"' . V^4 Columbia Umberattpd^w. in tfje €itp of Jleto gotfe X * g>tfjool of ©ental anb (J^ral gmrgerp 1 l^^W^S A TREATISE ON DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE, FOR DENTISTS AND LAWYERS, EMBRACING THE FOLLOWING SUBJECTS: Dantal Jurisprudence— Dental Expert Testimony— Identification by Means of the Teeth— Dental Malpractices— Cocaine Poi- soning—Fracture of Maxilla During Extraction of Teeth —Injuries and Deaths Due to Anaesthesia — The Jurisprudence of Dental Patents, etc., etc., BY WILLIAM F. REHFUSS, D.D.S., Author of "Dental Massage;" Member of the Odontological Society, of Pennsylvania ; of the New Jersey State Dental Society ; Dental Protective Ass'n of U. S. A., etc. PUBLISHED BY THK WILMINGTON DENTAL MFG. CO., No. 1413 Filbert Street, PHILADELPHIA. I892. •X- Kntered according to Act of Congres c , in the year 1892, By The Wilmington Dental Mfc. Company, PHILADELPHIA, PA., In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. TO JAMES TRUMAN, D.D.S., (Professor of Dental Pathology, Therapeutics, and Materia Medica, in the Denial Department of the University of Pennsylvania, and Dean of the Faculty), Whose Efforts and Merits in the Advancement of Dentistry are Recognized and Honored by His Professional Brethren, THIS WORK IS INSCRIBED Token of Esteem and Admiration for Him as a Teacher, and a Tribute of Enduring Friendship OF HIS FORMER PUPIL, —The Author. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from Columbia University Libraries http://www.archive.org/details/treatiseondentalOOrehf ALEX. DURBIN LAUER, ATTORNEY- AT I.AW, ROOM 701, DREXEL BUILDING, Philadelphia, July 30th, 1891. Mi Dear Doctor: — I have examined the MSS. of your ■'■Dental Jurisprudence," and find the general legal principles therein enunciated correct, while the arguments presented in the special subjects are in accordance with the authorized legal views. I can state that there are many facts in it which can not fail to be of service to the advocate in the trial of a cause, involving any part of the ground it covers. In the absence of any work on that particular subject, and especially from its intrinsic merit, your book is bound to become a reference in all cases of that kind. Yours, very truly, ALEX. D. LAUER. Dr. W. Y. Re h fuss. PREFACE. The purpose of this volume is to supply to the dental and legal professions a comprehensive treatise or text-book, covering the subject of dental jurisprudence, showing the relations the dental practitioner sustains to the law. It is true that the general principles of medical juris- prudence apply equally as well to the dental practitioner, but there are certain special questions which arise exclu- sively in dental practice, undoubtedly creating a field for a distinct and separate jurisprudence for dentistry. The ob- jective point is to produce a true work of reference for tech- nical points of a dento-legal character, enabling those who are desirous of obtaining information, or quoting opinions or decisions relative to any dento-legal question, to do so with- out extensive research. The absence of such a work has frequently been com- mented upon, and in consequence thereof I have devoted my energies toward supplying this need to the professions. Owing to the wonderful advancement within late years of the dental sciences, embracing the discovery of many new operations and methods of treatment, increased responsibili- ties are accredited to the dental surgeon, the neglect of which might involve him in litigation, and the knowledge thereof may at some period in his professional career avoid a calamity of a serious nature. For this reason, a knowledge of dental jurisprudence would be of infinite value to the young graduate, who too frequently enters upon his professional duties utterly igno- rant and oblivious of the legal responsibilities incident to the practice of his profession. An error of judgment, reck- l< — ness, a careless mistake, or unprofessional conduct may involve him in unwonted trouble that might ruin his whole professional career. VII VIII PREFACE. In dentistry, as in medicine, jurisprudence must event- ually become an important subject of education, not alone to explain and show the nature of the different legal liabilities for which the dentist is answerable, or the legal conse- quences of dental malpractices, but to point out to the stu- dent, and caution him against the dangers referred to above, and which are more fully elaborated in other portions of this work. In writing a book on jurisprudence, it is important to consider the decisions of the courts in actual cases, and thereon base the arguments and conclusions on the subject; consequently, the work now presented is largely composed of references to and extracts from such decisions, and the au- thor's own private thoughts have in no instance been given preference to these. Where no precedent has been estab- lished, the conclusions are derived from analogous cases. As the intention is to make this treatise comprehensive and practical, the repetition of important points becomes a necessity, in order that each subject, to a certain extent, is complete in itself, rendering it unnecessary for the reader to constantly refer to other portions of the book for explana- tions or information ; and, moreover, this is a particular ad- vantage and convenience for those who may desire to consult and study certain subjects, without being obliged to peruse the greater portion of the book. In preparing this volume it has been my aim to consult the works of the standard au- thors on all subjects, as well as the current literature. Such knowledge, becoming as it does, common prop- erty, may be quoted and reproduced by all who may so desire, providing the courtesy of always giving the author the deserved credit, is observed. Having faithfully complied with these requirements, the author feels that he is under no further obligations for Lis extensive quotations from standard works on jurisprudence and other sources of information, than to acknowledge his in- debtedness to such authors who have contributed to the completeness of the subject ; and the reader will perceive, by the numerous references to their names in the following PREFACE. IX pages, that those especially worthy of mention are: Daniel Nason, Esq. (whose article on " The Legal Status of Den- tists." read before the Dental Society of Xew York, is com- mendable) ; Judge Chas. G. Garrison's (M. D.) valuable article on Dental Jurisprudence, in " American System of Dentistry," Volume III ; the treatises of Professors Taylor and Guy, of London ; Field's Medico-Legal Guide ; "Whar- ton and Stille's works on Jurisprudence ; Howson on U. S. Patents ; Williams on Physicians, Druggists and Dentists ; " Dental Cosmos ; " "Items of Interest," etc. In addition, the author has made an extensive research of the court reports and digests of the cases that occurred in the United States and England, which have a bearing on the subject. It will be noticed that particular attention has been ob- served in preparing those subjects which are of most impor- tance to the dentists — notably, the different forms of dental malpractices, injuries and deaths from anaesthesia, the legal rights of the dental practitioner, and the jurisprudence of patents are treated exhaustively. My thanks are also due to Professors James Truman and C. X. Peirce, and to Alex. Durbin Laucr, Esq., for their kindness in reading my MSS., and for the pleasure and encour- agement derived from their favorable opinions on the work and their commendation of it; to Dr. E. C. Kirk (editor of " Dental Cosmos") and W. Potter, for their many courtesies. In conclusion, in submitting this treatise to the criti- cism of my professional brethren and of the legal profession, it is with the hope that they will be lenient, and deem it, to a certain extent, worthy to meet the desideratum which it is intended to supply. William F. Rehfuss, D.D.S. 1224 Walnut street, , .,, ., , , . . ,, , ,,. . _ ' ' Philadelphia, Pa. utb Broad i-ireet, / CONTENTS. NUMBERS RKEER TO THE SECTIONS. "i 1. Dental Jurisprudence. — Definition. \ '1. Requirements of Dental Jurists. ',. 3. Dental Witnesses. \ 4. Subpoena. '"/. 5. Dental Expert Witnesses. 'i 6. The Qualifications Required of Experts. 2 7. The Distinction Between an Expert and Common Witness. \ 8. The Fields of Dental Expertism. \ 9. Identification by Means of the Teeth. 1 10. The Legal Protection Afforded the Dentist by the Degree of D.D.S. — The Limitations of the Practice of Dentistry. — The Legal Right of the Dentist to Administer Remedies Systeinically. | 11. Malpractice. — What Constitutes Dental Malpractice. \ 12. The Various Kinds of Dental Malpractice. 'i 13. The Dentist as a Defendant. — Criminal and Civil Prosecutions. \ 14. The Degree of Skill Required — "Ordinary Skill." 'i 15. Not Bound to Use the Highest Degree of Skill. § 16. A Dentist Cannot Experiment with his Patients. \ 17. The Question of Abilities Decided by the Jury. \ 18. The Standard of Skill Varies According to the Circumstances and Lo- calities. 'i 19. Where Life is Endangered, a Greater Degree of Skill is Required of the Dentist. ''/, 20. Specialists and Non-Specialists. \ 21. Responsibilities of the Dentist for an Error of Judgment. 3 22. Negligence ■? 23. Contributory Negligence. 2 24. Damages. \ 25. The Fracture of the .Jaws (the Alveolus of the Superior or Inferior Maxilla i During the Extraction of Teeth. \ 20. Cocaine Poisoning. '/ -1 . Injuries and Deaths due to Anesthesia. Hemorrhage Following the Extraction of Teeth. Infection of Diseases from Unclean Instruments. XI Nil CONTENTS. { SO. Rape Under Anesthesia. (i 31. ( ompulsory Services. 2 3'2. Compensation — Contracts for Services may Ik- Bx pressed or [mplied. § 33. The Legal Rules Regulating the Amount of the Fees Recoverable. >/. 34. Liability of a Third Party who Requests the Services of a Dentist for the Benefit of Another. 35. Claims for Services for Married Women. # 36. Liability of Minors for Services. \ 37. The Book-Accounts of Dentists. \ 38. Partnerships — Contracts Between Preceptor and Pupil. \ 39. The Legal Relations of a Dentist and his Assistant. \ 40. Authority and Legality of State Boards. £ 41. The Constitutionality of Dental Laws. — Liability for Practicing without a Diploma or License. 2 42. Patent Rights. APPENDIX. History of Dental Legislation. — The Statutes Regulating the Practice of Den- tistry in the United States and in other Countries. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. § 1. DEFINITION. Dental jurisprudence maybe defined as that science which teaches the application of every branch of dentistry to the purposes of the law ; hence its limits on the one hand are the requirements of the law, and on the other the whole range of dental knowledge : anatomy, physiologj', therapeutics, materia medica, chemistry, operative and prosthetic dentistry, etc. To enable a court of law to arrive at a proper conclusion or decision in a dental case at issue, as necessity arises, each one of these branches of science may be an aid in properly interpreting the evidence adduced. § 2. REQUIREMENTS OF DENTAL JURISTS. The field of dental jurisprudence is necessarily limited, but a dental jurist should have a theoretical and thorough practical knowledge of every branch of his profession, and have had a large range of experience. When called to testify in a case in court, he should be able to interpret any difficult dento-legal question that may arise, and be prepared to adapt his knowledge and experience to the proper explanation and interpretation of any questions or facts submitted to him, to enable the jury to arrive at a just conclusion. The more perfect a man has made himself master of his profession, the better will he be qualified to follow and apply himself to the practice of dental jurisprudence. For he can fxpect no consideration from the lawyers at the bar if he at- tempts to explain that of which he has but a vague knowl- edge. Dr. Ellwell, a member of the legal as well as the medical profession, observes that "no witness is ever compelled to 9 ID DENT \l. .M RI8PR1 DEKCE. appearand testify to whal he doea nol know." He may be compelled to attend in court in obedience to a subpoena, but if he attempts to testify upon subjects requiring opinions upon which he has no well-settled or well-defined ideas, it is his own fault, and he alone is to blame, for no one as himself can know bo well a> he, until he has exposed himself, how unfit he is for the occasion. However anxious a witness may be to appear learned, and no matter how hard he may labor to show it. he will find it difficult to make the court and counsel believe that he is really so. To appear really learned he musl be able to make the subject upon which lie gives an opinion clear, and to give satisfactory reasons for his opinions. It is, therefore, necessary that he clearly and thoroughly understands the subjeel upon which he gives his opinions. (Taylor's Med. Jurisp., p. 50.) § 3. DENTAL WITNESSES. A dentist may be required to appear and testify in court, or before judicial or other officers, to facts within his observation, as an ordinary witness, or to offer expert testi- mony either orally or by deposition, in the same manner as a non-professional man, if served with a subpoena command- ing him to do so. In the former case, there is no distinction between the dentist and other witnesses, and the same legal rules, regulating the production of all testimony, apply to him as to any other witness, who having seen or known some fart, is called to testify thereto. § 4. BUBPCBNA. A dental practitioner is bound to attend court, when served with a subpoena. Every witness must obey a sub- poena when with it his reasonable expenses, etc., for journey are tendered him. In civil cases, the failure to pay one day's attendance and mileage in advance — the fee being usually fixed by statute and is different in the various states — would frequently constitute a reasonable excuse for non-attendance. In criminal cases it is not generally necessary to tender a fee in advance to compel the witnesses to attend, it being their DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 11 duty to obey a call of that description, it being also a case in which he is, in some measure, a party. But his fees will in general be finally paid from the public treasury. The accused in all such cases is entitled to compel witnesses to attend in his favor. (Greenleaf's Ev., ^ 311.) An expert is allowed a larger fee than a common wit- ness only as a matter of policy or arrangement of the party litigant subpoenaing him. In no case can the excess over the usual fee ($1.50 for each day or fraction of a day's at- tendance at court) be included in the bill of costs filed by the successful party. (Foster's Est. C. P. No. 1., Phila. Co. Ms.) A question of much importance in regard to the attend- ance of a dental witness may here be discussed. If a SUBPCENA IS SERVED ON AN ORDINARY OR SKILLED WITNESS, IS HE BOUND TO ATTEND? In a medical case, Betts v. Clifford (Warwick Lent Assizes, 1858), the late Lord Campbell stated, in reply to a question, that a scientific witness was not bound to attend upon being served with a subpoena, and that he ought not to be subpoenaed. If the witness knows any question of fact he might be compelled to attend, but he could not be com- pelled to attend to speak of matters of opinion. This ruling of Lord Campbell would necessarily apply to dentists, who belong to the same category of scientific men as the medical practitioner. In Rich v. Pierpoint, an action for malpractice, Dr. Lee was summoned against his will to give evidence on the part of the plaintiff*. On the evening previous to the trial, a solicitor called on him with a subpoena. Dr. Lee would not listen to any account of the case which the solicitor proposed to give, and stated he would have nothing to do with the case. The solicitor warned him that he would be compelled to pay the usual penalty if he did not attend. He went to court and was warned not to leave before the case was over. He heard the evidence on the part of the plaintiff and the medi- cal testimony, and on this gave his opinion — not much in favor of the party who summoned him, and not against him. Dr. Lee considered that he could not avoid attending the 12 DENI \l- -'I RISPBUDENCE. trial under the circumstances. (" Medical Times and Gazette," April 12th, 1862, p. 389; Case of AVebb v. Page, "Medical Times and ( Jazette," April 26th, 1862, p. 432 ; Taylor's Juris- prudence, p. 38.) "Upon affidavit of the service of subpoena and the pay- ment of witness fees and mileage made (in the Courts of Pennsylvania), within an hour of the opening of the session, a recalcitrant or absent witness may be brought in by at- tachment." (A. D. Lauer.) When the subpoena has been duly served and the fees paid in advance when demanded, it' the witness is entitled to advanee fees, it is the duty of the person thus served toobe}' the command of writ — the failure to do so without a reason- able excuse, as an accident, physical infirmity, death in the family, etc., which rendered it impossible, would be a con- tempt of court and subject the offender to a fine, imprison- ment, or both. 5 5. DENTAL EXPERT WITNESSES. As an expert, a dentist may be classed with medical and other expert witnesses. The difference is not of kind, but simply the elass of facts and knowledge presented. An expert witness may be defined as one who has gained peculiar knowledge and experience, by practice or observa- tion, in the art, science or business in which he is called to offer his testimony or opinions, which are of value in de- ciding the case at issue. "Expert Avitnesses are persons professionally conversant with the practice, science, skill, or trade in question." (Best on Ev., sec. 346 ; Strickler on Ew, 408— Field's Medico-Legnl Guide, p. 5.) An expert witness is not requested, as other witne. . to testify because he witnessed or observed a fact bearing on the case at issue ; but he is summoned to interpret and ex- plain, for the benefit of the court and jury, the meaning and significance of the facts as they are understood bv himself and others of his profession or art. On the subject of experts, Greenleaf observes: "On DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 13 questions of science, skill, or trade, or others of a like kind, persons of skill, sometimes called experts, may not only tes- tify to facts, but are permitted to give their opinions in evidence." (Greenleaf on Ev., sec. 440.) An expert witness is not required to testify positively, but may state his impressions as to occurrences, facts or events, from his knowledge or recollection of them, and he has the right and may be compelled to refresh or assist his memory, where it is at fault, by a reference to a written in- strument, memorandum or other document. (1 Greenleaf on Ev., sec. 440 ; Blake v. People, 73 N". Y., 586 ; Reed v. Board- man, 20 Pick., Mass., 441 ; Kan v. Stivers, 34 la., 123 ; 3 Field's Law}-er's Briefs, Sub. Evidence, sec. 318.) In a note by Mr. Smith to Carter v. Boehem, supra, he observes : " On the one hand it appears to be admitted that the opinion of the witnesses possessing peculiar skill, is ad- missible whenever the subject matter of the inquiry is such that inexperienced persons are unlikely to prove capable of forming a correct judgment upon it, without such assistance ; in other words, when it so far partakes of the nature of a science as to require a previous habit or study in order to the attainment of it ; while on the other hand, it does not seem to be contended that the opinions of witnesses can be re- ceived when the inquiry is into a subject matter, the nature of which is not such as to require any particular habit or study in order to qualify a man to understand it. (See Hardy v. Merrill, 56 K H., 227 ; Com. v. Sturtevant, 117 Mass., 122 ; 19 Am. Rep., 401 — Field's Medico-Legal Guide.) And a witness cannot generally give his opinion as an expert upon matters of common knowledge and not requiring special skill or experience. (White v. Ballou, 8 Allen, Mass., 408 ; New England Glass Co. v. Lovell, 7 Cush, Mass., 321 ; Luce >:. Dorchester Ins. Co., 105 Mass., 299.) § 6. THE QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED OF EXPERTS. Before a witness can be examined as an expert it is necessary to prove that he is competent and possesses the necessary qualifications to render him legally eapable of 14 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. giving expert testimony. This is preliminarily decided by the court when the alleged expert is put upon his coir dire, but the slightest symptoms of technical knowledge will carry him past the court into the tender arms of the advocates, who are only waiting to pick him apart before the jury. There is no strict test for the settlement of this question. In order to determine that he is competent to act as an ex- pert in his specialty, the court will inquire what special advantages and opportunities he has and has had for acquir- ing the necessary familiarity, how long he has followed or pursued it, and it rests with the court to ask such questions, to prove or disprove his claims of competency to act as an expert witness. The intention of the court is merely to find out whether his knowledge of the art or science of the subject under consideration, is sufficient to give him the character of an expert therein. Theoretical experience alone is not requisite, nor is it also necessary to constitute an expert. In examining a dentist as to his qualification to offer expert testimony, the court would be satisfied if it were proven that he had received an education in dentistry, and was, or had been, a practitioner thereof, as it is not neces- sary for an expert to still be a practitioner, as his knowledge of his profession does not cease on his retirement from practice. As stated, the expert is summoned to interpret to the satisfaction of the jury the accepted scientific or technical thoughts upon such questions with which they are unfa- miliar. In order that his evidence be acceptable, he must offer a positive fact, otherwise his testimony will not be con- sidered. " Thus in dentistry, a question relating to the profession is to be considered. The jury, who usually are but ordinarily educated men, are not supposed to be versed in the science of dentistry ; therefore an expert is called into the case to explain to the court and jury the facts under consideration, lie is supposed not to give his biased opinion, but the ac- cepted opinions of the profession at large on the subject. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 15 There is a diversity of opinion on the subject usually, which renders it difficult to give an impartial opinion thereon. What the law requires is the fact as to what the scientific thought is on the subject." (Garrison's American Sys. Dentistry.) Books are not to be admitted in evidence, nor are their contents to be admitted, or to be imputed as expert testi- mony. A professional man, if called to testify to an ordinary fact within his knowledge, cannot refuse to attend. Whether or not he can refuse to attend as an expert, is an undecided question in the United States. In England, extra compensa- tion is given one for expert testimony. In the United States, two views are maintained. One favoring extra com- pensation, and laid down in the case of Buchanan r. The State, 59 Indiana, p. 1 ; in the case of Roelker v. Sprague, 276, in the IT. S. District Court of Mass. ; also in U. S. v. Howe, in the U. S. District Court for the western district of Ark. 12, Central Law Journal, 193. Another class of cases denies the right of extra com- pensation. [Ex parte Dement, 53 Alabama, 389 ; Summer r. State, 5 Texas Court of Appeals, 374. — Garrison's Amer. System of Dentistry, Yol. III.) This question of compensation of witnesses needs entire revision and appropriate legislation covering the whole of expert testimony. Certain states have already passed statutes upon this subject, viz. : Iowa, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Indiana. In the first three, the extra compensation is allowed, while in the latter it is denied. In this unsettled condition it would be unsafe for an ex- pert witness to refuse to testify without compensation in any state where no statute covers the question, as the power of the court to commit for contempt is practically unlimited, and not to be legally defined. 7. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXPERT AND COMMON WITNESSES. The line between expert and non-expert witnesses, is not always clearly distinguishable. A.- ;i general rule, HOD- 16 DEXT \l. JURISPR1 DESCE. experts are confined to a mere statemenl of tacts. (Com. v, Wilson, 1 Gray, Mass., 387; Caleb v. State, 39 Miss., 722; Gehrke >■. State, l". Tex., 568 ; Clapp v. Fullerton, 34 X. Y., 100; Real v. People, 42 N". Y., 270.) And they cannot give an opinion upon a hypothetical statement of facts. (State v. Klinger, 40 Mo., 228 ; Fan-el v. Brennan, 32 Mo., 328 ; Boardman v. Woodman, 47 N. II., 120; Dunham's Appeal, 27 Conn., 102; Weema v. Weems, 10 Md., 334; Eckert v. Flowry, 43 Pa., St. 49— Field's Medico-Legal Guide, sec. 0.) The opinions of professional men are competent evidence, and in many eases are of much importance and justly worthy of consideration. But it is the decision of the jury which is to govern, and this is to be formed upon the proof of the facts laid be- fore them ; but certain questions He beyond the knowledge and experience of men in general, but within the scope of those whose pursuits constantly bring that special class of facta under their observation and consideration. The dental prac- titioner alone has the particular means of acquiring knowl- edge and experience in whatever relates to dentistry. There- fore, when a question arises in a judicial case upon the sub- ject, and certain tacts are testified to by other witnesses, a dentist may be called into the case to interpret and give his opinions as to the character of such facts. Such opinions, when advanced by persons of consider- able experience, in whose correctness and reliability of judg- ment just confidence can be had, are of great importance and justly deserving of the respectful consideration of the jury. On the other hand, the opinions of dental surgeons having but little experience, or undeveloped or visionary theories to support, are unworthy of consideration. The value of such testimony will depend principally upon the fidelity, experience and impartiality of the witness. When a dentist or other professional witnesses have attended the whole trial, and heard the testimony of other witnesses as to the facts and circumstances of the case at issue, they are not to judge of the credit or value of the testimony of the witnesses or the truth of the facts testified to bv others. It DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 17 is for the jury to decide whether such facts are true or sat- isfactorily proven or verified by others. § 8. THE FIELD FOR DENTAL EXPERTS. A dentist called in a case as an expert may be required to give his opinions on any question pertaining to dentistry. It perhaps is one relating to prosthetic dentistry, as in a civil suit, where the defendant alleged that an artificial denture made for said defendant was not properly adjusted to fit the mouth, and therefore was an unsuccessful opera- tion, for which he did not intend to pay. The expert is called in to testify that, in his opinion, it was done as well as could be required of a dentist possessing ordinary ability, or his opinion may be the reverse. In criminal cases, when the defendant is charged with malpractice, where the inju- ries are alleged to be due to the improper administration of anaesthetics, medicines or causing the fracture of the max- illa ; also, identification of dead or living persons by means of the teeth, etc. ; the dental expert may be asked to give his opinions concerning any of these questions ; in fine, upon anything that may be construed to come within the domains of dentistry. He may be subpoenaed by either the plaintiff or defen- dant in the case ; and in no wise is he responsible for the consequences of his opinions. By oath, he is bound to tell all and suppress nothing of what he conscientiously be- lieves to be the truth, no matter what may be the result to the accused. § 9. IDENTIFICATION BY MEANS OF THE TEETH. This is one of the most important subjects for the careful consideration of dental experts. All modes of identification have their disadvantages and defects, but the dental tests least of all. Frequently the absolute identification of a person, whether living or dead, is a difficult matter. Cases are recorded where criminals have been identified by means of certain peculiarities of their teeth after all other 18 DENTAL .11 aiSPRUDENCE. methods of positive identification have failed. Again, per- Bone accused of murder and other crimes, have established their innocence, by proving that their own physical peculiari- ties and characteristics differed from the published descrip- tions of the supposed criminal, especially in cases where peculiarities of the teeth were considered reliable means of identification in the published description of the criminal. Notably, the celebrated case of the murder of the Chicago millionaire, Snell, by Tascott, can be cited as an illustra- tion thereof; viz. :-— A large reward was ottered for the arrest of the murderer. Two years afterwards, a man named Suther- land was arrested in Philadelphia, under the belief that he was Tascott, the murderer. The proofs seemed conclusive,, as his description apparently tallied with that of the pub- lished account of Tascott ; but his innocence was primarily established, because it was proven that his teeth had not certain peculiarities (gold fillings in the central incisors) as those accredited to Tascott's. Eventually, on the production of other proofs of innocence, he was acquitted and liberated. In the renowned case of Dr. Cronin, the Irish-American patriot, who was murdered in Chicago, although the body was identified and recognized by a number of witnesses, still his dentist was called to attend at the inquest, to give cor- roborative testimony regarding his teeth. JSTumerous other cases may be cited. It is often impossible to identify a corpse, even if no part of the body is missing, and in cases where mutilation has occurred (as usually in premeditated crimes, accidents, etc.), the difficulties are increased, and no test is more valuable than that afforded by dental jurispru- dence. When the identity of a corpse is suspected, and a doubt exists, especially as the clothing, hair, hands, ears, etc., afford no positive clue or proof, the dentist of the person, whom the deceased is supposed to be, is summoned to exam- ine the teeth and mouth of the said deceased and therefrom testify, whether or not the peculiarities, etc., of the teeth are similar to those of his former patient, and thus establish identity or non-identity. He has available many and diverse DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 19 means for positive identification : as the presence or absence of teeth ; the condition of the alveolar processes ; the presence of dentures ; fillings, or mechanical dentures and contriv- ances ; irregularities in the arrangement of the teeth ; state of decay, and many other peculiarities. He may have dia- grams, records, models, or moulds of the mouth to rely upon, which give a precise means of identification, such as no other methods offer. In the identification by these means, the expert cannot be too cautious, and should observe the greatest care and discretion in presenting his evidence and in establishing his claims as to the identity or non-identity of the person. His proofs must be absolute to substantiate these claims. He has many adverse circumstances to com- bat, and unless he has examined the mouth of the supposed person but a short time previous to his death, it may be very difficult for him to remember the exact conditions of the teeth and mouth at that time, unless anomalies or unus- ual conditions exist. Thus, one or more of the teeth may have been extracted in the mean time, and of course there is a rearrangement of the alveolar processes due to absorp- tion of the alveoli, and shrinking of the gums, presenting an entirely different condition than at the previous examination. Unless, under the circumstances, his proofs are conclusive, they are to be received merely as opinions and not as facts. The following cases are interesting, as practical illustrations of identification by means of the teeth, viz. : Dr. Guy states that a doubtful case of identity in Edinburgh was decided by a dentist, who produced a cast of the gums, which he had taken before death. So, also the remains of the Marchioness of Salisbury, discovered among the ruins of the Hatfield House, were identified by the jaw-bone having gold appendages for arti- ficial teeth. (Ghiy'fl Forensic Med., p. 23.) In Mr. Sargent's late history of Braddock'a expedition (Philada., 1850, p. 227), is narrated a very interesting in- stance of identification by means of an artificial tooth. Sir Peter Halket, in 1758, after the reduction of Fort DuQuesne, proceeded to the spot of Braddock'a defeat for the 20 DEN 1 'AL .11 RISPR1 DENCE. purpose of discos ering, if possible, the remains of his father, who was there killed. " In reply to his anxious ques- tions,' 3 we are told, "one of his tawny guides had already told Ilalkct thai he recollected, during the combat, to have Been an officer fall beneath such a remarkable tree as he should have no difficulty in recognizing; and at the same momenl another, rushing to his Ride, was instantly shot down, and fell across his comrade's body. As they drew near the Bpot, the detachment was halted, and the Indians peered about through the trees to recall their memories of the scene. With sneaking gesture, they briefly discoursed in their own tongue. Suddenly, and with a shrill cry, the Indian of whom we have spoken, sprang to the well-remem- bered tree. While the troops rested on their arms in a circle around, he and his companions searched among the thick, fallen leaves. In a moment, two gaunt skeletons were ex- posed, lying together, the one upon the other, as they had died. The hand that tore away their scalps had not dis- turbed their position; but no sign remained to distinguish the relics from the hundred others that strewed the ground. At the moment Sir Peter remembered him of a peculiar ar- tificial tooth which his father bore. The bones were then separated, and an examination of those which lay under- most at once solved all doubts. "'It is my lather'.' exclaimed the unhappy youth, as he sunk into the arms of his scarce less affected friends." A most singular case of disputed identity, in which there was between two persons such a similarity of name, time, place, age, occupation and circumstances, as for a long time utterly to perplex the investigation, occurred in Lon- don. The body of a woman supposed to have been mur- dered, was missing, and another woman was arrested upon suspicion of having secretly made way with her, and sold her remains for dissection. Both direct and circumstantial evidence brought the crime home to her. The day after the alleged murder, an old woman of the description of the sup- posed deceased was found, with a fractured thigh, lying ex- hausted in the streets. She irave her name as Caroline DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 21 Walsh, and said that she was from Ireland. She died, and was buried at the London Hospital. The name of the miss- ing woman was also Caroline Walsh, and she was also Irish. The prisoner, Elizabeth Ross, insisted that this was the fe- male whom she was accused of having murdered. Various points of difference were established by a large number of witnesses, but the chief distinction was that while it was stated that the missing woman had very perfect incisor teeth (a remarkable circumstance for her age, which was eighty-four), the other one, who died at the hospital, had no front teeth, and the alveolar cavities corresponding to them had been obliterated for a considerable time. More- over, the non-identity was further confirmed by the grand- daughters of the missing woman, who swore that the exhumed body of Caroline Walsh was not that of their grandmother. There is great danger that on such occasions public opinion, feeling or passion may warp the judgment, and sometimes even pervert the facts. The celebrated case of the body of Timothy Monroe being identified as that of William Morgan, the murdered free-mason, in 1827, will present a case fully in point. The proof from the testimony of Mrs. Morgan, and the family physician and others, seemed to leave scarcely am T doubt on the subject. The bald head, grey beard, much hair on the breast, long white hairs in the ears, mark of innoculation on the left arm, the teeth double all around,two of them being ex- tracted on the same side of the face, the dentist having the very teeth which fitted exactly, the marks of a surgical operation upon the large toe of the left foot, all seemed to be proof of a character that could leave little doubt remaining, notwith- standing that the clothes found on the body were different from any Morgan had ever worn; and his pockets were found to be full of tracts published by the British Tract So- ciety. The verdict was that the body was that of William Morgan. Soon afterwards a Canadian advertisement for the body of Timothy Monroe, caused the remains to be disin- terred, when, on the holding of a second inquest, it was S-UDDERZOOK CASE (76 PA. ST.). But the most remarkable case in dental literature is the Goss-Udderzook case, which occurred in Maryland and Pennsylvania early in 1782. The particulars, in so far as they are necessary to a comprehension of the dental phase of the case, are here given in full : On Feb. 3d, 1872, a Baltimore newspaper stated that W. S. Goss, residing 314 X. Eutaw street, had been burned to death in a cottage the previous night. This house was several miles out of the city, and the fire was supposed to Lave been caused by an explosion of chemicals, with which Goss was experimenting in making a substitute for india- rubber. The house was entirely consumed. The remains of a human body were drawn out of the building, the lower limbs destroyed and the features so burned or charred as to be beyond recognition. From the shape of the chest, neck and head the corpse was identified as that of W. S. Goss. Indeed, who else could any one suspect it to be? So the coroner held an inquest which rendered the verdict "that W. 8. Goss came to his death by the explosion of an oil lamp." 2 I DENT \L .11 RISPR1 DEN< I'. The body was taken to Baltimore, and, after solemn funeral sen ices, removed to the Baltimore ( Jemetery. While it lav al Eutaw street, the widow had noquestion as to the fact that the remains were those of her husband. She knew the contour of the Deck, head and breast. Some ten or more witnesses testified to their belief in the same identity, regard- ing the recognition of the body as nor difficult or doubtful. In May, 1871, W. S. Goss had seemed to be seized with ;i sudden mania for insuring his life. He had insurance to the amount of $25,000, payable to Ins wife. Bis last policy was dated eight days prior to hi- " cremation." The stories of William E. CTdderzook and A. 0. Goss, brother-in-law and brother of W. S. Goss, conveyed the impression that "they knew too much," and led the insurance companies at once to inquire into the facts. While all disclosures tended to strengthen the suspicion of fraud, there was absolutely nothing in the way of direct demonstration. The companies refusing to pay the claims at maturity, suits were promptly instituted under each policy. At the inquest it was observed that, although the ex- tremities were more or less consumed, the head was entire, and it was believed the bones of the skull, including the teeth were uninjured. Any peculiarity of the teeth, whether natural or arising from mechanical dentistry, might at once determine the question of identity of these remains. An effort was made to obtain a description of any peculiarity, if it existed, for the purpose indicated. In pursuance of this information every dentist in Baltimore was interrogated, but with only negative results. So far as could be ascertained, < loss ^";> s known to have unusually good teeth, which were conspicuous in his ordinary conversation and fully exposed when he laughed. From no source could it be learned that he had had occasion to employ a dentist. Mrs. Goss had testified before the coroner to certain facts touching the 'personnel of the supposed deceased. She was therefore requested to make a more elaborate descrip- tion, especially of his teeth, and to grant permission for the exhumation and examination of the remains. This was the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 25 proposition in regard to the teeth: Furnish "description of liis teeth, their quality and appearance ; whether wholly or partially sound or defective, natural or artificial ; whether he had any peculiar teeth, had lost any, and how many and what teeth ; had any teeth heen broken, and how many and what teeth, and how broken ; had any teeth been filled or otherwise operated upon by a dentist, and how, where and when oper- ated upon, and by what dentist." Her reply was: "He wore no artificial teeth, to my knowledge, never complained of pain or inconvenience from decayed teeth, and I do not remember his requiring the services of a dentist during the time we lived together. I should call his front teeth quite regular." The remains were exhumed and examined in the Balti- more College of Dental Surgery by Professor F. T. Miles, M.D. ; R. Wysong, M.D. ; Prof. E. Lloyd Howard, M.D. ; and Prof. F. J. S. Gorgas, M.D., D.D.S. The medical ex- perts, who examined the exhumed body, were able to say little that could throw light on its identity with W. S. Goss except in the matter of teeth. The physicians stated: (1) The remains were those of a male ; (2) he was not a negro ; (3) he was between the ages of twenty-five and fifty years ; (4) he was of fair average height, of stout build, and of great muscular strength ; (5) it is impossible to determine whether the burning was the cause of death or was post-mortem. But Prof. Gorgas, the dentist, was able to give more valuable opinions. The maxillary bones and teeth were thus fully described by him: ■• ( ondition op Maxillary or Jaw-Bones. -Superior Maxillary — Perfect, except margin of alveolar process. In- ferior Maxillary — A portion of the external surface of body of the bone below the alveolar process and to the right of median line, including the right mental foramen, destroyed for a space of two and a half inches long and one inch broad or w'kU;; the bone otherwise perfect. " Number of teeth remaining in upper jaw, two ; num- ber of teeth remaining in lower jaw (including one root of tooth |, -even. 26 DENTAL .m MSPR1 DENCE. "Condition of the Two Teeth ix Upper Jaw. — Superior Eight Second Bicuspid — A superficial carious cavity on pos- terior proximal surface. Cusps on grinding surface worn away by mechanical abrasion, bul qo1 so much as wholly to obliterate the natural depressions on this surface". Superior Bight Third Molar — Perfectly Bound. "Condition or the Seven Teeth ix Lower Jaw. — Root of Inferior Eight Central Incisor — The crown evidently de- stroyed by caries to a point below free margin of the gum before death. Inferior Right Lateral Incisor -Perfectly sound. Inferior Right Canine — Sound : angle worn away by mechanical abrasion. Inferior Left Central Incisor — Various cavities on both proximal surfaces, which communicated. Inferior Left Canine — Carious cavity on the anterior proxi- mal surface. Inferior Left Second Bicuspid — Small carious cavity on the anterior proximal surface. Inferior Left Third Molar — Large carious cavity on the buccal surface, near neck ; also a superficial cavity on grinding surface. Grinding sur- face worn by mechanical abrasion, so as almost to obliterate the natural depressions on the surface. " Form of Irregularity of Inferior Front Teeth. — Proximal surfaces of the inferior right lateral incisor and inferior left central incisor approach near together at the cutting edges, caused by the loss of the crown of the right central incisor, the root of this latter tooth remaining in the alveolar cavity." No tokens of the wearing of any artificial teeth were discovered. This careful and critical examination could not be reconciled with the statement of Mrs. Goss describing the mouth of her husband. As Mrs. Goss bad been married to W. S. Goss fourteen years, during which time they bad lived together, it was fair to presume she necessarily would have beard complaints of pain and inconvenience from such badly decayed teeth and jaws; that she w. ) The science of dentistry is constantly changing and ad- vancing. Xew treatments and operations are continually being discovered and advocated by the body of the profes- sion, consequently the standard of " ordinary" knowledge and skill varies. Many methods of operating and treat- ments are abandoned and superseded by others. AVhen such changes become generally known and adopted in a particular locality, they become "ordinary;" therefore dental practi- tioners of such localities are responsible for a knowledge of these changes and expected to practice them. The Supreme Court in the case of McCandless v. McWha. (22 Pa. St., 261), rendered the following opinion : " The standard of ordinary skill is on the advance ; and he who would not be found wanting, must apply himself with all the diligence to the most accredited sources of knowledge." There is a distinction to be noted between things certain and uncertain in medical science and practice in fixing responsi- bility. It has been demonstrated that " ordinary " knowl- edge may become ordinary in its application. This is true in dentistry as well as in medicine. For instance, there may be two or more remedies for the same disease or symp- tom ; there may be different instruments used to perform the same operation ; there may be uncertainties as to how ordinary medicines are to be administered in cases of com- plicated diseases. In such cases a physician or dentist may have to rely on his own judgment and responsibility, and DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 43 where reasonable doubt exists he is not liable for adverse re- sults, if he does the best he can under the circumstances. ^ 16. A DENTIST CANNOT EXPERIMENT WITH HIS PATIENTS. A dentist must, exercise judgment and care in under- taking to perform a new operation or use a new instrument. He cannot interpose his judgment contrary to what has become a settled practice or custom. "Should injury result from experimentation with his patient, he can be held liable in damages for the same." (Patten v. Wiggins, 51 Me., 594.) Experimentation with new instruments and methods is dangerous for the first time. In the case of Slater v. Baker, 2 Wils., 359: "Two surgeons used a new instrument on the leg of a patient which had been broken, for the purpose of lengthening or straightening it." An action for malpractice was brought against the sur- geons. The substance of the opinion and ruling of the court was, as follows : " That it appeared to the Court that it was the first experiment with the new instrument. If it was, it was a rash action ; and he who acts rashly, acts igno- rantly. And though the defendants may be as skillful in their respective professions as any two gentlemen in Eng- land, yet the Court cannot help saying that in this par- ticular case they acted ignorantly, and contrary to the known rules and usages of surgeons." However, if a dental practitioner has a new mode of operating or treatment suggest itself to him as applicable to the case, and it is founded on good judgment, and, further- more, he could prove that it was advantageous over the old methods in vogue, or that it was the only one available, he is privileged to practice the same ; and there is no doubt but that the jury would exonerate him, if the injury could not be directly attributed to an unskillful and imprudent opera- tion. When such operations are adopted and advocated by 44 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. the body of the profession, according to the accepted views of the courts, their legality is established beyond question. § 17. THE QUESTION OF ABILITIES DECIDED BY THE JURY. In each case the jury decides whether or not the de- fendant possesses ordinary skill, there being no fixed rule on the subject. It will not be sufficient for a dentist to say that he acted to the best of his abilities, because he should have formed a more just estimate of his own capabilities, before he under- took the case. The actual amount of " ordinary skill " varies widely among men in the same profession, but it must be sufficient to enable him without fraud to assume the responsibility of his profession, otherwise every professional act and injury at his hands is a fraud. As the cases are variable, it would be impossible to lay down any requisite standard of skill, the want of which would in any particular case, hold the prac- titioner liable in malpractice. To prove that he possesses the ordinary skill the den- tist may adduce evidence to establish the existence of such skill, irrespective of the particular case. This may be shown by those of the same profession, who can speak from per- sonal knowledge of his practice. § 18. THE STANDARD OF SKILL VARIES ACCORDING TO THE CIR- CUMSTANCES AND LOCALITIES. Even in the same country, state or locality the degree of skill required of the dental practitioner may vary according to the circumstances. It must be taken into consideration that in country towns and in unsettled portions of the coun- try remote from cities, the dentist has not the advantages requisite to attaining the latest knowledge, both practical and theoretical, of all the dental sciences, because he can- not have intercourse with the leading and best authorities ;i- is afforded the city practitioner ; and therefore he may not have kept apace with the progress attained in dental opera- tions; consequently, he is not expected to be as well versed DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 45 in them as a dentist residing in a large city ; and it would be unreasonable to exact from one in such circumstances that high skill which a dentist having the greater opportuni- ties for observation and experience, would be expected to possess. To cite a medical case in support of these views : " An action was brought against a physician and surgeon for not properly treating a wound on the plaintiff's wrist. There was evidence that the wound was a severe one, requiring considerable skill in its treatment, and that the defendant had no experience in surgery beyond that usually pos- sessed by country physicians, and that an eminent sur- geon lived within four miles of the defendant, and that the latter was physically able, if he so directed, to have visited any other surgeon than the defendant. At the request of the plaintiff the judge instructed the jury that if the defendant had not the requisite skill and experience to treat the wound, he should have temporarily dressed it, and recommended the plaintiff to a more skillful surgeon. He also instructed the jury against the objections of the plaintiff's counsel, that the implied contract of a physician and surgeon, was that he possessed that reasonable degree of learning, skill and experience which is ordinarily possessed by others of his profession, having regard to the advanced state of the science of surgery, ' and that the defendant was bound to possess that skill only which physicians and sur- geons of ordinary ability and skill practicing in similar lo- calities, with opportunities for no larger experience ordinarily possess, and that he was not bound to possess that high degree of art and skill possessed by eminent surgeons in large cities, and making a specialty of the practice of sur- gery; and that the rule applicable to the case was not appli- cable to physicians and surgeons alone, and was not confined to other members of the learned professions, but was equally applicable to all persons holding themselves out as possess- ing special skill in the business in which they are en- gaged.' " Held the plaintiff had no ground for exceptions. (Small v. Howard, 128 Mass., 131, 1880.) 