
and surgeon, and that medical att enhance"
by law does not necessarily
the sumInoning OF a ply
,ician. He says the indict Inent charges
imposed upon him by law to furnish med
Oh 1otandAnoe for . minor child. and that
ie refused to allow the child o be attended
md prescrfbed for by a regular physician.
Continuing, he says ......
The intention was TO charge that the crime
edicIl attendance morally. but a failure
o furnish medical attendance by q qualified
IL this view OF the indictment IL correct
seems to me that IL failed to charge q crimi-
lal offence In the absence Of an allegation
" statement OF facts showing that the case
vas one In which a regularly hensed and
practising physician and surgeon ought TO
AVE been called The question az 70 s6 S,
mined, / think. BY the standard OF conduct |
n an ordinarily Dr-Ident psrson In other
gord. / think the medical attendance which
ne law reuuireT the parent TO provide for |
is child deps ndS upon the cirsr m stances |
II the case: thai in -on. instances ordInary
smtly may IT, s,ifrcieni; that II the illness
~ grsy.r chars~,"r I, nav h@ eno'' eI |
a can n tn services O, ira N d nurse. and |
~ a dsng,r - spp.r, nt. t.l n tIe oDiigation |
n,,rsi@isn b.. slmwoned But he guide |
n nrots.T conduct must ba a.os RI aimed by /
sling Nhst would an ordinarily I,rlIdent |
arsoI, sollcitous for IN. ". Hare or his child
nj snXi@ns 10 promo,e The r. covcry OF the |
n tn, n, M ., ,sr ~ s'''"
urb view az ~. lsS as o this eI The Iea,nea
rsI i,idee ,o,d the ,,iTy that i,efor. ,hey
he sS.s ss def. s cs Ia M ,n.y
eerslry ana i9,sn,,"nay T., i" .iss e Tssa
nedlcinrs ~ The sdence Of he az. would
AZ would ee prop-r thai a child In i'- oondi-
y :. true ,hs' ~. ror',9n OF w. shsfr.,
!. dsts.dsI't MN, ,ou,IS Mn IL o,lieS.
lons under The ias by givins proper n,.di-
inss, eve? y be did not call In a doctor
~ Ih,nh ! va solns 70" tI 70 inmA
[. 10 M" hnnt,i ~ Az w.
''s.,'ss,,. ,s ,a's Ssr, 10, .,"h 81 H.
.Isnsr Of ~. az. would .sv acre pfo,,sT
- I have alfsadv minated. 4 think the
ti.ndard siidi sho',ld Va Arnllsd 10 the
90 dn'f 81 a. "fdinaiill piadsni lsig.,
~ ifN W "f '"..'tiN'.l" ~ '- M \