UNREGISTERED PRACTITIONER

Northern Advocate, 7 February 1928, Page 6

UNREGISTERED PRACTITIONER

PROPRIETARY FIRM’S AGENT.

QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION,

An interesting case was heard at the Wliangarci Magistrate ’s Court this morning, when, before Mr F. H. Lovicn, S.M., Hugh Scally was charged that, on or about January 25, not being a registered veterinary surgeon, he used the description of veterinary surgeon and stock specialist in connection with his calling, in a manner which might reasonably cause any person to believe that he was a registered veterinary surgeon.

Defendant pleaded not guilty. Harold S. Beohre, a carrier, stated that, as one of his horses required attention, he telephoned to Scally, who treated his horse. It did well, and witness was quite satisfied with the treatment given. Having seen defendant’s advertisement, witness took it that he was a veterinary surgeon. Ho also had a card on which was printed defendant’s name and the wording ‘ ‘ veterinary practitioner. ’ ’

Detective Robertson said that defendant had informed him that the advertisement in the paper was-put in by the Ring Proprietary firm in Auckland. If asked, defendant was fin tho habit of telling people that he was not a registered practitioner.

Defendant stated that for 25 years he had been practising the profession. He had been away from the country 1 at times, but in January, 1927, he complied with a notice and put in his plication for registration. Since theft he had carried on, as he had received word from the Minister of Agriculture that he could continue to treat animals, ' | but that ho could not use wording or initials likely to lead people to think that, he was a registered practitioner. Counsel submitted that Scally was like a commercial traveller for King’s proprietary, and was salesman of their preparations. The Magistrate quoted the advertisement, which stated clearly that Scally was representing Ring’s Proprietary, veterinary surgeons and stock specialists. Nobofly could say that the advertisement would load people to think that Scally himself was a registered veterinarian. Mr Robertson contended that the evidence of the police witness showed, that he had been led to believe that Scally was registered. The Magistrate reserved his decision.