46 DENTAL -U RISPRUDEN< E. Li the case of Mallei] v. Boynton, 132 Mass., 443, 1882, the judge instructed the jury, as follows: That if the prac- titioner had not the requisite skill to give the broken arm the treatment, he should have dressed it temporarily and recommended the plaintiff to a more skillful surgeon. These principles are applicable to the dentist as well as the physician and surgeon. § 19. WHERE LIFE IS ENDANGERED, A GREATER DEGREE OF SKILL IS REQUIRED OF TDK DENTIST. A much stricter standard of skill than ordinarily, is re- quired of the dentist when he assumes to perform an opera- tion that may endanger the life of the patient. (Cayzer v. Taylor, 10 Gray, 280; Fletcher v. Boston, 1 Allen, 9.— Wil- lard on Torts, Vol. 1, p. 118.) What would be "ordinary skill'" in, one case, would be gross negligence in the other. Here, the legal interpretation of " ordinary skill," is held to include all the knowledge and experience the profession has attained on the subject, particularly is it the case in the ad- ministration of ana?sthetics. " The standard of skill required may vary according to the condition of the patient." This is illustrated in the case of Keily v. Colton, 1 N. Y. City Ct. Rep., 439. Here the de- fendants undertook to extract a tooth while the patient was under the influence of laughing gas. In extracting the tooth, the forceps split, and part of the tooth went down the plain- tiff's throat, causing coughing and vomiting, which con- tinued at intervals for about four weeks. Under the circum- stances, the court was of the opinion that the defendants were bound to use extraordinary care. " They knew that the plaintiff, while under the influence of the anaesthetic, had no control of his faculties ; that he was powerless to act, and that he was unable to exercise the slightest effort to protect himself from any probable or possible consequences of the operation that they had undertaken to perform. He was in their charge and under their control to such an extent they were required to exercise the highest professional skill and diligence, to avoid every possible danger, for the law implies DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 47 duties on men according to the circumstances in which they are called on to act." § 20. SPECIALISTS AND N T ON-SPECIALISTS. The law recognizes a difference existing between the relative skill and knowledge of a specialist and non-specialist. A dentist holding himself out to the public as a spe- cialist in any branch of dentistry, whether in bridge or crown operations, diseases of the mouth, administration of nitrous oxide gas, or operative dentistry, is by law supposed and expected to possess more than the ordinary skill or knowledge of the subject required of a general practitioner. He is expected to possess and practically use the highest skill and knowledge his profession has attained on the subject. When a patient secures the services of a dentist for the performance of a special operation or act, and the said dentist professes to be a specialist in such operations, the patient expects and demands more than the ordinary care and ser- vices, because the presumption, both civil and legal, is that, though the non-specialist is responsible for ordinary care, the specialist or expert is liable for special care, because of his especial study and practice of the specialty which he follows. A defendant may be charged with the lack of special care, i. e., such care as a professional man who practices that specialty is accustomed to give. His defense is, that he is not a specialist in this branch, and that he never claimed to be, and further avers that the plaintiff knew he was not a specialist. If this be true, unless it can be proven that the defendant exhibited in the case the ignorance of the ordinary knowledge of the subject, he cannot be held liable. § 21. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DENTIST FOR AN ERROR OF JUDG- MENT. In cases where a reasonable doubt or uncertainty exists, a dentist cannot be held liable for an honest error of judgment. Where uncertainties exist as to the diagnosis of a certain ease, or the methods of treatment, the dentist is thrown back 48 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. upon his own mental resources and responsibilities, and if he acts to the best of his abilities lie is not held responsible, if his judgment should lead him into an error. In support of these views no special decisions given in dental cases can be cited ; but, following the analogy of the judicial decisions rendered in other learned professions, the presumption is that the general rule would be as stated above. A case (Percy v. Millavdon, 10 Mart., 36) in point, cited bv Daniel Nason, Esq., the substance of the ruling was, as follows: " It has been said that it will not be sufhYient for a pro- fessional man to say he acted to the best of his abilities, because he should have formed a more just estimate of his own capacity before he engaged himself. This doctrine, if sound, would make an attorney responsible for every error of judgment, no matter what care or attention he exercised in forming his opinion. It would make him liable in cases where the wisdom of legality of one or more alternatives was presented for his consideration, no matter how difficult the subject." Such a requirement would be unreasonable. In the case of Leighton v. Sargent, 7 Foster, X. II., 475, the ruling was to the following effect, viz. : " To charge them with damages on the grounds of unskillful and negligent treatment of his patient's case, it is never enough to show that he has not treated his patient in that manner, nor used those measures which, in the opinion of others, even medical men, the case required, because such evidence only tends to prove error of judgment, for which he is not responsible.'' In the case of Bogle r. Win slow, 5 Phila. Rep., 13*3, Judge Hare, in his charge to the jury, said : " All science is the result of a voyage of exploration, and the science of medicine can hardly be said to have reached the shore. Men must be guided, therefore, by what is probably true, and are not responsible for their ignorance of the absolute truth which is not known. If a medical practitioner resorts to the acknowl- edged proper source of information ; if he sits at the feet of masters of high reputation, and does as they have taught him, he has done his duty, and should not be made answerable for DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 49 the evils that may result from errors in the instruction which he has received. Medical opinion varies from time to time. What is taught at one period may be discovered to be erron- eous at another, but he who acts according to the best known authority, is a skilled practitioner, although that authority should lead him, in some respects, wrong." § 22. NEGLIGENCE. Even though a dental practitioner possess ordinary skill, he is still liable for any injury which may result from his carelessness or negligence. A negligent offense is an offense which ensues from a defective discharge of duty, which defect could have been avoided by the exercise, by the offender, of that which is usual under similar circumstances, with prudent persons of the same class. Civil law affirms the existence of three degrees of negli- gence, viz. : slight, ordinary, and gross. Slight nea;lio;ence is the want of srreat care and diligence. (Story Bailment, sec. 17). Ordinary negligence is the want of ordinary care or diligence. (Wyld v. Rickford, 8 Mees and W., 443, 461.) Gross negligence is the want of even slight care and dil- igence. (Cashill v. Wright, 6 El. and Bl., 891, 899, etc.) When a dentist assumes the responsibility and under- takes the care of a patient, or to perform any dental opera- tion, whatever its nature, he is bound to use the " ordinary skill" required of him, and exercise due care and diligence in employing it in any given case; the failure to do so con- stitutes negligence. Legally, a dentist is held liable for injuries resulting from a want of care or diligence, and this without reference to his abilities. In the performance of his professional duties, the law requires of the dentist diligence and care, as well as pro- ficiency, and negligence is punishable no less than want of skill. From a standpoint of civil law and from that of the moral code, tin; practitioner, who possesses skill and neglects 50 DENTAL JURI8PRUDEN< E. to apply it in liis treatment, is held more liable than one, who, though ignorant, endeavors to produce a cure. There is no fixed rule as to what constitutes due care and diligence in every case; usually it is decided by the jury upon the evidence presented. In many, the evidence pro- duced conclusively proves carelessness, without further ques- tioning, as where a dentist extracts a sound tooth instead of the diseased one. It seems that by reason of a delicate condition of health, the consequences of a negligent injury are more serious still ; for those consequences the defendant is liable, although they are aggravated by the imperfect bodily condition of the pa- tient. (Ct. of App., 1884; Tice v. Munn, 94 ]S T . Y., 621, and sec. 96 X. Y., 264 ; Abbot's N". Y. Digest, 233.) In an action against a surgeon, it is necessary for the plaintiff to affirmativel}' prove all the elements of negli- gence charged, including defendant's want of skill or knowl- edge, where that is relied upon. (Leighton v, Sargent, 11 Foster, 119.) The production of the simple evidence as to the mode of treatment pursued by the defendant in the particular case at issue is sufficient for this purpose. If that indicates want of skill, it is unnecessary to go outside of the case for proof upon that point. (Carpenter v. Blake, 60 Barb., 488.) The defendant may, how r ever, produce evidence of his general skill, where an issue is made upon his possession of skill, and not merely upon his use of it. And where there is much doubt as to the skillfulness of his treatment of the particular case, evidence of his general skillfulness will be material upon all the issues of the case, for if he had skill, it is but natural to presume that he used it. But where the plaintiff does not question the defendant's general skillful- ness, evidence thereof is not competent on behalf of the defendant in a case not otherwise evenly balanced. (Mertz v. Serg., 376 ; Seare v. Prentice, 8 East, 348.) But to rebut evidence introduced by the defendant to support his general professional character, it is competent to show that he is not a regular practitioner. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 51 The fact that some surgeons approve of the practice adopted does not necessarily preclude a jury from condemn- ing it as negligent, if the decided weight of authority is to that effect. (Carpenter v. Blake, 60 Barb., 488.) " If a person is injured by the negligence of another, it is no defense for the wrong-doer ' that others acted in the same way as he did.' " (Hill v. Winsor, 118 Mass., 251, 1875.) That the service rendered was gratuitous is no defense for a suit for negligence. Again, a person suing for malpractice must prove it. (Baird v. Marford.) "Where there has been mutual negligence, and the negli- gence of each party is the proximate cause of the injury, no action whatever can be maintained by the party receiving the injury. (Hamilton v. Des Moines E. Co., 36 Iowa Rep., 31.) Whenever death shall be occasioned by unlawful vio- lence or negligence, and suit for damages be not brought by the party injured, during his or her life, the widow of any such deceased, or if there be no widow, the personal repre- resentative, may maintain an action and recover damages for the death thus occasioned. Again, if the action was brought during the life time of the plaintiff, it shall not abate by reason of his death, but the personal representative of the deceased may be substituted as plaintiff and prosecute the suit to final judgment and satisfaction. The above principles relating to negligence, are in ac- cordance with the authorized legal views on the subject. Negligence is always a question for decision by the jury, and La based upon the evidence presented in the case. In the case of Grove v. Stewart and Sharp (New York Supreme Ct., 1890), dentists, C. H. Stewart and Samuel P. Sharp, were sued by Miss Emma Grove for negligence in allowing the tooth extracted to drop into her lungs, causing her severe injury. A verdict of $1,200 was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. Keily v. Colton, (1 N. Y. City Ct. Rep. r 439 », i- a case of the same nature. Koskey v. Y. k T. Tunstall 52 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. New Orleans), mulcted in $5,000 damages for injury to the face, due to negligence while performing dental operations. In the case of Matthews v. Conrad, the defendant was charged with neglect and unskillfulness in the treatment of the plaintiff, resulting in the forming of an abscess and con- sequent injuries. The case was tried in the Supreme Court, District of North Carolina, in 1890, but the plaintiff failed to recover, and was compelled to pay costs. The following is an ab- stract of the circumstances as detailed by the defendant : MATTHEWS V. CONRAD. " On January 18th, Mr. F. L. Matthews, a young man about 32 years of age, presented himself at our office, stating that he had lost a filling out of one of his teeth and would like the tooth refilled. I found the second bicuspid had lost a filling that had been put in, according to the statement of the patient, twelve years before. There had been some decay in the cavity, and the enamel worn off the grinding surface. I prepared the tooth for filling, found a corner of the pulp exposed, this I touched with carbolic acid, and capped with dento-plastique. I inserted a compound gold filling, supply- ing the place of the lost enamel on the grinding surface with gold. Several other teeth needed filling, which I filled, as the patient wanted everything done that was needed to the teeth. " The occlusion was abnormal, the lower incisors strik- ing almost squarely against the upper, and the four superior incisors with the left canine had worn away about half of the crown, and there was a space of half a line between these teeth and the low r er, when the jaw r s were closed. I advised with my partner, Dr. Watkins, who with me thought the only way to stop the abrasion was to cap the four superior incisors and left canine with gold, building them up a half a line and making them occlude with the lower. The teeth had never given pain, were not at all clouded, indicating a dead pulp. I prepared and filled the canine and left lateral the lirst sitting, was careful to make the cavity not deeper DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 53 than thought necessary and made retaining pits just under the enamel. The tooth responded to cold water and the in- strument slightly, but nothing to cotton fibre, so I was satis- fied the nerve was alive but not exposed. Believing from every indication there was a deposit of secondary dentine I had but little to fear on this line. On the following morning, when the patient returned, I asked if the teeth filled the day before had given pain, his answer was, " Xo, not at all." The centrals were filled that day and the following day, January 24th, 1889. I finished and dismissed the patient perfectly satisfied as he expressed himself. I charged him carefully, if there was any soreness or pain in the teeth after two or three days — leaving long enough for them to get well from the operation — that he should come to the office, and I would treat them for him ; for teeth in the condition of his are always more or less liable to give pain, death of the pulp, and I had filled them to pre- vent that, thinking they would last twenty years or more. "I met the patient often, but heard no complaint, until March 4th. I met him at church at night. He stated that he had been unwell for several days, and that one of his teeth had been sore, and the gum was swollen and the tooth a little loose. I told him he ought to have come before it got so bad, but to go with me to the office and I would open the tooth and give relief; that unless that was done, I feared he would not sleep much. He said he felt too bad to go that night, but would be down early in the morning. He came, the tooth was loose and the gum swollen. "With a spear- pointed drill I opened through the filling to the pulp cham- ber, and with a broach extracted the pulp which was of a dark red color, the removal giving very little pain. I showed it to the patient and told him I thought his trouble with the tooth was over. I left the drain open, and painted the gum with tr. iodine; made two applications of this before he left the office and gave him some capsicum plasters, with the instruction to apply them that afternoon if the pain did not cease. I dismissed him with an engagement to call the next morning. Tie was complaining with pains all over, espe- 54 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. cially in his Leg3, which made him walk like a man in- toxicated. " Next morning he sent word he was not able to come to the office, ami wished I would come to sec him as he was still suffering. I found him in bed, the face considerably swollen and the tooth very loose. I lanced the gum well, but failed to find any pus. I forced the broach in the pulp chamber as far as I could, but found no pus. He had used the capsicum plasters. " The following morning his physician called at our office and asked me if I did not think that tooth would have to be extracted. He said the patient was suffering with bilious fever, and that he was under the impression the tooth would have to come out. I thought we would make another effort to save it, and went over to see. I found the patient in the same condition, and the pus had burrowed its way to the surface at the neck of the tooth. I opened it with a lance and left it to heal. The adjoining teeth were slightly sore. u Pain continued in the bones of the face, as well as in other parts of the body, and the next morning the tooth was so loose that I believed the peridental membrane had been destroyed. The patient and his mother were anxious to have the tooth extracted. I yielded and found the membrane gone as I expected, though there was no discharge of pus or sign of a sack. All the anterior teeth were sore, those that had not been filled as well as the others. The pain was all through the jaw and not local. The gums were very little changed except over the tooth that was extracted; this was congested and angry-looking. I left asking to be notified of the condition of the patient. One or two morn- ings after, I was sent for to extract another tooth, and I found the central loose, and removed it — the peridentium was destroyed two-thirds the way from the apex. I told his mother all the anterior teeth would probably have to be removed, as periodontitis had set in and was attacking the sound teeth, and that to remove them as they became in- volved, was the only remedy for them in this condition. " There was no sign of an alveolar abscess except with DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 55 the first tooth, and no health}- pus discharge after the gum was lanced. " My partner went with me and we met the physician, who agreed to all I did, and said that it was a decided case of bilious fever, and that he was treating him for that. We were satisfied with his treatment, and said nothing about it, except Dr. Watkins suggested that the doctor make him a mouth-wash of wine and opium, to be used after the teeth were extracted ; and on another visit, when the patient com- plained of the bad taste, Dr. W. gave him a wash of phenol- sodique. "Eight of the teeth were removed as they became involved, leaving three in the superior maxillary, the others beino- extracted before. We made no direct local treatment, except the mouth- washes. "I made two or three visits after the last tooth was extracted, and finding the mouth needed no other treatment at that time, for the swelling had subsided from the cheeks, and the condition of the gums improving, as I thought, so I told the patient I could not see I could do anything, but would come any time he needed me, and would remove the other teeth, if he found they gave him trouble. " I saw his half-brother on the street, and asked after him, one or two days after I was there, and he reported him ' better.' I inquired of him almost every day, and received the same answer. In the meantime, I left town for five days, and on my return asked Dr. Watkins if he had heard from him. He said he had heard every day or so, and that he was much better. "After three weeks from the time I made the last visit, my uncle spent the night there, and the next day told me Frank's mouth was in a terrible fix. I could not go right away, but asked Dr. Watkins to go, and he went in a few minutes after he heard that he was not doing well. They told Dr. W. that Dr. Lott, his physician, was not doing him any good, so they sent for Dr. II , who was an old, ex- |MTiono<;l'.X cease, and that the policy of forty thousand francs has been paid by the company ; "That we must also consider that the death was not only due to the fault of M. Duchesne, but, also, by the impru- dence of the victim himself, who without consulting his own physician, or without having any medical doctor present, called for the application of an anaesthetic ; " That this imprudence justifies a decree of abatement against the claim of the prosecution ; "That, in consideration of these circumstances, the sum of three thousand francs is sufficient reparation ; Duchesne is condemned to pay six hundred francs penalty to the state, and to pay to the widow of Lejeune the sum of three thou- sand francs damages. The prosecution is condemned to pay expenses, except the fines required from Duchesne."* The administration of nitrous oxide gas is universally conceded to be safe, even in some organic diseases, but, as stated, if a dentist administers the same, knowing the patient suffers from an organic disease, which a careful practitioner would regard as interdicting the use of an anaesthetic, he would be liable for willful malpractice, if unwonted results or injuries be caused by the administration of the same. How- ever, if the dentist states to the patient that it would be dangerous to administer the anaesthetic, and declines to do * The author will not presume to sit in judgment in this case, nor to criti- cise the verdict rendered, as I believe the carelessness of the dental surgeon in not ascertaining the physical condition of the patient previous to administering the nitrous oxide gas, when in doubt, is sufficient to render him criminally liable for the results of his negligence. But the requirement of the presence of a doctor of medicine when a dental surgeon presumes to administer nitrous oxide gas, is, in my belief, an unjust one, and not requisite according to the acceptable legal views in the United States. It is supposed that deDtal surgeons in gen- eral, have a thorough knowledge and understanding of the methods of admin- istering anaesthetics, and their right to do so is never legally questioned ; it is their personal competency and ability that is considered. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 81 so, be would not, according to certain decisions, be held responsible for adverse results, if the patient assumes the responsibility. This rule is laid down in the case of Gramme u. Boerer, 24 Indiana St. (Ripley's), 795, as follows:— "It is the duty of the surgeon when called to perform an opera- tion, to advise against it, if he thinks it unnecessary or unreasonable. But if he advises a patient of mature years and sound mind that the operation is unnecessary and improper, and the patient still insists, the surgeon cannot be held responsible to the patient for damages in complying with his wishes, on the ground that it was improper/' I doubt the wisdom and legality of the decision in the case of Gramme v. Boerer, especially in reference to the ad- ministration of anaesthetics, unless there were reasonable as- surances of success, otherwise it should be regarded as will- ful malpractice. The dental surgeon may have humane intentions to re- lieve the patient's sufferings, but he should not be excused from the charge of willful malpractice, when he knew there was reasonable cause to suppose that the anaesthetic might produce an injury or cause death. The inference in these cases is, that the administration is not absolutely necessary, that the life of the patient is not dependent upon its use in performing the operation. The law holds that no surgeon can assume to perform an operation or act which may en- danger human life, unless the life of the patient is abso- lutely dependent upon the operation as a last resort, and he would be held criminally responsible for the results, and he is not excused on the ground of good intentions. "When anaesthetics are administered to a patient, and the operation is a prolonged one, demanding the entire attention of the operator, so much so that he is incapable of noting the effects of the anaesthetic and the condition of the patient, the law demands that he shall have the assistance of one who is qualified to administer an anaesthetic. In dentistry, the majority of the operations requiring anaesthesia are performed in a comparatively short space of time, enabling tbe operator to give his attention to his v - DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. patient aside from operating; consequently, the legal require- ment does not make it obligatory for the dentist to have the additional services of an assistant or attendant. £ 28. HEMORRHAGE FOLLOWING THE EXTRACTION OF TEETH. It frequently occurs that a severe hemorrhage results from the extraction of teeth. The consequent loss of blood by some persons is greater than others, owing to their pre- disposition to a hemorrhagic diathesis. Several deaths re- sulting from the loss of blood occasioned by hemorrhages of this character are recorded. One case that is recalled to the author's memory occurred in the summer of 1888, at Long Branch. Teeth were extracted for a patient by a dentist practicing at that seaside resort, and at the time there was but slight bleeding. The patient walked a number of miles, living outside of Long Branch, but before reaching home a severe hemorrhage commenced, which could not be checked, and the patient died from the loss of blood. In this case, the dental surgeon could not be held liable for the fatality, as death was not due to any neg- ligence on his part. A dentist's duty is plain in the treatment of cases of the nature cited above, as he should be familiar with the methods adopted, and styptica employed to check these hemorrhages. No liability for the results of the hemorrhage can be charged to the dentist, unless for negligence in not properly attending a patient, or using, the proper means to check the bleeding. lie cannot be held responsible, because he encountered circum- stances and conditions, natural and unforeseen consequences, that were beyond his skill to remedy or prevent. The case of Shaw /•. Evans, X. Y. Sup. Ct., can be quoted in connection with the above statements. This case was a civil suit for damages for injuries consequent upon a hemor- rhage following tooth extraction, and due to improper treat- ment of the same. (The case savors of the nature of black- mail, and, undoubtedly, the circumstances, as related, prove that it was an unjust prosecution, and that a great wrong was done Dr. Evans.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 83 The facts of the case, as related by the defendant, Dr. Geo. W. Evans, are, as follows : " The plaintiff' called with her sister and had about nine or ten loose teeth extracted (badly affected with pyorrhea alveolaris) about half past three o'clock in the afternoon. The bleeding stopped before she left the office. " At half-past seven o'clock, her husband called while I was at dinner, and waited in ray office, without stating what he wanted, until I was finished, about eight o'clock. He, then, when I came up stairs and saw him, stated that a ' slight hemorrhage,' as he described it ; commenced about half-past six o'clock. As it was a fine evening in August, I asked him to bring her around to my office, instead of my going to his house, as he suggested. He consented, and I promised to wait until he returned with her. But instead of doing as he promised, he went after his family physician. The physician was out, so he went after his assistant. He also was out, or out of town. At half-past nine he sent a woman, whom I did not see, to my door, who simply said : ' Tell Dr. Evans to come around to the house,' and left without seeing me. As Shaw lived about five or seven minutes' walk of my house, I sent my assistant around to inquire what it meant, and why they acted as they had, as I thought it rather strange. "While my assistant was gone, I got my things, a few instruments and styptics, together, to be ready the instant he came back. I do not think I lost ten minutes by this ' wait.' When my assistant returned, and I heard I was wanted at the house, I immediately left for there, with my assistant as a witness, for I had then become suspi- cious. The reason I had for acting thus far as I did, was be- cause I did not like the appearance of the parties, nor their ac- tions either. At the house I was kept waiting in the parlor twenty minutes, before I was admitted to the patient's room. The room was very dark, no gas or light of any kind. I asked for a candle or lamp. The lamp was empty of oil. They sent out and obtained some, and, finally, in about fifteen minutes more, a light was furnished. I, then, found the bed covered with napkins or towels, each of which had some 84 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. bloody spits daubed over them in such a manner as to make a big show. I looked at her mouth and found a slight hem- orrhage was going on in one of the sockets. I plugged it with styptics, and stopped the hemorrhage in about three minutes. The next day I returned and removed the plug. "About three months afterwards I received a letter from a lawyer, demanding me to pay him $200 damages to his client, the plaintiff in the case, and patient before men- tioned. I refused to do so. Plaintiff's lawyer then gave up the case. Sometime afterwards the case was given to another lawyer. He also interviewed me, and would have probably settled for a very small amount. The case was taken out of this lawyer's hands, and one named SSilverstone was en- gaged." Two suits were brought against Dr. Evans, by this law- yer. One for the husband for the loss of his wife's services, — $2500 damages claimed ; the other by the wife, " for neg- lect," — damages, also $2500. The lawyer, Mr. Silverstone, had another one to join him in prosecuting the suit. They refused to give a bill of particulars to more fully describe the charge against the defendant. The court or- dered them to do so ; and, upon their refusal, they were fined. They appealed to the upper court, but the decision of the lower court was affirmed. They were ordered to more fully answer, and, neglecting to do so, were again fined. They once more appealed, but the appeal was not recognized. As before, they did not quite fully answer, and again were fined. This time the court heard them (unjustly going against their previous record), and, on a " per curiam " order, ordered the the case to go on. As the case then stood, the charge against the defendant was, " that he carelessly, negligently and unskill fully performed the operation, and that the hem- orrhage resulted therefrom; and that the defendant, when requested by the plaintiff to discontinue extracting the teeth, refused, and by force extracted the remaining ones. " That the shock, incident to such a severe operation, in- jured her, and that the plaintiff neglected her by not attend- in o- to her case." DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 85 These cases were in the courts for five years, but were not decided judicially. The plaintiff's lawyers became tired of the case, and compromised. § 29. INFECTION OF DISEASES FROM UNCLEAN INSTRUMENTS. The following dissertation is in the nature of a sue;- gestion and forewarning in reference to certain principles to be observed in regard to the cleansing of the instruments used in performing surgical-dental operations. Numerous cases are recorded, and others can be cited, to prove that the infection of persons with various diseases has been caused by the use of unclean instruments in operating. Patients have been innoculated with the poisonous germs on these instru- ments, and the sorrowful results have been varying from a simple local inflammation to the most horrible of diseases — syphilis. In proof of these facts, the following cases are quoted from the " Dental Mirror," October, 1890: "A gentleman in September, 1884, visited a physician, Dr. L. D. Buckley, of New York city, to see him about what he thought was a cancer on his tongue, but which proved to be a chancre, the characteristic syphilitic eruption following shortly after. About a month previous to his call- ing on Dr. Buckley, he had had some dental operations done, and he said he remembered that the instruments occasionally slipped, and his tongue was injured. The dentist did not appear very clean or particular about his instruments. As he was a married man no other cause could be found by which he could have become affected. Sir William Watson published a case of this description, and John Hunter relates two similar cases about which there can be no doubt. J. C. Lettsom has recorded three cases. Dr. C. W. Dulles, of Philadelphia, reports a case which was also seen by the late Dr. Maury. The patient, a female domestic of excellent character, developed a chancre of the lip, two weeks after a visit to a dentist, who on that occasion extracted a tooth, and later did some cleaning of the teeth. Although the case was hard to confirm, it seemed reasonable 86 DENTAL JURISPR1 DBNCB. to suppose that the operation was in some way responsible for the inoculation. Dr. F. M. Otis, also mentions a chancre of the lip which occurred in a gentleman about three weeks after a visit spent in a dentist's chair. Lancereaux relates a similar case of chancre of the lower lip of a woman, after extraction of a tooth and other dental work; and Giovannie, of Bologna, has reported a chancre of the lip from a dentist's instru- ments ; Leloir mentions one from the same cause ; Lydston has likewise reported a case of a woman with syphilis, the chancre having- developed three weeks after some cleaning and repairing done to her teeth. Roddick, of Montreal, re- ports a very interesting case — the patient was the wife of a physician and the mother of healthy children. She became infected while having a tooth extracted. (Dr. Ottolengui, in Dental Mirror.) Dr. Barclay reports a case (Med. and Surg. Rep., Feb. 20th, 1892) of a young girl, who, according to his statement, was poisoned by a dentist. He states, " that the dentist who extracted her tooth, abraded her lip ; " and, furthermore, that he saw her three weeks afterward, and his opinion, after an examination was, that she had been poisoned. This opinion was corroborated by that of several other physicians, who likewise examined the girl. In this case, secondary man- ifestations of syphilis came on in about sixty days; her hair fell out, etc. This case w T as referred to a lawyer, and, without doubt, will be taken into court. Unfortunately, in many of the instances cited above the dentist is, doubtless, unjustly accused. There are a variety of ways in which such diseases can be transmitted. For in- stance, as in the case given by Dr. Buckley, suppose this girl had a family friend who had something on her lip and that she kissed her good-bye at a station about the time she re- ceived the injury at the dentist's hands, she would have re- ceived this inoculation, and the dentist would have to bear the blame' again ; the girl might have been inoculated by drinking from a cup used by others, or she might have wiped her face with a towel that the servant girl had used, or she DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. O i might have contracted it in one of a thousand other ways. Hence, when a case of this character comes into court the plaintiff would have the greatest difficulty to prove that the abrasion on the lip was the site of the chancre, showing that the inoculation was made by the instrument that produced the abrasion. The introduction of antisepsis has caused an entire revo- lution in the methods and requirements of surgery. The recognized principles of surgery now demand that a surgeon thoroughl}- disinfect his instruments, before and after operat- ing, with some solution (usually one of carbolic acid), or by heat that will destroy any germs of disease or bacteria that maybe on the instruments, and, further, as a safeguard and preventive of infection by that means. When a principle of practice in surgery is universally recognized in all schools as a necessity to be practiced where the life may be endangered, without its use, or injury result, the law demands that the surgeon shall employ these means, to lessen the dangers to a minimum. No legal cases can be cited in support of the views pre- sented above, but they certainly are in accordance with the doctrines of the practice of surgery and the principles of the law. It is a well-known fact, and the above mentioned cases prove, that a certain class of dental practitioners negligently and carelessly use instruments, especially forceps for tooth extraction, without properly cleaning or disinfecting them before or even after operating, and thus have inoculated pa- tients, as stated, with poisonous germs and bacteria of diseases. It is but just to presume, that a dentist would, legally, be held liable for the consequences of such negligence ; and if legal proceedings were instituted against him, and these facts could be established, unquestionably, he should, and would be mulcted in damages. .' 30. RAPE UNDER ANAESTHESIA. In the whole domain of dental jurisprudence no criminal charge brought in a court of justice against a dentist, can be 88 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. conceived more grave than the accusation of having com- mitted rape on a female in whom he was inducing anaesthesia. Several legal cases of this character are recorded, where the defendant was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for his alleged crime. The women no doubt believed that they had been violated, but it is certain that in many of these cases, and probably in all of them, they mistook the real act for the subjective erotic sensations induced by the anaes- thetic. That a dental practitioner in the pursuit of his calling is exposed to grave charges of this nature, is a serious matter for consideration and reflection, requiring careful and deli- cate interpretation, both morally and legally. Frequently the accusation is based upon and solely sustained by the evi- dence of the plaintiff, and, in view of the known tendency of anaesthetics to excite erotic sensations, such evidence should not be received without the corroborative testimony of other witnesses, or circumstances, as the unsupported evidence of women under such conditions cannot be relied upon. Dr. II. C. Wood says that ""the valuclessness of the testimony of persons as to occurrences during the time of their intoxica- tion with an anaesthetic, should be recognized by law as a governing principle of evidence." " Manifestations of erotic sensation during artificial anaesthesia have been witnessed, although rarely, but dreams of a sexual character are doubtless far more frequently ex- perienced, and very vividly. Women undoubtedly arc more liable to them than men, especially when the admin- istration of the anaesthetic takes place at or about the time of periodical congestion." (J. C. Reeves, on Anaesthetics, " Reference Hand-Book of Medical Sciences.") Ether, from its more stimulating effect, produces these dreams more frequently than chloroform. Cases have occurred where the woman was so positive that liberties had been taken with her person during anaes- thesia, that the testimony of relatives, who were present all the time, scarcely sufficed to convince her that she was labor- ing under a delusion. These cases occur more frequently DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 89 than we have knowledge of, and are compromised without judicial proceedings being instituted. The leading prosecution of this nature is that of Dr. Beale, a highly respectable dentist of Philadelphia, a wid- ower; the patient a young lady of unimpeachable character, who was engaged to be married, and who, on the occasion in question, was accompanied to the house of Dr. Beale by her betrothed. She arrived at the dentist's office at about ten o'clock in the morning, and after a few moments spent in awaiting the departure of two other lady patients, she was ushered into the doctor's operating room. The evidence of the plaintiff, as given at the trial, was, as follows : " I went into the office ; took off my bonnet, and Dr. B went to the wash-stand to wash his hands ; he asked after the family. I took a seat on the operating chair ; in a few minutes Dr. B told me one of the men wanted to speak to him, and he gave me a book to read and left the room ; did not say what man ; I supposed there were men there. He has a room in which the teeth are made ; I be- lieved the men to be there. Dr. B 's family were out of town at that time; he said so, and the door was opened, and there was no furniture in the front room. I don't know how Ions; Dr. B was absent ; when he came back I was sitting in the operating chair ; he went to the instrument case and be- gan with my tooth ; the tooth was on the left side ; he com- menced operating on the tooth before he gave me ether ; the operation was very painful ; he said he would either put something in to destroy the nerve or give me ether, leaving the choice tome. I told him I'd prefer taking ether; I didn't learn what he proposed putting into the tooth ; he gave me the ether on a small napkin, folded up. I felt very dizzy at first; I was cold and felt very numb ; it increased upon me ; I did not lose my consciousness of what I was doing ; I continued to breathe the ether ; my eyes were closed ; I closed them voluntarily ; I did not try to open them for some time after. After he gave the ether he did not, as I remember, operate on my tooth ; he felt my pulse era! times, put his hand on my arm under the sleeve up 90 DENTAL JUBISPR1 DENGE. my arm. I had a loose sleeve ; he did it once; he put his hand on my breast under my dress on the bosom, he put his hand on my person under my dress. I have a distinct mem- ory of that. I was not able to make any resistance or out- cry. He went round before me and raised my clothes. I am perfectly distinct in my memory of that. I did not try to cry out; do not know if I was able. After he had raised my clothes my feet were crossed, and he raised them and put one on each side of the stool : he then put his arm around me under my clothes. He drew me down to the edge of the chair. I do not know what he did after that till I felt pain ; he did enter my person ; it was then that I felt the pain ; I was not able to cry out or resist ; I did not try. I don't know what was his position. My eyes were closed. I have no doubt that he did enter my person, and did give me pain. All this time I was conscious of everything that was going on. After this he left me and crossed the room to the wash- stand. I heard him pour out water into the basin. After he had been to the washstand and returned, I opened my eyes and saw *my clothes up ; he did not see me. I have a clear recollection of seeing my clothes up. I closed my eyes immediately. He put down my clothes, and in a few min- utes he was at the side of the chair and lifted me up into the seat. I was just to the edge of the seat. It was a large dentist's chair. In a few minutes he told me he'd have to take the tooth out ; that was the first remark he made, ex- cept the first when he asked me if I was getting sleepy. At the time he entered my person I did not feel his person against me ; pain I distinctly felt. When he spoke about taking out the tooth I asked him why. He said they were both decayed and he could not save them both. I told him I was afraid it would pain me, and he said he would not let it ; he then gave me more ether and extracted the tooth. It was on the left side ; when he extracted the tooth it was painful; I screamed then ; he then assisted me to rise and led me to the rocking-chair. I felt a little dizzy when he led me to the rocking-chair. He then went out of the room, and in a few moments came up with a lady. T have not DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 91 *een her since. He asked me if I would be introduced to her. I believe I said no. He did not introduce me then. I heard him tell the lady he'd always been our dentist, and that we had never been to any other. He said my teeth were very good ; he said I had taken ether when the tooth was extracted. I think she said something about hearing me scream. He said yes, ether had not much effect on me ; I was either nervous or for some cause. In a little while I got up and he introduced me to the lady. I think it was Mrs. P . I made several remarks, but I don't know what they were. I then put on my bonnet, and Dr. B fol- lowed me down stairs. The lady was left upstairs ; he came to the door, and I wanted to stop an omnibus ; he asked me how far I was going, and I told him to Third street and Lombard ; he told me I had better walk. He said he thought I had some of the ether in me, and the walking; would do me good. I walked down "Walnut to Sixth, and did not get into an omnibus. I did not reproach Dr. B at the house ; I was afraid. I stopped in C 's ice-cream saloon at Sixth below Pine. I got ice-cream. I went then along Sixth street to Spruce, and down to Third and Lombard streets. I was going to see a young woman who sent for me. I did see her ; don't recollect how long I was there ; when I left I came up to Mr. T 's, at Chestnut street, near Fifth. I was very intimate with Mr. and Mrs. T . I met Mr. M on the way up, near Sixth and Chestnut streets. He joined me and spoke to me ; did not accompany me to Mr. T 's ; did not meet any but those I have named. I reached Mrs. T 's at one o'clock ; they had not been to dinner. I first mentioned to Mrs. T what had occurred at Dr. B 's the same day, after tea. That afternoon I was taken unwell ; it was the usual time. The door of the dentistry-room at Dr. B 's was phut ; there are two in the room, the one leading to the entry door was closed. Dr. B said he closed the door because the smell of ether would go over the house; the door was shut before he gave me the ether ; the chair is one that leans backward." <»2 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Re-examined. — "I said Dr. B generally used me like a lady. lie said, a year ago, lie should like me for his second wife; he had a good many children, but they should not trouble me, as he would get nurses for them. I spoke of it at home to my mother and sisters. After the doctor took me out of the chair after the operation, all I said was in answer to questions by him, or to remarks ; the reason why I did make another appointment with him (Dr. B.) was that I did not want him to know that I knew anything of his conduct. I had not concluded what course to pursue." The result of this case was that Dr. B was found guilty of rape, and sentenced to four years and six months imprisonment. In this case no corroborative testimony was given to sustain the indictment, the dentist being convicted solely upon the evidence of the young lady herself, who averred that during the whole period occupied by the assault she was too profoundly under the influence of the anaesthetic to either resist or make an outcry, but remained entirely passive. It was admitted b}' the plaintiff that etherization had taken from her the power of voluntary action ; her testimony obviously is then derived solely from her remembrance of what occurred while in this condition. " Under every rule of evidence, the testimony of any witness is the remembrance of that witness of a material fact observed by him or her while possessed of perceptive facul- ties and in a state of rational consciousness. But even this definition is not sufficiently broad to include the testimony of the witness in this leading case. For, observe as the pros- ecutrix complaining of an assault, the gravamen of her case was the admission that she was so far under the toxic influ- ence of the anaesthetic as to be and remain entirely passive under the alleged assault. According to her statement, not only did she oiler no voluntary resistance, but her admission carries with it the assertion that the administration of the agent had been carried to that point where the muscular system fails to respond in the way of reflex action to exciting causes. This is the witness's own statement necessary to her DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 93 case, and must be considered in judging her fitness as a wit- ness." (C. B. Garrison, Vol. III. p. 962, Amer. Sys. Dent.) The question as to the capability of a female giving evidence relative to what occurred during the period of ether- ization, and the possibility of resistance under such circum- stances, receives an answer in the subjoined remarks, quoted from Wharton and Stille's Med. Juris., Vol. III.: " There is a striking analogy between the effects of ether and those of alcohol ; the chief difference being in the more rapid and complete insensibility produced by the former, and the more evanescent character of the intoxication. There is a period of excitement, stupor, and of recovery, and the phenomena in different individuals vary according to their temperatures and habits. In general the state of excitement in etherized patients is short, and verges rapidly into that of unconsciousness and insensibility to pain. The vapors of ether seem literally to ascend and diffuse themselves through the brain, and to permeate every portion of the body ; the patient has a sense of fullness and warmth ; the whole body feels lighter and seems to spurn the earth ; the sense of hear- ing becomes confused ; the sight dim, and the touch be- numbed. External objects lose themselves in a confused mist, which appear to swell their proportions and contort their ^hape ; the muscles become relaxed, and the patient sinks lethargic and unconscious into profound sleep." (Wharton and Stille, Med. Juris.) The patient responds to external impressions only in an automatic way during the transition into a stage of entire sensibility. He is entirely oblivious of the most painful oper- ations ; all his movements are instinctive, and though an expression of pain is depicted upon the face, and the hands are raised against the operator as he attempts to draw a tooth, it is not an expression of suffering. The recovery from the advanced stages of anesthesia is sudden, as in the waking from a profound natural sleep ; the perceptions are but a few moments confused, even while the person thinks himself fully awake and appears to be so. There is then a remission into the stage of intoxication, and the same symp- 94 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. toms are manifested in the recovery as when the ether is administered. In the inhalation of ether the lapse into consciousness is rapid, and cannot be divided into distinct intervals. Fre- quently the sensation of pain is lost before outward conscious- ness is entirely lost. Several instances can be related in support of this state- ment. A case is recorded in which the patient looked on calmly while a severe operation was being performed on Lis body, and apparently painless. In this instance, although the patient replied correctly when questioned, still he imagined himself in a distant country, showing that per- ception was by no means unperverted. A similar case is re- ported by Velpeau, who states that, while performing an operation upon a young girl, she raised herself into a sitting position as if to observe. She said afterwards that she sup- posed she was at a dinner table. (Rev. Med., 1847.) It is unquestionably the experience of every practitioner who administers anaesthetics to observe that, in the majority of cases, the patient has an illusion of, or hallucination of, some occurrence entirely foreign to the operation. The per- ceptions are perverted, the illusions sometimes being sug- gested by the scene actually passing, and, at others, arising without being prompted by external perceptions. Xumerous cases illustrating this fact are quoted by Dr. Flagg (Ether and Chloroform, etc.). The following cases are derived from that source, and are also quoted in Wharton and Stille's Med. Juris. : "After an operation performed on the forehead of Mr. T , a dentist of this city, he said, that although his eyes were shut, he saw every cut of the knife. He saw the shape of the wound upon the forehead, and, what was better than all, this cutting appeared to be done upon someone else." Again, " A little girl, the extraction of whose tooth made a report like the drawing of a cork r sprang out of the chair, crouched upon the floor, and looked up anxiously at me, and inquired if anybody had been DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 95 killed. She supposed she had been traveling on a locomo- tive, which had blown up and thrown her into the air." Xumerous illustrations of this character may be cited to demonstrate the fact that patients, while anaesthetized, have been completely oblivious of their surroundings, and entirely ignorant of what was in reality occurring at the time ; and they have in no wise realized, or dreamed, that they were the subjects of a severe surgical operation. In the anesthetic state the will no longer exercises its control over the mental faculties. The thoughts run in their accustomed track or in any direction, and are generally guided by the impressions made upon the nerves of general or special sensation. The power of restraining them is lost, and if the dream is a pleasant one, there is no desire to es- cape these thoughts ; but the reverse is the case when the illusions are painful or disagreeable. Movements under these circumstances imply an exercise of the will power, and is almost always due to illusions proceeding from external im- pressions. To demonstrate that the power of the will over the mus- cular movement is not entirely abolished in etherization, we need but refer to the following case, quoted in Wharton and Stille's Med. Juris. : "A young man having been sufficiently etherized, the dentist prepared to extract a tooth. In a mo- ment he dashed the instrument from his mouth, left the • hair, and, striding about the room, demanded what they meant to do with him. In a few moments the effects of the ether passed off. Being again put under its influence the same scene was enacted with even greater violence, and he endeavored to jump out of the window. When he regained his memory, he related that he imagined himself surrounded by a great number of enemies, one of whom endeavored to drive a nail into his mouth, and being unable to struggle with them, he sought safety in flight" (Union Med., Sept., 1857.) Other examples of this nature may be cited. Again, the muscular movement is not entirel}' abolished in etheriza- tion ; the muscles are related, but not paralyzed. If the patient exercises his will to make any movement, 96 DENTAL .11 RISPR1 DBNCB. the fact is due either to the pleasurable or trivial character of his mental perception, or to the temporary or complete unconsciousness and insensibility produced by the anaesthetic. It is well-established that in the advanced stage of an- aesthesia, when perfect narcotism is produced, if the power of resistance is lost, so also is the consciousness of any real motive for it. In demonstration of this fact it may be said that, if an outrage be perpetrated on a woman lying wholly uncon- scious and helpless, she cannot be cognizant of any liberties taken with her person, and will not therefore make any op- position to them. Moreover, it would be impossible for her afterwards to describe with elaborate detail, the manner and particulars of the assault, and yet have been incapable of re- sisting it. If her muscles and voice have been paralyzed, so also has her outward consciousness ; and all remembrance of occurrences during this stage of etherization is wholly confined to the outward mental perceptions — to dreams which have all the vividness of real occurrences. The plea of irregularity of action of the anaesthetic has been advanced, but it may be stated that anaesthetics are as constant in their mode of action and as little liable to vari- ation as any medical agents, and that such wide departures from their ordinary effect, as consciousness of pain, with ina- bility to resist, is highly improbable and inconsistent, and only to be accepted as a fact upon the presentation of abund- ant positive testimony of competent observers. The follow- ing summary of this branch of the subject is taken from Wharton and Stille's Med. Juris., Vol. III., and the proposi- tion may be assumed as correct: First, that the consciousness of perception of external objects and impressions is impaired in the early, and lost in the final, stage of etherization. Second, that during the time the mind remains suscep- tible to external impressions at all, these reach it in a feeble or perverted manner. Third, that the emotions, especially those of erotic char- acter, are excited by the inhalation of ether. