OF INTEREST TO DENTISTS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVII, Issue 117, 19 May 1909, Page 3

OF INTEREST TO DENTISTS.

(By Telegraph. — Special to The Post.) DUNEDIN, This Day. Two cases of interest to dentists were heard before Mr. Kenrick, S.M., at Tapanui. Under the Dentists' Act of 1908, it is provided that in the case of an association carrying on the practice of dentistry, the names of the dentists forming such an association shall be legibly and conspicuously affixed outside their business premises. The defendant, John O'Neil, was proceeded against on the ground of having exhibited a card of the Otago and Southland Painless Dental Company, in which this proviso wUs not observed, he being at the time not registered under the Act. He pleaded guilty, and on his behalf it was put forward by Mr. Miller that after the local constable had drawn defendant's attention to the omission, the name was put up. The Magistrate said that it was very necessary that the law should be complied with, so that the public might know with whom they were dealing, and he convicted defendant, and fined him £3, and costs (£1 ISs). O'Neil was also proceeded against for having unlawfully performed a dental operation — extracting certain teeth — he not being a qualified dentist. Defendant admitted having extracted teeth, but said that he had not charged a fee for it, and therefore came under the exemptions provided for in the Act — namely, that a person who merely extracted teeth did not require to be registered. It was, however, proved that in addition to the extracting of teeth, a drug was used for the purpose of injeation into the gums. The Magistrate held that this was a dental operation within the meaning of the Act, and convicted defendant, fining him £3, and costs (£2 12s). Ipbess association.! SLANDER ACTION SETTLED. AUCKLAND, 18th May. The action brought by Dr. Thomas Stuart, of Tauranga, against Dr. Edward Bewes and his wife, also of Tauranga, for £501 damages for alleged slander, has been satisfactorily settled. In announcing the fact at the Supreme Court to-day, Mr. Reed (for defendants) said the terms of the settlement required explanation. The statement of claim set out that plaintiff was slandered by defendant's wife by saying in effect that plaintiff had been imposing his attentions on her servant girl. The latter had complained to Mrs. Bewes that she had been followed about by Dr. Stuart, who was a single man, and eventually began to produce letters purporting to have come from Dr. Stuart asking her to make an appointment with him. The matter became public talk. Ultimately the girl, when taxed, confessed that throughout the whole proceedings she had misled Mrs. Bewes ; that she had never been molested by Dr. Stuart ; and that the letters she had produced purporting to be from Dr. Stuart had been written by herself. The terms of settlement were that defendants were to pay plaintiff's costs, and they expressed regret that Dr. Stuart should have suffered from any statements made. AN AIRSHIP INVENTED BY AN auckla:\ t der. AUCKLAND, 18th May. A locally invented airship is to be exhibited at the Auckland A. and P. Association's exhibition next week, provided that the trial, which is to be made next Friday, is attended with satisfactory results. The inventor is Mr. Barnard, and it is stated that the trial made some time ago was sufficiently gratifying to warrant a patent being taken out. PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS-HEM-PLOYERS' RESOLVE. WAXGANUT, 18th May. At the annual meeting of the Employers' Association to-night it was resolved : "That this association is strong*

ly opposed jto the new phase of preference to unionists as lately laid down uy t#e Arbitration Court, and pledges itself to oppose the same by every means in its power. We are satisfied that a very large proportion of the workers of New Zealand are not members of a union, and that they have strong objection to joining any union. The employer is the only person competent to judge who is capable and worthy of employment by him.' NAPIER HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS. NAPIER, 18th May. At a meeting of the Napier Harbour Board to-day replies were received from three engineers, Messrs. J. Blair Mason (Dunedin), Cyrus Williams (Christchurch), and J. P. Maxwell (Wellington), submitting terms for reporting on the harbour schemes. Mr. Maxwell intimated that he considered a joint report unsatisfactory, but would be prepared to' make a separate report. The board decided, "That the offer of the three engineers be accepted, and that they be appointed to report on the present breakwater and Mr. George Nelson's inner harbour scheme ; that they be informed that while a joint report would be preferred, the board would have no objection to their reporting separately, and that the board would like the three engineers to visit Napier at the same time." The board also fixed the order of reference to the engineers. In a letter read at a meeting of the Napier Harbour Board to-day, Messrs. Huddart, Parker and Co. stated that the masters of their boats visiting Napier had sent in their opinions on the completion of the breakwater. They considered that if the breakwater was completed, as proposed by Mr. Marchant, the board would have a harbour of sheltered water free from tides or currents as good as any in New Zealand, with plenty of room to manoeuvre the largest ships likely to come to Napier.