MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS ACT.
PROSECUTION FAILS. (PK7.SS ASSOCIATION TELEGEAM.) AUCKLAND, October 14. Mr J. W. Poyntcn, >S.M., gave judgment in the case against three eyesight specialists, Edward Smith, Conrad P. McWiUiams, anil Edward O. von Sturmer, charged with having practised a branch of medicine under the title of doctor. The Magistrate said the accused used a sign at their business places, stating that each was a doctor of optica the use of the term "Doctor" being permitted only to registered medical practitioners. If optics was a branch of either surgery or medicine, an offence had been committed. There was no doubt about the skill of the who had been many years in practice' and of high standing. H c held that optics was not a branch of cither surgery or medicine, and dismissed the charge, differing from another Magistrate who had convicted in a similar case. There was. lie added, need for legislation to ensure that onlv proncrlv qualified persons were allowed to practise as opticians. *■
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19241015.2.52
Bibliographic details
Press, Volume LX, Issue 18204, 15 October 1924, Page 8
Word Count
165MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS ACT. Press, Volume LX, Issue 18204, 15 October 1924, Page 8
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.
Log in