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 97 Fourth, the voluntary muscular movement is not para- lyzed until the state of perfect narcotism is produced, at which time, however, all outward consciousness is extinct. Fifth, that the memory of what has passed during the state of etherization is either of events wholly unreal, or of real occurrences perverted from their actual nature. Sixth, that there is reason to believe that the impressions left by the dreams occasioned by ether, may remain perma- nently fixed in the memory with all the vividness of real events. Much evidence in the support of these views was given by dentists at the meetings of various dental societies in New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and other cities, and in consequence thereof, and the large amount of testimony pre- sented by physicians and dentists to prove that ether fre- quently produced erotic sensations and hallucinations of that character, Dr. B was subsequently pardoned by the Executive of State. A case similar to that of Dr. B occurred at Mon- treal, in 1858 ; here, a dentist was indicted for attempting to commit a rape upon one of his patients under the influ- ence of chloroform. At the trial, a witness testified that his wife was under the impression that she had been vio- lated by the prisoner, while under the influence of chloro- form ; yet her husband was present during the whole time she was unconscious. The jury rendered a verdict of guilty of an attempt to commit a rape, with a recommendation to mercy. — Boston Med. and Surg. Journ., November, 1858, p. 287. For another case of this character see post § 266., Wharton & Stille's Med. Juris. Again, a dentist, K , of Brandenburg, Prussia, was sentenced by the jury court of Potsdam to a term of four years imprisonment iu the penitentiary, for repeated cases of rape committed during his dental practice. Jas. T. Grant, a dentist, was charged, at the Jersey (Channel Isles) police court, on October 8th, 1872, with com- mitting an indecenl assaull upon Carolina Pope, a servant. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. He gave her gas, and it was alleged, while under its effects, grossly outraged her. Testimony was ottered to corroborate this statement. Xo evidence of a rape was produced. Witnesses gave Mr. Grant the highest moral character, etc. The defendant was committed for trial on the charge of in- decent assault, and admitted to bail in $250. The trial oc- curred November 11th. The case for the prosecution failed,, and the jury found a verdict of not guilty for the defendant. —Cosmos XIV, 659 ; XV, 82. In all of these cases no testimony was produced by the prosecution to show that an examination of the plaintiff's person and clothing was made, directly or within a reason- able time after the alleged assault occurred, to prove recent detloration of the plaintiff. The establishment of this fact by testimony is always considered important evidence, neces- sary to the conviction of the defendant who is charged with committing a felonious assault. Evidence has been brought forward to prove that co- caine, when injected hypodermically, produces erotic excite- ment. A Philadelphia physician reports giving a hypodermic injection of a few drops of a 10 per cent, solution of cocaine in a woman from whose face he proposed to remove a small tumor. The erotic excitement that followed led the patient to behave in a most unseeming way, although her usual con- duct was modest and becoming. A St. Paul dentist reports a similar experience, his patient making indecent exposure while under the influence of a small injection of cocaine. — Medical Brief and Dental Mirror, Oct., 1890. Dentists should indeed be careful and on their guard,, since they use cocaine for treating and extracting teeth, and are so frequently alone with their patients. In view of the known tendency of anesthetics to excite hallucinations and erotic sensations, and of the loss of char- acter, liberty and ruination of all professional prospects, if convicted on the charge of rape, it is evident that no dental practitioner should administer anaesthetics to female patients DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 99 excepting there be a witness or attendant present. This precaution is not to be overrated, for too frequently are the cases of attempted — and sometimes successful — blackmail,, where the dentist is threatened with prosecution if he refuses to compromise by the payment of the monetary consideration demanded. The author has learned of several cases of this nature, but not having the particulars, is unable to cite them. The above warning, if heeded, may save many dentists from misfortune and the clutches of blackmailers ; whereas its neglect may ruin his whole professional career. § 31. COMPULSORY SERVICE. A dental practitioner cannot, legally, be compelled to- render professional services to a patient when requested. Though dentists have been threatened, if not actually suedr for their refusal to perform certain operations, there is no foundation in law for such compulsion. A dental surgeon is not a common carrier, as his professional services at their inception are purely voluntary ; but when once he has under- taken a case, he must continue his services, unless he is dis- missed, or until reasonable time has been given to procure other attendance, even if the services are gratuitous. § 32. COMPENSATION CONTRACTS FOR SERVICES MAY BE EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. The contract between a dentist and his patient for com- pensation for services rendered, like that of a physician, may be EXPRESSED Or IMPLIED. An express contract is one that is formally stated, either verbally or in writing ; while an implied contract is one that is inferred from the acts and conduct of the parties and the attendant circumstances. A contract between the dental practitioner and his pa- tient is usually an implied one, and may he enforced the -;n no as an express contract. The legal presumption is, that agreements and stipula- tions are supposed to have been made between the parties, such as fair and honest men ought to have made under like 100 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. circumstances. (Nevins v. Lowe, 40 111., 209; Ogden >\ Saunders, 12 Wheat., W. S., 341 ; Secoa v. True, 53 is T . II., 627 ; Field's Medico-Legal Guide, § 112.) Under the implied contract, the general practitioner agrees to render certain services, with the ordinary degree of skill, and with due care, and he does not hecome an in- surer or assume the responsibility of the results. The practitioner assumes, under the ordinarily implied contract, to render but a fair average degree of knowledge and skill, and legally it is not expected of him that he will exercise an extreme degree of skill. Frequently the defendant, to avoid the contract, offers the plea of defense, that no benefit has accrued to him. The court will not sustain a defense of this nature, unless it be proven that the practitioner, by reason of his lack of ordi- nary skill, defrauded the defendant who believed that he possessed the requisite skill. A dental practitioner is not liable for the use of more than ordinary skill, unless a contract for this purpose be made, or unless such a contract is to be inferred from all the circumstances of the case. (McCandless v. McWha.) In the case of Simonds v. Henry (39 Me., 159), it was de- cided, that " a dentist is required to use a reasonable degree of care and skill in the manufacture and fitting of artificial teeth," and that, " the exercise of the highest perfection of his art is not implied in his professional contract." In this case, the suit was to recover a fee for an artificial denture. The contract was made with the wife for the manufac- ture of the teeth for a certain price, with the knowledge and assent of the defendant, the husband. When put in her mouth, she complained that they felt odd and pained her. The plate was then somewhat filed, but she still complained and declined to pay for them. It was agreed that she might take them away and return them on the following Monday, when she returned and said she could never wear them. Something further was clone to the teeth, but she declined to pay for them, and left them, although the plaintiff forbade DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 101 her so doing and claimed his pay. There was conflicting evidence whether the teeth fitted her mouth. By one it was testified that it was a good piece of work ; by another that they were a fair average piece of work, and by a third that they were nothing extra. Among other instructions the jury was told, that if the plaintiff had used all the knowledge and skill his profession had attained at that time, it would be all that would be required of him, and that they would determine from the testimony whether the teeth were pro- perly made and fitted to the mouth. A verdict was rendered for the defendant. Exceptions were taken to the instructions " which re- quired the dental practitioner to possess and use the highest knowledge and skill of his profession." Burrows, in support of the exceptions, cited Lamphier v. Phips, 8 Carr & Payne, 475 ; Sears v. Prentice, 8 East, 348 ; Hoacke v. Hopper, 7 P. & C, 81 ; McClellan v. Adams, 19 Pick, 333 ; Chitty on Con- tracts, 553-554, etc. The exceptions were sustained, and a new trial ordered. The rule, as stated in these cases, is laid down in Potter v. Wiggins, 51 Maine, 594, as follows : " Physicians and surgeons (and this rule is also appli- cable to dental surgeons) offering themselves to the public as practitioners, impliedly promise thereby that they possess the requisite knowledge and skill to treat such cases as they undertake, with reasonable success." The rule does not require the possession of the highest, or even the average skill, knowledge or experience ; only such as will enable them to treat the case understandingly and safely. " The law implies that they will exercise reasonable and ordinary care and intelligence in all cases they undertake." {Ibid.) "And they are bound to use their best skill and judg- ment in determining the nature of the malady, the best mode of treatment, and in all respects to do their best to secure a perfect restoration of their patients." (Ibid.) " They do not stipulate success and arc not liable for 102 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. failure in that respect, unless through sonic default of their duty." {Ibid.) When a patient accepts the services of a dentist, he en- ters into an implied contract, in which it is agreed, on the one hand, that the dentist will render certain services, suit- able to his undertaking ; and, on the other hand, that tin- party who accepts the services, promises to pay an adequate reward fixed by the first party for the services rendered. The law imposes upon both parties the duty of fulfilling the obligations incident to the contract. The dentist cannot withdraw from the contract, unless he is dismissed by the patient or party employing him, or until he gives reasonable notice of his intention of doing so. Professional men are not to be considered as warrantors of the results of their work, as they never impliedly stipulate for success at all events ; unless, as is sometimes the custom of dental practitioners, to warrant the permanency of certain work or operations. The practitioner can give his assurance that the operation was performed to the best of his ability ; and never, but in special instances, should he guarantee the permanency of an operation or cure. In the treatment of cer- tain patients, dental practitioners have many adverse circum- stances,conditions, and causes to combat, and contingences may arise which render the stability of their operations an uncer- tainty. As in the failure of gold fillings, due to the neglect of the patient to keep the mouth in a clean condition, which gives rise to micro-organisms, or produces an acid condition of the mouth, thus causing the recurrence of decay. Again, an alveolar abscess or any other disease peculiar to the teeth, which the dentist has apparently cured, may recur, but which is not attributable to the dentist's neglect ; however, by war- ranting the permanency of the cure, he is bound to fulfil his contract and insure the permanency of the cure for the stipulated period, or no compensation or fee is justly due him. It would be a more just principle if the dentist would give the assurance of his good faith and intentions, and im- plicitly charge the patient to aid him by eveiy possible DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 103 means to insure a successful operation or cure, and should any trouble or contingencies result that can be attributed to the dentist's neglect, he will honorably make all reasonable amends. The reason of this rule has been clearly stated, as follows : Where the result desired, as in the cases cited above, depends both on the skill in the use of the means, and the influence of other causes, the law raises no such implied ■engagement; it regards the engagement only for the use of the proper means. The retainer of a lawyer obliges him to the right con- duct of a suit, but not for the judgment of the court, for that is beyond his control. The retainer of a physician obliges him to the employment of ordinary medical skill in the treatment of his patient ; the cure does not rest with him. {Gallagher v. Thompson, Wright, Oh. Rep., 466.) When a special agreement is made between the dental practitioner and his patient, or if an express contract existed by which a definite result was guaranteed, or when the agreement required an absolute cure or a successful opera- tion, or there should be no compensation, the parties in these cases must abide by the terms of the contract or agreement. A contract between a dentist-surgeon and his patient will be declared void, if fraud on the part of either can be shown. In the case of Allen v. Davis (4 DeG. and Smale, 133), cited by Daniel Nason, Esq., " Simpson gave a bill of ex- change for over £200 to one Davis, a dentist, it being agreed, as was alleged by the latter, that he should, during the former's whole life, attend to his teeth, and supply him with new ones from time to time. He also alleged that the price of a set of teeth varied from £30 to £50. The body of the bill was in the dentist's handwriting; the only part, if any, in the handwriting of the patient, was the signature. It was said to have been given in the dentist's house with- out the presence of a third party. Simpson died before the bill came due, and it did not appear that any one had heard of it before his death ; nor did it appear that the contract woe in writing. Other circumstances connected with the 104 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. case were, that after Simpson's death Davis spoke and wrote inaccurately on the subject, and Lad placed the bill in the hands of a creditor of his own, to put it in suit. Meanwhile, Simpson's executors began a proceeding in equity for the purpose of impeaching the bill for fraud, and praying that it might be delivered up to them. The vice-chancellor stated that it was impossible for a reasonable being to draw any other reference from the materials and evidence before him than that the whole transaction was fraudulent, and accordingly granted the relief prayed for. jj 32. THE RIGHT TO CHARGE FOR LOST TIME. The right of a dentist to charge for time not actually spent in operating upon a patient, yet set aside for him by appointment, is a question which has resulted in numerous litigations. In these cases the court views the acceptance by a patient of an appointment, for a specified time, with a den- tist, as an implied contract ; the understood terms thereof holding the patient responsible for such accepted time r (usually one hour for a " single " appointment, unless more time is specified), if he voluntarily violates the contract by failing to keep the appointment, without the consent of the dentist, the first party to the contract. This rule is within the reason, because a dentist relies upon his professional time for support, and if a patient fails to keep an accepted appoint- ment, such time results in a pecuniary loss to the dentist, if he cannot, owing to the default of the said patient, refill it by appointment "with another patient. In the case of Dr. D. D. Smith v. W. P. Tatham, heard before Judge Pole, in Philadelphia, Pa., Magistrate's Court Xo. 9, July 11th, 1891, this point was in dispute. The evi- dence developed the fact that the defendant engaged the plaintiff to perform certain dental operations, which the latter proceeded with, pursuing his usual methods of operating. The defendant requested that the roots of the teeth be filled with gold, whereas the doctor in his best judgment and opinion deemed it impractical, in this particular case, and therefore refused to accede to the request; thereupon, the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 105 defendant left the chair and the office, thereby causing the loss of the doctor's time, for that appointment and a subse- quent one, which had been agreed upon. The plaintiff claimed that it was customary among the profession, and that it was their right to follow their own judgment in treatments and operations of the character in dispute. The correctness of his position was corroborated by the expert testimony of Drs. Turner and Rehfuss ; also as to the usage of the profession in charging for time set apart by appointment and not used, owing to the default of the patient. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff. A dentist brought suit against a lady in a Chicago court, in 1875. The plaintiff charged that the defendant made a series of appointments with him and failed to keep them. His claim was for eighty dollars, charging at the rate of two dollars and fifty cents per hour. The plaintiff" secured judg- ment for the whole amount. — Dental Cosmos, XIX, 110. In these cases the decision of the court will rest upon the circumstances and evidence produced. § 33. The Legal Rules Regulating the Amount of the Fees Recoverable. A dental practitioner may legally recover a fee, the amount of which was fixed by an express contract ; but if no agreement was made stipulating the fee to be received by the dentist for his services, he is entitled to recover a reason- able compensation ; for it is a well settled principle of law that, where one has used his skill or labor for the benefit of another, the law recognizes an implied promise on the part of the one to compensate the other for his services. The legal presumption in these cases is that the defend- ant has derived some benefit from the service, because it is an established rule that, when no beneficial service has been derived by the defendant, there shall be no compensation due the plaintiff, and it is competent for the latter to show that his work was properly done, if that be disputed. (Basten 1 . Butter, 7 East, 479). On the other hand, the defendant, 10»5 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. to evade the claim, musl clearly prove that no beneficial services were received by him, or that the service was not <>f the valueaa claimed. Daniel Nason, Esq., thus states the law applicable to tins point : "Ifadentist administers chloroform to a patient and extracts the wrong tooth, he cannot recover for Lis services, nor can he, if his bill has been increased by Lis own mistake, as when being employed to extract a tooth and insert an artificial one in its place, extracts two and has to insert two, recover for this additional amount of work." It was decided in the case of Kannen v. McMullen (Peake's N. P. C, Vol. I., 83), " that no man can come into a court of justice and recover a fee for the cure of a wound of which he was the direct causal.'" Legally, no limitation is placed on the fees recoverable by a dentist other than they be reasonable and in proportion to the amount of services rendered. " Within this rule, a practitioner may charge more or less, using his discretion in estimating the value of the services he renders; but the pre- sumption is that similar charges are made for similar ser- vice^" ( Garrison V Amer. Sys. Dent,,Yol. III., 050.) Again, the value of the services of all professional men are not alike. An eminent practitioner, with an established reputa- tion and long experience, can reasonably demand a larger fee than a less experienced parctitioner, for the same service, as it is presumed that the party employed him with a knowl- edge of this circumstance. — Willeox's Medical Profession, III. A court will not interfere and reduce a bill, unless it is evident that the fees charged are excessive and unjust ; in such cases, it is for the jury to decide whether the charges are improper, and regulate them so as they be reasonable and hear a relation to the services rendered. In New York city, recently, a jury reduced a dentist's bill from 8445 to $67. In the bill was an item of $40, charged for repairing a bridge which he himself had made, and which the evidence showed had always given trouble. The jury deemed this charge — and, in fact, the whole hill— unjust, and amended it accordingly. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 107 Again, when the payment of the bill is refused, the dental practitioner is not restricted to items and thereby pre- vented from showing what his services were reasonably worth, and thus recovering a larger fee than that charged. (Wil- liams v. Glenny, 1(3 K Y., 39.) The variety of circumstances — as the nature of the disease, the amount of knowledge and skill required in the treatment, the circumstances under which the services were rendered, the difficulties and expenses attending them, and the responsibilities devolving upon him- — regulate the value of the services of a professional man. (Commissioners v. Chambers, 57 Ind., 409 ; Corns, v. Brewington, 74 Ind., 7.) A dentist may hold a set of artificial teeth made or re- paired by him as a securit} r for his reasonable charges ; this lien he will waive by parting with posession, or by entering into any contract inconsistent with its continuance, as, for instance, when he agrees to give credit for a stipulated time. (Edwards or Bailmerts, §§ 420-425). § 34. LIABILITY OF A THIRD PARTY WHO REQUESTS THE SERVICES OP A DENTIST FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANOTHER. When a person calls a dental surgeon to perform a ser- vice for the sole benefit of a third person, and he himself does not expect to derive any benefit therefrom, nor pay for the service rendered, the law will not imply an employment by the party making the request, and as there is no implied promise to pay therefor, he cannot be held liable for the same. (Field's Medico-Legal Guide, § 114 ; Abbot, Trial Ev., 358 ; Boyd v. Sappington, 4 Watts Rep., 247; Norris v. Dodge, 23 Ind., 190.) It has been held, in an action in Court, that in order to recover on the ground of a request, it must appear that the person making it intended to pay for the services, and that both parties understood it in that way. (Smith v. Watson, 14 Vt, 332; Boyd /•. Sappington, 4 Watts, Pa., 247; Wil- liams v. Breckell, 37 Miss., 1582 ; Dunbar ik Williams, 10 John, .V. Y., 249 ; Field's Medico- Legal Guide, § 114.) 108 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. "The third person cannot be held liable, unless the rela- tion between him and the person operated upon is that of parent and child, guardian and ward, husband and wife — the domestic relation.'' (A. D. Lauer. I The advice to the dental practitioner is not to hold a claim against one person tor services to another upon a mere request — a promise to pay — but to obtain in some manner an acknowledgment of a liability or promise to pay. § 35. CLAIMS )0R SERVICES FOR MARRIED WOMEN. A married woman is not liable for necessities furnished her, unless she makes a contract therefor in her own behalf, because the presumption is that, when she obtains necessities for the family of her husband and herself, she is acting as his agent, and on the husband lies the primary duty of fur- nishing and paying for them. However, the wife may be the financially responsible party for the services rendered, in consideration of her ex- press promise binding her separate estate for the payment thereof. In a case — Gilman v. Andrus, 28 Vt., 241 — it was decided, " that artificial teeth must be considered necessities, and for that reason the husband is liable for payment when they have been furnished his wife, particularly if she retains them with his knowledge, and he has given the dentist who supplied them reason to believe, from previous conversation with him, that she was authorized to contract for them. Even under the Act of 1887, giving a married woman control of the disposition of her own property, the husband (in an action for necessaries) must be joined in the suit. A dental or medical practitioner cannot recover from the hus- band for services rendered the wife, if the husband shows to the satisfaction of the jury that he gave notice to the plaintiff that he would not be responsible, and that he had secured the services of another; for while the law holds him liable for such services to his wife, it gives him the choice of offering any competent practitioner he sees fit. (Remick v. Crabtree, 21 W. X. C, 31.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 109 § 36. LIABILITY OF MINORS FOR SERVICES. Generally, a minor cannot be held liable for services for which he contracts, but, under certain circumstances, the law allows exceptions, when their contracts are for necessaries furnished him. As a minor cannot bind himself for neces- saries when he has a parent or guardian who supplies his wants, it is incumbent upon those who intend to furnish necessaries to the minor, to apply to such guardian or parent and contract with him. If, upon inquiry, it is shown that the minor is not pro- vided by his parents or friends with the necessaries, a stranger may supply the necessaries proper for him. In case of utter desertion of a child by his father, he would be liable for necessaries supplied to him by another person. And a ward can be furnished with necessaries upon his own contract, if his guardian cannot or will not furnish them for him. (Guthrie v. Murphy, 4 Watts, 80 ; Story, on Contracts, sec. 87 ; Williams, on Physicians, 47 ; Johnson v. Sims, 6 Wand S., 80 ; Newport v. Cooke, 2 Ashmead, 332, etc.) An infant is liable for services performed by a dentist. (Lee v. Griffin, E. B. and S., 272.) And the filling of teeth for their preservation, to give relief from pain and prevent its recurrence, is a necessary for which an infant is liable. According to the statutes of Pennsylvania, males and females who are under the age of twenty-one years, are con- sidered minors. § 37. THE BOOK-ACCOUNTS OF DENTISTS. To the book-accounts of the dental practitioner much legal importance is attached, in proving his claims for ser- vices. It is of practical consequence that the entries be made in the day-book, on the same day the service is rendered, al- though some authorities allow a short grace after the day. The account should be charged to the person who is to pay it, and give dates, items, and prices. The charges should 110 DENTAL JURI8PEUDBM( B. not be lumped, but as specific as possible ; they should not make one charge for two or more fillings, or for several treatments, but should be distinctly itemized. If this plan is not carried out, the books are imperfect, and, if admissible at all, are unsatisfactory in proving the value of the services charged. Various methods are used by dentists, wherein day- book and ledger are combined, and various marks and signs are substituted for plain language, to represent a certain class of operations. These methods are viewed with disfavor by the court and juries, and are sometimes overruled and ex- cluded as evidence. As stated, it is the best practice to enter the charge for the service at once, because it is of importance to do so in case the debtor should happen to die. Under these circumstances, the dentist would have to prove the value of his services by other persons, as no reliance could be placed in the books. Should the dentist produce his book, and it was properly con- ducted, with the regular methods of entry, he would have little difficulty in collecting his claim. According to the Act of 1869, a plrysician is not bound to prove his claim by his books. If the debtor is living, under this Act the physician can be a witness himself to prove his claim in any way; but in case his debtor is dead, he is confined to his book-account and other testimony besides his own. (Williams, on Phy- sicians, etc., p. 50-52.) It was held that this Act applies as well to the dental practitioner. Richard Williams says : " If proper books are kept, an advantage will be gained in the State of Pennsylvania under its affidavit-at-defense law." That law authorizes copies of book-accounts to be filed in suits in court, and thereupon the defendant will be re- quired to file an affidavit, stating the grounds of his defense. If no such book is kept, or if such book has not been properly kept, the result may be that the claimant will have to prove his claim before a jury. Much time elapses before a claimant can succeed in having his case brought to DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Ill trial, and it will be greatly to the interest to dental practi- tioners with large practices to avoid, if possible, such a re- sult, by keeping books that will stand the test of judicial scrutiny. A case in point showing the difficulties attendant upon the collection of a bill by suit, is illustrated in the settle- ment of the estate of Ambrose White, 11 Phila. Rep., 100. Here a claim was presented for services as a dentist to the decedent. It was claimed that the bill was false and un- founded, and, to prove the charges against decedent in his book of original entries, both his reputation for truth and veracity, and of his books of original entry for correctness and fair dealing, were attacked, and the claim was disal- lowed. The Orphans' Court held that particular instances of irregularity and false charges may be proven, to discredit tin- books and show them unreliable. § 38. PARTNERSHIPS. The general laws of partnership are applicable to part- nership agreements which are formed between dentists. In the formation of a partnership, no especial formal- ities need be observed, nor must the agreement necessarily be in writing, unless when an unequal division of the profits is to be made, when the terms of partnership must be drawn up, otherwise the legal presumption is that the partners share equally in the profits and losses. Partners must exercise good faith in all of their deal- ings in the firm's name ; a willful and continued neglect of business, immoral conduct materially affecting the business, gross misconduct in reference to partnership matters, or per- manent physical incapacity, are just grounds for the dissolu- tion of the partnership. A partnership may also be dissolved by mutual consent, or by the expiration of the time in which it was to continue Daniel Naaon, Esq., cites an interesting discussion as to the right to use the firm-name after dissolution, viz. : The parties to this suit practiced dentistry under the firm-name of " Morgan k Schuyler,*' in the city of Rochester. (79 N. 112 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Y., 490.) Having dissolved by mutual consent, the defend, ant purchased certain partnership property, assumed the rent, and continued to occupy the rooms of the late firm- It was understood that the plaintiff was to open another office in the same city, and this he did. After the dissolution . the plaintiff caused his name to be removed from the sign containing the firm's name ; but the defendant replaced it as nearly as possible as before, and then placed over the firm- name, on the sign, the following: " B. F. Schuyler, successor to," in letters so small and in such a way as to be almost im- perceptible. This action was brought to restrain the defend- ant from using the plaintiff's name on signs, circulars, or advertisements, or from declaring himself to be the suc- cessor of the late firm of Morgan & Schuyler. A judgment was directed granting the plaintiff the relief sought, and a reference was also directed to ascertain his damages. This judgment was sustained by the Court of Appeals. Judge Danforth, in giving the opinion of that Court, said : " There was nothing in the former relations of the parties, or the express terms of the agreement of dissolution, which gave to either one the good-will of the business hitherto conducted by them under the firm-name of ' Morgan & Schuyler,' nor was either in any way restrained from con- tinuing the practice of his profession on his own account in any place. Yet the defendant became the equitable assignee of the unexpired term of the lease under which the firm held its place of business, and the sole owner of certain partner- ship property and fixtures. He thereby acquired an advant- age over the plaintiff, for he had the exclusive right to occupy the rooms of the late firm, and as an incident thereto, the benefit of that good-will which Lord Eldon defines ' as the probability that the old customers will resort to the old place.' The extent of this depends partly on the force of habit, and in the case of such business as had been carried on by these parties, in some degree, on the satisfaction which the patient had received at the hands of one or the other member of the firm ; but it is after all a very different theme from the good-will which may be said to attach to the per- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 113 *on of a professional man, as the result of confidence in his skill and ability. The first is of no value except to the occupant of the place, while the latter is inseperable from the person and follows its possessor wherever he goes. So far as it belonged to the plaintiff it could not have been transferred to the defendant; but the advantage secured to him, as the occupant of the old place of business, would doubtless have been rendered more valuable if the plaintiff" had retired, not only from the firm, but from the practice of his art. This, however, he not only did not undertake to do, but it was understood by both parties at the time of dissolution that the plaintiff was at once to open an office, and carry on his business of dentistry in the same city. This fact precludes the idea that the defendant acquired any good-will in the business, except such as was incident to his sole ownership of the property mentioned in the agree- ment. It is evident, therefore, that it was not the intention of the parties that the defendant should, in the conduct of his business, in any manner use the plaintiff's name, either ill combination with his own, as ' Morgan & Schuyler,' or in subservience to it, by declaring himself the ' successor ' to that firm. It is not claimed that there is any express contract to that effect, and none can be implied, either from the language of the agreement actually made, or from any fact or circumstance connected with it. ***** * Xor has the defendant any better right to declare himself the 'successor' of the firm of 'Morgan & Schuyler.' In so doing, he represents not only that the firm is extinguished, but that his co-member has quit, or retired from business. The latter, therefore, will lose patronage to which he is entitled, for those persons who might otherwise resort to him for assistance, will be misled into supposing that his -«:ivices cannot be obtained. In either aspect the plaintiff's '•use was made out. It does not follow, however, that the defendant may not avail himself of the full value of his pur- chase,and to that end, by signs or advertisements, refresh the memory of those customers who had acquired a preference for the particular locality in which he continues his business, 114 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. or recall to their attention the circumstance to which thai performance may be due. He may lawfully describe the rooms as 'formerly occupied by Morgan & Schuyler,' or himself as 'formerly/ or 'late 3 of that firm, by these or other phrases. He would thus state simply facts belonging to his own life or incident to the office, as much so as to the time or place of his birth, the name of his father or instruc- tor, or the college from which he graduated, or the time when the premises were first used in the practice of his call- ing. All this might be done in good faith." Whether a partnership exists in a particular case ie a mixed question of law and fact. The partnership may last for any time agreed upon by the partners. It is termin- able at will, unless it has been agreed that, it will endure for a specified period. The shares of partners are prima facie equal. Inequality must be proven by evidence. Each member of a partnership is entitled to take a share in its management, unless, as is frequently the case, one member is appointed managing partner. A partnership at will is dissolved by the termination of the will or agreement of the partnership share. After dissolu- tion, the persons who constituted the partnership become tenants in common of the partnership property until the division of assets, unless any other provision is made by agreement. The partnership debts are paid out of the partnership assets, and the private debts out of the private- assets. £ 38. CONTRACTS BETWEEN PRECEPTOR AND PUPIL. Daniel Nason, Esq., submitted the following forms of contract, by request, to the New York Dental Society. * AGREEMENT, Made in the of , County of , in the State of New York, this day of. 189..., between of the of. , County of in the State of New York, party of * These contracts were drawn by the partner of Daniel Nason, Esq. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 115 the first part, and of the of County of , in the State of , party of the second part. WITNESSETH, That Whereas, the said party of the first part by profession a dentist, and duly qualified as such under the law of the State of New York to practice his said profession of dentistry within said State, is desirous of associating with himself as a the said party of the second part, to the end that he may teach, instruct, and perfect the said party of the second part in the practice and art of said profession of den- tistry, and that the said party of the second part may assist and co-operate with him in the practice of his said art or profession ; and whereas, the said party of the second part is desirous of associating himself with the said party of the first part ; and whereas, the said party of the first part now has a large and extended practice in his art or profession of dentistry, and many patients who resort to him for treatment in his said art or profession from the region in and about the of extending to a distance of many miles in all directions therefrom, to wit: to the distance in all directions of about miles; and both the parties hereto are desirous that on the dissolution of the relationship cre- ated between the parties hereto by this agreement, there should be no conflict of interests between the said parties in the practice of their profession or art of dentistry. Now, this Agreement witnesseth, that in consideration of the mutual promises hereinafter set forth, and of the sum of one dollar by the party of the first part to the party of the second part this day in hand paid, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowl- edged, it is mutually promised, covenanted, and agreed by and between the parties hereto. I. That on the terms and conditions in a memorandum hereto annexed, expressed, the party of the first part will well and properly, in the manner and according to the customs and usages in that respect now practiced in the art or pro- fession of dentistry, teach, instruct and perfect the party of 116 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. the second part in the art, practice, and profession of den- tistry for and during the period of .■ from the date first above written. II. That, on the terms and conditions in a memorandum hereto annexed, expressed, the party of the second part will well and faithfully, for and during the period of. from the date first above written, the said party of the first part assist in, and learn from him, the said art, prac- tice, and profession of dentistry, in the manner and accord- ing to the customs and usages in that respect now prac- ticed in the art or profession of dentistry ; and the said party of the second part hereby expressly promises and agrees, that during the continuance of, or upon the dissolution in any way, of the relationship, between the parties hereto by this agree- ment created, he will not practice or follow the art or pro- fession of dentistry in the of in the State of New York, or within the distance of miles from said of , while the said party of the first part shall practice or follow the said art or profession of den- tistry in the said of , or within miles thereof; saving and excepting such time as he, the said party of the second part, may so practice or follow the art or profession of dentistry by the written consent of, and as assistant to, or pupil of, the said party of the first part. III. That the terms and conditions in the memorandum hereto annexed, expressed, shall be taken as a part of this agreement the same as if they had herein been set forth in full. In Witness Whereof we have hereunto set our hands and affixed our seals the day and place first above written. I>s.] [L.S.] DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 117 STATE OF NEW YORK, County of On the day of 189 . . . , before me per- sonally came to me personally known, and known to me to be the persons mentioned and described in the foregoing instrument and who executed the same, and they thereupon severally acknowledged to me that they had executed the same for the intents and purposes therein expressed. Memorandum mentioned and referred to in the foregoing instrument. The terms and conditions of the agreement in the fore- going instrument other than those therein expressed are : CONTRACT FOR MINORS. WHEREAS, at request dentist of the of , County of , in the State of New York, as the party of the first part, on the day of , 189..., entered into a certain agreement in writing with one ....of the of , County of. , in the State of , an infant, as party of the second part, whereby among other things the said party of the first part, subject to the terms and conditions in said agreement, agreed to teach, instruct, and perfect, during the period of from the date of said agreement, in the art, practice and profession of dentistry, the said party of the second part ; and the said party of the second part thereby, among other things, for a like period, and subject to the same terms and conditions, agreed to, well and faithfully, the said party of the first part, assist in, and learn from him, the said art, 118 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. practice and profession of dentistry, and promised and agreed that he, the said party of the second part, would not, during the continuance of or upon the dissolution, in any manner, of the relationship created between the parties thereto by said agreement, practice or follow the art or profession of dentistry in the of , in the State of New York, or within the distance of miles from said of while the said party of the first part should practice or follow the profession of dentistry in The said of or within miles thereof, saving and excepting such time as he, the said party of the second part should so practice or follow the art or profession of dentistry by the written consent of, and as the assistant to, or pupil of, the said party of the first part. Now, therefore, Know All Men by These Presents, That in considera- tion of the said having at request entered into the agreement above set forth, and in considera- tion of one dollar to in hand by the said paid on the ensealing and delivery of these presents, the re- ceipt of which is hereby acknowledged held and firmly bound unto of the of , in the State of New York, in the sum of dollars, lawful money of the United States of America, to be paid as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, to the said , , his executors, administrators, or assigns, for which payment well and truly to be made bind heirs, executors, and administrators, firmly by these presents. Sealed with seal and dated the day of ,189... The Condition of the Above Obligation Is Such, that if , an infant, hereinabove men- tioned and described, shall well and truly perform, accord- ing to the true intent and meaning thereof, all the agree- ments and promises by him, in the said agreement herein- before mentioned and described, agreed and promised to be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 119 performed, then the above obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue. Signed, sealed and delivered in presence of .[L. S.] STATE OF NEW YORK, ) - ss County of I On the day of 189..., before me personally came to me per- sonally known and known to me to be the person mentioned and described in the foregoing instrument, and who executed the same, and.., thereupon acknowl- edged to me that had executed the same for the intents and purposes therein expressed. — 1ST. Y. Trans., Items of Interest. § 39. THE LEGAL RELATIONS OF A DENTIST AND HIS ASSISTANT. The law recognizes certain relations existing between the dentist and his assistant, and, w T hen necessary, protects the professional rights of the former from invasion by the latter. As a general rule, they are governed by the ordinary law of master and servant. In reference to the following legal propositions, by an assistant is implied one who aids the dentist in his profes- sional duties and has not complied with the statutory enact- ments, in contra-distinction to the assistant who has received a diploma or fulfilled the requirements necessary to the prac- tice of dentistry in the state or county in which he practices as an assistant. In various states the dental statutes have certain clauses especially inserted applying to the assistant, stating the qualifications necessary to be possessed by him and the regulations to be observed. In others, this is not speci- fied in the statutes. 