DR. DUNDAS MACKENZIE.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 249, 20 October 1924, Page 8

DR. DUNDAS MACKENZIE.

ACTION TO DEREGISTER MOTION FOR EVIDENCE ABROAD. DISMISSED BY JUDGE. A motion, moved on October 1, allow evidence of witnesses res ing abroad upon commission, stead of tendering them examination in tiie ordinary way the hearing of a motion charging ll with grave professional misconduct, v .lismissed by Mr. Justice Herdman the Supreme Court this morning. The Medical Board, constituted uni the Medical l'ractitioners' Act, 11) applied to the Court for the remoi of Dr. Mackenzie's name from the N Zealand register of medical prtutinners, upon the ground that he h heen guilty of infamous conduct in professional respect, inasmuch as i the past four year-, or thereabouts, bad, it was alleged, practised t alleged scientific method of diagno nnd treatment known as "Abrams," such a manner as to show that be cot not honestly have believed that t method of treatment and diaguosis w XL reliable or useful ono in the cases \\;hirh he employed it. At the bearing. Mr. V. Tl. P. Meredi represented the Medical Board, and 5 4. F. W. Diekson appeared for 1 Mackenzie. Proof of Honest Belief. In outlining the circumstances of t «dse Mr. Justice Herdman stated in 1 judgment that, on the one hand, t ijoard, which had commenced the pr Cetdings under special statuto authority, had a public duty to di idiarge. It was bound to guard t. people against impostors and disbonc members of the medical profession, part, at any rate, the statute w, designed for the purpose of ensurii that the public should be well at honestly served by medical practitioner In the performance of its duty, tl Roard had filed a charge, in which sets forth with particularity, instance of misconiluct. on whicii it proposes t to»]y as supporting the allegations thf a ' practitioner practised a certai method of diagnosis and treatment witl out having any honest, belief in i' iVll-lracy. The Board's allegation was n( that the practitioner practised a pa tk-ular system, but that be practised IB such a manner as to show that li did not honestly believe that it we reliable or useful. On the other ham flhe practitioner attacked had his d< fence to make, and he would, if th Board established a case calling for a answer, be forced to prove that he ha an honest belief in the system. It wa: no doubt, with that end in view, tha he wished to obtain the evidence of pei sons of repute, who, with some weigh and authority, might be able to stat that the system was a meritorious ont for if he could prove, as a fact, that th system practised by him was scienti fically sound, that would, at any rate be proof that there was justification fo its use. evidence Unobtainable Here. "There is another circumstance whiel should not be lost sight of, and tha is that if Dr. Mackenzie fails in thes proceedings his means of earning i livelihood will be destroyed," continue! his Honor. "He is therefore vitall; interested in the result of the motioi to remove his name from the register But the fact that Dr. Mackenzies posi tion is grave gives him no absolute right to get a commission to cxamim witnesses abroad and so dispense witl their personal attendance. If evidenci to support the genuineness of tin Abrams system can be obtained out o New Zealand, I fail to understand whj it is not available in New Zealand. II am not able to state the number o medical practitioners in practice in this colony, but this at any rate is certain: the list is a large one, and it contains the names of many who are not onlj skilled and highly qualified, but who can be depended upon to give an authoritative and honest opinion about the value of the system which Dr. Mackenzie, I understand, claims has some merit." Necessity for Attendance. The next circumstance for consideration was both weighty and significant, continued Mi. Justice Herdman. He was informed that in New Zealand Dr. Mackenzie could find only one other practitioner wlio was prepared to express approval of the system practised by him, and, also, that it was useless to go to Australia for evidence in its favour. "I should have thought that had the system any well-founded merit there would have been no difficulty in producing evidence in New Zealand or from Australia to testify in its favour," said the judge. "In any event, one would expect to find in medical works of recognised authority some definite and convincing statement about its worth." His Honor had -been led to understand that little or no evidence of the inherent honesty of the Abrams system could be obtained from any of these wurces. The very fact that there existed such wide spread and definite scepticism in New Zealand and Australia about the genuineness of this system proved to his Honor's mind that, if justice was to be done in the proceedings instituted by the Board, evidence tendered in support of the system should be submitted to the severest test, and this could only be accomplished by insisting upon the attendance of witnesses in Court where they could 'be carefully cnoss-cxamined, and where their demeanour could be observed -by the members of the Court. •System "Widely Suspectea. To lay down in this case that it was necessary for the purpose* of justice that the ordinary mode of taking evidence should be departed from would mean suspending an important investigation for six months, perhaps for 12 months. To this it might be retorted thait such a postponement was immaterial when the one matter of importance was that justice should be done. In conclusion, Mr. Justice Herdman said no such answer was, in his opinion, available when it was proposed, in such an inquiry as the Medical Board had originated, to tender in support of the merits of a system Which, if not almost universally condemned, was widely sus-< I*cted, evidence whioh he was entitled '■ to assume might not be given by cred- I ilile witnesses, ami which it would not I 1-e possible to submit to the most searching scrutiny. j The summons was therefore dismissed | with costs £3 3/-. " I