The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1911-02-18
rnn coMniNE SECURED rnr law
on 1901

Ahh 'hhhhNE Ntt Y RID Iff LAW
on 1901
dental ~ medical law 10 supposed
% hr Ter frF protection - tho puhiif
but tn resiitY ihr public never ala ash
Toe deufni ~ inedirai iaw except
years $50. for ths purpose % ptsvsnf.
lna she phrsleian from charFihs Hn.
fHasuHahiH fsrs. medical ana dental
LAYS - today are asked fef snd -.
safsd -. ths medical and dental PEE
fsssina. foe their oan protection and
bsnsfii. ard IN 1891. ths dental iap na-
IN fefrs ras secured ~ the dental
combine Ter The purpose ~ keeping
dsntisss cut % this state. ana ~ she
epefaiiee % The present dental iaw it
prohibits ihs study ~ dsufisfrF IN thls
state Msny dentists sha rsfs legally
stud1ins ani pfaciieinH under the lac
u 1893 wrrs made criminals n thsg
epnttuusd 70 siufy under the present
az eeeAss@ ~ she terms u ~. pres
snt. iaw dentist cannot even be 80.
aminsd unless he has a diploma This
ueFhsf feffeiturr ~ IN. giRht 81 all
iaw - 1919
cornr MISTAKE NO.
MauF washiasfor dentists Lost their
constitutional FiEht ~ shat Il hnasn
AZ The eufth case The iav % 1893
Permitted ne s'sdy 81 dentistry 10 this
state. and many had been engaged in
stadf for from five "a ten years a fee
had taken she examination under the
laN u is9t bat failed "a pass and be
fore thsf could be sramiusd asain. the
combine la % 1897 -, Passed. ard
rlomss are allowed 20 b. examined
thsrsfnFs al dentists who wsfr de-
pTivsd 81 their constitutional risht NOT
HEcAusK on THE LAW. because the
iaw e 1891. nov IN force. provides Tor
certificates for those who we're study.
'iuz under the law ~ fsPa and n We
the court decision IN the smith case
that worked she forfeiture % the fiEht
''seetian tssT. ri~vrr'. Code" says
Provided. mi. s~rison shall not apply
TO persons snEascd In the practice %
dentistry st the time 81 the passage Of
this act who arc bona fids sifis-n. Of
thr state Of Washington" IN. above
saving clsuse is supplemented by -s~--
ton tteg, which provides AL
TER Evsry person having been adj
raift~d 10 the prscfirc 81 dentistry by
said board In this state after the APP
prevail 81 this SGT shall. On or before
the first dsy Of July. 1901, cause his
business 10 be rrsistsred with the
board 81 d~ntsi examiners, ~ NOT
ALREADY REsIsrERFD. state
ment 81 ever, such p~rson that he was
engaged In the prsrtie. ~ dentistry In
this state nj the time Of approval ~
by him and placed with the board 81
dental examiners. ~ shall b~ the duty
Of tho secretary Of tho said board TO
send TO each person rcsistered under
tho provisions 81 this act. without fee.
certificate similar In form 20 the
other certificates provided for b, this
act. signed by the president and ~cerr-
tarY 81 the board % examiners. which
certificate the holder theresa shall
have recorded with the county auditor
T.. L.. A..
sire@ 10 practice. within ninety days
from the date Of said certificate"
There was but one class Of dentists
which the above provisions o. the pres
ent laS could refer 10. and without
question the legislative intent was 10
prevent dsstroying the rights Of those
dentists who had been studying for
years under tho law Of ifaa, but who
would not be allowed 20 he examined
under the combine Law % 1901 These
plain provisions 81 Law surely did not
apply 70 dentists who we're already
licensed ana registered. because those
who had a certificate and were licensed
did not need another certificate.
The practice OF dentistry Ia legally
defined BY our law ~ treating LESSONS
Jaws and correcting maipositions there
Of" But listen TO this The above
section OF our statute provides that "all
who were not already registered" should
a
ment Of every such person that be was
engaged IN the practice Of dentistry in
this state At the time Of approval OF this
act shall be verified under oath by him
and placed with the board OF examin-
ers IL shall be the duty Of tho score
tary 10 send 20 each person registered. q
certificate permitting them 20 practice
dentistry" and all those who had for
years been studying ana pfacticing, az
provided by the law o. 1899. we're pro-
vided for. but the dental combine re-
fused TO issue the certificates and the
John Smith case was brought TO com
pei the dental board 20 obey the law,
but when this ease came on Tor trial
the court held that the law referred TO
those who were legally praciicinH and
already registered, aud the lower court
waa sustained by our supreme court.
why should a dentist already registered
and In possession 81 his certificate ~
compelled 90 register when the law
plainly states ~ not already registered ?
Tbe greatest mistake ever made by -
court Ia Washington was made In the
ease Of the state 81 Washington. on re-
Iation OF .. W smith, appellant, vs..
Hoard ~ Dental Examiners % the state
81 Washington, respondent, ~ Wash
inntan avg, because John Smith was and
had been legally studying ana praoticinE
dentistry for five years under the law
nf 1899 and the law Of 1901 provided
that ne could register ana receive his
certificate. and the court sustained the
board IN ns refusal 90 obey the plain
provisions Of the law, and John Smith
was the fire, dentist to Doe iudiclaliy
deprived Of his right to hts liberty, 20
eurity. aud his property f'sht In the
My nfileio next Saturday VIII be on
court mistake No. 2.
EDWIN j BROWN.
ia First kse