APPEAL DISMISSED.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 50, 1 March 1922, Page 7

APPEAL DISMISSED.

AS UNREGISTERED PRACTITIONER. In the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon Mr. Justice Stringer heard an appeal by Herbert A. Yeldham againsv a decision by Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M., in convicting him for practising medicine under the style of "late acting surgeon, I defence and pensions." Appellant was represented by Mr. Johnston. in November last the appellant was charged on three informations, that not being registered under the Medical practitioners' Act of 1914, lie did practise medicine under the description of "late acting surgeon, pensions and defence." On the first charge he was convicted and( fined £2 and costs by the magistrate, who held that the "description" used implied that appellant /was specially qualified to practise medicine and surgery. In his opening Mr. Johnatone said that it was a question for his Honor to decide whether the appellant committed an offence under the Act.

His Honor informed counsel that it eras not a question of fact. Mr. Johnston then submitted that it wae a question of law, and also a question as to whether the appellant's title implied "special qualifications." Numerous cases and authorities were quoted by Mr. Johnstone in an endeavour to show that the words "specially qualified , ' used in the Act meant holding qualifications which entitled a man to registration. The words used by appellant did not amount , to a representation of any such qualifications. It was just a question whether the Act was passed for the protection of the public. Mr. Johnstone thought that most probably it was for the protection of the profession.

For the Crown, Mr. Meredith submitted that appellant by his representations had committed an offence under the Act, and that the decision of the magistrate could not be disturbed on such an appeal. The public would easily be deceived by the words used by the appellant, and would recognise him as a duly qualified surgeon. It was contended that as the appellant nad been employed by the Defence Department for, examinations for a limited period only the inference that could be drawn was that the appellant had intended to deceive. '

The appeal was dismissed by his Honor who said that the words, "late acting surgeon, defence and pensions," rather aggravated the offe%?, because the general public would q\iite naturally assume that the appellant was a man of good qualifications. That was not true; he was an examiner for the Department in the special circumstances. Even if the question wae one purely of law, the appeal could not be allowed.

An order for costs at £5 5/ was made ■gainst the appellant.