The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1910-05-16

tHhNrHh Hides poor Eheepj 6gDle@
lie had been aEs0ciated Wiis +,
largest dental offices IN chicaKs s
Louis. kauHss city and San -
cisco. and could take the dental !. &
animation 90 any state where 4.
constitution % the United &c., =
not been forgotten And Or. Tsas-'
son also knows that IL ever ~
In these "corpuieuta" United 81.
had a law like Washington. az !
dental college like Washington a
there would not be a person IA h.
whole United States allowed 10 -
dentistry. some people wgat =
this. set 70 may soak Ia on The &.
cal combine iihcy are wissi
anyway. DR. Thompson deelss,
Try and get relief BY order d !.
courts and In this 0plnidr =
court after reviewing The o.
isw said No favored or prefers Z
classes are created or rec0gnlztl :
also pass an examination IL
adds. 1.-THE right 90 defern,ln. ~
requirement utnst be met By an - \
piienut &. wifhiE the exclusive ~. B
ines Of the legislature
Now where are We att Al ieae f
per cent Of the dentists Ia the Crss
States do not possess diplomas r
are licensed IN different states n
have been practicing for from ~
to fiftY years but She stats
Washington refuses 70 aIiow iisz
dentists 20 be examined anf Z
maintains that mo preferred Or ! {
Fored classes are created Seri "
are given 70 understand that ~
legislature alone may detsrnins *
requirements for dentists" baf RI
81 wrts
very exclusively, determines fbs =
qulFcments for dentists in Wasthl
ton. except a diploma. and tie "a
tai combine prescribe whsfs -
must get that. 80 the court seaa
Thompson contention. shat u
state alone has power 20 detsrnla I
the requirements 10 be met. o. n
qualifications" But the stats u
determined nothing except tht, !
order for a dentist to be ailasee F
follow his vocation. he must rtn /.
his arrangements with the dssn
combine. and relief 10 Thozgsz
was denied though his contests
was affirmed. and as Carlyle reE
say. "the woods are 80 thick. -
Thompson can not see the tfeet
Driving the Point Home.
In the case u state ex rei Rios
VS. Smith. AZ Wash 1ss-ztS, q
very principle that the dentists an
cumten1ed for against the coslaiH
Tor years Is involved. and y
plumbers law Of this state vas =
nullcd There is little differsm
10 the dental combine betwee1 .
ing teeth ard doing piumbingl ~
our court said: This board hu =
very greatest and an entire.Y ~
trary discretion as 20 whaf q2Al1
cations b. viii exact from a. alil
cant IL may make an examintaz
which none but an expert In mi
tary knowledge could pass.
may make the examination eniiits
perfuncfory.
.-Tnktng the act as a whoa
would seem quite apparent thai ?
uurnose is 10 enable the emplafif
plumbers TO create a sort OF 81
or body among themselves ~
which none Is 20 be permitfed .
ter except as he may pass an ehln
nation. the requirements q NJ
are not stated and where MS =
cess or failure is to be detefai1a
hy a board Of which some o. ~
number are members" The reasA
lnEs IN this case must prevail y.
annui the dental law eeosass
reasoning is founded In pfinct.
but wait The case OF sists
Walker. IS Wash. IL. is idsntias
parallel la principle and ~ Nv.
This was case In which NAa
the barber. was prosecuiea
working at the barber trade wios-
first procuring license, ana !.
barber act provides that only ~
who have served two years uhl
precoptors may be examinee ~
our supreme court expressed ~
thus. Unreasonable arbitrary =,
visions cannot be enf0rcel
think the provision quoted ~
unreasonable and arbitrary.
What the public is iHterestss
know is that the barber Is ee.s
tent. how he has acquired his ~
or knowledge Is OF minor ~ w Z
lance. n he has qualified hinlsssA =
attendance upon some sohe es,..r
that purpose. or by his own civ
unassisted. or by having serrei
apprenticeship under some dsan
barber. or In some other equai1
ficacious way. that Is all tnas
be reasonably required OF MIA =.
limit the qualification 20 one
tiCulnr way or 20 one pAl.,, =, a
place. where there are many - Y
vcrsally recognized as eqaahl -
and provide that none othet
apply. Is no doubt unreasonan.ss 3
result is that this requirenis,.a. ~, +
the act is void" Indeed -
only to add that under me -
law one apprentice or stuaeaa.,
allowed I'm a shop 60 each $3.50
barber. so that to study AZ 80 -
school was made a violation - 49, Z
but vet. a young man couia
aud learn the barber trade unes
preceptor under the law, " "
court holds Il unreasonanN ~
said that an that could fcAs
be required was qualifieAtioh. -, 3 I
Permit me now 90 call atluhs 4,
the dental law that prohleis.. ~ \
study Of dentistry in TINS s ,A,s .r.e
also denies dentists who n lev Ia
ticed their profession for fiil{ Ia
the right 20 be examined les
they have not a diploma, W. "a 1
a matter OF common knowieoss n. b
the best lawyers. doctors ~. ~ E
lists are the men who, .N,,.s n Z
their education and qualileA sgesss I
experience gained through hg
effort ana toll. The preserle'aass M
qualifications FOR those W." ~
the practice OF professions ~ - 10
IslatiVe duty and the coe
power 20 pass upon the reasosis,a
ness OF qualifications s,s.nr.a
vet. withal. the law Of tins "a 4,
is what our courts say u s ,ss.
NTH element Tor the leglsiss
guard against. Is the franz nn.,,le,i
law based on favorahle "
though adverse decisions a. ~
courts. What the state hes s, ~
dental and medical law tnssassissi +
tects the people against pr..sv ~ +
straight lace hide hlgetE. ~
don't see the trees because
woods are so thick -, ,rtgl f
My next, the sixth ana a. ~. rups 1
TO the legislators. viii oe wv ~
records and compensation, sslle E
dental board and what tls VIZ, wrlts
should be. After that ! Niil,sstfi
series OF articles on me i've u
tinn Of the dental board - vou
evidence. on. ! forgot 10 ts ss,, az
send me your friends Tor ~ w mars
tai work. must have yo. ~ :
and financial support 70
fight, LUX
7tS First Ave. Between Chs'"
Columbia. "a sanas'
Open evenings until ~
....t N Roc t,n.v1a who Mofht