120 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. For instance, in the New Jersev Btatutes, no reference ie made to the assistant, and according to the new laws he is required to possess the same qualifications as a regular prac- titioner. He must possess a diploma from a recognized and reputable dental college in addition to passing the examination of the State Board of Examiners. This view has been accepted as the correct interpretation of these statutes, because at the present time a New Jersey dentist will not engage an assistant . unless he possesses these qualifications or has fulfilled the ne- cessary requirements. This is obvious, because the assistant performs the duties of a regular practitioner ; and on behalf of his employer accepts from the patient a fee for his services, the same as though he were his own master. As he usually receives from his employer a salary for his services, in no wise can it be construed otherwise than that he is a regular practitioner, but subject to the personal will of his employer, of which no cognizance can be taken by the public or others. Nothing in these statutes can be construed to prevent a student or other person from performing the mechanical opera- tions (for definitions see § 38) in the laboratory of a dentist. Again, under the direct supervision of his preceptor, a stu- dent, doubtless, may perform dental operations ; but the belief is that his preceptor could not collect a fee for such services, according to the accepted interpretations of these statutes. However, according to People v. Monroe (4 Wend., 200), «' a dentist can recover his fee for the services of his assistant, and this even though the assistant has not fulfilled the statu- tory requirements." In similar prosecutions, it is a matter of doubt whether this decision would be recognized as lawful or influence the result of the case, especially if the assistant has failed to ful- fill the statutory requirements. When a dentist allows his assistant to attend regular! y to his practice and gives him authority to enter into express or implied contracts with his patients, lie is held liable for all such contracts. Again, where an assistant usually orders drugs or dental materials on credit, and the dentist usually pays for them, the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 121 dentist will be held liable to pay for any goods of a similar character, which the assistant may obtain on credit for his own use. (Niekson v. Brohan, 10 Mod., 109.) A dentist will be held liable in damages for any injury his assistant, acting within the scope of his employment, does a patient through want of skill, or carelessness and negli- gence on his part. (Hancke v. Hopper, 7 C. & P., 81.) The law protects the dental practitioner from his assistant injuring his practice, or from deriving any prestige, by imitating the cards and signs of his employer. On this point, Daniel Nason, Esq., cites the facts of the case of Colton v. Thomas, 2 Brews., 308, as follows : " The plaintiff purchased of Dr. Gardner T. Colton, of New York, the right to use the name, "Colton Dental Association," in connection with the use of nitrous oxide gas to alleviate pain in the extraction of teeth, and com- menced practice in the city of Philadelphia under the des- ignation of the "Colton Dental Association." When the defendant, who had been in his employment, opened dental rooms for himself, he issued cards and put out signs very similar to those used by Dr. Colton, with the addition, how- ever, of the words, " formerly operator at," in very small and almost illegible letters. The court restrained the defendant from using the cards and signs complained against, on the ground that such use was a fraud upon the public ; and it also restrained the employment by the defendant of any device by which the patients and patrons of the plantiff, without the exercise of excessive care, would be induced to suppose that the defendant's place of business was the place of business of the "Colton Dental Association." A dentist may desire to restrain his assistant from prac- ticing in the same locality as he does, on the termination of the relations between them. Some dentists, to avoid the possibility of such occurrences when employing an assistant, make with him what is known as a " contract in restraint of trade " (see § 40, which is one of the forms of this class of contracts) ; that the assistant, by reason of the prestige gained by his association with him, and the advantage of such loca- 122 DENTAL JURSIPRUDENCE. tion, will not influence patients to leave his former employer, and instead en£a°;e liis professional services. Public policy does not favor "contracts in restraint of trade," yet they are valid when the conditions prescribed are confined within certain limitations. The requisites which are essential to the validity of con- tracts of this character, are : First, that the restraint he partial ; second, that it he reasonahle ; and third, that the assistanl receive an adequate consideration for the privileges waived. In the case of Horner v. Graves (1 Bing., 735, cited by Daniel Nason, Esq.)," the plaintiff, who was a surgeon-den- tist, entered into a contract with the defendant, hy which the former agreed to employ the latter, paying him for his services, for the term of five years ; and in addition thereto, that he would instruct him in the profession of a surgeon- dentist. On the part of the defendant, it was agreed, among other things, that he would faithfully serve the plaintiff as assistant, and that he would not, at the expiration or sooner termination of the said term of five years, provided the plaintiff was then living and practicing his profession, prac- tice as surgeon-dentist at or within one hundred miles of the city of York, without the plaintiff's previous consent in writing, under a penalty of £1,000. The defendant vio- lated the latter terms of agreement, and thereafter the plain- tiff brought this suit to recover the penalty. Counsel for the defendant contended that this contract was void, on the ground that the restraint was unreasonable, and the consideration inadequate. On the question whether the restraint was reason- able or not, the court said : " We do not see how a better test can be applied to the question whether reasonable or not, than by considering whether the restraint is such only as to afford a fair protection to the interests of the party in favor of whom it is given, and not so large as to inter- fere with the interests of the public. Whatever restraint is larger than the necessary protection of the party can be of no benefit to either ; it can only be oppressive. And if oppressive, it is in the eyes of the law unreasonable. On the true inspec- tion of this, it must strike the mind of any man that a DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 123 circle round York, traced with a radius of one hundred miles, encloses a much larger space than can be necessary for the plaintiff's protection. The nature of the occupation, which is one that requires the personal presence of the prac- titioner and the patient together at the same place, shows that the plaintiff" has shut out the defendant from a much wider field than can by any possibility be occupied benefi- cially by himself." . On the question of the adequacy of the consideration, the court further said : "It must be confessed it is very small compared with the restraint under which the defendant con- sents to place himself. ******* At the time of entering into this contract he was at liberty to set up his claim and endeavor to gain his livelihood in the city of York. But under the present contract, after being employed by the plaintiff for three months only, and receiv- ing in consequence no more than the sum of £30, he was liable to be prevented from carrying on his business and earning his livelihood within the space comprehended within a circle drawn with a radius of one hundred miles from the city of York. Surely this appears a very slender and inadequate consideration for such sacrifice." Cook v. Johnson (47 Conn., 175) is a case illustrating a valid contract in restraint of trade. Here, the defendant r-old to the plaintiff his dental practice, and agreed, for the sum of $100, not to practice dentistry within a radius of ten miles from Litchfield. There was no limitation whatever in regard to the time daring which the restraint was to continue ; but, in the opin- ion of the court, such a limitation, under the circumstances, was not required ; for the reason that there is a well-settled distinction between a general restriction as to place, and a general restriction as to time. The mere fact that the dura- tion of the restriction as to time is indefinite or perpetual, will not of itself avoid the contract, if it is limited as to place, and is reasonable and proper in all other respects. 124 DENTAL JUBISPRUDEN< E. § 40. AUTHORITY AND LEGALITY OF STATE HOARDS. The statutes and enactments regulating the practice of dentistry in the majority of the states, provide for the ap- pointment by the Governor, or election by the State Dental Society, of a State Board of Dental Examiners, whose duty it is to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of the statutes. The board is usually composed of from live to seven reputable dentists, and they are commissioned to ex- amine all applicants who wish to practice dentistry in the State ; and, furthermore, they are empowered to grant them a certificate of qualification entitling them to engage in the practice of dentistry in that Commonwealth, providing the said applicants have complied with the provisions of the Act. The authority and legality of such State Board of Ex- aminers has been questioned, but there is no doubt as to their constitutionality. Dentistry being analogous to medicine, the annexed case and decisions, in a medical case published in the "Cosmos," is quoted to emphasize and support the views and conclusions stated above, viz. : An opinion was rendered in the Supreme Court of the United States January 14th, 1889, in the case of Frank M. Dent, plaintiff in error, v. the State of West Virginia. In error to the Supreme Court of Appeals of the State of West Virginia. Dent was convicted of unlawfully engaging in the practice of medicine without a diploma, in violation of a statute which requires every practitioner of medicine to ob- tain a certificate from the State Board of Health, that he is a graduate of a reputable medical college, or that he has prac ticed medicine in the State continuously for ten years, or that, he has been found, upon examination by the board to be qualified to practice medicine. Dent appealed the case to the State Court of Appeals, asserting that the Act was unconstitutional, in- asmuch as it deprives him of liberty and property without due process of law, contrary to the fourteenth amendment to the constitution. The Court of Appeals gave judgment against Dent, and this court affirms that decision. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 125 The court, in an opinion by Justice Field, says : " It is un- doubtedly the right of every citizen of the United States to follow any lawful calling he may choose, subject only to such restrictions as are imposed upon all persons of like age, sex, and condition. This right may, in many respects, be con- sidered as a distinguishing feature of our republican institu- tions. Here all vocations are open to every one on like conditions. " The right to continue the practice of professions is often of great value, and cannot be arbitrarily taken away any more than real or personal property can ; but there is no arbi- trary deprivation of such rights where its exercise is not permitted because of a failure to comply with conditions im- posed by the State for the protection of society. The power of the State to provide for the general welfare of its people, authorizes it to prescribe all such regulations as may be necessary to secure the people against the consequences of ignorance and incapacity, as well as of deception and fraud." In this connection the following remarks by Judge McGary, of Washington, in a paper on " Are Medical Laws Constitutional,?" published in "Hearth and Home," Septem- ber 15th, 1884, are worthy of consideration : " The State may doubtless create a Board of Health, or a similar body, and require every physician to register his license with the board, or in the office of the County Clerk, or other appropriate place. "But his right to practice will not depend upon his registration, as the right has been already vested and assured by the diploma of the college. And should the State also vest this Board of Health with the right, and even the duty, of examining and licensing appli- cants, it could not apply to those who held a license from the incorporated colleges. Nor could it militate against or in- validate in any way the right of the colleges to issue valid diplomas and licenses, before or after ; for not even can the State, by its legislation, divest or impair a vested right which the colleges already had." In Wilkins v. State (Black's Indiana Digests, 3,652), the decision was rendered that: "The Act of March 7th, 1887, to 126 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. regulate the practice of dentistry, prescribing what qualifi- cations a person who enters upon the practice of the pro- fession shall possess, and providing for the issuing of certifi- cates to applicants by a Board of Examiners, is constitutional and valid." The court will take judicial knowledge that the dental profession is one requiring skill, and that an unskilled person may injure one who employs him, and this being so, the Legislature may prescribe the qualifications of those permitted to practice the profession. — Ibid. Legislative Power. — The Legislature having plenary power over the whole subject, it alone must be the judge as to what is wise and expedient, both as to qualifications required and as to the method of ascertaining those qualifications, and so long as it keeps within the constitution, the courts can exercise no supervisory power. — Ibid. Corporation. — The provision delegating to the Indiana Dental Association the naked power to name three members of the Board of Examiners, provided for in said Act, is not a grant of corporate power, and hence is not a violation of the constitutional provision forbidding the creation of a cor- poration by special Act. — Ibid. Board of Examiners. — While the Board of Examiners in some degree acts judicially, it performs no judicial duty within the meaning of the constitution, and therefore the Act is not invalid, because it does not make such provisions as would be necessary if the examiners constituted a judicial tribunal. —Ibid. The time and place of meeting of the Board of Exami- ners are to be fixed by the person whom the law has vested with authority, and one who desires a license must make reasonable inquiry, and if he fails to do so, he cannot defend a prosecution for practicing without a license, on the ground that no notice had been given him (Black's 1881-1888 Digests of Indiana). DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 127 § 41. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF DENTAL LAWS. LIABILITY FOR PRACTICING WITHOUT A DIPLOMA OR LICENSE. These two subjects are analogous, and are treated to- gether, because a dentist or alleged dentist, when charged with the illegal practice of dentistry, invariably has recourse to the defense of the unconstitutionality of the statutes regu- lating the practice of dentistry, if he cannot fulfill the require- ments and qualifications of these statutes. Therefore, in their relations, the two subjects sustain an equal and similar importance — the one being dependent upon the other, is the reason of their amalgamation. Consequently, before con- sidering the statutes and the penalties prescribed by legisla- tion for their violation , it is a necessity to show that the courts sustain such laws, for whose violation it prescribes penalties ; however, if the courts fail to uphold the statutes and declare them illegal, as has unreasonably been done by the Supreme Court of New Hampshire (quoted elsewhere), there can of course be no violation of the law 7 , and as there w r ould be no legal restrictions, any person could practice dentistry with- out being subject to penalties, the Penal Codes being also invalidated by such a decision. The objective point, as stated, is to prove the validity of the State enactments, then the penalties that involve their violation can be shown. These statutes have been attacked without reason or justification. It cannot be denied that the Constitution of the United States empowers the State Legislatures to enact such laws and provisions for the protection of the people from empiricism in relation to the practice of dentistry to exclude from practice those who are unfitted for it. It has been decided by decisions in the Supreme Court that, in the exercise of that right, the Legislature may make such enact- ments w r hich may require as a condition of the right to practice, that the person shall obtain a license ; it may also provide for the appointment of, or designate some officer or board, to issue the license or determine whether the appli- cant possesses the qualifications necessary to entitle him to it, 128 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. and may prescribe the qualifications required, and how the possession of them by the applicant ean be entertained. In relation to this subject the opinion and decision of the Supreme Court of Minnesota that sustained the Minnesota law governing the practice of dentistry in that State, in the case of State v. Geert A. V andersluis, appellant, can be quoted. [The New Jersey Dental Law which went into effect April 1st, 1890, has provisions similar to the Minnesota law, viz., in requiring the applicant to possess a diploma from a reputable college, and in addition pass an examination before the State Board of Dental Examiners. The New Jersey law has been criticised as unreasonable, and therefore, if tested in the Supreme Court, would be declared unconstitu- tional ; the decision of the Supreme Court of Minnesota in the case quoted below, certainly has an important bearing thereon.] The opinion in full is, as follows : " That the Legislature may prescribe such reasonable con- ditions upon the right to practice medicine or law as will ex- clude from the practice those who are unfitted for it, is so well settled by decisions of the courts as to be no longer an open question. The power rests on the right to protect the public against the injurious consequences likely to result from allowing persons to practice those professions, who do not possess the special qualifications essential to enable the prac- titioner to practice the profession with safety to those who employ him. The same reasons apply with equal force to the profession of dentistry, which is but a branch of the medical profession. That, in the exercise of that power, the Legislature may require as a condition of the right to practice that the person shall procure a license, may designate some officer or board to issue the license and to determine whether an applicant possesses the qualifications required to entitle him to it, and may prescribe, so far as can be done by a special law, what qualifications shall be required and how the pos- session of them by the applicant shall be ascertained, neces- sarily follows from the power itself. "It is for the Legislature and not for the courts to deter- mine those things. The only limit to the legislative power to DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 129 prescribe conditions to the right to practice in a profession, is that they shall be reasonable. Whether they are reasonable, that is, whether the Legislature has gone beyond the proper limits of its power, the courts must judge. By the term reasonable we do not mean expedient, nor do we mean that the conditions must be such as the court would impose if it were called upon to prescribe what should be the conditions. They are to be deemed reasonable, where, although perhaps not the wisest and best that might be adopted, they are fit and appropriate to the end in view, to wit, the protection of the public, and are manifestly adopted in good faith for that purpose. If a condition should be clearly arbitrary and capricious, if no reason with reference to the end in view could be assigned for it, and especially if it appeared that it must have been adopted for some other purpose, such, for in- stance, as to favor or benefit some person or class of persons; it certainly would not be reasonable, and would be beyond the power of the Legislature to impose. " In 1885, the Legislature passed an Act to regulate the practice of dentistry, Ch. 199, Laws 1885. This Act continued in force until it was superseded and repealed by Ch. 19, Laws 1889. The latter Act is assailed as unconstitutional. Though the Act of 1885 is not called in question, we think it well to refer to some of its provisions. Section 1 made it unlawful for any person not at the passage of the Act engaged in the practice of dentistry in the State, to commence such practice without a certificate as in the Act provided. Section 5 pro- vided for the certificate,which was to be issued by the Board of Examiners provided for in the Act, upon a satisfactory ex- amination. Section 4 made it the duty of every person at the time engaged in the practice of dentistry in the State to within six months after the passage of the Act, to cause his name and residence or place of business to be registered with the board in a book to be kept by it for that purpose, pro- vided that every person so registered is a practitioner of den- tistry and might continue to practice as such. "Chapter 19, Laws 1889, Section 1, provides that from and after September 1st, 1889, it shall be unlawful for any 130 KENTAL UJRISPBUDENCE. person to practice dentistry in the State, unless he shall have first obtained a certificate of registration and tiled the same, or a certified copy thereof, with the District Court of the county of his residence, as in the Act afterwards provided. Sections 2 and 3 provide for a Board of Examiners. Section 4 makes it the duty of the board to transfer to a register, to he kept by it for that purpose, within ten days after the sec- ond Tuesday in July, 1889, the name, residence, and place of business of each and every person who on the second Wed- nesday in July, 1889, pursuant to the Act of 1885, shall be qualified to practice dentistry in the State, and who shall then be duly registered on the books of the board created by the Act of 1885, and makes it the dut} 7 of the board to send to each of such persons a certificate of his registration. "It will be seen from these various provisions that those qualified to practice dentistry under the law of 1885 continued to be so qualified under the Act of 1889, including both those who were in practice at the date of the former Act and regis- tered as it required, and those who became qualified by the examination and certificate provided by it. " Section 5 of the Act of 1889, the provisions of which fur- nish one of the grounds on which appellant assails the Act as unconstitutional, provides that any person who shall desire to begin the practice of dentistry in the State after September 1st, 1889, shall make application for examination to the Board of Examiners, paying a fee of ten dollars, and shall undergo an examination. The section further enacts : ' In order to be eligible for such examinations, such person shall present to said board his diploma from some dental col- lege in good standing, and shall give satisfactory evidence of his right to the possession of the same ; provided also, that the board may in its discretion admit to examination such other persons as shall give satisfactory evidence of having been engaged in the practice of dentistry ten years prior to the date of the passage of this Act. " ' Said board shall have the power to determine the good standing of any college or colleges from which such diplomas DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 131 may have been granted.' It then goes on to perscribe the manner, extent, and subjects of the examinations. " What particular objections of a constitutional charac- ter, the appellant makes to this section, it is somewhat diffi- cult to tell from his brief. We infer, however, that he claims the section to be objectionable because, no matter how well qualified by learning and skill or experience one may be, he has no absolute right to be examined by the board, unless he has a diploma from a dental college in good standing, such good standing to be determined by the board, and this he claims to be a discrimination between the rich and poor,, because one may be pecuniarily able and the other not able to attend a dental college. The mere fact of discrimination in such a law is no objection to it. Requiring a certain degree of learning and skill as a condition of being allowed to prac- tice, is discrimination between those who have and those who have not that degree of learning and skill, between those who are able and those who are unable to acquire it. " If there were discriminations between persons or classes upon any matter not pertinent to the legitimate purpose of the law, to wit, to secure fitness and competency in those who shall be permitted to practice, it would be objectionable. As,. for instance, if it were as to place of birth, color, or religious belief. The requirement of a diploma from some college or learned society in order to practice medicine, has been inserted into the laws of many states and questioned in but few. In Massachusetts, a law required the practitioner to have been licensed by the Medical Society, or been graduated a doctor in medicine at Harvard University. This was held constitu- tional in Hewitt v. Charier, 16 Pick., 356. The statute of Xevada (1875) required a medical education and a diploma from some regularly chartered medical school. This was held constitutional — ex parte Spinney, 10 Nev., 323. As the fact of having graduated at and received a diploma from a school or college devoted to teaching the particular sciences, medi- cine, surgery, or dentistry, bears directly upon the person's qualifications to practice, we have no doubt the Legislature might have made that the sole test. 132 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. "That this statute allows, in the discretion of the board, ten years' practice, prior to the passage of the Act, as a sub- stitute for the diploma of a college, furnishes no objections on constitutional grounds to the Act. True, it is asked why ten years' practice after the passage of the Act ought not to entitle one to the same right as ten years' practice before its passage. A sufficient answer to this is that such practice after the Act, if in this State, would be in violation of law, and the Legislature surely may provide against inviting vio- lations of the law, and for that purpose withhold all benefit from its violators. "It is objected that it is left to the discretion of the board to determine whether ten years' practice, instead of a diploma, shall admit one to examinations. On the score of expediency some questions might be made upon it. But as the Legislature might have left that provision out altogether and made no concession to the requirement that an applicant for examination should have a diploma, we do not see that any questions can be made of the power to fix the period of ten years, nor of the power to leave it for the board to de- termine in each particular case whether the extent and char- acter of the applicant's practice during the period has been such as to be equal as evidence of his qualifications to the possession of a diploma. " Section 7 reads, ' All persons shall be said to be practic- ing dentistry within the meaning of this Act, who shall for a fee, or salary, or other reward paid either to himself or to an- other person for operations, or parts of operations of any kind, treat diseases or lesions of the human teeth or jaws, or correct malpositions thereof. But nothing in this Act con- tained shall be taken to apply to acts of bona fide students of dentistry, done in the pursuit of clinical advantages under the direct supervision of a preceptor or a licensed dentist in this State, during the period of their enrollment in a dental college and attendance upon a regular, uninterrupted course in such college.' " It is claimed that this shows the law to be an arbitrary measure for the benefit of dentists, by giving them a mo- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 133 nopoly to practice a brunch of surgery which has heretofore been largely carried on by regular physicians and surgeons. " It was proper, in order to give precision to the law, to define what was meant by practicing dentistry. It is not, however, to be supposed the Legislature intended to enlarge the sphere of the profession. There may be diseases of hurts to and operations upon the jaws that are within the legitimate profession both of the general surgeon and of the dentist. We do not know how this is. But if it be so, the licensed surgeon would be protected by his license in treating such. The Act before us could hardly be so construed as to limit the right of the surgeon under his license. " It is claimed also that it discriminates between students of dentistry, by allowing them to operate upon the teeth and jaws during the period of their enrollment in a dental college and attendance upon a regular uninterrupted course in such college, and excluding others. The purpose of this provision of the law is apparent. It is to permit to actual bona fide, students the benefit of practical work under an in- structor. But to prevent evasions of the law by persons practicing the profession under the pretense of being students, the Act very properly defines who shall be regarded as stu- dents within the clause allowing them to perform operations or parts of operations. It is open to every student to bring himself within the definition. "The interpretation of the clause under consideration upon which appellant argues that it was intended to prefer schools of dentistry within the State as against those out of it, is too narrow. We see no reason why a student in such a school, in another State, may not during vacation pursue his studies here under a licensed dentist and be within the mean- ing of the clause. By ' regular, uninterrupted course ' the Act does not mean a course in which there are no vacations, such as all schools have. To hold that it does would lead to this unreasonable result: that the student even in a school in this State might during the term have the benefit of practice in operations under a licensed dentist, but would have to BQgpend as Boon ae the term should close. 134 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. "The provisions and requirements of the law are un- doubtedly rigorous. They ought to be in any law aiming to protect the public against ignorance and incompetency in so important a profession as the medical profession in any of its branches. "We see nothing in the provisions of this law that was not clearly inserted by the Legislature in good faith, to effect the end in view. The law is valid. Judgment af- firmed." — Dental Cosmos. In the case of George Wilkina p. The State of Indiana, the Supreme Court of that State, on March 2nd, 1888, rendered its decision, affirming the court below and sustaining the con- stitutionality of the Act regulating the practice of dentistry. The plaintiff in error, we are informed by Dr. Chap- pell, Secretary of the Indiana State Board of Dental Exam- iners, began practice at Marion in December, 1886, and was indicted in the Grant Circuit Court for failing to register, under the law which went into effect August 1st, 1887. On the trial, he pleaded the possession of a diploma from the Delavan College (the Board of Examiners had refused to ac- cept diplomas from that institution), and attacked the con- stitutionality of the law. The Circuit Judge sustained the law, from which decision Wilkina appealed. In the Supreme Court, the opinion of the full bench was pronounced by Justice Byron Iv. Elliott, as follows : "The indictment upon which is founded the judgment from which this appeal is prosecuted, charges that the appel- lant did practice the profession of dentistry without having obtained a certificate from the Board of Examiners estab- lished under the Act of March 7th, 1887. '* There is entire harmony in the adjudged cases upon the question of the power of the Legislature to enact laws pre- scribing what qualifications a person shall possess, who enters upon the practice of a profession requiring professional skill and learning. From the earliest years of the common law, men who engaged in the practice of the professions of law and medicine were required to possess skill and learning, and to obtain evidence of their qualification from the sources desig- nated by law. A long and unwavering line of cases, extend- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 135 ing from those early years of the law to the present, sustain this doctrine. (Eastman v. State, 109; Ind., 278, and cases cited ; Orr r. Meek, 111 Ind., 40 ; The State ex rel. v. Green, 14 N. E. Rep., 352.) " This firmly-settled doctrine is thus well stated in a late work : ' Where the successful prosecution of a calling re- quires a certain amount of technical knowledge and profes- sional skill, and the lack of them in the practitioner will re- sult in material damage to one who employs him, it is a legiti- mate exercise of the police power to prohibit any one from engaging in the calling, who has not previously been exam- ined by the lawfully constituted authority, and received a certificate in testimony of his qualification to practice the profession. The right of the State to exercise this control over the skilled trades and learned professions, with the sin- gle exception in respect to teachers and expounders of reli- gion, has never been seriously questioned.' (Tredman, on Limitations of Police Power, p. 200, Section 87.) In even stronger language, Judge Cooley affirms this general princi- ple. (Cooley, on Torts, 289.) This principle extends to many trades and professions, as pilots, engineers, and the like. (Tredman, on Limitation of Police Power, 624 ; Cooley, Const. Lim., 743.) The legislative judgment, that the welfare of the public requires that those practicing the dental profession shall possess the necessary skill and learning, and shall obtain a certificate, is probably conclusive. But, if it were not, the court must take judicial knowledge that it is a profession re- quiring skill. The fact that the dentist employs his profes- sional skill upon an important part of the human body, is of course known to every one, and cannot be unknown to the courts. As this is known, it must follow that it may also be judicially known that one unskilled in the profession may injure the person who employs him. As this is so, then, as we have seen, the Legislature may prescribe the qualifica- tions of those permitted to practice the profession. " The Board of Examiners, established under the law, is the lawfully constituted authority, and from it the certificate required by law must be obtained. The Legislature, as the 136 DENTAL JURISPR1 DBN( I . law making power, has authority to prescribe the method <»i" procedure. Its authority does nol end with declaring what qualifications lie who enters upon the practice of that profee sion shall possess. As it has plenary power over the whole subject, it alone must be the judge of what ie wise and ex- pedient, both as to the qualifications required, and as to the method of ascertaining these qualifications. The courts cannot exercise any supervisory power over the Legislature as long as is keeps within the limits of the Constitution. (Fry v. State, 63 Ind., 532 ; Eastman v. State, supra ; Cooley, Const. Lim., 202-206.) " It is an established law that an Act of the Legislature cannot be annulled by the judiciary in any respect, unless it clearly contravenes some provision of the constitution. Doubt must be resolved in favor of the validity of the statute. Since the doctrine was announced by Chief Justice Marshall, early in the history of our country, it has been inflexibly adhered to by all the courts. (Cooley, Const. Lim., 5th ed., 218 ; Beau- champ v. The State, 6 Blackf. 299; Pittsburg, etc., Co. v. Brown, 67 Ind., 49 ; Hedderich v. State, 101 Ind., 564 ; Rob- inson v. Schenck, 102 Ind., 307-319.) " As the Legislature has exclusive power over the entire subject, it is our duty to uphold the statute as it comes to us from the Legislature with the executive sanction. We can- not annul any part of the statute, unless it clearly violates some provision of the Constitution. We have given full con- sideration to the appellant's argument, but w T e are unable to perceive that it even proves that it is probable that some pro- vision of the Constitution has been violated ; much less does it prove that it has been violated beyond doubt. "It is contended that the Act is unconstitutional, because it authorizes the Indiana Dental Association to appoint three members of the Board of Examiners. The argument is that the Dental Association is a corporation, and that the Act, in authorizing it to appoint, enlarges its corporate powers, and. therefore, violates the Constitution by enlarging the powers of a corporation by a special Act. In more particulars than one, this argument is unsound. It rests on an undue assump- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 137 tion. Authorizing a corporation to select persons to per- form a duty in which the public is interested, is, in no just sense, the enlargement of corporative powers. The desig- nation of the corporation as the selecting body is not the grant of corporate powers. This is very clear to our minds. Clearly, the Legislature might repeal the Act at pleasure, and this of itself proves that no corporate right is granted, for, if there was such a grant, there could be no valid repeal. It is quite as clear that a statute, artificial or natural, which di- rects a person to perform a particular act, is not, for that reason, transformed from a general into a special statute. But granting (and the concession can only be made for the argument's sake) that the authority to appoint members of the Board of Examiners is a corporate act, still the concession would, by no means, lead to the conclusion that the statute infringes upon the Constitution. The provision, which it is asserted the Act violates, is this : ' Corporations, other than banking, shall not be created by special Act, but may be formed under general laws.' It cannot, with the faintest tinge of justice, be affirmed that the simple delegation of authority to appoint three men to perform duties affecting the public, is the creation of a new corporation. Changes of infinitely more importance have been held not to create a new corpora- tion. (Wallace v. Loomis, 97 IT. S., 146 ; Atty.-Gen. v. The Xorth Am., etc., Co., 82 N". Y., 172; South v. Pacific R. R. Co., 6 Sawyer, 157.) " The general rule is thus stated by a late writer: ,l A special Act of the Legislature regulating an existing corpora- tion, or granting to it new privileges, without altering its charter or affecting its charter contract, would not be in vio- lation of the letter, or of the spirit of the Constitutional prohibition." (Moranetz, on Corp., sec. 12.) The case of the Corporation of Bluffton v. Wiley, 111 Ind., declares a similar doctrine. But it is really not necessary to inquire how far a corporate grant may extend without violating the Constitution, for we are well satisfied that the delegation of the naked power to name three members of the board is not a grant of corporate power. 138 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. "The objection that the Act invests the Board of Exam- iners with judicial functions, is fully answered by the casesof Elmore v. Overton, 104 Ind., 548; Eastman v. State, supra, and the cases there cited. If the appellant were correct in his as- sumption, then every School Examiner, who examines an ap- plicant for license; every Clerk, who accepts and acts upon affidavit; every Auditor, who accepts an abstract of title when he loans school funds, and every officer who ap- proves a report, would exercise judicial functions. That they do, in some degree, act judicially, is true, and so does every officer, from the Governor to Constable, who is invested with discretionary powers ; for the Governor, when he issues a requisition for a fugitive from justice, decides many things, and the Constable, when he executes a writ or a warrant, exer- cises a discretion, but no one of these officers exercises judi- cial judgment in the sense that a court or judge does. These officers, one and all, are ministerial officers, and not judges or courts ; and the judicial functions meant by the Constitu- tion are such only as courts or judges exercise. A judicial duty, within the meaning of the Constitution, is such a duty as legitimately pertains to an officer in the department desig- nated by the Constitution as the judicial. By this desig- nation is meant the judiciary in the true sense of the term. " This case falls within the class of cases represented by Maynes v. Moore, 16 Ind., 116 ; Flournoy v. City, 17 Ind., 169; Pennington v. Streight, 54 Ind., 316 ; State v. Johnson, 105 Ind., 463-467 ; Weaver v. Templen, 14 N. E. Rep., 600; Betts v. Dixon, 3 Conn., 107; Crane v. Camp, 12 Conn., 463. In Flournoy v. City, supra, the court said : t; An act is none the less ministerial because the person performing under it may have to satisfy himself that a state of facts exists, under which it is his right and duty to perform the act." It is a mistake, therefore, to assume that the statute must con- form to all the requirements as to notice and like incidents, that would be necessary if the Act were judicial. We cannot, therefore, hold the Act unconstitutional, because it does not make such provisions as would be necessary if the examiners constituted a judicial tribunal. We suppose a successful de- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 139 fense might be made by a person who had, in good faith, sought an opportunity to obtain a license, and failed, through the fault of the examiners, to meet at the time appointed ; but one who has had notice, and failed to avail himself of the opportunity, as was the case here, cannot successfully defend. The time and place of meeting of the board are to be fixed by the persons whom the law has vested with author- ity, and one who desires a license, must at least make reas- onable inquiry ; for a public law gives him notice, nor is an ap- plicant delayed until the meeting of the Board of Examiners, for Section 7 of the Act expressly provides that, ' any member of the board may grant a permit to any person who shall file with the member his application therefor.' There is, there- fore, no denial of an opportunity to acquire a permit, or any delay required, for a permit may be had at any time upon application. The way, therefore, is always open, and no one need to be in doubt what course to pursue. One who has a way always open to him, by which he can attain what is required to protect him, has himself to censure, if he does not use diligence to avail himself of the opportunity afforded him. If the permit is obtained under Section 7, then notice is necessarily imparted ; but where the party must himself take the initiatory step, he cannot insist that notice be given him before prosecution. "If it were conceded that counsel were rio-ht in asserting; that Section 11, which provides the method in which com- pensation of members of the Board of Examiners shall be fixed, is unconstitutional, it would not avail the appellant, for, if all that part of the statute were annulled, there would still be a complete law fully prescribing rules and adequately defining the offense charged. It is perfectly well settled that a part of a statute may be declared invalid, and if enough remains to constitute a complete statute, that which remains may be enforced. If, therefore, all that part of the statute which relates to the compensation of members of the Board of Examiners should be rejected, the appellant would derive no benefit, for the valid part of the statute fully prescribes the duties of those who assume to practice dentistry, and 140 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. fully defines and creates the offense described in the indict- ment. lw Arguments that might perhaps not be without weight if addressed to the Legislature, are adduced by counsel, but, as these arguments all bear upon questions of pure legislative policy, they can have no weight with the courts. All that the courts can do, even though they may be impressed with the need of amendments, is to test the statute by the Constitution, and, if it sustains that test, they must uphold it as it is written. " It is urged that the state did not prove that the Indiana Dental Association w r as duly incorporated, and that for this reason there should have been an acquittal. This position ie untenable. It is so, because it is immaterial whether the association was incorporated or was not, for the Legislature might have authorized an unincorporated association, as well as an incorporated one, to select three members of the Board of Examiners. It is so, because granting that only a corpo- ration could be authorized to appoint, the corporate existence cannot be questioned in a collateral proceeding. It is so, be- cause the Legislature has recognized the existence of the asso- ciation, and this creates the presumption, if indeed it does not do much more, that it had a legal existence. Finding no error in the record, we affirm the judgment." THE STATE OF INDIANA, ) Supreme Court. / I, William T. Noble, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Indiana, certify the above and foregoing to be a true and complete copy of the opinion of said court in the above entitled cause. In witness thereof, I hereto set my hand and affix the seal of said court, at the city of Indianapolis this seventh day of March, 1888. AVm. T. Noble, C. S. C. [seal] — Dental Cosmos. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 141 Again, the Supreme Court of Kansas has given a deci- sion sustaining the validity of the dental law of that state. Dr. E. H. Creditor was practicing dentistry in another state, and came to Kansas after the dental law went into operation. He was promptly informed by the State Board that he was ineligible to practice, not having a diploma. He denied the validity. of the law, and continued practice. The matter was brought before the lower court, which decided that the law was valid and in force. Dr. Creditor appealed, and the Su- preme Court unanimously affirmed the validity of the Kan- sas law. These three decisions of the Supreme Court would seem to uphold the constitutionality of these statutes ; but on the other hand, the reverse decision has been rendered by the Supreme Court of New Hampshire, on July 26th, 1889, viz.: In the cases of a physician and dentist indicted for practicing medicine and dentistry without a license, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire quashed the indictments and declared the law requiring a license for the practice of medicine and den- tistry unconstitutional. There is no question but that this decision, contrary to the decisions of the Supreme Courts of other states, is un- just and illegal, and inconsistent with the objects of the Con- stitution of the United States. If the cases are appealed to the United States Supreme or Circuit Courts, I firmly believe the decision will be reversed. In the various states, if not generally, the practice of dentistry is prohibited without a diploma, or a license from the " State Board of Dental Examiners." Penalties are usually imposed by the statutes for a vio- lation of the enactments regulating the practice of dentistry, and the statutes provide that the offender, for their violation, may be fined, imprisoned, or both. In Pennsylvania, any one convicted of illegally practicing dentistry is guilty of a misdemeanor, and is punishable by a fine of not less than fifty, nor more than two hundred dollars. In the State of New Jersey, the penalty for unlawfully prac- ticing dentistry is three hundred dollars, upon conviction. 142 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. In New York, the penalty is a tine of from fifty to two hun- dred dollars. The Colorado law imposes a fine of not less than one hundred, nor more than five hundred dollars, or im- prisonment of from one to ninety days. Where the defendant was charged with practicing with- out, a diploma, the production of a diploma by the defendant would be a prim" facu evidence of his right to it. (Raynor v. State, 62 Wis., 289 ; Wendel v. State, 62 Wis., 300 ; Holmes v. Ilalde, 74 Me., 28.) Formerly, in some of the states, notably New Jersey and Pennsylvania, it was almost impossible to convict a per- son for the illegal practice of dentistry, on account of the jury system in vogue, the jury usually being composed of men who lacked the brains to comprehend the case, and judgment necessary to give a just decision. Clear and conclusive evi- dence has in a number of cases been produced by the prosecutor, proving that the defendant violated the law, and the judge has charged the jury strongly against the offenders, still the juries have acquitted the men simply through a feel- ing of sympathy. The case of Johannas Van Elderen v. State, in New Jer- sey, in 1883, furnishes a notable example of these unjust de- cisions. Another case in Nebraska is, as follows : In July last, Geo. W. Schwartz was indicted for prac- ticing dentistry in Nebraska City, Nebraska, in violation of the State law. The committee of the State Dental Society did not commence the case, but, finding it had been com- menced, took charge of the prosecution. The case came to trial September 28th, the defense being that Schwartz was a graduate of medicine, and qualified by his diploma to prac- tice dentistry. The court, however, held, "that a physician's diploma did not authorize him to practice dentistry or dental surgery. " The defense further offered to prove that the defend- ant was a skilled workman in dentistry, that he operated in a manner that gave satisfaction to his patients, and that he did good work as a dentist. All of which was ruled out by the court. In spite of the fact that the rulings of the court ex- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 143 eluded every particle of defense offered by the defendant, and that the instructions of the court were against the defendant, the jury, after being out eighteen hours, returned a verdict of not guilty. What the court thought of the verdict is shown by the unmerciful scoring Judge Field gave the jury in dis- charging them at the close of term. Among other things, he said : "Gentlemen, I cannot refrain from saying something at this time. There have been four criminal cases of import- ance before this court durins; the term. The first was that of the dentist Schwartz, who admitted a violation of the law ; yet the jury acquitted him," etc. The majority of the statutes have been amended and made more stringent, hence they are less frequently violated than formerly, and a conviction can be more easily obtained. 