Evening star., 1908-02-04
PRACT|CEO WITHOUT LICENSE
CHARGE AGAINST DIR. ALMA G.
ARNOLD.
Trial Of the Case in Police Court.
Court Instructed the Jury
to Acquit.

| The case of DIR. Alma {. Arnold. who
conducts what is known as the Healthari-
| um at the intersection Of 18th and ]
| streets northwest. charged with practicing
medicine without { license. was called for
trial before Judge Mullowny of the Po-
lice Court shortly after II o'clock this
morning. The information against DR..
Arnold was that she prscticed medicine
at her establishment at divers times from
November I. 1907. to February 3. 1908,
the latter being substituted for the orig
inal charge of about fifteen months ago.
under which DIR. Arnold was placed under
arrest and liberated under bond. The
hearing today resulted in the acauittal Of
the defendant.
The defense was represented by G. T..
| Hamilton and NJ. j. Colbert Of the
| firm Of Hamilton & Colbert and w. w.
Bride. The prosecution was in charge Of
| Assistant Corporation Attorneys Blair
and Pugll.
Statement by the Defense.
| In the opening statement Of the attor-
neys for the defense it was outlined that
| they proposed to show that DR.. Arnold
was not i'll stictly legal sense practicing
medicine. The methods she employed,
counsel states. is a form of massage or
| osteopathy. Such forms of treatment,
| counsel stated. do not come under the
local medical laws. and In consequence.
the defendant was not required TO pro-
cure license. The first witness for tho
prosecution called to the stand was In
spector T. w. Van Zant of the health
department The witness stated that in
November last he called at DR.. Arnolu s
establishment and requested that he be
treated for q generally rundown condi-
tion. nr. Arnold. according to tho wit
ness. subjected him to massage or
character of hand treatment, the defend
ant deducting her diagnosis from the
sense of touch.
Upon cross-examination the inspector
stated that he went to DR.. Arnold's cs-
tablishment. the latter knowing ham Az
an officer Of the law. with the under
standing that ne was to undergo the ex-
animation for a. generally rundown con.
| dtion. as a sample of her method Of
| treatment.
| G. 8. Cats. n policeman. was the sec.
ond witness for the prosecution. He tes-
tilted to going to Arnolds establishment
January Is of the present year. Cats
| testimony. in the main, corroborated that
| of the previous witness. and upon his
leaving the witness stand the prosecution
| government.
Motion for Acquittal.
| At the close of the government case
the defense' made the motion asking the
court to instruct the jury to return ver-
dict Of not guilty upon the ground that
the evidence offered did not prove that
the defendant was practitioner of medi-
cine. Arguments by counsel for both sides
followed the prosecution contendinS that
bona-fide case had been made out, IN
| that the practice Of "rhiropractics' by
| which name the defendant called her
method Of treatmeut-was basic upon the
/ science of medicine.
| The defense argued that the practice. as
desorfbed. was but a. form of masss &c
| and other forms Of treatment exempted
| by the law, and in consequence, the de-
| fendant was not guilty. A number of
authorities were referred to the court in
support Of the two arguments.
| At a late hour in the afternoon Judge
/ Mullowny decided In favor of the de-
fense. as stated, instructing the jury to
| return verdict of not guilty.