Cases relating to the medical council : for the use of members of the General Medical Council only / (edited by Fredk, Willis Farrer.).
- Farrer, Frederick Willis.
- Date:
- 1897
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Cases relating to the medical council : for the use of members of the General Medical Council only / (edited by Fredk, Willis Farrer.). Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Leeds Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Leeds Library.
26/86 page 18
![Council that he had done so. In the year 1885 the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland, upon the ground that Mr. Partridge had advertised for business, canceUed his diploma, and thereupon the General CouncH directed his name to be erased from the Eegister. The nth section of the Act contains provisions as to the contents and form of the Eegister, and as to corrections to be made in it from time to time. *'It was argued for the General Council, that where the original qualification no longer existed, the Council were bound to correct the Eegister, and erase the name, as if there never had been a qualification. On the other hand, it was argued for the applicant that the name of a person qualified either by prac- tice or dij)loma, when once properly placed on the Eegister, could only be erased in the manner and upon the grounds specified in the statute. It was urged that the mere fact that the diploma had been canceUed by the medical authority which had granted it was not a ground upon which the General Council was justified in disqualifying the applicant, or exposing him to the penalties imposed by the Act upon unqualified practitioners. We are of opinion that the contention of the applicant is right, and that he is entitled to have his name restored. [His Lordship here read sects. 12 atid 13, and also re/erred to sect. 15.] It appears to me that, in such a case as the present, the Medical Council possessed no further powers of dealing with the Eegister than those conferred in the sections referred to. It was admitted that the Council had not decided that Mr. Pai-tridge had done anything to justify the removal of his name under sect. 13, but had considered that they were bound to erase his name when the determination of the medical authority grant- ing the diploma had come to their knowledge. But this is a course which, it seems to us, they were not entitled to adopt, otherwise it would seem that where a medical authority has withdrawn a diploma on the ground, for instance, that a par- ticular theory of dental surgery had been adopted or discarded, the name of the holder must be struck fi-om the Eegister. But this is a ground upon which the General Council, under sect. 13, are expressly prohibited from erasing a name. The 3rd clause of sect. 13 appears to show that the Council was not intended to be bound by any determination of the medical authority, even](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21508124_0026.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