144 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. § 42. PATENT RIGHTS. A. — THE .JURISPRUDENCE OF DENTAL PATENTS. The subject of the jurisprudence of patents of the heal- ing arts, is peculiar and applicable alone to dentistry, which is the only profession that from necessity must harbor and submit to a system of " patent-methods." Jurisprudence, in reference to dental patents, compre- hends the interpretation of the principles and practices of the law as applied to such classes of patents ; hence its limita- tions, on the one hand, are the legal rights and privileges granted the inventors in the " claims " allowed in the patents issued to them ; and, on the other hand, the requirements of the law respecting the observance of their legal protection and non-infringement. In the consideration of this subject, only such patents that have been granted for dental operations, methods and processes of operating, will be reviewed ; and patents on dental instruments, appliances, apparatus, etc., must necessarily be ignored as not properly belonging to the subject. It is not the intention of the author to enter into a tirade against these patented dental operation methods, illiberal patent methods, and of the abuses that have manifestly resulted in the legal inability of the dental practitioner to perform certain operations, but to give a distinct legal inter- pretation of these patents and define other legal points pertaining thereto.* * It is the intention of the " Central Dental Association of Northern New Jersey," with the co-operation of many of the leading dental societies throughout the United States, to petition Congress to pass an enactment pro- hibiting, in future, the granting or issue of letters patent for any invention or discovery, or any improvement thereof, or any method or process in operative dentistry, and providing some expeditious method by which such patent here- after inadvertently granted, may, by the decree of some competent court, be annulled and cancelled. The Act annexed hereto is the proposed enactment : DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 145 B. — LBGAL DEFINITION AND CLASSIFICATION OF DENTAL OPERATIONS. Legally, an operation in dentistry would be considered as the performance of some manual act, in a methodical man- ner, upon the human teeth, surrounding tissues and bones, usually with instruments, with the view of restoring them to a sound or healthy condition ; and the adaptation of substi- tutes for them, when, by age, accident, or disease, they are lost. For convenience and practical reasons, operations in dentistry can be divided and classified into: first, surgical dental; second, surgical-mechanical dental ; third, mechani- cal dental. A surgical dental operation would be interpreted as a cutting or some similar operation performed upon the teeth, AN ACT TO PROHIBIT THE GRANTING AND ISSUE OF LETTERS PATENT, IN CERTAIN CASES. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, 1. That from and after the passage of this Act, letters patent shall not be granted or issued to, nor obtained by any per- son, for any invention or discovery, or improvement thereof, of any method or process of repairing or restoring the human teeth, or the functions thereof, filling cavities therein, destroying the pulp or nerves thereof, reducing inflam- mation in the human mouth or teeth, giving to any person under treatment, or applying locally to any part to be treated or operated upon, any drug, gas or substance, in aid of any surgical or dental operation, or for the purpose of alleviating the suffering caused by such operation or treatment, inserting in the mouth, or applying or fixing to the teeth, any dentures or other artificial appliances intended to replace, renew, or restore lost, decayed, and defective teeth, or of any method or process of surgical or dental treatment of or opera- tion upon the human mouth or teeth, for any disease, decay or defect what- soever, or of any new or improved method or process whatsoever, in operative dentistry, and every such letters patent hereafter granted, or issued to or obtained by any person, shall be absolutely void and of no effect. 2. That the Circuit Courts of the United States are hereby given juris- diction and power to decree the annulment and cancellation of any letters patent granted, issued or obtained in violation of this Act, upon suit brought in equity by any person against the owner or owners thereof. Such suit may be instituted in any district in which the owner, or one or more of the owners reside, and in case any one of several owners be served with process, decree of annulment and cancellation may be made against all of the owners, in the same manner as if they had all been served with process. ■>. This Ad shall take effect immediately. 140 DENTAL JURISPRUDENT I . their roots, or the bones and tissues surrounding them, with the view of restoring them to a sound or healthy condition. The extraction of the teeth, the burring or cutting of diseased portions of a tooth, the removal of the pulp, the cutting or shaping of the end of a tooth- root, previous to adapting an artificial crown to it — can all be classified as surgical dental operations. A surgical-mechanical dental operation is distinctly an operation dependent upon a surgical dental operation, in com- bination with mechanical means or devices to restore artifici- ally the lost parts operated upon, and thus renew their natural functions. In this classification, such operations as the filling of the teeth by all methods and materials, the filling of their roots, insertion of crowns, crown-bridges, artificial dentures, cleft-palate operations, and the regulation of the teeth, can be included. A mechanical dental operation is construed to mean, the construction and process erf constructing out of the mouth the mechanical rrnans and derives necessary and intended to restore the lost natural function of the part operated upon. In this class, we have such operations as the methods and processes of making crowns, bridge operations, artificial dentures, etc.; substantially they are process-patents. c — patents granted for dental operations. In the first class, surgical dental operations, several pat- ents have been granted, as follows : A patent, No. 277,935, was issued May 22nd, 1883, to Cassius M. Richmond, of New York, N. Y., in which the following claim was allowed : The process of treating teeth to remove the nerves, the same consisting in isolating the tooth to be treated (presum- ably by a rubber dam), and then subjecting the latter to the action of a jet of volatile liquid until the nerve in the same is benumbed. Again, a patent, No. 277,943, was granted onthe same date to Cassius M. Richmond : DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 147 First. For the process of preparing roots for the recep- tion of artificial dentures, which consists in grooving, with opposite grooves, on the lingual and palatine surfaces, and re- moving (snapping off) the crown by a suitable forceps. Second. For the process of preparing a root for the recep- tion of an artificial tooth-denture, which consists in removing the crown from the root by a suitable contrivance, and then im- mediately expelling the nerve from its cavity, by driving a suitably shaped piece of wood into the nerve cavity. Third. For the process of treating and preparing the roots of teeth, the same consisting in expelling the nerve from its cavity, and then instantly filling the nerve cavity with a wooden peg. Fourth. For the process of preparing a root for the recep- tion of an artificial denture, which consists in removing the crown, and then driving into the nerve cavity a suitably shaped piece of wood, in removing the same, and cleansing the nerve cavity, and in immediately plugging or filling the upper part of fhe nerve cavity, by driving in another piece of wood. This patent, No. 277,943, was declared invalid in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond et al (30 Fed. Rep., 785, United States Circuit Court, Southern Dis- trict New York.) On an appeal, the United States Supreme Court sustained the action of the Circuit Court declaring this patent invalid. A patent was issued to E. A. Bigelow, Brandon, Vt,, March 8th, 1827, for a method of engrafting teeth. (Patent expired.) A patent was granted to Thomas Bruff, Maryland, July 1st, 1797, for extracting teeth. (Patent expired.) A patent was granted to H. H. Hayden, Baltimore, Md., October 4th, 1817, for means of preventing decay of teeth. (Patent expired.) Patent, No. 22,851, was issued to W. G. A. Bonwill, Feb- ruary 8th, 1859. The claim was for the application of elec- tricity to dental purposes, the described method consisting of extracting or extirpating the dental pulp or internal nerve of teeth, to wit: by the application of a current of electricity, 148 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. through the instruments made use of in the performance of said operation, and constantly to the dental pulp or internal nerve, during the operation of cutting out or extracting the same. (Patent expired.) Methods <>f Filling and Restoring Decayed Teeth. In the second class — surgical mechanical operations — the following patents were issued : Patent, Wo. 404,745, granted to Elbert C. Taylor, June 4th, 1889, for a method of filling teeth, which consists in cleaning the cavit}*, electro-plating the walls thereof, then inserting a plug in the cavity, and subsequently filling up the space be- tween the walls of the cavity and the plug, and the re- mainder of the cavity, by electro-deposition. Remark : — The methods described in this patent right are entirely novel, and hence its validity is unquestionable. Patent, No. 386,692, granted to Win, A. Dartt, January 24th, 1888, for a process of filling decayed teeth, which con- sists in first filling the cavity of decay with soft material, as wax, and restoring the original form of a tooth out of the same material ; next, taking an impression of this restored tooth with plaster-of-Paris, and casting a zinc die therefrom in shape like said tooth; then, placing a piece of gold or other swagable metal plate on the zinc die, at a point corres- ponding to the location of the cavity in the natural tooth ; then, placing a piece of soft metal, such as sheet lead, over the last named metallic plate, and, pounding it down into the die, removing this plate, which is shaped like the tooth at that point, the inner side is coated with wax, and the plate is pressed against the natural tooth at the corresponding point, removing the surplus wax and metal, and affixing pins in the inside of said plate ; next, cleaning the cavity in the nat- ural tooth of the first named soft material, and filling it with a suitable plastic material, like cement or gutta-percha, and pressing the pins secured to the plate into said plastic materi- al, while the latter is still soft, and keeping the plate in po- sition till said material hardens around the pins. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 149 Remark : — This is substantially a process-patent, in which each element or step in the operation is necessary to sustain its validity. The result attained is practically the same as described in patent, No. 179,945. In the latter pat- ent, the claim is for the result, whereas in the patent under discussion, the claim allows for the method of obtaining the result. Patent, No. 402,252, granted to Albert Robinson, April 30th, 1889, for a process of filling teeth, by first making a mould by swaging metal foil into the cavity ; filling said mould with molten gold or other metal ; grooving the bottom of the filling thus prepared, and fastening said filling into said cavity by means of cement inserted in said grooves. Remark : — This patent is novel to the extent of the sub- stitution of gold or some other metal for a plastic substance in filling the matrix or mould to form the tooth-plug. In patent, No. 375,167, the claim granted is similar, aside from the above noted substitution of materials, which would invali- date the patent, but the dissimilar methods employed in securing the plug in the cavity sustain each patent. For methods of restoring lost portions of a natural tooth- crown, several patents have been issued, as follows : A patent, No. 403,597, issued to Charles II. Land, May 21st, 1889, for a process of restoring a lost portion of a tooth, by forming a crown or partial crown to conform to the lost por- tion of the tooth. The claims granted allow, first, to secure an anchoring post in the crown (natural); then, fitting a thin plate (platinum) on this post and burnishing it to the adja- cent tooth-parts to form a mould — the exact shape of the lost portion of the tooth. A tube is fitted over the anchoring post and fastened to the metal mould. A porcelain facing with pins is then ad- justed to form the portion of the tooth restored. Plastic por- celain paste is moulded as an intermediate body between the facing and the metal mould, and the said body is fused with the matrix or base and the facing, making one whole piece, with the tube in the centre. This piece is slipped over the anchoring post of the tube in the body engaging it, and it 150 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. can be secured permanently on the post by means of a cement. (The tube is not a necessity according to the second claim of this patent.) Remark: — This is a " combination " patent, in which each element of the claim is necessary to sustain the validity of the patent, which can be avoided by taking away one ele- ment and substituting another. Thus, if the anchoring post and tube are omitted, and, instead, using a band to encircle the tooth soldered to the metal mould, the patent is overcome. Again, if the tube is split and tapered, and anchored in the natural tooth, while the post is baked in the porcelain por- tion, the method is reversed, and more security is obtained by means of the split tube chucking the post when inserted in position. Patent, No. 405,167, to Charles H. Land, Detroit, Michi- gan, granted June 11th, 1889. This patent allows a process for restoring decayed teeth, by imbedding an anchoring nut in the tilling material (either amalgam, gold, cement, etc.) with the tooth-cavity, and fastening thereon a tooth-crown, or portion of a crown, by means of a screw uniting the tooth- crown, or section, with the nut. The patent also allows a fluid-tight protecting coat, gutta-percha or cement over the tilling material, before screwing on the tooth-section, thus making a fluid-tight joint. Remark : — This patent seems valid as it does not inter- fere with any previously known methods, nor infringe exist- ing patents. However, the second claim, respecting the fluid- tight covering of gutta-percha to be placed over the tilling material, probably infringes the Sheffield patent, dated No- vember 16th, 1886, and methods previously used. Patent, No. 432,737, to Charles H. Land, July 22nd, 1890, for a process of restoring defective teeth by means of an artificial tooth-section, which has a porous or biscuited surface, having a metallic surface applied, in solution, upon the said surface and fused thereto ; this metallic surface constituting a means of attaching the said section to the base or natural tooth by means of amalgam, which unites with the metallic biscuited surface. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 151 The patent also grants the right of securing an impres- sion of the surface of the tooth-portion, to be restored by means of a thin sheet of metal fitted upon the surface to form a matrix or mould ; secondly, causing the tooth-section to conform to said mould and hardening said section ; and thirdly, uniting said section to the tooth by means of amalgam. Remark: — The methods granted in this patent right ■were presumably novel at the time the patent was granted ; hence the patent is valid, and no doubt would be sustained as such in court decisions if its validity were questioned. Patent, No. 400,921, granted to Charles H. Land, April 9th, 1890, for a means of adjusting a partial or whole crown. The whole combinations or claims of this patent grant the right for a porcelain section or tooth to be attached to a natural tooth, or the root of the tooth, by means of a threaded or non-threaded pin with a porcelain head ; also, an inter- vening protecting substance between the tooth-section and the natural tooth may consist of thin metal burnished to conform to the natural tooth, or cement, or other intervening- substances. Remark : — This patent is valid, as no interferences can be presented. Patent, Xo. 454,566, granted to Charles II. Land, June 23d, 1891. Claims : — First. The process of making a mould by swag- ing metal foil into a cavity, and then filling said mould with molten gold or other metal. Second. For fastening said metal section in place in the tooth by means of amalgam. Third. For the process of restoring a decayed tooth by ti ret building up a foundation upon the surface of the lost por- tion of the tooth by means of amalgam, then burnishing upon said foundation thin metal to form a matrix, then fashioning a section by means of said matrix and fastening said section to the tooth. Remark: — The first and second claims granted in the above patent right are similar to the claim issued to Albert Robinson, patent, No. 402,252, and if this latter patent is 152 DENTAL JURISPKUDENCB. valid, the first claim, above referred to in the Land patent, must be declared void. The third claim is a combination which produces essentially a different result, and hence is valid. Patent, Xo. 375,167, granted to Charles H. Land, Decem- ber 20th. 1 — 7. First. For a process of restoring decayed teeth, consisting of partially filling the cavity to cover an exposed pulp as a protection, and of securing the impression of a cavity in a decayed tooth by mean- of a thin plate of metal to form a matrix. Second. To provide said matrix with engaging pin-. hooks or countersinks. Third. To mould into said matrix a plastic substance, to form a section or plug. Fourth. Engaging said section or plug upon a matrix. Fifth. Securing said matrix, with its adherent section or plug, into the cavity of the natural tooth, etc. Remark : — There is no evidence of interference with previous patents, that will invalidate the above patent right. Devices for Retaining Fillings in Teeth, and Metal Cap Cover- ings for Fillings. Patent, No. 143.418, to Edmund Osmond, October 7th, 1873. A small gold screw, which is inserted in the bottom of a prepared cavity in a tooth, is provided with split upper ends, which, when the filling has been packed around, are turned down over it. to receive and secure the filling more firmly. Patent, No. 179,946, granted to R. Noble, July 18th, 1876. A metal cap having pins is forced into the filling, while soft, as a covering. Patent, ZSo. 135.710, issued to IT. Weston, December 26th, 1876. The cap is struck-up sheet metal, and a small rectangular piece is cut from its centre and turned up to form a handle, leaving an opening in the cap, which i- closed after the cap is placed in position. DENTAL JURISPRUDENT £. 153 Remark : — The validity of the above patents would be sustained if tested in court, as no interferences could be shown. Method <>f Fastening Tooth-Crowns in the Prepared Roots. Patent, No. 238,748, November 16th, 1886, issued to Lucius T. Sheffield. The claim is for the combination of the prepared roots and an artificial denture adapted thereto ; a crystallizing cement is applied in the root-canal to secure the denture ; a water-proof cement, consisting of a solution of gutta-percha, is interposed between the denture and the crystallized cement. This is substantially a method for setting a crown, whereby a film of gutta-percha is inter- posed between the crown and the cement in the tooth-root. Remark : — This method is merely a deviation from the usual modes employed in similar operations. Permanent Bridge-Dentures. Patent, Xo. 352,784, to Lucius T. Sheffield, granted No- vember 16th, 1886. Abstract of Claims : — In the manufacture of artificial denture, preparing the roots and applying the supporting teeth in position thereon ; applying metallic crowns to the supporting natural teeth; then, taking an impression of the mouth, and removing the crowns and supporting teeth there- with; then, connecting the opposite sides of the structure by a supplemental brace, connecting the crowns and support- ing teeth by the usual method ; and then, securing the inter- mediate artificial teeth between the supporting teeth and crowns, and removing the exposed portions of the brace, substantially as described. Remark : — The method of using a supplemental brace, connecting the opposite sides of the bridge-denture, is the element or' novelty in its construction. Patent, Xo. 238,940, granted to James E. Low. March 15th, 1881. ]">4 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Brief: — The artificial tooth is held by bands rigidly and permanently securing it to natural teeth upon either side. The artificial tooth requires no dental plate, and does not, as usual, rest and press upon the gum beneath. Claims : — First. The herein described method of insert- ing and supporting artificial teeth, which consists in attaching said artificial teeth to continuous bands fitted and cemented to the adjoining permanent teeth, whereby said artificial teeth are supported by said permanent teeth, without dependen- cies upon the gum below. Second. An artificial tootli cut away at the back, so as not to present any contact with the gum, except along its front lower edge, and supported by rigid attachments to one or more adjoining permanent teeth, substantially as and for the purpose set forth. Remark : — The validity of this patent was sustained in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond et al. (30 Fed. Rep., 775.) Patent, No. 313,434, to James E. Low, granted March 3d, 1885. Claims: — First. In combination with a natural tooth, or teeth, a denture provided with a band, or bands, perma- nently connected to said natural tooth or teeth, and having a narrow bearing surface fitted to rest upon the hard ridge of the jaw, whereby said denture is supported both by its bear- ing upon the said ridge and by its attachment to the nat- ural tooth or teeth, substantially as described. Second. In combination with the permanently secured denture having its lower surface contracted to oppose the ridge of the jaw, the metallic plate fitted accurately to the jaw-sur- face and secured to the denture and to the band or bands by which the denture is permanently held in place, substan- tially as described. Remark : — This patent was granted as an improvement upon the bridge-denture patent, isssued to James Low, March loth, 1881. As the previous patent (No. 238,940) was declared valid in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond, this improvement, consisting of the claims dental jurisprudent i:. 155 granted in that patent, in combination with the bearing sur- face (plate) resting upon the hard ridge of the jaw, also car- ries validity. Patent, No. 336,230, Charles P. Grout, February 16th, 1886. Claims : — First. The combination of two metal tooth- crowns, adapted to be secured to two tooth-stumps, and a detachable connection between the crowns, to provide for separately placing them on and removing them from their roots or stumps. Second. The combination, with a dental bridge and a tooth-crown at one end thereof, both forming one integral structure of another tooth-crown, upon which the other or free end of the bridge is supported, and capable of self-adjust- ment as the bridge expands or contracts. Patent, No. 318,579, issued to Lucius T. Sheffield, May 26th, 1885. The following is an abstract of the claims granted : — In the method of manufacturing artificial dentures, fitting the supporting tooth-crowns to the roots and teeth in the mouth ; preparing a cast thereof ; making a mould from the said cast representing the jaw ; preparing a trial-plate of wax ; fitting the said mould ; mounting thereupon the artificial teeth which are to form the bridge; adjusting said artificial teeth upon said trial-plate, by placing the said trial-plate in the mouth fitted with the supporting teeth, thereby securing a proper articulation, and then investing the said bridge-teeth and the said supporting teeth, together with the trial-plate in the mouth, and removing them together ; removing the wax, additionally investing the teeth sufficient to keep them in their relative positions, and then soldering the denture to- gether, making a completed whole. Remark: — This patent rests upon a combination of the methods used by dentists in a similar class of mechanical operations. Being a combination of these methods, the inventor can claim novelty and the right to a patent. However, the 156 DENTAL JURISPRUDENT K. methods can be varied by substitution of other elements, without infringement. Patent, No. 318,581, granted May 26th, 1885, to W. S. Sheffield, for a support for artificial dentures. Claim: — Improvement in the manufacture of artificial dentures, the same consisting in connecting metallic crowns adapted to the teeth, by a bar extending over the alveolar ridge ; attaching the said bar to a plate adapted to rest upon a portion of said ridge, and mounting the artificial teeth upon said bar, etc. Remark : — The validity of this patent is questionable. Patent, No. 319,238, granted to Chas. P. Grout, June 2nd, 1885. Abstract of claims: The method of obtaining a metal fac- simile of natural tooth-roots, or stumps on which to fit metallic tooth-crowns, consisting in trimming or shaping the ends of natural roots or stumps to the desired form, and forming in them pin-holes or sockets; then, applying soft metal tubes to the roots or stumps, and pressing them down below the free margin of the gum ; in inserting pins in the holes or sockets ; then, tak- ing a plaster impression of the natural roots or stumps, and the soft metal tubes and pins from the mouth, and in finally casting from this impression, with its tubes and pins, a me- tallic facsimile having projections in which are holes or sock- ets, and which correspond in form to the natural roots and stumps, etc. Remark : — The novelty in this patented method consists in the adaptation of the soft metal tubes to the root-ends to form a mould. In former crown-methods, a gold band was fitted to the root, with the pin in position in the socket. A plaster or wax impression of the root was then taken ; a model, usually plaster, was made from the same, with the pin and band in position, and the tooth was fitted upon the said model. Patent, No. 446,769, granted to Joseph W. Clowes (New York City), February 17th, 1891. Claims: — First. An improvement in dentistry, which consists in combining with the teeth suitable plastic fillings, DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 157 which are extended between the teeth and are moulded upon the gum. Second. The combination with connected plastic fill- ings inserted in two or more teeth of a strengthening bar in- serted in the teeth, and inclosed in the plastic tilling. Third. The combination with fillings inserted in cavi- ties in adjacent teeth of a connective body of plastic material, formed integrally with the filling moulded upon the gums, and carved in imitation of teeth. Remark : — This method of bridging teeth has little novelty to sustain the patent. A strengthening bar inserted in the cavity of natural teeth and inclosed in the artificial tooth, was the method practiced by Bing, and the Beale Tooth- Crown also consisted of a tooth with a bar baked therein, and having its ends projecting from the lateral walls of the tooth. The mode of moulding teeth of plastic material upon the gum is merely a deviation from the usual methods. It is questionable whether such methods have not been previously practiced by some dentists. Patent, No. 374,572, granted to Stephen T. Beale, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa., December 13th, 1887. Claims: — First. An artificial tooth having a triangular shaped bar baked into the body thereof, in its formation, and extending beyond the side walls of said tooth, in combination with one or more teeth, having metallic backs with sockets and anchor-posts. Second. ■ An artificial tooth, in combination with a hori- zontal bar and one or more pins, with heads which are held firmly in the body of the tooth, and the opposite ends of said bar and pins extending beyond the side walls of the tooth, for attachment to a tooth having a similar bar and pins fitted into the same. Third. The combination with a porcelain tooth and a triangular bar running horizontally through said tooth of one or more pins, the heads of which are imbedded into the body of the tooth, in its formation, and extended from the side walls thereof, and a platinum or other plate attached to laid bar and pins. 158 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Remark : — The artificial tooth is similar in construction to the Bing tooth, in which the bar or pins are baked in the body of the tooth, and extended from the side walls thereof; the difference is in the shape of the bar and method of soldering the teeth together. The inventor has not operated the patent to the extent of claiming royalty, and the belief is that it has been abandoned to the profession. Patents for Removable Bridge-Denture. Patent, No. 365,764, granted June 28th, 1887, to J. A. Throckmorton, for clasps extending over the alveolar process, to retain the plate in place. Claim : — The combination, with a whole or partial plate of artificial denture, of one or more metallic clasping plates (clasps) extending from the inner or outer margin of the denture, as described, said clasping plates being bent or curved over the alveolar process and gums of the upper jaw, or the buccal side, or under the parts at the lingual side of the posterior position of the lower jaw, substantially as here- in set forth. Remark : — The use of clasps in bridge-dentures has been in vogue, in removable plates and bridges, more than fifty years previous to the date of the granting of this patent. The clasps extending over the alveolar process is, in a measure, novel, though it is but a modification of the method of allowing a metal plate to extend over the alveolar process, both deriving support by the same means. Patent, No. 421,116, granted to John A. Throckmorton, February 11th, 1890. Claim: — The removable bridge-work for artificial den- ture, substantially as herein described and shown, with clasp- ing arms for attachment to natural teeth, or plates extending from the inner or outer margin of the bridge-work, and adapted to clasp over the alveolar process of the gums, as set forth. Remark: — The criticism appended to patent, No. 365,764, applies as well to the above described patent, as the claims granted therein are for the adaptation of the same principle DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 159 granted in patent, No. 365,764, applied to a different form of denture. These patents, No. 365,764 and No. 421,116, are being operated by the inventor, i. e., a royalty is charged for the use of the method. Patent, No. 352,653, granted to John J. Stedman, May 19th, 1891, for an artificial denture having the last molars omitted therefrom, and having incased spring mechanism located between its plates in the position of the lost molars. Remark: — It is an old method to fasten spiral springs to upper and lower dentures, thus connecting them, and hold the plates in position. The patent is an improvement thereon. Patent, No. 424,924, granted to George L. Curtis, for a removable bridge-denture, consisting of the combination of a divided truss supported upon natural roots or crowns of teeth, with a bridge or crown removably secured to said di- vided truss ; said crowns having slots to engage the arms or trusses. Remark : — This method of removably securing bridge- dentures is novel, and hence the patent is valid. The belief is that the inventor has abandoned this invention to the pro- fession. Patent, No. 390,521, for removable bridge for artificial dentures, granted October 2nd, 1888, to Cassius M. Richmond, assignor to the International Tooth-Crown Co. Claims : — First. The combination of the prepared root having a sealing metallic cap, hermetically sealing the same, and a removable bridge fitting the face of said metallic cap, and provided with a pin permanently secured thereto, and entering within the metallically sealed cavity of the tooth, substantially as described. Second. The combination of a prepared root having its end metallically hermetically sealed, a dental bridge adapted to fit the same at one end and provided with a support at the other, adapted to rest upon the supporting surface of a tooth or root, substantially as described. Third. The combination in a removable dental bridge of u prepared root having its end hermetically sealed, with a suit- able terminal support on the said bridge fitting said root, the 160 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. said bridge being provided at its other end with a clasping attachment connecting it to a supporting tooth or terminal, substantially as described. Patent granted to Geo. V. I. Brown, March 16th, 1886, for dental bridge-work. Claims : — The process in the manufacture of artificial dentures of fitting silver bands to the permanent teeth, mak- ing a plaster cast of the jaws, with the bands attached ; then, removing the bands, adjusting them to the model of the permanent teeth on the cast ; waxing up such artificial teeth as may lie necessary ; investing the cast and artificial teeth in a flask ; removing: the wax and casting about the teeth and bands a molten alio} 7 , forming the metal bridge without backing or the use of solder — all as and for the purpose set forth and described. Patent, Xo. 315,656, granted to Philip A. Palmer, April 14th, 1885. Claim : — A natural tooth provided with a protective band or cover permanently secured thereto, in combination with a removable partial artificial denture, provided with one or more fastenings, whereby the natural teeth will not be clasped directly. Remark: — This patent provides for banding the natural tooth permanently, to prevent the abrasion of the tooth caused by the friction of the clasps. Its validity is ques- tionable. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 161 a o u O o o a *S -B aS P> m r-i. 5 "5 ■3 5 "3 .g _ &■ § * S * 3 -5 5 £ .■S tin is 5 a> +» - 5* 3 3 > o bo *" tj 1 s g p bO °* 3 3 cp OS 3 a bo ** ^ T-i .a a a -m 5 •g a * Sfi li o S u a ~ a 2 B .s r s r a - * 2 * * -3 o ,™ fl« « -, r- * g .2 £ S S So ? 5 - >■ S ■ ~~ --= 5 § t. — B ■/ a £ || || *| 3 6*5 "7 — 5 £." " S * u M - r. bl) — _ i 9 o o — B u o _3 f ; 0) — ~ bl Pi ?i — -= ( - — be be gd be 3 = e ft a = o 3 B s V B — ' "5 o 7. "5 at ; s "3 U ,0 § - $ 00 bl - "■ I- - - z. :i. s K _■ u " I a "5 - •2 a 7" S ~ o - -' 6 43 £ 1 0) s 1 ; 9) nd R g - — 0) 5 — a a 5 be a u u s 5 IT a 0) B ~ ~ V, g £1 - u: a i'. S = •3 f- = Z c « *B = - 0) .=S t: r- 5 3 >° 2 » S g g i/- - bo s a g b s a ■§ a - - T — • _, O - ' -r 3 be a .E s ■p — .- - "-■ _ ^3 05 ~Z ~ 2 — 3 s 5 "& I '> '-- - ^ & 2 i — w > a w r; « C- (C £ « - ** S * "S 19 = I I £ = 1 I § -sis 1 tl iJiSs ^ _ v d 3 1 = - = » £ S - ^ - - ^ i < < - - lis 1 1. ► 1 b •& g I g 2 "3 «d« S p " -g 1 ? 3 jj 5 ! " o o s & = &. J. g ~ 1 B — Ui -. ' 1*3 J J* 3 £ £ = - ? * 1 O IB Oi C cc .• c t «> . - C ^.^. H ° ^s c .E '- us V-Ql, a a ~^_ & " c O - geoo B _ . W r, S £gas V. > 1'ENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 165 PATENTEE. NO. OF PATENT. DATE OF ISSUE- 1. J. Logan, 310,294, January 6, 1885 2. E. Parmley-Brown, 423,467, March 18, 1890 3. Cassius M. Richmond, 346,316, July 27, 1886 4. A. C. Fones, 455,450, July 7, 1891 5. Cassius M. Richmond, 351,071, October 19, 1886 6. Charles P. Grout, 354,833, December 21, 1886 7. Moses Rynear, 342,761, May 25, 1886 8. James E. Low, 376,603, January 1?, 1888 9. Genese. 430,522, June 17, 1890 1U. Arthur E. Mattison, 280,052, June 26, 1883 11. Cassius M. Richmond, 392,226, May 22, 1883 12. S. B. Dewey, 409,671, August 27, 1890 13. Cassius M. Richmond, 277,941, May 22, 1883 14. E. T. Starr, 342,271, May 18, 1886 15. W. H. Gates, • 163,913, June 29, 1875 16. Calvin S. Case, 328,837, October 20, 1885 17. Lucius T. Sheffield, 354,356, December 14, 1886 18. Lucius T. Sheffield, 354,357, December 14, 1886 19. Cassius M. Richmond, November 6, 1888 20. J. J. Patrick, 380,512, April 3, 1888 21. George L. Curtis, 424,050, March 25, 1890 22. Charles P. Grout, 333,216, December 29, 1885 23. A. W. Day, 388,269, August 28, 1888 24. J. B. Beers, 144,182, November 4, 1873 25. W. G. A. Bonwill, 238,334, March 1, 1881 26. W. S. How, 313,737, March 10, 1885 27. H. C. Register, 319,946, June 9, 1885 28. M. W. Williams, 317,2o9, May 5, 1885 29. Calvin S. Case, 282,640, August 7, 1883 30. W. S. How, 313,738, March 10, 1885 31. C. S. Hulburt, 377,855, February 14, 1888 32. Charles P. Grout, August 24, 1886 33. George W. Evans, 373,346, November 15, 1887 34. Moses Rynear, 305,238, September 16, 1884 35. Henry Lawrence, 6,406, May 1, 1849 36. T. S. Waters, 377,970, February 14, 1888 37. Charles E. Blake, Sr., 355,126, December 28, 1886 38. Charles P. Grout, 319,236, June 2, 1885 As it is an impossibility to give an individual descrip- tion of each patented tooth-crown, the above classification has been arranged, embracing all such patents. Referring thereto, it will be noticed that nearly all forms of tooth, crowns used by dentists have been patented. 104 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. D. — A LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF CROWN AND BRIDGE PATENTS. The legal position of the dental practitioner with regard to certain crown and bridge patents, in view of the decisions of Judges Wallace and Shipman in the suit of International Tooth-Crown Co. r. Richmond et a!, receives an answer in that important case. This decision declaring the two patents, Xos. 277,941 and 277,943, granted to Cassius M. Richmond, for tooth- crowns, invalid, practically makes free the wdiole system of tooth-crowning, where a metal band is used to encircle the tooth-root, or a metal cap to cover the end of the root, and any tooth-crown consisting of a metal band or cap covering the end of the root, in combination with a metal backing and porcelain facing, or any varieties of this form of crown. This decision should annul certain patents for " tooth-crown- ing methods," which are but improvements upon this system. Regarding bridge-dentures, the decision in International Tooth- Crown Co. v. Richmond, declaring the patent, ISTo. 277,933, to Alvan S. Richmond, for "bridge," an infringe- ment of a patent, Xo. 238,940, granted to James E. Low, makes this latter patent the key to all forms of " permanent bridge-dentures, supported at one or more points by caps or bands," cemented on adjoining teeth, without dependencies on the gum beneath. The current belief of competent experts and that of the author is, that evidence and arguments can be presented to show that the claims granted in the Low patent are too broad, and the construction and interpretation of these claims in the decision given in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond, allow the patentee more than he is justly en- titled to. The annexed abstract of this case contains the decision of the four patents alleged to be infringed : United States Circuit Court, Southern District of New York. In the case of International Tooth-Crown Company v. Richmond et al (30 Fed. Rep., 775), before Wallace and Ship- man, J. J., Wallace, J.: (United States, etc.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 165 " The complainant is the owner of four patents relating to improvements in the dental art, all of which are alleged to be infringed by the defendants. This suit is brought for an injunction and accounting. " The first of the patents in suit was granted to James E. Low, March 15th, 1881, upon an application filed Decem- ber 20th, 1889. The subject is an improvement in dentistry, whereby artificial dental surfaces may be permanently fixed in the mouth in place of lost teeth, without the use of plates or other means of deriving support from the gum beneath the artificial denture. The patentee refers in his specifica- tion to the preexisting state of the art." [A part of the patent is then quoted, and the Judge pro- ceeds :] " It is entirely clear that the invention described in the patent was not only new and useful, but was an improve- ment in the dental art of considerable merit. " The former methods of supporting artificial teeth re- ferred to in the patent, were not designed to secure a perma- nent attachment of the artificial tooth to the natural teeth, but were intended to secure a removable attachment, the the- ory of many dentists being that a rigid attachment was un- desirable and impracticable, as unclean and, also, as liable to produce inflammation of the natural teeth. The methods which had been employed to secure a permanent or rigid at- tachment of the artificial to the natural teeth, were well cal- culated to excite the distrust and opposition of intelligent dentists. One of these is described in an article, of which W. H. IT. Eliot was the author, published in March, 1844 r in ' The American Journal of Dental Science.' This de- scribes an artificial denture consisting of three teeth, fastened upon a backing of metal. The extreme teeth, or the ones at each end of the artificial denture, are provided each with a pin. The pins are to go into holes drilled in the prepaid! roots of natural teeth, and in this way the denture is to be held in place. A slight bearing surface is formed by plates which are to bear upon the smooth ends of the natural roots remaining in the gum. This denture simply consists of 166 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. teeth held in by pivots and connected by a bar or backing of metal. Another of these methods is described in the United States patent to Benjamin J. Bing, of January 23d, 1871. This method consists in attaching artificial bars, which bars at either end are to be secured to natural teeth by forming cavities in the natural teeth, inserting the ends of the l>ars in the cavities, and then tilling the cavities with gold. " The objection to the use of plates and other methods of supporting the artificial tooth by the gum, are sufficiently pointed out in the patent, and the objections to methods like those of Eliot and Bing for supporting the artificial teeth by a permanent attachment to natural teeth, or the roots of such teeth, are obvious. Where pivots are inserted in the teeth to secure a rigid attachment, as in the Eliot method, they become loosened in the process of mastication, and the teeth are liable to be split by a sidewise wrench or motion. Such methods as Bing's tend to the destruction of the adja- cent natural teeth, the strain and motion in mastication loosening the metal fillings, and requiring a re-attachment of the denture, from time to time, to the increasing injury of the natural teeth. "By the method of the patent, a plate is dispensed with when some natural teeth remain, and instead of the artificial teeth being loosely clasped to the adjacent natural teeth, they are attached with strength and permanency, and are not forced into contact with the gum during the strain of masti- cation. By being firmly fixed upon bands of metal, secured rigidly and permanently by cement, or otherwise, upon the adjacent natural teeth, which they surround, the denture has an easy and efficient bearing, the gum escapes injury, and the strain of mastication is transferred to the natural teeth. When the natural teeth employed have their surface adja- cent to the gum cut away at the back, and only descend to contact with the gum along the front edge, another advan- tage results ; because the small area covered by the bases of the teeth precludes such an accumulation of food or other foreign matter between the gum and the denture as cannot be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 167 readily removed. It is not contested that Low was the first to devise and perfect the improvement described in the patent ; but it is urged that, in view of the prior state of the art, as described by the publications referred to, and as also de- scribed by the publications of Lintott, Scott, Fowell, and others, the improvement of Low did not involve invention. The references to the publications of Lintott, Scott, and Fowell are not of sufficient importance to require comment. Undoubtedly, Low was materially assisted in perfecting his invention by his observations of the artificial crown of Dr. Richmond, and it is not unlikely that the invention derives its chief value from its adaptability to use with the Rich- mond crown. It may not have involved a high order of in- ventive faculty to work out the conception, by connecting such crowns by a bar or bridge bearing an artificial tooth or teeth. Nevertheless, the fact remains that Dr. Low was the first to accomplish successfully what skilled dentists, like Dr. Rich, did not believe to be practicable, and to demonstrate how the objections, which were supposed to be so serious to the method of rigid attachment, could be obviated. It is not difficult after the fact to show, b}- argument, how simple the achievement was, and, by aggregating all the failures of others, to point out the plain and easy road to success. This is the wisdom after the event that often confutes invention and levels it to the plane of mere mechanical skill. This inge- nious argument in this case has not satisfied us that there was no invention in the improvement of Low. " The defense is relied on that the invention had been in public use for more than two years before the application for the patent. The proofs show that operations were performed by Low during the latter part of the year 1877, in which he Inserted the dentures of the patent in the mouths of patients. As the application upon which the patent was granted was not filed until December 20th, 1880, the defense would be es- tablished, were it not for the fact that Low had made an ap- plication, which was filed in the Patent Office January 6th, 1879, which had never been abandoned, for substantially the same invention. That application contained some matters 168 TiKNTAL JURISPRUDENCE. foreign to the subject of the second application, but so far as it related to the inventions covered by the claims of the patent, it did not differ from the second application, except in a single particular. The specification of the patent states that non-contact of the artificial tooth or denture carried by the bridge, with the gum, or the absence of pressure upon the gums, is one of the advantages of the invention ; while it was stated in the first application to be necessary ' to care- fully fit the base of the tooth or block to be inserted to the jaw, and, when secured, it should be so pressed down as to leave no space beneath it for the admission of food.' The statement in the first application is not inconsistent with the method of the patent, which consists in attaching the artifi- cial tooth or the denture to bands, and supporting them by the adjoining permanent teeth, ' without dependence upon the gum beneath.' So long as this essential feature of the in- vention is retained, it is quite immaterial whether the artifi- cial denture ' is so pressed down as to leave no space beneath it for the admission of food,' in the language of the speci- fication, or whether it is in positive non-contact with the gum. When the artificial denture is in non-contact with the gum, cleanliness is facilitated, and the suggestion which was first made in the second application was, therefore, a useful one. But it did not change the invention in essentials. Al- though the tooth or denture is pressed down so close to the jaw that food cannot lodge between it and the gum, it is still supported by the adjacent tooth or teeth, and not by the gum. As was stated in the first application, ' the yield- ing surface on which it rests will readily conform to the tooth or block, and any pain at first induced by the pressure will disappear.' " There is nothing to indicate that Low intended to aban- don his first application. His application being refused, cor- respondence ensued with the Patent Office, and finally Low made a personal visit to the office, had an interview with the Examiner, and convinced the Examiner that the invention which was the subject of the application was meritorious and novel, and one for which he was entitled to a patent. PENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 169 During the controversy with the Patent Office, various in- terpolations had been made in the first application, and the Examiner suggested that Low had better make a new appli- cation, and thereupon the second application was drawn up. So far as relates to the present invention, the new applcia- tion differed from the first merely in omitting some super- fluous matters, and in changing the description in reference to the character of the contact between the denture and the gum. There was no act on the part of Low which was equivalent to a withdrawal of his first application or to an acquiescence in its rejection. He merely made a new appli- cation as a more convenient way of presenting the original application for the final action of the office, after he had been assured that the rejection of his first application would be considered and a patent would be granted for the present invention. Both applications are to be considered as parts of one continuous proceeding, and the two years within which the invention could not be publicly used without invalidating the patent, did not begin to run until January 9th, 1879. (Godfrey v. Eames, 1 Wall, 317 ; Smith v. Goodyear Co., 93 IJ. S., 500; Graham v. Geneva Lake Co., 11 Fed., 138.) " The second claim includes, with the elements of the first one, the features of a tooth cut away at the back. Thus construed, the defendants infringe both claims of this patent. " The next patent in suit, which may be most conveniently considered, is No. 277,941, granted May 22nd, 1883, to Cassius M. Richmond, assignor, etc. The application for this patent was filed December 1st, 1882. This patent is for the inven- tion known in the dental profession as the Richmond Tooth- Crown. A ] latent was granted to Richmond, dated February 10th, 1880, for an artificial tooth-crown, and the present in- vention is said to be for an improvement upon the tooth- crown therein described, but it is, in fact, for a radically differ- ent tooth-crown. The invention relates to an improved method or device for attaching such crowns to the roots of stumps of natural teeth remaining in the mouth, the object being to provide an artificial crown of improved construction to be adjusted and secured to the root of the natural tooth, in a 170 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. permanent, practical, artistic manner, so that the tooth, when finished, will present a natural appearance and be capable of the same service as a sound natural tooth. After the natural root or stump has been cut off or ground, preferably on a level with the gum, and a hole is drilled therein, into which a pin is to be subsequently inserted, a metallic ferrule is then fitted upon and shaped to the prepared root of the tooth. A suitable crown is then selected to be applied to the root (color, size, and shape being consulted), in order to make it con- form, in ap] tearanee, to and as a substitute for a natural tooth. The artificial crown is provided with a metallic back or attachment, which has holes through it to allow the passage of the pins, which are firmly imbedded into porcelain. The root and crown having been so prepared, the crown is placed in position and attached to the ferrule by wax, sufficiently to hold the crown firmly in position to allow of the removal of the ferrule. Then a suitable pin, designed to be inserted in the hole drilled in the root, is im- bedded in the wax. The prepared crown is then invested or protected by a suitable cover of marble dust and plaster, leaving the wax portion exposed. This investiture will hold the parts in the position which they are to occupy in the mouth. The wax is then melted from the pin and crown, and replaced by a suitable gold solder, which may be blown in a blowpipe and fused around the pin. This solder will unite with the pin extending into the root, the ferrule, the pin extending into the porcelain, and the porcelain back- ing, making a solid backing to the crown and firmly holding all the parts together. The prepared crown is then slipped upon the prepared root