A consideration of the legal aspects of chiropractic : and more particularly of the question whether or not chiropractic is included within the terms of the Michigan Medical Act-Act. No. 237, Public Laws of 1899, as amended-and is subject to the provisions of that act. Brief, argument and authorities for the affirmative / by Loesch, Scofield & Loesch, Counsel for American Medical Association.

  • Loesch, Scofield & Loesch, Chicago.
Date:
[1911]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A consideration of the legal aspects of chiropractic : and more particularly of the question whether or not chiropractic is included within the terms of the Michigan Medical Act-Act. No. 237, Public Laws of 1899, as amended-and is subject to the provisions of that act. Brief, argument and authorities for the affirmative / by Loesch, Scofield & Loesch, Counsel for American Medical Association. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, Harvard Medical School.

    33/94 (page 25)
    Staie V. Ycgge (1905), 19 S. D., 234; 103 N. W., 17. Ex parte Collins (1909), 57 Tex. Crim., 2; 121 S. W., 501. II. THE OBJECT OF THE STATUTE IS TO PROTECT THE SICK AND AFFLICTED FROM THE PRETENSIONS OF THE IGNORANT AND THE UNSCRUPULOUS State V Busw^dl (1894), 40 I^eb., 158; 24 L. E. A., 68: 58 K W., 728. Little V. State (1900), 60 Neb., 749; 51 L. E. A., 717; 84 X. W., 248. Bragg \. State (1902) 134 Ala., 165; 58 L. E. A., 925; 32 S., 767. Brooks V. State (1890), 88 Ala., 122; 6 S., 902. State V. Miller (1910), — Iowa, —; 124 N. W., 167. Staie V. Edmunds (1904), 127 Iowa, 333 ; 101 K. W., 431. State V. Heath (1904), 125 Iowa, 585; 101 N. W., 429. State V. Williite (1906), 132 Iowa, 226; 109 ]^. W., 730; • 11 A. & E. Ann. Cas., 180. State V. Bair (1900), 112 Iowa, 466; 84 ¥. W., 532; 51 L. E. A., 776. State V. Adhins (1910), — Iowa, —; 124 N. W., 627. O'Neil V. State (1905), 115 Tenn., 427; 3 L. E. A. (N. S.), 762; 90 S. W., 627. People, for use, etc., v. Blue Mountain Joe (1889), 129 111., 370; 21 N. E., 923. Witty V. State (1910), — Incl., —; 25 L. E. A., (K S), 1297; 90 N. E., 627. Commonwealth v. Jewelle (1908), 199 Mass., 558; 85 N. E., 858. Commonwealth v. St. Pierre (1899), 175 Mass., 48; 55 K E., 482. Hewitt V. Charier (1835), 33 Mass. (16 Pickering), 353. People V. Phippin (1888), 70 Mich., 6, 19; 37 N. W., 888. State V. Yegge (1905), 19 S. D., 234; 103 N. W., 17. Staie V. Pollman (1908), 51 Wash., 110; 98 Pac, 88. State V. Oredson (1905), 96 Minn., 509; 105 N. W., 188. III. IN CONSTRUING THE MEDICAL ACT WE MUST CONSIDER THE PUR- POSE OF THE ACT, AND THE MISCHIEF INTENDED TO BE GUARDED AGAINST 1 Kent's Commentaries, Ji.62. 2 Sutherland's Statutes and Siatutorij Construction (2cl, ed. by Lewis), Sees. 370, 374, 376 and 456. And cases cited under preceding heading (II).