and cemented thereon, the ferrule, when placed in position, projecting along the very margin of the gum, sufficiently to protect the root from decay and to conceal the ferrule from view.'' [The patent is then quoted from, and the opinion pro- ceeds :] " It is not open to doubt that this patent describes an in- vention in dentistry of the greatest utility and value. The invention enables an artificial tooth to be placed upon a DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 171 natural root, which can only be distinguished from the natural tooth by the most critical examination, which is as service- able while it lasts as a natural tooth, and which is very dur- able. The Richmond crown not only supplies the place of a natural tooth for the purposes of use so as to be a perfect substitute for a lost tooth, but it can be so artistically made as in any instance to be an improvement, in appearance, upon the natural tooth. Nevertheless, if the patent can be sustained as valid to any extent, it can only be upheld by placing a very narrow limitation upon the claims. " Without referring at present to the state of the art at the time Dr. Richmond conceived the inventions of the pat- ent in 1880, and of the present patent, it suffices to say that everything which is the subject of the fourth, fifth, and sixth claims of the present patent, had been in prior public use for more than two years prior to the application for the patent, and was public property prior to the year 1880 ; and if the remaining claims are valid, it is only because an inclosing cap by which the end of the root is hermetically sealed, and thus protected from the action of the fluids of the mouth, is an element of each claim. The inventor himself had aban- doned all the rest of his invention to the public. As early as in December, 1876, Dr. Richmond had inserted a denture in the mouth of a patient in San Francisco, involving the principle of the patent. That denture differed from the arti- ficial tooth-crown of the patent only because the inclosing ferrule or band was not a cap which covered the end of the root, and did not extend so far under the gum of the patient as to wholly conceal the gold surface. The denture as then inserted by him was a complete practical success, and, so far as is known, still remains in use in the mouth of the patient. In the years 1878 and 1879, Dr. Richmond practiced the inven- tion extensively in many of the large cities of the United States, and demonstrated to hundreds of dentists in public clinics and private practice the method of preparing and inserting his artificial tooth-crowns. The method was practiced with dif- ferences of detail, but was always the same in essentials. The root was always prepared in the way pointed out in the pat- 172 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. ent, and the denture always consisted of a ferrule or band accurately fitted to surround the root, to which was soldered a crown with a porcelain front having a pin extending into the root, the whole being cemented on the root in one piece. Sometimes a loose floor of platinum or gold was packed in- side the band behind the backing of the porcelain front, so as to make a floor above the solder when the crown was in- vested in position and the solder blown in ; and sometimes instead of a loose floor a half floor was joined to the band extending partly over the end of the root, forming a cap em- bracing part of the exposed end of the root, and the solder was then blown in under the cap. When made in either of these ways, the denture consisted of a porcelain tooth at- tached to a ring of gold at its upper part, and where the porcelain itself met the ring, there was no solid floor to the ring, but the porcelain itself impinged upon the ring. " Among those to whom Dr. Richmond taught the in- vention, was Dr. Gaylord,a dentist, one of the defendants in this cause. Two original dentures made by Dr. Gay lord and inserted in the mouths of patients, one in April, 1879, and the other in May, 1879, have been produced in evidence and identified, and the fact that these tooth-crowns were made and inserted at those dates and were practical and suc- cessful operations, and that with a single exception both were in all respects the tooth-crowns of the patent, inserted according to the method of the patent, is clearly established. It is conceded by the expert for the complainant, that if these dentures had been made with a ring or ferrule having a com- plete floor embracing the exposed end of the root, they would be the tooth-crowns of the patent. One of them has a half floor of platinum back of the porcelain under the ring, in- tended to partially inclose the exposed end of the root ; and the other has a partial floor made of loose gold foil stuited behind the porcelain, before the solder was flowed through the back of the crown. It is insisted that when the crown is constructed in this way, it does have the inclosed cap of the patent, and consequently the end of the root is not her- metically sealed. The controversy as to this patent is thus DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 173 narrowed down to the question whether the substitution of a complete floor over the end of the natural root, in the place of a partial floor, involves a sufficient invention to sustain the patent. " It is to be observed that in one sense the end of the root is hermetically sealed according to the method of the patent, whether covered with the closed cap or not. The specifica- tion states that the prepared crown is slipped upon the pre- pared root and cemented thereto. As the invention was practiced by Dr. Richmond from 1876, enough cement was placed inside the recess of the prepared crown to exude at the margin of the gum when the crown was forced on the root, to fill up the space, and to make a solid contact, when hard, between the root at all the parts exposed and the crown beneath and the rino; surrounding the root. The cement not only serves to hold the crown firmly in its place upon the root, but forms a hermetically sealed inclosure of the root. But it is insisted by the experts for the complainant, and by some of the witnesses who have applied the invention prac- tically, that unless the ring has a solid metallic floor, the porcelain, where it joins the ring, cannot be so closely united that the juices of the mouth will not enter at the joint ; that the solder flowed in behind the porcelain will not effectually close this joint ; and that inconsequence the cement inclosing the root will soon be dissolved and destroyed by the secre- tions of the mouth. It is alleged that if the minutest hole or perforation is left in the floor of the inclosing cap, the cement is exposed to the secretions ; that the secretions of different mouths vary wonderfully in their destructive action, and that while in some cases the cement might resist for years, in others, it would fail speedily ; and thus that the practical value of the invention depends most materially upon the inclosing cap. " Inasmuch as Dr. Richmond had for years been practi- cing the invention, without a closed cap, and introducing his artificial crown everywhere to the profession as a perfect sub- stitute when inserted upon a natural root for the natural tooth, it may be doubted whether the mechanical change of 174 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. covering the ring with a solid floor, thereby converting it into a cap, was introduced by him so much for its utility as it was tor t lie purpose of suggesting novelty, and enabling him and those with whom he had been engaged to obtain a patent. The change was not made until others had become pecu- niarily interested with Dr. Richmond in his invention. Then it was suggested that the reason of the failure of several crowns which had been inserted for patients, was that they were defective, because they were open at the end of the cap in- closing the end of the root at the point where the porcelain came in contact with the cap. Thereupon the closed cap was adopted. Xo experiments were apparently necessary, but the defect was remedied as soon as it was suggested. It is testified that the effect of this change was greatly to increase the strength of the artificial crown, and assist in protecting the root from the leverage of the pin by lateral pressure, as well also to protect more efficiently the cement from the action of the secretions of the mouth. On the other hand, the tes- timony indicates that since the closed cap has been adopted, it is not exclusively used by those who are authorized to practice the invention under the patentees. And although it is perhaps generally preferred, the impression left by the proofs is, that there is considerable exaggeration in the opinion that attributed to the closed cap the peculiar efficacy which has been assigned to it. " If Dr. Richmond had been the first to make a closed cap for a use cognate to that to which it was applied by him, the question whether there was any invention in making the change might be resolved in favor of the complainant. But it Avas not new in the art to use a closed cap in order to her- metically inclose the root of a tooth. This sufficiently ap- pears by reference to a publication in the ' Missouri Dental Journal,' in 18G9, of the operation of Dr. Morrison. That publication describes an operation in which a gold cap is fitted upon the root of a lost or decayed tooth, so as to be adjusted accurately to the remaining portions of the tooth and made to correspond, in configuration, with the original tooth. The cap is tilled with thin paste of cement, and DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 175 pressed to its place upon the root, the superfluous cement being crowded out at the margin of the gum where the cap extends quite to the alveolus. Another instance of the use of the caps having a tight metal floor to be inserted on the natural roots of teeth, and having a porcelain tooth-crown sol- dered on the cap, is disclosed in the patent granted February 3d, 1881 , to John B. Beers, for an improvement in artificial crowns for teeth. In view of these references alone, it must be held that there was no invention in making the change which was effected by Dr. Richmond in the fall of 1881, by substituting the closed cap in the place of the cap with a partial floor or without a solid floor. All that Richmond did, was to close a band or ferrule with a bottom of gold, and build up his artificial crown upon it, and the way to do this had been already pointed out. " The patent cannot be sustained upon the theory that Dr. Richmond was experimenting with and improving his method of making and inserting artificial tooth-crowns dur- ing the time intervening between his operation in San Fran- cisco, in 1876, until at last, with the change to the closed cap made by him in the fall of 1881, he succeeded in perfecting an invention which up to that time had been inchoate or in- complete. During all this period, he had been demonstrating and practicing the invention in public to dentists through- out the United States and in his private practice, with all the variations of mechanical detail. Those to whom he taught his method for compensation bought their instruction in order to practice the invention in their profession ; they did practice it, and it was put into successful use in all parts of the country ; and it is now too late to deprive the public of what became rightfully theirs, by supplementing to the invention a mere matter of mechanical improvement which in itself had no patentable novelty. " The third patent in suit is No. 277,933, granted May 22nd, 1883, to Alvan S. Richmond, assignor, etc., for an arti- ficial denture. " It is sufficient to say of this patent that, in view of the invention of Dr. C. M. Richmond and Dr. Low, the first and 176 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. third claims embrace nothing which involves invention, and that carrying the metal of the bridge under the wearing sur- face of the porcelain does not impart a patentable character to the third claim. "At the hearing of the cause, we indicated sufficiently the reasons for considering the fourth patent, upon which the suit was brought, invalid for want of novelty, and it is unnecessary to enlarge upon them now. " A decree is ordered for an injunction and an account- ing as to the first of the patents in suit. As to the others, the bill is dismissed. Neither party is awarded costs. u E. X. Dickerson, Jr., and E. N. Dickerson, for the plaintiff. "John Iyimberly Beach and S. J. Gordon, for the de- fendants. " (Endorsed) United States Circuit Court, Southern Dist. of X. Y. The International Tooth-Crown Company v. Richmond et al. — Opinion, Wallace, J., U. S. Circuit Court. Filed, February 22nd, 1887., Timothy Griffith, Clerk." The history of this litigation shows that Dr. Richmond having sold his crown patent to Dr. Sheffield, one of the in- corporators of the International Tooth-Crown Company, and taken a license under it, was, in default of payment of license fees, sued as an infringer of his own patent. Another suit having been brought against Dr. Gay lord, of New Haven, for infringement of patents owned by the International Tooth-Crown Company, a consolidation of the two cases was effected, and the issue was tried on its merits, to test the validity of the four patents named, with Dr. Gay lord, as the principal defendant. An association of dentists was organized in New York, under the leadership of Dr. A. L. Northrop, which assumed the defense of the suit. The case was argued before Judges "Wallace and Shipman, with the result as stated above. An appeal was taken by the Crown Company to the Supreme Court, as to the two patents to C. M. Richmond. The defense was conducted by the association of New York DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 177 dentists referred to, assisted by the counsel of the Dental Protective Association. The Supreme Court has sustained the action of the Circuit Court declaring invalid the C. M. Richmond patents, 2sos. 277,941 and 277,943, which are now public property. The Low patent and the A. S. Richmond patent had not been appealed, and were not before the court. The former, there- fore, is in force, and the latter remains invalid by the decree of the Circuit Court, the decision in both these cases being, however, subject to revision by the Supreme Court on appeal. Artificial Bridge-Dentures. A bridge-denture practically means the adaptation of one or more artificial teeth, to replace the lost natural ones, without the use of a plate covering the roof of the mouth ; the artificial teeth being connected to a bar having its ter- minal supports upon the natural teeth or roots, by clasps, pins or similar devices and intervening ones, if necessary, upon adjacent teeth, thereby securing it in position permanently or removably. The bridge principle was in use over fifty years ago, and even as far back as 1785, and therefore is public property; hence any dental practitioner can avail himself of the various uses to which the principle can be adapted, providing he does not infringe certain existing patents. There are two methods recognized in bridging teeth, viz. : removable and permanent. The former are generally retained by means of clasps encircling adjoining teeth. This principle has been practiced, as stated, for more than fifty years. Cases can be brought forward in substantiation of this fact ; consequently all forms of removable bridge-work are practically free (de- cided in International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond et al), and can be practiced without infringement, excepting possi- bly the Throckmorton patent, in which a clasp extends over the alveolar border, or the Curtis Bridge-Denture. All other improvements patented are such as do not embrace the nov- 1T V DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. elty requisite to sustain the claims of invention, or the inven- tion lias been abandoned to the profession. Permanent bridge-dentures, it is claimed, are all infringe- ments of the Low patent, sustained in the case of Inter- national Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond et al, this patent practically covering all forms of permanent bridge-dentures. This claim is erroneous. The following forms can be prac- ticed without infringement, viz. : "An artificial denture con- sisting of teeth fastened upon a metal backing. The extreme teeth, or those at each end of the artificial denture are pro- vided each with a pin. These pins are to go into holes drilled in the prepared roots of natural teeth, and in this way the denture is to be held in place by means of cement. A slight bearing is formed by plates which are to bear upon the smooth ends of the natural roots remaining in the gum. This denture consists of teeth held in by pivots and connected by a bar or backing of metal." This method was described by W. II. II. Eliot, in an article published in March, 1844, in the American Journal of Dental Sciences, and was quoted in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond. Hence this form of permanent denture can be practiced with- out fear of infringement. For a more accurate description, it can be said " that to join artificial teeth together by means of a bar or by metal backings, and having the extreme teeth (or intervening ones) provided with pins which are inserted in the canals and fastened by means of cement,'" is a legiti- mate form of practice, unprotected by patents. Again, a method for which a patent was issued to Ben- jamin J. Bing, January 23d, 1871, consists of attaching arti- ficial teeth to metallic bars, which bars at either end are secured to natural teeth, by forming cavities in the natural teeth, and then filling the cavities with gold or other ma- terial. As this patent has expired, it can be used without legal liability. Combinations of the Eliot and Bing principles can be formed, in which one end of the bar is an- chored in a cavity in the natural tooth, and the other one consists of an artificial tooth with a pin which is cemented in the natural tooth-root, or the intervening artificial teeth DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 179 may be provided with such pins. These and similar com- binations may be formed without fear of infringement of any patents. The claims granted in the Low patent and sustained by U. S. Circuit Court, Southern District, N. Y., are entirely too broad, and the claim of novelty is in violation of evi- dence that can be produced, and of the general principles of dentistry and mechanics. The first claim is as follows : " A bridge attached to con- tinuous bands cemented to adjoining permanent teeth with- out dependencies on the gum beneath." Upon the analysis of this claim, it seems as if it rests entirely upon the use of the cement to hold the denture in place permanently, as there is no further novelty involved, as one acquainted with the principles and practices of dentistry can demonstrate. The specification states that " artificial teeth are attached to continuous bands fitted and cemented to adjoining teeth." Thus it is shown that the patentee is restricted solely to sup- porting and fastening the band permanently to the natural tooth. In the claim, it is not stated whether the band attach- ment can be made to a metal cap- fastened on the root, or whether a metal crown or cap can be substituted for the con- tinuous band. The patentee's right is specified in the patent claims, and in no wise is he entitled to more than is contained in these claims. Hence it is but reasonable to suppose that a natural root with an artificial metal crown cemented thereon, can be used in conjunction with other forms of artificial teeth, without infringement of the Low patent. However, notwithstanding the distinct statement in the claims, the le- gal decision in International Tooth-Crown Co., as mentioned later, gives a more liberal construction of them. In further '•riticism of this patent, it may be said that a continuous band is simply a clasp entirely closed, an addition of a half • •ircle. This does not involve invention. Continuous bands have been frequently used in dentistry previous to the issue of the Low patent, particulary in gold plates, in the regulation of teeth, and in removable bridge-dentures. 180 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. In Bean v. Small wood, 2 Story, 408, the court said, " a machine, apparatus or other mechanical contrivance, in order to give the party a claim to a patent therefor, must in itself be substantially new. If it is old and well known, and applied to a new purpose, that does not make it patentable." The particular use to which a device may be put has no hearing upon the patentability of such device ; that must depend upon the essential novelty of its construction and mode of operation. Hence the use of a continuous band by Low is not new in dentistry, and presumably unpatentable alone, as it is only adapted to a new use. It has been held in this case that a metal crown or cap is but a continuous band with a roof on it. It is as much novelty for Richmond to support a bridge •on caps or metal crowns, as for Low to use continuous bands. A band is a plain, continuous strip, with its ends open. In no wise can a metal crown be construed as a band with simply a cap on it. A band must encircle the object it bands closely and be in contract at every point, on its inner side, with the object it encircles, or it cannot be called a band. Its outer side may take any desired form, concave, corrugated, etc. For example, a ring or barrel hoop. The ring closely clasps the finger, and the hoop the barrel — the outside may take any desired form. The primary requirement is that the inner side be in contact with the object encircled. If one end is closed, it becomes a cap, a new device. When a metal cap or crown is inserted on a tooth-root, but one end encircles the tooth, at its neck, while the other portion is not in contact with the tooth ; hence, it can in no wise fulfill the require- ments of a band and cannot be construed as such. The laws of mechanics will uphold this reasonable view. The Bing and Elliot dentures were permanently cemented, in position, therefore Low cannot claim novelty in fastening a denture permanently in position by cementing the bridge- piece to the adjoining teeth. His right is restricted, as above noted, alone to the cementing of continuous bands to the ad- joining teeth. Furthermore, as to the clause, " without dependencies on DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 181 the gum beneath," in the Elliot and Bing principles of bridge- dentures, such dependencies on the gum beneath for support were not required, as the bridge-denture, when in position, was a rigid attachment. Hence both of these inventors had done (Elliot in 1844, and Bing in 1871) what Low claims, in his patent (1878), was original with him. In each case, Bing and Elliot derived the support for their especial form of bridge-denture from the adjoining teeth. The second claim grants the inventor the right to " an artificial tooth cut away at the back, so as not to present any contact with the gum, except along its front lower edge.' x This was the form of artificial tooth used by some dentists in constructing bridge-dentures many years previous to the date of this patent. Even in certain classes of temporary bridge-dentures, this principle was observed, because the cut- ting away of the tooth in the back caused it to better adapt itself to the gum. In conclusion, the novelty involved in the Low patent right consists in the combination of two elements that have been used in dentistry, for similar purposes, previous to the date of this patent, but not combined. Hence it was new to combine them, and the patent is valid to that extent, viz. :- the cementing of continuous bands to adjoining teeth. Should a new element be substituted for one of those claimed in the patent, the claim would be broken without infringement, particularly if a new result were attained. Thus, if a metal cap or crown is substituted for the continuous band, the pat- ent is avoided, because it cannot be denied that an entirely new device is used, and another result obtained. The clause, in the first claim, " without dependencies on the gum be- neath," has no special signification, because, as has been proven, both Elliot and Bing inserted permanent bridge- dentures without such dependencies. The foregoing dissertation and criticism, by the author, of the Low bridge-denture patent, and of the litigations that have ensued consequent upon its infringement, is a statement of his opinion and belief as to the actual novelty involved in this method of bridging teeth ; of the interpretation of the. 182 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. claim as granted in the patent right, and of the broad construc- tion of these claims given in the decision in the case of International Tooth-Crown Co. v. Richmond et al. These conclusions and arguments arc stated merely as a personal opinion, and as such must be considered, as the Low patent lias been judicially declared valid. The statement of the le- gal interpretation of this decision is cited elsewhere and ex- pounded below, in the opinion of Messrs. Beach and Gordon, which can be assumed to be correct. A statement as to the status of the International Tooth- Crown Company's suits, and an interpretation thereof made by Messrs. Gordon and Beach, at the request of the First District Dental Society of the State of New York, is as follows : " These suits involved the validity of the two patents to Cassius M. Richmond, Nos. 277,941 and 277,943, for ' tooth- crowns,' etc., the patent to Alvan S. Richmond, No. 277,933, for 'bridge,' all dated May 22nd, 1883, and the patent to James E. Low, for ' method of supporting artificial teeth by bands cemented to permanent teeth,' No. 238,940, dated March 15th, 1881. " The first two patents covered what is known as the ' Richmond ' and the ' Sheffield ' Tooth-Crowns in all their varieties. They were held invalid, and, therefore, you are at liberty to make such tooth-crowns, without being in any way liable to the International Tooth-Crown Company. " The complainants have appealed this case to the United States Supreme Court, but we do not advise you that any different decision will probably result. (Decided.) The practical result is that the tooth-crown is free. " The patent for the Richmond bridge was also held in- valid, but the Low patent was declared to be good. This Low patent covers a bridge attached to continuous bands cemented to adjoining permanent teeth, 'whereby said arti- ficial teeth are supported by said permanent teeth, without dependencies on the gum beneath.' " The Richmond patent is, as you will remember, for a bridge supported by caps, and the court held that it was not invention for Richmond to support a bridge on caps, but DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 183 it was invention for Low to support a bridge on bands, taking all the surrounding circumstances into consideration, and that, as a cap was nothing but a band with a roof on it, the Richmond bridge infringed the Low patent. " The practical effect of this decision, if the complainant chooses to follow it up diligently, and unless some new evi- dence is found, will be to shut the profession out from insert- ing permanent bridges supported at one or more points by cemented caps or bands without dependence on the gum. As the matter now stands, any dentist inserting a Richmond bridge (according to the decision) infringes the Low patent, and an injunction would doubtless now be granted by any Federal judge, on application, on the strength of that adjudi- cation alone. " An appeal can be taken by the defendants to the Supreme Court a year or so hence, after an accounting by them, and determining the amount of profits or damages the complain- ant is entitled to recover. "If such proof can be made strong and clear enough to satisfy the court that what Low described was well known, and had been practiced by the dentists in the United States before Low claims to have done it, the present case may be •opened for rehearing on the newly-discovered evidence, or the courts might refuse to grant injunctions upon the ground that the present decision would have been the other way, if this evidence had been before it. At any rate, the question ■of the validity of the Low patent would be retired, if its owner ever had the temerity to sue a dentist who had signed a license in which he covenanted never to deny its validity. " Whether in a suit against such a licensee the court would enjoin upon the covenantees, under a patent declared void, either before or after taking of the license, is question- able." — Dental Cosmos, December, 1887. Mechanical Operation Patents. Numerous patents have been issued for mechanical op- erations, the methods of constructing artificial dentures, etc. The annexed patents quoted are only a selection of a small 184 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. number of: them, embracing and representing the various classes of patents issued for methods of making artificial den- tures. The " Official Gazette of the United States Patent Of- fice " must be consulted for a more complete re] tort of all of them. Patent, No. 67,129, granted to E. J. Merrick, for au elastic plate, which is attached to the hard portions and may be renewed as the mouth changes. The claims are : First,, for an elastic base plate, and second, for the manner of making the elastic base smooth on the lingual side, by means of its- being vulcanized in contact with polished metal. Patent, No. 90,765, to J. A. McClelland, dated June 1st, 1869, for a plate or brass plate having an upturned margin, and for making the gums and attaching them to the pre- pared plate at one and the same operation of pressing. Patent, No. 179,508, granted July 4th, 1876, to M. Bemis. Brief: — A lower denture is composed entirely of double teeth (molars), and is used by placing the denture over either the stumps or the front teeth themselves when they are short. Again, for artificial teeth in which the plates are formed to fit over the remaining natural ones, the artificial teeth arranged with the longer side inward, and being all or only in part molar teeth. ratent, No. 89,253, granted April 20th, 1869, to L. 1\ Streeter, for a celluloid base plate. Patent, No. 19,916, to Geo. Diffenbach, granted April 13th, 1858, for making the base of an artificial denture of a composition of matter, in which amber forms the principal ingredient. Patent, No. 39,538, granted to J. A. McClelland, April 11th, 1863, for the combination in a dental plate, of a skele- ton-plate, or a plate woven, or of perforated metal, with a base or filling of vulcanized India-rubber, in order to unite the perfect adaptability of rubber to the mouth with the strength of the metal. Patent, No. 71, 707, granted to G. W. Cool, December 3d. 1867, for the method of attaching a thin gold plate to the vulcanized plate, by fitting it to the concave surface of the- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 185 vulcanite, and attaching by means of the line teeth on its surface, that penetrate the vulcanite and are clinched. Patent, No. 88,682, granted to H. Twitchell, April 6th, 1861, for the method of lining hard rubber plates, or plates of other material, with soft rubber, either partially or wholly. Patent, No. 391,062, granted to W. H. Miller, October 16th, 1888, for an artificial denture, consisting of a non- metallic denture-plate, having side gums and teeth attached thereto, and a porcelain gum fused thereon, forming the front of the denture, the metallic plate or gum being secured to the non-metallic denture-plate, and the latter vulcanized for a denture having a continuous gum. A patent was granted on July 7th, 1885, for a dental plate, with one or more strips of absorbent material for hold- ing perfumed or medicated substances in a recess formed in the palatine surface of the plate, and means for securing said strips with a suitable covering for said strips. A patent granted July 28th, 1885, for a denture com- posed of perforated metal plate, having a moulded or cast interior surface to fit the palatine surface, combined with teeth set on the perforated plate, and held in place by the moulded or cast material, the metal plate forming the lingual surface and also the base of the whole plate. A patent was granted to J. J. Stedman, September 24th, 1889, for a method of employing clasps in partial denture. The clasp has a lug, which is vulcanized in the rubber plate, to secure the clasp thereto. Patent, ]STo. 60,871, granted to N. T. Folsom, January 1st, 1867, for an atmospheric dental plate. A slight, con- tinuous ridge is formed on the inside of the plate, to form a chamber between the plate and the gum, from which the air is partially exhausted, to retain the plate in position by atmos- pheric pressure. Patent, No. 115,951, granted to J. P. Gillespie, June 13th, 1871, for a dental plate provided with a flexible disk, the said disk being corrugated on the side next to the plate, or the plate under the disk is corrugated. Patent, No. 118,484, August 29th, 1871, granted to S.T. 186 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. Purvine and II. Smith. The patent claim allows in a dental plate, as a connection between the plate proper and tin- vacu- um chamber, the bar or bars with open spaces. Patent, No. 207,099, granted September 3d, 1878, to Basil Wilkerson, tor a dental plate having an annular groove of soft rubber around the air-chamber. A patent was granted September 1st, 1885, to T. Phil- lips, for a method of imitating the gold filling in a natural human tooth, with liquid prepared gold, and then baking or firing' the tooth. Patents for lining artificial dentures with foil were granted to J. A. Daly, .October 9th, 1888, and on October 19th, 1888 ; also to E. T. Starr. Tooth-Crown Patents. Many tooth-crown patents have become void, either by legal decisions, expiration of the patent right, or by abandon- ment to the profession. Again, many of the inventors have not sought to com- pel the payment of royalties for the use of their patent, i. e., the patent has not been operated. The patents for the Rich- mond, Sheffield, etc., crowns (owned by the International Tooth-Crown Company), have been declared invalid by deci- sions in the courts. In the case of hollow crowns and shells, the Beers pat- ent practically covers all such classes of crowns. A perusal of the claims granted in this patent will attest that fact. The patent was granted to John B. Beers, San Francisco, Novem- ber 4th, 1872. Brief: — A hollow metal crown of gold is lined with enamel, and secured over a screw inserted in the natural tooth. Claims -.—First. A hollow metal tooth-crown or shell for the purpose above described. Second. The hollow metal crown or shell, when filled with porcelain or other substance, with and for the purpose above described. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 187 Third. A shell or hollow crown secured upon and around the projecting portion or neck of a tooth by means of the screw and a suitable cement, substantially as described. The claims granted in this patent right are very broad and explicit, granting the patentees the right to all forms of hollow crowns or shells, whether a gold with a porcelain lining, a plain metal or a hollow porcelain crown. The third claim distinctly states : a shell or hollow crown, etc., not specifying whether metallic or porcelain ; hence all hol- low crowns of whatever material they may consist, if they are " secured upon and around the projecting portions or neck of a tooth,'' can be claimed under this patent right. All forms of hollow crowns that have been patented since the date of the Beers patent (November 4th, 1872), are but such improvements as recmire a mere substitution of material or mode of construction, or more skill in the mode of making, with but little novelty in the crown itself. Many of these patents, if given a test in court upon such evidence, would be invalid. In view of the above facts, and as the Beers patent has expired, it is safe to say that nearly all forms of tooth-crowns can be used without fear of infringement. The Goodyear Vulcanite Patents. During the existence of the Goodyear patent for vulcan- ite rubber, the dental profession was involved in constant litigations, because of its infringement, in adapting hard rub- ber to artificial dentures, without a license from the Vulcan- ite Company. The suits instituted against dentists for the infringement of this patent right and the Cummings' patent, are too numerous to mention. The amount of money collected from dentists as royalty under these patent rights was fabulous. In consequence of these suits by the vulcanite companies of Boston and New York, the dentists of Xew York and other cities organized the American Dental Protective Association, to defend them- selves against these unjust demands. lss dental jurisprudence. The patent rights underwhich these suits were contested, was the Nelson Goodyear patent, granted May 6th, 1855, for the exclusive control of hard or vulcanized rubber for all purposes; and the patent issued to John A. Cummings, June 7th, 1864, for the adaptation of hard rubber to dental pur- poses. The process covered by the Goodyear patent, was "to mix four ounces of suphur and one pound of rubber, and sub- jecting this mixture to a heat of not less than 260° to 275° Fahr.," which forms the vulcanite. The claim in the Cum- mings patent was for " a plate of hard rubber or vulcanite or its equivalent, for holding artificial teeth or teeth and gums.'" These patents were owned by the Goodyear Vulcanite Co., of Boston, Josiah Bacon having a controlling interesl therein. Many suits were instituted against dentists through- out the United States for the use of the methods claimed in these patents, without obtaining a license therefor from the company. Among the numerous suits contested for the infringe- ment of these patents, the following may be mentioned : American Hard Rubber Co., of New York, r. J. R. Dil- lingham, tried in the IT. S. Circuit Court, of Boston, January, 1864, before Judge Sprague, to restrain defendants from mak- ing hard rubber bases for artificial dentures by the process patented to the plaintiffs. Bacon v. Hill, Supreme Court, Dist. Columbia. Motion for a preliminary injunction overruled. Goodyear v. Hills, same court. Motion for a preliminary injunction allowed, subject, however, to be dissolved on motion of the defendant, upon reasonable notice, and on giving to the complainants security to the satisfaction of the court, that he will keep and render an account of all plates for artificial teeth, etc., made of hard rubber, in pursuance of the invention described in the letters in the bill mentioned. Dental Vulcanite Co. v. Drs. Smith, of Syracuse, Harris, of Skaneateles, and Watson and Tripp, of Auburn. Injunc- tion to restrain defendants from using hard rubber denied in every case, with costs. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 189 H. B. Goodyear, as administrator, and Conrad Poppen- husen v. Meyer Dittenhoefer, Joseph Steinert et al, U. S. Circuit Court, South. District, N". Y. In equity, Cummings r. Gummey, Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. v. Gardiner, IS. Y. Circuit Court and U. S. Supreme Court. Bacon v. Wait, H. B. Goodyear et al v. the same. Suit for a preliminary injunction to restrain T. G. Wait from in- fringing the Goodyear patent. H. B. Goodyear v. Berry, IT. S. Circuit Court, South. District, Ohio. A new rubber, under the Simpson patent, issued October 6th, 1866, was advertised, in which the manufacturer, A. R. Hale, agreed and guaranteed to defend all purchasers of his rubber in all suits, in law or equity, brought against him under the Patent Laws of the United States, for using the same for dental purposes. The Simpson patent was for the process of mixing two ounces of benzoin with sixteen ounces of sulphur, and to six- teen ounces of this mixture one quart of linseed was added. This mixture is then subjected to the proper degree of heat, and the result is the vulcanized compound. To make hard rubber, from ten to twelve ounces of this compound is used, in addition to one pound of rubber. This is thoroughly mixed and ground between warm rolls. This mixture of rubber and vulcanizing compound is subjected to a heat of 320° Fahr. The result is the vulcanite. Numerous dentists availed themselves of the opportunity of the guaranteed immunity from suits, and used the rubber. In subsequent suits, A. R. Hale failed to defend the pur- chasers of his rubber, excepting the case of Goodyear v. Evans, in which it was decided that Simpson's patent was an infringement of the Goodyear patent. The majority of these suits were contested under the Goodyear patent which, however, expired May 6th, 1872 ; but the Cummings patent was still in force, and the Vulcanite Company continued to levy upon the dentists for royalties under this patent right, for the application of hard rubber to dental purposes. A test case of this patent was instituted by the dentists, viz., Good- year Dental Vulcanite Company et al V. Daniel H. Smith, 100 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. r. S. < Jirct. Ct., 1 >ist. Mass., and tried before J udge Shepley, May 8th, 1874. The patent was sustained and an injunction ordered. An appeal was taken to the CJ. S. Supreme Court, and, in the final decision, the action of the Circuit Court de- claring the patent valid was upheld. The Cummings patent was then in force, until it expired, seventeen years from the date of its issue. E. — UNITED STATES PATENT PRACTICES. The experience of the United States Supreme and Cir- cuit Courts has proven that many patents issued are infringe- ments upon others that have been previously granted, but until their legality or invalidity is established by the deci- sion of the courts, the claims that are granted in the patent must be recognized and not infringed. For What a Patent is Granted. A patent is granted for any new or useful art, machine, manufacture or composition of matter, or any new or useful improvement thereof. To entitle a person to obtain a patent, he must prove himself to be the inventor or originator of that for which he seeks the protection of a patent. This matter is laid down in the patent laws as follows : "A patent is granted any person, alien or citizen, who has invented or discovered any new and useful art or machin- ery, manufacture or composition of matter, or any new or useful improvement thereof, not known or used by others in this country and not patented or described in any printed publication in this or any foreign country, before his inven- tion or discovery thereof, and not in public use or on sale more than two years prior to his application, unless the same is proven to have been abandoned — such person may, upon payment of fees required by law and other due proceedings had, obtain a patent therefor." — Sec. 4886, R. S. The only presumption why patents have been granted for certain methods in operative dentistry is because the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 191 Commissioners of Patents have not access to the data of what has already been accomplished in the dental profession, and consequently grant the patent petitioned for, if no previously issued patent interferes, and no one interposes an objection ; or if the patentee has not surrendered his right by abandon- ment of his invention to the public, by allowing it to be in public use or on sale for more than two years before apply- ing for a patent. The invention, besides being new, must be useful, i. e., it must be capable of being used, which implies that it has been brought to that state of perfection or completeness, that, if fully and correctly described in the specifications, those skilled in the art may, from the information thus given, without experiment or invention of their own, be able to practice the invention. In dentistry, many diverse conditions are presented for treatment by the dentist. In certain cases, one method of operation would be applicable, while in others, it must be al- tered or improved or changed in some of its details, that it may be practically employed. As a case in point, a tooth- crown may be instanced. It is the experience of many prac- titioners and the author's own observation, that certain forms of tooth-crowns are adaptable to but a limited class of cases. The methods of applying the crown must be im- proved and altered before it can be adapted to other classes of cases. This necessarily involves invention on the part of the dentist. Hence it is but reasonable to suj>pose that the patentee can claim but that portion of his invention which is adapted to the limited class of cases, and not that covered by the dentist's invention. When a patent is issued for a method of dental opera- tion, in view of the above circumstances, the specifications should precisely define the class of cases for which it is applic- able. There is abundance of proof to show that some of the claims granted in tooth-crown and bridge patents are too broad, and would not be allowed if their legality were ques- tioned. 192 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. The proof that a claim is too broad, and covers more than the original patent should allow, is a powerful defense for infringement of a patent. A claim serves to define not only the limits, bul the '-lass of the patented invention claimed by the inventor ;is his in- clusive patent, and great care is requisite to frame it so that it covers the whole invention, hut not more than really he- longs to the inventor. First Invention. It is a settled principle of law that whosoever perfects an invention first, is entitled to a patent, and is the real in- ventor, although others may have previously had the idea and made some experiments towards putting it in practice. He is the real inventor and is entitled to the patent, who first brought the invention to a state of perfection and made it capable of useful operation. On this point, in the case of Pitts v. Hall (2 Blatchf., 229), Judge Nelson said : " Now, there is no doubt that a person, to be entitled to the character of an inventor, within the meaning of the Act of Congress, must himself have conceived the idea embodied in his improvement. It must be the product of his own mind and genius and not of another." Others may have had similar ideas and experimented upon them. However, the person who first perfected the idea and made it capable of practical use, is the inventor, and entitled to a patent. This rule, says Henry Ilawson, is not to be understood as meaning that as between two independent inventors, claim- ing the same thing, the right necessarily belongs to the one who may have first reduced the invention to practice. On the contrary, although a patentable invention within the meaning of the law is one perfected and adapted to actual use, the right of a party who has produced such an invention is referred to the time of his conception of the invention, provided he has perfected it and adapted to actual use with reasonable diligence. Mere suggestions, even if they point towards a result, are not sufficient to entitle one making them to be considered DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 193 the inventor. In order that he may claim the benefit of what another does, the suggestion must leave nothing for the mechanic to do, but to work out what has been suggested. Combinations may be made of parts entirely new or en- tirely old, or part new and part old, but if the parts when brought together so co-act as to produce a new and beneficial result, the party so bringing them together has made an in- vention and is entitled, if he make claim thereto, to a patent therefor. If new elements are added to an imperfect com- bination, and if by the addition of such new elements, the combination is made perfect and operative, the person who adds such elements is entitled to claim the new combination. (Hall v. Johnson, Commissioners' Decision (Marble), May 2nd, 1883.) What Constitutes Invention ? To constitute invention there must have been more than the mere idea of obtaining a certain result ; the conception must be substantially the means or method involved ; and the invention must be so far clear and matured, that the in- ventor is prepared to give explanation sufficing to enable one skilled in the art to carry out the invention. An imperfect and incomplete invention, theoretical or experimental in its scope, is unpatentable, yet the discovery of something new, by intellectual thought or experimentation, is the basis of such right, which is rendered practical by the perfection of the invention. Although a second inventor has perfected the same in- vention and reduced it to a positive practical form, however lie who invents first will have the prior right. But, if he conceives an idea, and does not use reasonable diligence in adapting or perfecting the invention, and another in the mean- time conceives the idea, but also perfects the invention and practically adapts it to actual use, the latter is to be con- sidered the first and original inventor, and a patent granted to the former will be void, as he is not the first and original inventor. (Reed v. Cutter, 1 Story, 599 ; Agawam Co. v. Jor- dan, 7 Wallace, 583 ; Cox v. Griggs, 2 Fisher, 174; Ransom <. Mayor, 1 Fisher, 252; II. & C. Ilowson, on Patents, 26.) 1114 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. By perfecting an invention, the law moans not that the inventor has so far perfected his invention that there could not he any subsequent improvement, hut that it is so far com- plete as to he of practical utility. The possession of a pat- ent is no evidence that the holder thereof is therehy entitled, legally, to the benefits of the law. If rebuttal evidence can he given to prove that the thing shown and described in the patent is impractical, or that before the invention or discov- ery of it by the patentee, it was known or used by others in this country, or patented or published here or abroad, as it i- especially specified in Sec. 4920, R. S., that the defense may he made to an action for infringement, that the patentee was not the original and first inventor or discoverer of any sub- stantial and material part of the thing patented; and to dis- prove the assumption that a patentee was the first to produce and confer upon the public the benefit of some new and use- ful thing described and claimed in his patent, it must appear that prior to his invention or discovery, knowledge of the same or substantially the same thing existed among other members of the public. The design of the patent laws is to reward those who make some substantial discovery or invention, which adds to our knowledge and makes a step in advance in the useful arts. It was never their object to grant a patent for every trifling device, every shade of an idea, which would natural ly and spontaneously occur to any skilled mechanic in the ordi- nary progress of manufactures. (Supreme Court, March 5th, 1883. Bradley. The Atlantic Works v. Brady ; National Manufacturing Co., et al v. Meyers, Southern District, Ohio, U. S. Circuit Court.) The substitution of material does not involve invention. Invention is an essential prerequisite to a patent ; while it is not always easy to distinguish the exact point where the ordi- nary mechanical skill gives place to invention, yet there are a multitude of devices and articles of manufacture so far re- moved from this doubtful point as to leave the mind in no uncertainty as to whether the inventive faculty has been exercised or not. One may often say positively that there DENIAL JURISPRUDENCE. 195 is no invention, even though nothing like the thing in ques- tion, in its entirety, was ever before made. Novelty, in this sense, does not necessarily presuppose invention, where in a tooth-crown, or other device, one well-known material is substituted for another in its construction, and it is adapted by a well-known process and attached by another well-known method in common use. The inventor would produce sub- stantially no improvement except that resulting from the mere substitution of material and devices, which is not pat- entable. The law certainly never contemplated giving a separate patent upon every possible form or use to which tooth-crowns could be adapted. The one first to invent a new and useful device is en- titled to the protection of a patent, even if its production was accidental, and not appreciated at the time. (Garrett v. Siebert. Interference decided October 21st, 1872.) In accordance with the principle of the law which re- quires of the inventor, in the interest of the public, reason- able diligence, not only in perfecting, but in publishing his invention, it is provided that all applications for patents shall be completed and prepared for examination within two years after the filing of the application ; and in default thereof, or upon failure of the applicant to prosecute the same within two years after any action therein, of which notice shall have been given to applicant, they shall be re- garded as abandoned to the parties thereto, unless it be shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that such delay was unavoidable. — Sec. 4894, R. S. In connection with this section, should be considered the proviso of sec. 35, Act of July 8th, 1870, "that when an application for a patent has been rejected or withdrawn prior to the passage of this Act, the applicant shall have six months from the date of such passage to renew his applica- tion or file a new one, and if he omits to do either, his appli- cation shall have been held to be abandoned, and upon the hearing of such application, abandonment shall be considered n- a question of fact." If a rejected and abandoned application is not evidence 196 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. of a prior and abandoned invention, as against another party, it cannot be so as against tbe applicant himself, unless the statute by express word makes it 90. But the word " aban- donment" in the section in question is used in connection only with the word "application," and the sections being in the nature of penal statutes, are to be strictly construed. In accordance with this reasoning, sec. 4894, R. S., is to be un- derstood as meaning that failure to complete an application -or to prosecute it after rejection, within two years, will work an abandonment of tit at application, while under sec. 35, all applications rejected or withdrawn prior to July 8th, 1870, and not renewed within six months, are abandoned. In any of such cases, a new application may be filed at any time, but it will not be treated as a continuation of the old application ; that, having been abandoned, is a nullity, and has no more relation to or bearing upon the new application of the same party or the patent that may be granted thereon, than it would have upon the application or patent of an independent inventor. Infringement. An infringement of a patent is the making, using or vending of a patented article without the patentee's express or implied consent. " The unauthorized use of a patented invention is an infringement, no matter what else the user may add to it " (Johnson v. Root, 1 Fisher, 351 ; Buerk v. Valentine, 2 0. G., 295), even though the object or result to be secured is thereby better accomplished (Imlay v. Norwich and Worcester R. R. Co., 1 Fisher, 340). And a device which performs all the functions of one that is patented, sub- stantially in the same way and by substantially the same means, is none the less an equivalent to those described in the patent, because it performs some of those functions better or performs others in addition. (Wheeler v. Clifford Mower and Reaper Co., 2 0. G., 442). " The patentee of an improve- ment upon a patented invention cannot take possession of the latter; he must obtain the license of the prior patentee to use his improvement, or await the expiration of the elder pat- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 197 ent," (Colt v. Moss Arms Co., 1 Fisher, 108 ; Ilowson, on U. S. Patents, 128). The addition of certain elements to a patented construc- tion, which does not unfit it from performing its original result, but simply adds the result due to the new elements, does not avoid infringement. A mere change of material, or of a form, or structure of a device, are not patentable. That is, such changes as are not attended with any new or improved results, or do not involve a new mode of operation. The change may be an improvement in one sense of the word — in the sense that a mere substitution of metal for wood may be, i. e., in excel- lence of construction — -but there must be something more in order to constitute patentable invention. It is not necessary that two devices be exactly similar to constitute infringement. If they have the same mode of operation, and if they effect substantially the same result in substantially the same manner, one will be an anticipation of an infringement of a patent for the other, according as it is later or earlier in construction. It matters not, if one gives a more perfect result than the other, if the same means and mode of operation are employed. When in a suit for infringement it is set up as a defense, that complainant derived his idea of the patented invention from some third party, who first conceived it, the burden of proof is on the defendant, and a doubt respecting the evidence is fatal to the defense. (Duffy v. Reynolds et al, Circt. Ct. X. J., Xovember 3d, 1885.) "When from the evidence it appears that the defendant La simply pursuing the same process of manufacturing, which he followed before the patent in question was issued, the court Avill not restrain him from continuing to use the same means. (Dorian v. Gine,U. S. Circt. Ct., Eastern Dist. Penna., IT. S. Pat. Repts., February 9th, 1886, 702.) The employment of mechanical advice to construct a device in accordance with ideas furnished by another, gives no right to the invention. The entire merit is in him whose- inventive susrgestiveness conceived the invention. 108 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. The use or knowledge of the use of an invention in a foreign country by a person residing in this country (U. S. A.), will not defeat a patent which has been granted to a hona fide patentee, who at the time was ignorant of the invention or of its use abroad. (Doyle v. Bpaulding et al, Illingsworth v. same, U. S. Circuit Ct., District N. J., Patent Repts., April 15th, 1884, p. 300.) Where it is shown that the patentee's title is clear be- yond, reasonable doubt, and infringement is admitted or evident, the courts in equity may grant a preliminary in- junction upon motion, after the filing of the bill of complaint and reasonable notice given of the application to defendant. Where all the parts claimed, with one exception, were old and had been used in a similar combination in other things of the same general character, the defendant, not using the excepted part, escapes infringement. (Brag et al v. Fitch, et d, Supreme Ct. U. S. A., Official Pat. Rep. Ga- zette, May 2nd, 1871, 829.) The application of an old process or device to a similar or analagous subject with no change in the manner of ap- plying it, and no result substantially distinct in its nature, will not sustain a patent, even if the new form of result has not before been contemplated. (Penna. R. R. Co. v. The Locomotive Engine Safety Truck Co., Supreme Ct., U. S. Com. Repts., April 8th, 1884, p. 206.) When a patent in suit is the first in its particular field of invention, its claim is infringed by a combination which employs well-known mechanical equivalents to accomplish the results which follow from the combination claimed in the patent. (Tarrant v. Duluth Lumber Co., U. S. Dist. Ct. Min- nesota, U. S. Pat. Repts., June 21st, 1887, p. 1425.) In the case of Tarr et al v. Webb (U. S. Circt. Ct., East Dis., N. Y., July 20th, 1872), it was decided that "a monopoly of the use of a well-known substance in a partic- ular, but well-known form, cannot be secured." Patents are infringed by the substitution of chemical as well as mechanical equivalents, even if, in some respects, they are an improvement upon the original processes patented. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 199 (Woodward v. Morrison et al in equity, U. S. Circt. Ct., Dist. Mass., March, 22nd, 1872.) Where there is a different mode of operation produced and an improved result accomplished by the substitution of one old device for another, a patent may be granted. And where the construction of a device is different from that of preceding ones, and better results are obtained, its novelty and utility is established. Adions-at-Law for Infringement. Remedy for infringement may be obtained by two legal modes of procedure, viz. : action-at-law or suit in equity. All such actions, suits and controversies arising under the Patent Laws of the United States ma} r be contested in the Circuit Court of the United States or any District Court having the power or jurisdiction of a Circuit Court, or by the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, or of any terri- tory. The court to be resorted to in bringing an action for in- fringement, must be that of a district in which the plaintiff interested in the patent and the alleged infringer reside. Sec. 4919, E. S., serves to define the question as to who can sue for infringement, as follows : "Action on the case for damages must be in the name of the party interested, either as patentee, assignee, or grantee," i. e., the suit is brought by the person having the legal title to the patent within the judicial district in which the suit is brought, at the time the infringement may have been committed. (Moore v. Marsh, 7 Wallace, 515.) The damages recoverable for infringement of a patent is laid down in Sec. 4919, R. S., of the Patent Laws of U. S. A., as follows: "Damages for infringement of any patent may be recovered by action on the case, in the name of the party interested, either as patentee, assignee, or grantee. And whenever in any such action a verdict is rendered for the plaintiff, the court may enter judgment thereon for any sum above the amount by the verdict, as the actual damages sus- tained, according to the circumstances of the case, not ex- 200 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. ceeding three times the amount of such verdict, together with the costs." The verdict for damages, no matter how large, is not a complete remedy for past infringements, unless accompanied by a restraint in the future. As it is not within the power of a court of law to issue an injunction, such remedy must be obtained in a court of equity. This is provided for in the- patent laws, that any one of the courts above named " shall have the power (upon bill in equity by any party aggrieved) to grant injunctions according to the course and principles of courts of equity, to prevent the violation of any right se- cured by patent, on such terms as the court may deem rea- sonable."— Sec. 4921, R. S. In the Act of 1870, it is provided that upon decree being rendered in any such case in equity for an infringement, the plaintiff shall be entitled to recover, in addition to the profits to be accounted for by the defendant, the damages the com- plainant has sustained thereby, and the court shall assess the same, or cause the same to be assessed under its direction ; and the court shall have the same powers to increase the damages found by verdicts in actions upon the case. — Sec. 4921, R. S. The damages recovered in a suit for infringement are merely a satisfaction for prior use and do not free the party infringing from the operation of a patent. The use of an invention covered by a patent may consti- tute an infringement, and a party so using an invention after an injunction granted, will be adjudged guilty of contempt. (Matthews v. Spangenberg, U. S. Circuit Court, Southern District, N. Y. ; U. S. Pat, Rep., April 24th, 1883, 1,624.) In an action for infringement, the defendant may plead the general issue, and show that he has not infringed the pat- ent, either by showing that the thing made, used or sold by him, and claimed to be similar to that covered by a patent, is not so in fact, or that he had a license under the patent, from the plaintiff, or that the plaintiff has no good title, or that the patent is void because of an ambiguous or unintelligent specification, or that the invention, admitting its novelty, is DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 201 not a patentable subject. (H. and C. Howson, on U. S. Pat- ents, 135.) Under the general issue, the defendant may have recourse to other defenses, but not without notice in writing to the plaintiff or his attorney, giving thirty days before trial. — Sec. 4920, R. S. The defenses alluded to in the notice are as follows: First. That for the purpose of deceiving the public, the de- scription and specification filed by the patentee in the Patent Office was made to contain less than the whole truth relative to his invention or discovery, or more than is necessary to pro- duce the desired effect. Second. That he had surreptitiously or unjustly obtained the patent for that which was in fact invented by another, who was using reasonable diligence in adapting and perfecting the same. Third. That it had been patented or described in some printed publication prior to his supposed invention or dis- covery thereof. .Fourth. That he was not the original and first inventor or discoverer of any material and substantial part of the thing patented. Fifth. That it had been in public use or on sale in this country for more than two years before his application for a patent, or had been abandoned to the public. Notice of the second, third or fourth of these special defenses must state the names of patentees and the dates of their patents, and, when granted, the names and residences of persons alleged to have invented or to have had prior knowledge of the thing patented, and where and by whom it had been used. — H. and C. Howson, p. 136. F. — DENTAL PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The dentists in the United States have an Association, termed the " Dental Protective Association of the United States," to protect themselves from the unjust demands of in- ventors, and to contest, in a lawful manner, the validity of 202 DENTAL JUEISPRUDBNCB. certain patents owned by various companies and individuals, when such validity has not been established. In Milwaukee. Bix suits were pending for infringe- ment of the Low bridge patent, owned by the International Tooth-Crown Co. These suits were discontinued by the plain- t ill's. Similar suits have been brought against dentists in Bal- timore. New York State, Connecticut, New Jersey, etc. A number of them were decided in favor of the plaintiffs, the defendants being ordered to render an accounting and pay costs. Many of these cases were contested in behalf of the de- fendants by the Protective Association. It is not the purpose to laud this Association, but it certainly is deserving of credit for its worthy object in protecting dentists from pecuniary extortion. In reference to this Association, one important legal propo- sition remains a question of doubt for interpretation, viz. : " Whether or not any dentist in the United States, who has taken a license from the International Tooth-Crown Co., un- der their various letters patent, and signed certain written covenants and conditions contained in such licenses, is at liberty, after the expiration of such license, to contest either the scope or validity of any of the International Tooth-Crown Company's patents recited in that license, or deny that the bridge-work made or put in by such individual dentist in- fringes such letters patent, granted James E. Low, dated March 18th, 1881, No. 238,940?" This question is doubtful, as no legal decisions have been rendered in dental cases of this nature ; however, the follow- ing favorable decision on this point may be quoted : In White et al y.Lee (U. S. Circuit Court, District Mass., U. S. Pat. Reps., April 24th, 1883, 1623), it was decided that a " licensee is at liberty to contest the question whether the articles made by him embody the invention or any material part of it, and a stipulation to the contrary in the contract is of no effect." Again, in a suit by a patentee against a licensee for license-fees for the use of a patented improvement, something DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 203 corresponding to an eviction of the licensee must be pleaded and proven, if he would defend against an action for royal- ties. Judge Lowell, in his opinion, said : " One of the de- fendant's agreements was, that he will not, in any way, con- test the validity of said patents, or either of them, or any reissue or renewal thereof, nor the sufficiency of the specifi- cations or the validity of the licensor's title, nor the fact of his infringement in the manufacture and sale of said shoes. One of the mutual stipulations was that in case of the reissue of said patent, the grant herein shall be good under said is- sue, and the foregoing stipulations and agreements on the part of the respective parties shall be binding upon them in the same manner and to the same extent as though such re- issue had never been obtained." He further said, "I inti- mated on a former occasion that the stipulation not to contest the fact of infringement was insensible and repugnant, inas- much as the agreement is only to pay for such shoes as em- body the invention, or some material part thereof, and both counsel agree that the cmestion of infringement or what would be infringement in a patent case is open." The question has been argued whether the defendant can resist an action for license-fees under a contract, by proving that the patent is void. In his very thorough brief, the defendant cites all the important cases ; and they, in a cursory examination, seem to present a difference of opinion, which, on a more careful study, will be found to disappear. Many of the decisions treat a licensor as a landlord and a licensee as his tenant, who cannot dispute the title so long as he has occupancy of the premises. Many of the cases, such as Bowman v. Taylor, 2 Adol. & E., 278 ; Smith v. Scott, 6 C. B., K". S., 771 ; Wilder v. Adams, 2 Wood & M., 329, are actions-at-law, and turn upon the effect of a recital or covenant in a sealed instrument. The agreement in this case is not under seal, and this is not an action-at-law. Other cases state the general doctrine in a somewhat absolute and general way, hardly admitting excep- tions. (Crossley v. Dixon, 10 H. L. Cas., 293 ; Clark v. Adie, 2 App. Cas., 423.) On the other hand, there are cases in the United States, which seem to hold that the invalidity 204 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. of the patent may always be proven, such as Harlow v. Put- nam, 124 Mass., 553. But these were cases on either side, which required no nice distinctions. The law is, I think r that a plea or answer that a patent is void, is not of itself a sufficient defense, but that evidence of what may be called an eviction in such a defense. The difficulty is to ascertain what amounts to an eviction in a patent case. It is easilv discovered whether a tenant of a certain parcel of land has or has not been evicted, but if a patent is void, still the li- cense may have all the benefit of a valid patent, because his exclusive title may never have been disputed. In Lawes v. Purser, 6 El. & Bl., 930, 932, the counsel for the plaintiff ad- mitted that if every one had publicly used the patented in- vention, that might be equivalent to an eviction, but con- tended that a simple plea that the patent was void, might mean merely that the pleader, when he began to draw his plea, had discovered a technical flaw which no one else had thought of, and the judgment pursued this exact line of rea- soning. In a case, in Massachusetts, the defendants, who were licensees and had used the patent to keep off competi- tion, were said by Judge Thomas to have had all the benefits of a valid patent, (Bartlett v. Holbrook, 1 Gray, 114). In New York, in a case which was twice brought before the Court of Appeals, it was held, first, that mere invalidity of the patent was not a defense, and second, that a repeal of a patent was a defense (Marston v. Swett, 66 N. Y., 206 ; R. C. K. Y., 562). These cases point to the true distinction, how- ever difficult its application may sometimes be, that some- thing corresponding to eviction must be proven, if a licensee would defend against an action for royalties. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 205 APPENDIX. DENTAL LEGISLATION. HISTORY OF DENTAL LEGISLATION. Dentistry, until within recent years, was not accorded the recognition of a scientific profession; for a long time it was practiced by persons engaged in other pursuits, as a superadded means of livelihood. Barbers, blacksmiths, watch- makers, and others of the same class, who had no professional education or qualifications whatever, performed the one oper- ation, tooth extraction, which constituted the surgical den- tistry in those days, with nearly the same success as the regular practitioner. In explanation, it may be stated that the accepted theory of the people then was, that a tooth should be extracted as soon as it ached or was attacked by caries ; and as the operation had no attractions for the medical men, it was relegated to the charlatans, who, in order to gain a surgical status, did not hesitate to claim that their specialty entitled those performing these operations to the designation of suRGEON-dentists, which title has ever since been applied without discrimination alike to qualified and unqualified practitioners of dentistry. An Act entitled, "For Barbers and Surgeons," passed in the thirty-second year of Henry VIII, is the first statu- tory law pertaining to the practice of dentistry enacted in England. By the third section of this Act, any one who " uses barbery or shaving" in the city of London, its suburbs, and within a circuit of one mile, is forbidden "occupying any surgery, letting of blood, or any other thing belonging to surgery, drawing of teeth only excepted." In 1840, the regular practitioners endeavored to change the existing status of dentistry, by securing recognition 206 APPENDIX. under the new Medical Act of 1843, which was then being introduced by Sir James Graham. The medical profession objected to such measures, on the grounds that they did not desire the dentists to appear as on equal footing with them- Belves. The dental profession at this time, says Dr. James Smith (Encyclopaedia Britannica), may be said to have divided itself into three sections: First, those who desired to see all the dentists fully qualified surgeons; second, those who wished them to have only a certain amount of surgical knowledge, and in this way to be subordinate to fully quali- fied practitioners ; and, third, those who advocated dentists being altogether disassociated from surgeons, and having a college and diploma of their own. The tendency of desiring to be recognized as a specialty of medicine, or as a kind of surgeon, again seemed rife among dentists of that period, as the idea of the dental col- lege and diploma was abandoned for the prospect of being attached in some way or other to the Ro}al College of Sur- geons of England. Many difficulties existed, however, which at first precluded the consummation of this arrangement. The full medical or surgical education, which was deemed desirable, in addition to the mechanical acquire- ments which dentistry required, would have entailed a pro- tracted period of education, such as few would desire to undertake. These representations were set aside in 1858, when the necessity for some improved system of dental edu- cation was more fully recognized ; and " power was given Queen Victoria to grant a charter to the Royal College of Surgeons of England, authorizing that body to institute and hold examinations, for the purpose of testing the fitness of persons to practice as dentists, and to award certificates of such fitness." (21 and 22 Vict., c. 90, s. 48— Daniel Xason.) The 3'ear following, the charter was granted. This did not entitle them to register as regularly qualified practition- ers, though to a certain extent they received a statutory status; and though they might recover their reasonable charges for work, labor done and materials supplied, they DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 207 could not recover such charges, because of their holding cer- tificates from the Royal College of Surgeons. — Greenwood, Laws. The title of " dentist " was not protected, nor was the practice of dentistry restricted solely to persons holding cer- tificates from the Royal College of Surgeons of England, as the Act itself expressly declared that nothing therein con- tained should be construed to prejudice or affect in any man- ner the lawful occupation, trade or business of dentistry. The law remained unchanged until the Dentists' Act was passed in 1878. This amendment of the law relating to dentists practi- cing in the United Kingdoms, provided, that, from and after the first of April, 1879, no one, under a penalty not exceed- ing £200, on conviction, excepting those who are legally qualified medical practitioners, shall take or use the name or title of dentist, either alone or in combination with any other word or words, or of dental practitioner, or any name, title, addition or description, implying that he is registered under this Act, or that he is a person specially qualified to practice dentistry, unless he is so registered, and further, unless so registered, or unless a legally qualified medical practitioner, no one can recover any fee or charge in any court for the performance of any dental operation, or for any dental at- tendance or advice. Any one is entitled to register under the Dentists' Act, who is a licentiate in dental surgery, or dentistry, of any of the medical authorities, or who is entitled to registration as a foreign or colonial dentist ; or who was bona fide engaged in the practice of dentistry either alone or in conjunction with the practice of medicine, surgery, or pharmacy on or before July 22nd, 1878. — Daniel Nason. The earlier existence of dentistry in America presented an aspect exactly similar to its foundation in England — it was but the beginning of a science, the rudiments of which were unknown. Each practitioner had his own methods, as there were then no recognized systems of practice. Dentis- try was then practiced as a secret art, and its disciples evi- denced great exclusiveness, and carefully hid from each other 208 APPENDIX. the methods by which they attained, or thought they attained, any superiority. Thus it came that the great majority of early practitioners were empiric, and, though it was the de- sire of the regular practitioners to prohibit this empiricism, there were many objections to any application for prohibitory legislation. Chief among them, the tact that they would be compelled to divulge their secret modes of practice, and thus give their professional brethren, perchance, the opportunity of adopting them and becoming as skillful as themselves. At that time, dentists of ability and merit easily com- manded all the practice they could attend, and consequently contented themselves with railing at such dental operators as were, or as they conceived to be, below them in scientific or practical status, being well aware that they were secure in the position they had gained in public estimation, and car- ing little for aught else. There was another fact which also operated strongly against any movement of the better class of dentists towards legislative protection against empiricism. This was, that the majority of persons practicing dentistry in this country was, in those times, composed of the very class against which any such enactment would, perforce, have been aimed. This class, although certainly not influential in individuality, was yet so as a whole, and could not be ig- nored — and might possibly not have been overcome — in any contest such as would surely have arisen on the question of dental legislation. — History of Dental and Oral Sciences in America. Alabama, almost the poorest in skilled dentists, att he time, of any state in the Union, was the first state in America to pass a dental enactment, and, indeed, it was the first legislation covering the dental profession. The effect of this enactment was probably more to suppress irregular prac- titioners than to elevate the standard of professional acquire- ments in dentistry. The latter, in fact, has proved an exceed- ingly difficult operation, through legislative action in later days and with the most approved form of law, and great suc- cess in this direction cannot be expected of so crude a statute, and in times such as were those in which it was passed. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 209 After 1840, dentistry was blessed with a period of prog- ress, and generally accorded a scientific standing, such as it had never before known. The graduates of dental colleges multiplied, and were better qualified than formerly. This condition of dentistry continued for a period of about twenty- five years, when the dentists realized that self-government in dentistry appeared to have, at that time, fulfilled its possi- bilities, and the profession cast about for some new and bet- ter method of government to replace it. With this end in view, they resorted to the original method put in operation by Alabama twenty-five years previous. Several states, notably Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and New York, attempted to procure legislative action in dentis-< try about 1860-68. Kentucky failed at first, but subsequently obtained an enactment in 1868. New York was the first, after Alabama, to procure a special legislative enactment rela- tive to dentistry. At the present time, nearly every state in the Union has some form of protective dental legislation, the requirements in most cases being that the dentist must possess a diploma from a reputable and recognized dental college, or pass the examination of the State Board of Examiners, as required by the special enactments of the states ; the failure to comply with these requirements is punished by a fine, im- prisonment, or both. 210 APPENDIX. THE STATUTES REGULATING THE PRACTICE OF DENTISTRY IN THE UNITED STATES, ENGLAND, CANADA, ITALY, FRANCE, GERMANY, SPAIN, RUSSIA, ETC. ALABAMA. An Act Regulating the Practice of Dental Surgery, and for other purposes. Section 1. Re it enacted by the Sevate and House of Rep- resentatives of the State of Alabama, in General Assembly con- vened, That from and after the first Monday in December next, it shall be the duty of each of the medical boards of this State to examine and license applicants to practice dental sur- gery, under the same rules and regulations, and subject to the same restrictions as those who apply for license to practice medicine ; and, in order more fully to carry this Act into effect, it shall be the duty of each of the medical boards, where the same is practicable, to add to their body, by elec- tion, a professional dentist having the requisite qualifications, which dentist so added shall constitute a part of the board. Sec. 2. That if any person styling himself as dentist, or other person, shall engage in the practice of dental sur- gery as a professional business, after the aforesaid first Mon- day in December next, without having been regularly licensed so to do by one of the Medical Boards of this State, as hereinbefore provided for, for every such offense shall forfeit and pay a sum not exceeding fifty dollars, recoverable before any court having jurisdiction of the same, one-half to the informer, the other half to the county where suit is brought. Sec. 3. That all bonds, notes, or promissory obliga- tions, or assumpsits, made to any person or persons not authorized as provided for in this Act, the consideration of which shall be for services rendered as a professional dentist, or in the line of professional dentistry, shall be utterly void and of no effect ; provided, the provisions of this Act shall not be so construed as to prevent persons from practicing dental surgery, who have a license to practice surgery and medicine DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 211 from either of the Medical Boards of this State, or diploma from any regularl} T constituted institution in the United States. Sec. 4. That hereafter it shall be the duty of all prac- ticing physicians, surgeons, and dentists, to have their licenses recorded in the office of the Clerk of the County Court in which they may reside, and the certificate of the clerk shall be considered as good evidence in any court of the right of any individual having a diploma or license to practice hi& profession, and recover his debts for the same. Sec. 5. That all laws, and parts of laws, contravening the provisions of this Act, be and the same are hereby repealed. Approved December 31st, 1841. This Act continued upon the statute book until 1881, when a new Act was passed by the Legislature. The follow- ing is the text of the amendment : An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Alabama. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Alabama, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of Alabama, unless said person has obtained license from a Board of Dental Examiners, duly authorized and appointed by this Act to issue such license ; provided, that dentists who have been in the regular practice of dentistry for five years next preceding the passage of this Act, shall not be required to submit to an examination, and shall be entitled to license without fee, which shall be trans- mitted to him, by mail or otherwise, upon his application, accompanied by an affidavit to the fact of his having been in the regular practice for the required time. Sec 2. That the Board of Dental Examiners shall con- sist of five (5) dental graduates, or practitioners of dentistry, who have obtained a license to practice dentistry from a Medical Board in this State, or from a Dental Board organized under this Act, and who are members in good standing of 212 APPENDIX. the Alabama Dental Association; provided, that said gradu- ates, or practitioners, have been praticing dentistry in the State of Alabama for a period not less than three (3) years ; and provided farther, that the first Board of Examiners under this Act shall consist of the present Executive Commit- tee of the Alabama Dental Association, who shall hold office until the next annual meeting of the said association, and until their successors are elected and qualified, as herein- after provided. Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of the said Alabama Dental Association, at its annual meeting next after the pas- sage of this Act, and every two years thereafter, to elect said Board of Examiners, who shall hold office for the term of two (2) years, and until their successors are elected and quali- fied. The President of said Association shall have power to fill all vacancies in said board for unexpired terms. Sec. 4. That it shall be the duty of said Board of Examiners, First, To meet annually at the time and place of meeting of the Alabama Dental Association, or oftener, at the call of any three of the members of said board. Thirty days' notice must be given of the time and place of meet- ing of said board, said notice to be mailed to all practi- cing dentists in the State. Secondly, To prescribe a course of reading for those who study dentistry under private in- struction. Thirdly, To grant a license to any applicant who shall furnish satisfactory evidence of having graduated and received a diploma from any incorporated dental college, or who has heretofore received a license from a medical board in this State, without examination or fee. Fourthly, To grant licenses to all other applicants who undergo a satisfac- tory examination, who shall pay to the said board a fee of five dollars for said license. Fifthly, To keep a book in which shall be registered the names of all persons licensed to practice dentistry in this State. Sec 5. That the book so kept shall be a book of rec- ord, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal of said board, shall be evidence in any court of this State. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 213 Sec. 6. That three members of said board shall consti- tute a quorum for the transaction of business, and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for its meeting, those present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum is present. Sec. 7. That one member of said board may grant a license for an applicant to practice until the next regular meeting of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time the temporary license shall expire, but such temporary license shall not be granted by a member of the board after the board has rejected the applicant. Sec. 8. That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in this State for a fee or reward, shall be liable to indictment, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty, nor more than three hundred dollars ; pro- vided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent persons from extracting teeth. Sec. 9. That on the trial of such indictment, it shall be incumbent upon the defendant, to exempt himself from the penalties of this Act, to show that he has authority, un- der the law, to practice dentistry in this State. Sec 10. That every person to whom license is issued by said Board of Examiners shall, within thirty days from the date thereof, present the same to the Judge of the Probate Court of the county in which he resides, who shall officially endorse said license and seal it with the seal of the court, and who shall record said license in a proper book in his office, and who shall be entitled to receive a fee of one (1) dollar for his services, but a temporary license issued under section 7, of this Act, need not be sealed or recorded. Sec 11. That it shall be the duty of the solicitors of this State to prosecute all persons violating all or any por- tion of this Act. Sec. 12. That all laws, or parts of laws, in conflict with this Act, be and the same are hereby repealed. Approved February 11th, 1881. 214 APPENDIX. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Alabama. Section 1. Be it enacted bij the General Assembly of Alabama, That from and ai'ter the passage of this Act, it shall he unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of den- tistry in the State of Alahama, unless said person has obtained license from a Board of Dental Examiners duly authorized and appointed hy this Act to issue such license; provided, that dentists who have been in the regular practice of dentistry for five years next preceding the passage of this Act, shall not be required to submit to an examination, and shall be entitled to license without fee, which shall be trans- mitted to him, by mail or otherwise, upon his application accompanied by an affidavit to the fact of his having been in the practice for the required time. Sec. 2. That the Board of Dental Examiners shall con- sist of live (5) dental graduates, or practitioners of dentistry, who have obtained a license to practice dentistry from a Den- tal Board organized under this Act, and who are members in good standing of the Alabama Dental Association ; provided, that said graduates or practitioners have been practicing dentistry in the State of Alabama for a period of not less than three (3) years. Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of said Alabama Dental Association, at its annual meeting in April, 1887, to elect said Board of Dental Examiners, whose terms of office shall be respectively five, four, three, two and one year, in the order in which they are elected ; and at each annual meeting of said association thereafter, one member shall be elected to fill such vacancy, who shall serve for the period of five years. The President shall have the power to fill all vacancies in said board for the unexpired term. Sec 4. That it shall be the duty of said Board of Exam- iners, First, To meet annually at the time and place of meet- ing of the Alabama Dental Association, or oftener,at the call of any three members of the board. Thirty days' notice must DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 215 be given of the time and place of meeting of said board, said notice to be mailed to all practicing dentists in the State. Secondly, To prescribe a course of reading for those who study dentistry under private instruction. Thirdly, To grant license to all applicants who undergo a satisfactory examina- tion, who shall pay to the said board a fee of five dollars for said license. Fourthly, To keep a book in which shall be registered the names of all persons licensed to practice den- tistry in this State. Sec. 5. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal of said board, shall be evidence in any court of this State. Sec 6. That three members of said board shall consti- tute a quorum for the transaction of business, and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for its meeting, those present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum is present. Sec 7. That one member of said board may grant a license for an application to practice until the next regular meeting of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time the temporary license shall expire ; but such temporary license shall not he granted by a member of the board after the board has rejected the applicant. Sec 8. That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in this State, shall be liable to indict- ment, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty, nor more than three hundred dollars ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent persons from extract- ing teeth ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be so con- strued as to require any person who is now lawfully engaged in the practice of dentistry, to procure any additional license or to attend any meeting or meetings of the State Dental Association. Sec 9. That on the trial of such indictment, it shall be incumbent upon the defendant, to exempt himself from the 216 APPENDIX. penalties of this Act, to show that he lias authority under the law to practice dentistry in this State. Sec. 10. That every person to whom license is issued by said Board of Examiners, shall, within thirty days from date thereof, present the same to the Judge of the Probate Court of the county in which he resides, who shall officially indorse said license and seal it with the seal of the court, and who shall record said license in a book in his office, and who shall be entitled to a fee of one (1) dollar for his services ; but a temporary license, issued under section 7 of this Act, need not be sealed or recorded. Sec. 11. That it shall be the duty of the solicitors of this State to prosecute all persons violating all or any portion of this Act. Sec 12. That all laws or parts of laws in conflict with this Act, be and the same are hereby repealed. Amended and approved February 28th, 1887. ARKANSAS. An Act to Regulate the Practice, of Dentistry, and Punish Vio- lators thereof, in the State of Arkansas. Section 1. Be it enacted by the State of Arkansas, That it shall be unlawful tor any person to practice, or attempt to practice, dentistry or dental surgery in the State of Arkansas without first having received a certificate from the Board of Dental Examiners. Sec 2. A Board of Examiners, consisting of five prac- ticing dentists, residents of this State, is hereby created, who shall have authority to issue certificates to persons in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, and also to decide upon the validity of such diplomas as may be subsequently presented tor registration, as hereinafter provided. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 217 Sec. 8. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Governor, and shall serve for a term of four years, excepting that the members of the board first appointed shall hold their offices, as follows : Three, for two, and two for four years, respectively, and until their successors are duly appointed. In case of a vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the Governor. Sec 4. Said board shall keep a record, in which shall be registered the names and residences or places of business of all persons authorized under this Act to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this State. It shall elect one of its mem- bers President and one Secretary thereof, and it shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener, and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. A majority of the members of said board shall constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall be at all times open for public inspection. Sec 5. Every person engaged in the practice of den- tisty or dental surgery within this State at the time of the passage of this Act, shall, within three months thereafter, cause his or her name and residence and place of busi- ness to be registered with said Board of Examiners ; upon which said board shall issue to such person a certificate, duly signed by a majority of the members of said board, and which certificate shall entitle the person to whom it is issued to all the rights and privileges set forth in section 1 of this Act. Sec 6. To provide for the proper and effective enforce- ment of this Act, said Board of Examiners shall be entitled to the following fees, to wit : For each certificate issued to persons in practice in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of one dollar; for each certificate issued to persons not engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of five dollars. Sec 7. That members of said board shall each receive the compensation of two dollars and a half per day for each day actually engaged in the duties of their office, which, together with all other legitimate expenses incurred in the 218 APPENDIX. performance of such duties, shall be paid from fees received by the board under the provisions of this Act ; and no part of the expenses of said board shall at any time be paid out of the State Treasury. All moneys in excess of said per diem allowance and other expenses, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct ; and such board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the fifteenth day of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them in pursuance of this Act. Sec. 8. Any person who shall violate thi3 Act by prac- ticing, or attempting to practice, dentistry within the State, without first complying with the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon con- viction thereof, shall be fined in any sum not less than ten dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars, said fines to be applied to the school fund of the district in which the offense is committed. Sec. 9. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication. Approved by the Governor on the 2nd of April, 1887. CALIFORNIA. The following is the text of "An Act to Insure the Better Education of Practitioners of Dental Surgery and to Regulate the Prac- tice of Dentistry in the State of California." Section 1. Ike people of the State of California, repre- sented in Senate and Assembly, do enact, as follows : It shall be unlawful for any person, who is not at the time of the passage of this Act engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to commence such practice, unless he or she shall have ob- tained a certificate as hereinafter provided. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 219 Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners, to consist of seven prac- ticing dentists, is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Gov- ernor from the dental profession of the State at large. The term for which the members of said board shall hold their offices shall be four years, except that two of the members of the board, first to be appointed under this Act, shall hold their office for the term of one year, two for the term of two years, two for the term of three years, and one for the term of four years, respectively, and until their successors shall be duly appointed and qualified. In case of a vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by the Governor in con- formity witn this section. Sec 3. Said board shall choose one of its members Presi- dent, and one the Secretary thereof, and it shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall at all reasonable times be open to public inspec- tion. Sec 4. Within six months from the time that this Act takes effect, it shall be the duty of every person who is now engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to cause his or her name and residence or place of business to be regis- tered with said Board of Examiners, who shall keep a book for that purpose. The statement of every such person shall be verified under oath before a Notary Public or Justice of the Peace, in such manner as may be prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Every person who shall so register with said board as a practitioner of dentistry, shall receive a certificate to that effect, and may continue to practice as such without incurring any of the liabilities or penalties provided in this Act, and shall pay to the Board of Examiners for such regis- tration a fee of one dollar. It shall be the duty of the Board of Examiners to forward to the County Clerk of each county in the State a certified list of the names of all persons resid- ing in his county, who have registered in accordance with the 220 APPENDIX. provisions of this Act, and it shall be the duty of all County Clerks to register such names in a book kept for that purpose. Sec. 5. Any and all persons who shall so desire may appear before said board at any of its regular meetings, and be examined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dental surgery ; and if the examination of any such person or persons shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons as they shall find to pos- sess the requisite qualifications a certificate to that effect, in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Said board shall also indorse, as satisfactory, diplomas from any reputable dental college, when satisfied of the character of such institu- tion, upon the holder furnishing evidence satisfactory to the board of his or her right to the same, and shall issue certifi- cates to that effect within ten days thereafter. All certifi- cates issued by said board shall be signed by its officers, and such certificates shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of California. Sec. 6. Any person who shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, may be fined not less than fifty dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars, or be confined six months in the county jail for each and every offense. All fines re- covered under this Act shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which said conviction takes place. Sec. 7. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provisions of this Act, the said Board of Examiners shall charge each person applying to or appearing before them for examination for a certificate of qualifications a fee of ten dollars, which fee shall in no case be returned ; and out of the funds coming into possession of the board from the fees so charged and penalties received under the provi- sions of this Act, all legitimate and necessary expenses in- curred in attending the meetings of said board shall be paid, and no part of the expenses of the board shall ever be paid out of the State Treasury. All moneys received in excess of expenses above provided for shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 221 board and carrying out the provisions of this Act, he giving such bonds as the board shall from time to time direct. And said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the first of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them pursuant to this Act. Sec. 8. Any person who shall receive a certificate from said board to practice dentistry shall cause his or her certifi- cate to be registered with the County Clerk of the county in which such person may reside, and the County Clerk shall charge for registering such certificate a fee of one dollar- Any failure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person holding such certificate to register the same with the County Clerk, as above directed, for a period of six months, shall work a forfeiture of the certificate ; and no certificate, when once forfeited, shall be restored, except upon the payment to the said Board of Examiners of the sum of twenty-five dollars as a penalty for such neglect, failure, or refusal. Sec. 9. Any person who shall knowingly and falsely claim or pretend to have or hold a certificate of license, diploma, or degree granted by any society organized under and pursuant to the provisions of this Act, or who shall falsely and, with intent to deceive the public, claim or pretend to be a graduate from any incorporated dental college, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to the same penalty as provided in section 6. Sec. 10. Nothing in this Act shall be so construed as to prohibit any practicing physician from extracting teeth. Sec. 11. This Act shall take effect immediately. COLORADO. Following is the text of the law recently passed entitled u An Act to Insure the Efficiency of Practitioners of Dental Surgery arid to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Colorado." Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Slate of Colorado, No person shall practice dentistry in this 222 APPENDIX. State until he or she shall have obtained a license for such purpose as hereinafter provided, but nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any physician or surgeon from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. A State Board of Dental Examiners shall be and is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to enforce and exe- cute the provisions of this Act. The said board shall con- sist of five members, who shall be appointed by the Gov- ernor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Each member of said board shall be appointed for the term of two years, and hold his office until his successor be duly appointed. Vacancies occurring in said board shall be filled by the Governor. Sec. 3. Said board shall choose from its members a Pres- ident, Secretary and Treasurer thereof, and shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. The first meeting of said board shall be held within sixty days after the time this Act will go into force and effect, at the Capitol of the State. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quo- rum, and the proceedings thereof shall at all reasonable times be opened to public inspection. Sec. 4. Any person desirous of continuing the practice of dentistry within this State, shall appear in person before said board at the first or any subsequent meeting of said board, at such time and place as the board may designate, and submit to an examination by said board, to determine his or her ability to continue the practice of dentistry in this State ; provided, however, that the Secretary of said board may, upon application of any such person, issue a permit to temporarily practice dentistry until the next meeting of the board, but not longer, unless the board at such meetings shall extend said temporary permit, and such person making application for examination by the board as aforesaid, shall deposit with the Secretary of said board, a fee of ten (10) dollars as compensation for making said examination. All persons who may be found qualified by said board, upon any such examination, to continue the practice of dentistry in DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 223 this State, shall receive from said board a certificate signed by the President and attested by the Secretary, under official seal of said board, authorizing the holder thereof to there- after continue the practice of dentistry in this State. Sec. 5. Any and all persons who so desire may appear before said board at any one of its meetings, and be exam- ined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dental surgery, and, if the examination of any such person or per- sons shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons as they shall find, from such examinations, to possess the requisite qualifications, a license to practice dentistry in accordance with the provi- sions of this Act. Sec 6. Any person who shall violate any of the provi- sions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to prosecution before any court of compe- tent jurisdiction, and, upon conviction, may be punished by a fine in a sum not less than one hundred (100) dollars, nor more than five hundred (500) dollars, or by imprisonment from one to ninety days, or both, in the discretion of the court. Each day that this Act is violated, shall be considered a separate offense. Sec. 7. Said board shall be authorized, out of the funds coming into its possession from the fees authorized by this Act, to pay to each member thereof, such compensation as the board may determine, and all legitimate and necessary expenses incurred in attending the meetings of said board. Said expenses shall be paid only from the fees received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the compensation or other expenses of the board shall ever be a charge against or paid out of the State Treasury. All moneys received in excess of said expenses shall be held by the Treas- urer of said board as a special fund for the meeting of the expenses of said board, by giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct. Said board shall make a bi- annual report of its proceedings to the Governor, by the fifteenth day of December of the year immediately preceding the next ensuing session of the Legislature, together with an 224 APPFNDIX. account of all moneys received and disbursed by tbem pur- suant to tliis Act. I hereby certify that I have compared this copy with the original and find it to be correct. 1'. C. French, Chief Enrolling Clerk. The following constitute the Board of Examiners ap- pointed by the Governor in pursuance of the provisions of the Act : J. X. Chipley, D.D.S., Pueblo ; P. T. Smith, D.D.S., Denver ; J. M. Porter, D.D.S., Denver ; M. J. Norman, D.D.S., Denver ; and Eugene Fowler, Colorado Springs. CONNECTICUT. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Connecticut. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Connecticut, in General Assembly convened, That it will be unlawful for any person who is not at the time of the passage of this Act engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to commence such practice, unless such person shall have received a diploma from the faculty of some dental school duly authorized by the laws of this or some foreign country, in which college there was delivered annually, at the time said diploma was granted, a full course of lectures and instructions on dentistry, or shall have had eighteen months' pupilage in a dental office ; and in addition thereto shall have attended one full course of lectures in some such college as specified above, or in case of removal from another State or county, shall have received a certificate from some lawful Board of Dental Examiners or have had six years' regular dental practice ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall interfere with physicians in dis- charge of their professional duties ; and further provided, that this Act shall not apply to any student studying or practi- cing in the office of any dentist in this State. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 225 Sec. 2. Any person who shall violate the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars for each offense. Approved by the Governor, the 4th of April, 1887. DELAWARE. The Delaware Dental Law, Passed at Dover, March 31st, 1885. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Del- aware, That it shall be unlawful for any person who is not, at the time of the passage of this Act, a recognized practi- tioner of dentistry in this State, and so recognized by the profession, to practice dentistry, unless he or she shall have obtained a certificate, as hereinafter provided, or shall hold a diploma from a reputable dental college, and so recognized by the board herein created. Sec. 2. That a Board of Examiners, to consist of five reputable practicing dentists, is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes, and enforce the provi- sions of this Act ; the members of said board shall be ap- pointed by the Governor, who shall select them from the dentists residing in the State. The term for which the mem- bers of said board shall hold their offices shall be four years, except that two members of the board, first to be appointed under this Act, shall be designated by the Governor to hold their offices for the term of two, and three, and four years, respectively, unless sooner removed by the Governor, and until their successors shall be duly appointed ; in a case of vacancy occurring in such board, such vacancy shall be filled in like manner by the Governor. Sec. 3. That said board shall choose one of its mem- bers President, and one Secretary thereof; it shall fix the time and place of its meeting or meetings; a majority of 226 APPENDIX. said board shall at all times constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall at all reasonable times be open to public inspection ; the board shall also make an annual re- port of its proceedings to the Governor. Sec. 4. That within six months from the time this Act takes effect, it shall be the duty of every person who is at that time engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to cause his or her name and residence, or place of business,, to be registered with said Board of Examiners, who shall keep a book for that purpose ; the statement of every such purpose shall be verified under oath before a Notary Public or Justice of the Peace, in such a manner as may be pre- scribed by the said Board of Examiners. Every person who shall so register with said board as a practitioner of dentis- try, may continue to practice the same as such, and shall re- ceive a certificate of such registration upon his or her pay- ing the said board one dollar for such certificate. Sec. 5. That any and all persons who shall desire to com- mence such practice, after the passage of this Act, shall appear before said board at any of its regular meetings, and be examined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dental surgery, and, if the examination of any such person,, or persons, shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons as they shall find to possess the requisite qualifications, a certificate to that effect, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, upon the payment of one dollar for such certificate ; all certificates issued by said board shall be signed by its officers, and such certificates and diplomas, granted as aforesaid, shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of Delaware. Sec. 6. That any person, who shall wilfully violate any of the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof in any court having criminal jurisdiction, maybe fined not less than fifty dollars, nor more than three hundred dollars, or be confined not more than six months in the county jail, in the discre- tion of the court; all fines received under this Act shall be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 227 paid into the common school fund of the city or county in which such conviction takes place. Sec. 7. That the Board of Examiners shall meet within thirty days after appointment, and frame By-Laws govern- ing the board ; and any person, or persons, desiring to be ex- amined by the Board of Examiners for a certificate to prac- tice dentistry in this State, shall give notice of such desire to the Secretary of said board, who shall notify the members thereof, and they shall, within fifteen (15) days from the re- ceipt of such notice, meet to examine such person, or persons,, and give him, her, or them, proper notice of such meeting. Sec. 8. That this Act shall not apply to any one now practicing who is the owner of, and purchased, real estate in the State, previous to the passage of this Act. Sec 9. That this Act shall take effect from the date of its passage. FLORIDA. Following is the text of An Act to Amend an Act entitled "An Act to Provide for the Appointment of a Board of Exam- iners and to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Florida, the same being Chapter 3711 of the Laws of Florida, approved June 7th, 1887." Section. 1. Re it enacted by the Legislature, of the State of Florida, That section three (3) of an Act entitled "An Act to provide for the appointment of a Board of Ex- aminers and to regulate the practice of dentistry in the State of Florida, the same being Chapter 3711 of the Laws of Florida, approved June 7th, 1887," be amended so as to read as follows : " Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of this board, First, to meet annually at the call of three (3) members of said board ; thirty (30) days' notice shall be given of the annual 228 APPENDIX. meeting. Secondly, to grant certificates to all applicants who have obtained a diploma from a reputable dental college and who pass a satisfactory examination. Thirdly, to keep a book in which shall be registered the names of all persons licensed to practice dentistry in the State of Florida. Fourthly, for which examination and certificate the board shall be entitled to receive a fee of ten (10) dollars to defray the expenses of holding the meetings." Sec. 2. All laws and parts of laws in conflict are hereby repealed. Sec 3. This Act shall take effect immediately upon the approval of the Governor. Approved May 25th, 1891. GEORGIA. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry, and to Protect the People against Empiricism in Relation thereto, in the State of Georgia. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That from and after the passage of this Act it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of Georgia, unless said person has graduated and re- ceived a diploma from the faculty of a dental college char- tered under the authority of some one of the United States or foreign governments, or shall have obtained a license from a Board of Dentists duly authorized and appointed by this Act to issue such license. Sec. 2. That the Board of Examiners shall consist of five (5) dental graduates or practitioners of dentistry, who are members in good standing of the Georgia State Dental Soci- ety ; provided, that said graduates or practitioners have been practicing in the State of Georgia for a term of not less than three (3) years. Said board shall be elected to serve for two years. The President of said Georgia State Dental Society DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 229 shall have power to fill all vacancies in said board for unex- pired terms. Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of this board, First, to meet annually at the time of meeting of the Georgia State Dental Society, or oftener, at the call of any three of the members of said board ; thirty days' notice must be given of the annual meetings. Secondly, to prescribe a course of reading for those who study dentistry under private instruc- tion. Thirdly, to grant a license to any applicant who shall furnish satisfactory evidence of having graduated and re. ceived a diploma from any incorporated dental college, with- out fee, charge, or examination. Fourthly, to grant license to all other applicants who undergo a satisfactory examina- tion. Fifthly, to keep a book in which shall be registered the names of all persons licensed to practice dentistry in the State of Georgia. Sec 4. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal, shall be evidence in any court in the State. Sec 5. That three members of said board shall consti- tute a quorum for the transaction of business ; and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for their meeting, those present may adjourn from day to day until a quorum is present. Sec 6. That one member of said board may grant a license to an applicant to practice until the next regular meet- ing of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time the temporary license shall expire ; but such temporary license shall not be granted by a member of the board after the board has rejected the applicant. Sec 7. That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in the State of Georgia for a fee or reward, shall be liable to indictment, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than three hundred dol- lars ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed t'> prevent any person from extracting teeth; and provided 230 APPENDIX. further, that none of the provisions of this Act shall apply to regularly licensed physicians and surgeons. Sec. 8. That on trial of such indictment, it shall be in- cumbent on the defendant to show that he has authority, under the law, to practice dentistry, to exempt himself from such penalty. Sec. 9. That one-half of all tines collected shall inure to the informer, and the other half to the educational fund of the county. Sec. 10. That dentists who have been in practice prior to the passage of this Act are exempt from all provisions of the same. Sec 11. Repeals conflicting laws. Approved August 24th, 1872. An amendment was passed and approved October 9th, 1885, of which the following is the text: GEORGIA AMENDMENT. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of Georgia, unless said person shall have obtained a li- cense from a Board of Dentists, duly authorized and appointed under the provisions of this chapter to issue license. Sec 2. That the Board of Examiners shall consist of five (5) dental graduates or practitioners of dentistry, who are members in good standing of the Georgia State Dental Society ; provided, that said graduates or practitioners have been practicing in the State of Georgia for a term of not less than three (3) years. Said board shall be elected to serve for two years. The President of said Georgia State Dental Society shall have power to fill all vacancies in said board for unexpired terms. Sec 3. That it shall be the duty of this board, First, to meet annually at the time of meeting of the Georgia State Dental Society, or oftener, at the call of any three members of said board ; thirty days' notice must be given of the annual meetings. Secondly, to prescribe a course of DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 231 reading for those who study dentistry under private instruc- tion. Thirdly, to grant license to all applicants who undergo a satisfactory examination. Fourthly, to keep a book, in which shall be registered the names of al 1 . persons licensed to practice, dentistry in the State of Georgia. Sec. 4. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal, shall be evidence in any court in the State. Sec. 5. That three members of said board shall con- stitute a quorum for the transaction of business, and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for their meeting, those present may adjourn from da}* to day until a quorum is present. Sec 6. That one member of said board may grant a license to an applicant to practice until the next regular meeting of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time the temporary license shall expire; but such tem- porary license shall not be granted by a member of the board after the board has rejected the applicant. Approved, as amended, October 9th, 1885. [See Code of Georgia, §1416.] An Act to amend Section 14-16 of the Code of Georgia Relat- ing to and Regulating the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Georgia, and to Require Practicing Dentists to Register. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That section 1416 of the Code of Georgia be so amended as to read, as follows : " That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in the State of Georgia for a fee or reward, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, shall be punished as prescribed in section 4:>10 of the Code of 1873 ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent any person from extracting teeth ; and provided further, that none of the provisions of this Act shall apply to regular licensed physicians and sur- geons in practice at or prior to the passage of this Act, and 232 APPENDIX. dentists who were in practice prior to the 24th of August,, 1872."' Sec. 2. Every person practicing dentistry in this State- shall, within sixty days after the passage of this Act, register his name, together with his post-office address, and the date of his diploma or license, in the office of the Clerk of the Su- perior Court of the county in which he practices, and shall,. on the payment to such Clerk of a fee of fifty cents, be en- titled to receive from him a certificate of such registration. Sec. 3. That all laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act be and the same are hereby repealed. Approved October 20th, 1879. An Act to Exempt all Regular Practicing Dentists from Jury Duty. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That from and after the passage of this Act, all dentists who are in regular practice in this State, shall be exempt from all jury duty. Sec. 2. That all laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are hereby repealed. Passed August, 1881. ILLINOIS. A Bill for An Act to Insure the Better Education of Practition- ers of Dental Surgery, and to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Illinois. Section 1. Be it enacted by the people of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly, That it shall be unlawful for any person, who is not at the time of the passage of this Act engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to com- mence such practice, unless such person shall have received a diploma from the faculty of some reputable dental college^ duly authorized by the laws of this State or of some other of DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 233 the United States, or by the laws of some foreign country, in which college or colleges there was, at the time of the issue of such diploma, annually delivered, a full course of lectures and instructions in dental surgery ; provided, that any per- son removing into this State, who shall have been for a period of ten years prior to such removal, a practicing den- tist; and provided also, that any person holding the diploma of Doctor of Medicine from any reputable medical college, shall be entitled to practice dentistry in this State, upon ob- taining a license for the purpose as hereinafter provided ; and nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any physician or surgeon from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners, to consist of five prac- ticing dentists, is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provision of this Act. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Governor. The term for which the members of said board shall hold their offices shall be rive years, except that the members of the board first to be appointed under this Act shall hold their offices for the term of one, two, three, four, and five years, respectively, and until their successors shall be duly appointed. In case of a vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by the Governor. Sec 3. Said board shall choose one of its members President and one the Secretary thereof, and it shall meet, at least, once in each year, and as much oftener, and at such times and places, as it may deem necessary. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall at all reasonable times be open to public inspection. Sec 4. It shall be the duty of every person who is engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, within six months from the date of the passage of this Act, to cause his or her name and residence, or place of business, to be registered with said Board of Examiners, who shall keep a book for that purpose ; and every person who shall so register with said board as a practitioner of dentistry, 234 APPENDIX. may continue to practice the same, as such, without incur- ring any of the liabilities or penalties provided in this Act. Sec. 5. No person whose name is not registered on the books of said board as a regular practitioner of dentistry, within the time prescribed in the preceding section, shall be permitted to practice dentistry in this State, until such person shall have been duly examined by said board and regularly licensed in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Sec. 6. Any and all persons who shall so desire may appear before said board, at any of its regularly meetings, and be examined with reference to their knowlege and skill in dental surgery, and, if the examination of any such person or persons shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons, as they shall find from such examination to possess the requisite qualifications, a license to practice dentistry in accordance with the provisions of this Act. But said board shall at all times issue a license to any regular graduate of any reputable dental college without examination, upon the payment by such graduate to the said board of a fee of one dollar. All licenses issued by said board shall be signed by the members thereof and be attested by its President and Secre- tary ; and such license shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of Illinois. Sec. 7. Any member of said board may issue a tempo- rary license to any applicant, upon the presentation by such applicant of the evidence of the necessary qualifications to practice dentistry, and such temporary license shall remain in force until the next regular meeting of said board occur- ring after the date of such temporary license, and no longer. Sec 8. Any person v 7 ho shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act shall be liable to prosecution before any court of competent jurisdiction, upon information or by indictment, and, upon conviction, may be fined not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than fifty dollars, for each and every offence. All fines recovered under this Act shall be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 235 paid into the common school fund of the county in which such conviction takes place. "Sec. 9. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provision of this Act, the said Board of Examiners may charge each person applying to or appearing before them for examination for license to prac- tice dentistry, a fee of two dollars, and out of the funds coming into the possession of the board from the fees so -charged, the members of said board may receive, as com- pensation, the sum of five dollars for each day actually engaged in the duties of their office, and all legitimate and necessary expenses incurred in attending the meetings of said board. Said expenses shall be paid from the fees and penal- ties received by the Board under the provisions of this Act. And no part of the salary or other expenses of the Board shall ever be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys received in excess of said per diem allowance, and other expenses above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct. And said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor, by the fifteenth -of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them, pursuant to this Act. Sec. 10. Any person who shall be licensed by said board to practice dentistry, shall cause his or her license to be registered with the County Clerk of any county or coun- ties in which such person may desire to engage in the prac- tice of dentistry, and the County Clerks of the several coun- ties in this State shall charge for registering such license a fee of twenty-five cents for each registration. Any fail- ure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person hold- ing such license to register the same with the County Clerk, as above directed, for a period of six months, shall work a forfeiture of the license, and no license, when once forfeited, shall be restored, except upon the payment to the said Board of Examiners of the sum of twenty-five dollars, as a penalty for such neglect, failure, or refusal. 236 APPENDIX. INDIANA. An Act to JRegn/- ciation, or oftener, at the call of any three members of said board, at such time and place as may be designated in such call. When convened, the said board shall examine all ap- plications for certificates of qualification, and issue such cer- tificates to all such applicants as shall pass a satisfactory examination. Sec 3. Any person who shall prove to the satisfaction of said Board of Examiners that he is a graduate of a dental college duly and legally incorporated, and who shall present a diploma therefrom, and shall further show that said college is of good repute, shall be entitled to a registration certificate on the payment of a fee of one dollar to said board. Sec 4. Any person who shall present to the said Board of Examiners a valid certificate of qualification, issued by the Board of Examiners under the provision of any former law of this State, shall be entitled to a certificate of registra- tion upon the payment of a fee of one dollar to said board. Sec 5. Any person who shall file before said Board of Examiners an application under oath, and sworn to by one DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 239 or more freeholders, setting forth the fact that said applicant has been engaged in the lawful practice of dentistry in this State continuously since the 29th day of May, 1879. Approved May 31st, 1879. IOWA. A Bill for an Act to Insure the Better Education of Prac- titioners of Dentistry in the Slate of Iowa. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of loica, That it shall be unlawful for any person who is not, at the time of the passage of this Act, engaged in the practice of dentistry in the State., to commence such prac- tice, unless such person shall have received a license from the Board of Examiners, or some member thereof, as here- inafter provided, or a diploma from the faculty of some reputable dental college, duly authorized by the laws of the State, or by some other of the United States, or by the laws of some foreign country, in which college or colleges there was, at the time of the issue of such diplomas, annually de- livered, a full course of lectures and instruction in dental surgery. Sec 2. A Board of Examiners is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purpose and enforce the pro- visions of this Act. The members of such board shall be ap- pointed by the Governor, and shall consist of five practicing dentists, \\ ho shall have been engaged in the continuous- practice of dentistry in the State for five years, or over, at the time of, or prior to, the passage of this Act. The term tor which the members of -aid board shall hold their offices, shall be five years, except that the members of the board first appointed under tliis Act, shall hold their office for the term of one, two, three, four and five years, respectively, and un- til their successors shall be duly appointed. In case of va- cancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall he filled by the Governor. 240 APPENDIX. Sec. •">. Said board shall choose one of its members Presi- dent, and one the Secretary thereof; and it shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener, and at such time and place, as it may deem necessary. A majority of said board shall, at all times, constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall, at all reasonable times, he open to public inspection. Sec 4. It shall be the duty of every person who is en- gaged in the practice of dentistry in the State, within six months from the date of the taking effect of this Act, to cause his or her name and residence, or place of business, to be regis- tered with the said Board of Examiners, who shall keep a book for that purpose ; and every person who shall so regis- ter with said board as a practitioner of dentistry, may con- tinue to practice the same as such without incurring any of the liabilities or penalties of this Act. Sec 5. No person, whose name is not registered on the books of said board as a regular practitioner of dentistry, within the limits prescribed in the preceding section, shall be permitted to practice dentistry in this State until such per- son shall have been duly examined by said board, and regu- larly licensed in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Sec 6. Any and all persons, who sball so desire, may appear before said board, at any of its regular meetings, and be examined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dental surgery, and if such person shall be found, after hav- ing been so examined, to possess the requisite qualifications, said board shall issue a license to such person to practice dentistry, in accordance with the provisions of this Act. But said board shall, at all times, issue a license to any regular graduate of any reputable dental college, without examina- tion, upon the payment by such graduate to the said board of a fee of one dollar. All licenses issued by said board shall be signed by the members thereof, and be attested by its President and Secretary ; and such licenses shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of Iowa. Sec 7. Any member of said board may issue a tempo- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. "241 rary license to any applicant, upon the presentation by such applicant of the evidence of the necessary qualification to practice dentistry ; and such temporary license shall remain in force until the next regular meeting of said board occurring after the date of such temporary license, and no longer. Sec. 8. Any person who shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act shall be liable to prosecution before any court of competent jurisdiction, upon information; and, upon ■conviction, shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than fifty dollars for each and every offense. Sec. 9. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provision of this Act, the said Board of Examiners may charge each person, applying to, or appear- ing before them for examination for license to practice den- tistry, a fee of two dollars ; and out of the funds coming into the possession of the board from the fee so charged, the members of said board may receive, as compensation, the sum of five dollars for each day actually engaged in the duties of their office. And no part of the salary, or other •expenses of the board shall be paid out of the State Treas- ury. All moneys received in excess of the said per diem al- lowance shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giv- ing such bond as the board shall, from time to time, direct. The said board shall make an annual report of its proceed- ings to the Governor, by the fifteenth of November of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them, pursuant to this Act. Sec. 10. Any person who shall be licensed by said board to practice dentistry, shall cause his or her license to be regis- tered with the County Clerk of any county, or counties, in which such person may desire to engage in the practice of dentistry ; and the County Clerks of the several counties in the State shall charge for registering such license, the fee of twenty-five cents for each registration. Any failure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person holding such licenses to register the same with the County Clerk, as above directed, 24l' appendix. for a period of six months, shall work a forfeiture of the license; and no license, when once forfeited, shall be restored, except upon the payment to the said Board of Examiners the sum of twenty-live dollars, as a penalty for such neglect, failure, or refusal. Sec. 11. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to [ire- vent persons from extracting teeth. Approved March 2nd, 1882. KANSAS. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry and Punish Viola- tors thereof in Kansas. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of KansasJThnt it shall be unlawful for any person to prac- tice, or attempt to practice, dentistry or dental surgery in the State of Kansas, without first having received a diploma from the faculty of some reputable dental college, school, or uni- versity department, duly authorized by the laws of this State or some other of the United States, or by the laws of some foreign government, and in which college, school or univer- sity department there was, at the time of the issuance of such diploma, annually delivered a full course of lectures and in- structions in dentistry and dental surgery ; provided, that nothing in section 1 of this Act shall apply to any person en- gaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, except as here- inafter provided ; and provided further, that nothing in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent physicians, surgeons and others from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners, consisting of four prac- ticing dentists, residents of this State, is hereby created, who shall have authority to issue certificates to persons in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, and also to decide upon the I>ENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 243 validity of such diplomas as ma} 7 be subsequently presented for registration, as hereinafter provided. Sec. 3. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Governor, and shall serve for a term of four years, ex- cepting that the members of the board first appointed shall hold their offices, as follows : Two for two, and two for four years, respectively, and until their successors are duly ap- pointed. In case of a vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the Governor. Sec. 4. Said board shall keep a record, in which shall be registered the names and residences, or places of business, of all persons authorized under this Act to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this State. It shall elect one of its mem- bers President and one Secretary thereof, and it shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener, and at such times and places, as it may deem necessary. A majority of the members of said board shall constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall be at all times open for public inspection. Sec. 5. Every person engaged in the practice of den- tistry or dental surgery within this State at the time of the passage of this Act, shall, within six months thereafter, cause his or her name, and residence, and place of business, to be registered with said Board of Examiners ; upon which said board shall issue to such person a certificate duly signed by a majority of the members of said board, and which certifi- cate shall entitle the person to whom it is issued, to all the rights and privileges set forth in section 1 of this Act. Sec. 6. Any person desiring to commence the practice of dentistry or dental surgery within this State, after the passage of this Act, shall, before commencing such practice, file for record in a book kept for such purpose, with said Board of Examiners, his or her diploma, or a duly authenti- cated copy thereof, the validity of which said board shall have the power to determine. If accepted, said board shall issue to the person holding such diploma a certificate duly signed by all, or a majority, of the members of said board, and which certifk-ate shall entitle the person to whom it is l244 APPENDIX. issued to all the rights and privileges set forth in section 1 of this Act. Sec. 7. To provide for the proper and effective enforce- ment of this Act, said Board of Examiners shall be entitled to the following fees, to wit : For each certificate issued to persons in practice in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of three dollars; for each certificate issued to persons not engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of ten dollars. Sec. 8. That members of said board shall each receive the compensation of five dollars per day, for each day actu- ally engaged in the duties of their office, which, together with all other legitimate expenses incurred in the perform- ance of such duties, shall be paid from fees received by the board under the provisions of this Act ; and no part of the expenses of said board shall at any time be paid out of the State Treasury. All moneys in excess of said per diem al- lowance, and other expenses, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses' of said Board, he giving such bond as the board shall, from time to time, direct ; and such board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the fifteenth day of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them in pursuance of this Act. Sec. 9. Any person who shall violate this Act by prac- ticing, or attempting to practice, dentistry within the State without first complying with the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in a sum not less than ten dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars. Sec 10. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after publication in the statutes. Approved February 25th, 1885. Took effect May 1st, 1885. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 245 KENTUCKY. LAWS RELATING TO DENTISTS. An Act to amend an Act, entitled "An Act to Incorporate the State Dental Association.'''' Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, That it shall be unlawful for any person to practice dentistry in the State of Kentucky for compensation, unless such person has received a diploma from the faculty of a dental college, duly incorporated under the laws of this or any other of the United States, or foreign country, or a certificate of qualification issued by the Ken- tucky State Dental Association ; provided, that nothing in this section shall apply to persons now engaged in the prac- tice of dentistry in this State. Sec. 2. There shall be a Board of Examiners, to con- sist of three practitioners of dentistry, who, together with the President and Secretary of the Kentucky Dental Associ- ation, shall be elected by said Dental Association, according to its By-Laws. Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of said Board of Exam- iners, so elected, to meet annually at the time of meeting of said Kentucky State Dental Association, or oftener, at the call of any three of the members of said board, or of an ap- plicant for a certificate to practice dentistry. Sec 4. Thirty days' notice must be given of the annual meetings of said State Association, and previous thereto ; that all applicants for certificates to practice dentistry will be granted the same upon satisfactory examination. Sec 5. The Kentucky State Dental Association shall cause to be kept a book, in which shall be registered the names of all persons having certificates to practice dentistry in the State of Kentucky, and that the book, or books, so kept shall be a book, or books, of record, and a transcript from the same, certified to by the officer who has it in charge, with the seal of said association affixed thereto, shall be evi- dence in any court in this Commonwealth. 24t> APPENDIX. Sec. 6. Three members of sai2 APPENDIX. reputable dental college, when satisfied with the character of such institution, upon the holder of such diploma furnish- ing evidence, satisfactory to the hoard, of his or her right to the same. All certificates issued, by said board shall be signed by its officers, and such certificate shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of Minnesota. Sec. 6. Any person who shall violate any of the provi- sions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, may be fined not less than fifty dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars, or be confined six months in the county jail. All fines received under this Act shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which such conviction takes place. Sec. 7. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provisions of this Act, the said Board of Examiners may charge each person applying to or appear- ing before them for examination for a certificate of qualifi- cation, a fee of ten dollars, which fee shall in no case be returned ; and out of the funds coming into the possession of the board, from the fees so charged, the members of said board may receive, as compensation, the sum of five dollars for each day actually engaged in the duties of their office, and all legitimate and necessary expenses incurred in attend- ing the meetings of said board ; said expenses shall be paid from the fees and penalties received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the salary or other expenses of the board shall ever be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys received in excess of said per diem allowance and other expenses, as above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting expenses of said board, and carrying out the pro- visions of this Act, he giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct. And said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the 15th of December, of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them persuant to this Act. Sec. 8. Any person who shall receive a certificate of DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 263 qualification from said board, shall cause his or her certifi- cate to be registered with the Clerk of Court of any county or counties of which such person may desire to engage in the practice of dentistry, and the Clerks of the Court of the several counties in this State shall charge for refiristerino- such certificates a fee of twenty-five cents for such registra- tion. Any failure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person holding such certificate, to register the same with the Clerk of Court, as above directed, for a period of six months, shall work a forfeiture of the certificate, and no certificate, when once forfeited, shall be restored, except upon the payment to said Board of Examiners of the sum of twenty-five dollars as a penalty for such neglect, failure or refusal. Sec. 9. Any person who shall knowingly and falsely claim, or pretend to have or hold a certificate of license, diploma or degree granted by any society, or who shall falsely, and with intent to deceive the public, claim or pre- tend to be a graduate from any incorporated dental college, not being such graduate, shall be deemed guilty of a misde- meanor, and shall be liable to the same penalty as provided in section 6 of this Act. Sec 10. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. Approved March 3d, 1885. MINNESOTA AMENDMENT. As will be seen, this law presents some new features and is in some respects more stringent than the law of 1885, which it supersedes, or than those which have hereto- fore been adopted in the several states. It requires both a diploma of graduation from a dental school in good stand, ing and submission to an examination before the State Board of Examiners, with practical clinical demonstration. All practitioners in the State are required to register, and new applicants who have been in practice for ten years prior to the date of the passage of the act, are admitted to exam- ination before the board without a diploma. Provision is 264 APPENDIX. made for the payment of an annual license fee of one dollar, and also, under certain conditions, for the forfeiture of a li- cense already granted. It lias been the earnest endeavor of the projectors of the law to furnish some additional safe- guards against charlatanry and incompetency, and it is be- lieved that its practical application will result in much im- provement in the status of dentistry throughout the State. The law, which is entitled " An Act to regulate the prac- tice of dentistry in the State of Minnesota," and which goes into effect on the 1st of September, reads, as follows: Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota, From and after September 1st, 1889, it shall be unlawful for any person to practice dentistry in this State, unless he shall have first obtained a certificate of registra- tion thereto, and tiled the same, or a certified copy thereof, with the Clerk of the District Court of the county of his res- idence, all as hereinafter provided. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners, to consist of five resi- dent practicing dentists is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of the first board under the pro- visions of this Act shall consist of the members of the pres- ent Board of Dental Examiners, existing under chapter 199 of the General Laws of 1885, who shall hold their offices as members of such new board for the term for which they were appointed under said former Act, and until their succes- sors are duly appointed. All vacancies in said board shall be filled by appointment b}* the Governor as herinafter pro- vided. The term for which members of said board shall be appointed shall be three years, and until their successors shall be duly appointed. It is also hereby provided that no person shall serve to exceed two terms in succession. In case of any vacancy occurring in said board in the term of any member of said board, such vacancy shall be tilled for such unexpired term by the Governor from names to be pre- sented to him, within two months of the occurrence of such vacancy, by the Minnesota State Dental Association, in the same manner as hereinafter provided. It shall be the duty DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 265 of said Minnesota State Dental Association, after September 1st, 1889, annually, prior to August 10th, to present to the Governor the names of twice as many practicing dentists resi- dent in this State as there are regular members to be ap- pointed of said board, prior to September 1st, in the following year. All appointments by the Governor shall be made within twenty days of the submission of such names to him, and, if such names shall not be submitted to him within the allotted time, he shall make his appointments within twenty days from the expiration of the time allotted for such pres- entation of names from among the resident practicing den- tists ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall prevent the appointment of two members of said board from among the resident practicing dentists, not members of said Minnesota State Dental Association, if the Governor shall so elect. Sec. 3. Said board shall choose at its first regular meet- ing, annually, one of its members President and one Secre- tary thereof, who, severally, shall have the power during their term of office to administer oaths and take affidavits, certi- fying thereto under their hand and the seal of the said board. And after September 1st, 1889, said board shall meet regularly, at least twice in each year, to wit : On the first Tuesdays in April and October, and at such other times as may be deemed necessary by the board. Such meetings shall be held at the medical department of the University of the State of Minnesota. A majority of said board shall, at all times, constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall, at all reasonable times, be open to public inspection. And it is furthermore provided, that in the event of any member of said board absenting himself from two of its regular meet- ings consecutively, the board shall declare a vacancy to exist, which vaeanc} T shall be filled by the means hereinbefore pro- vided. Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the first board hereinbe- fore provided for to meet at the city of Duluth, in said State, on the second Tuesday in July, 1889, and elect officers, and, within ten days thereafter, to transfer to a register, to be pro- vided by them for that purpose, the name, residence, and L't'.t; APPENDIX. place of business of each and every person, who, on the sec- ond Wednesday in July, 1889, and pursuant to an Act of the Legislature of the State of Minnesota, approved March 3d, 1885, shall be qualified to practice dentistry in the State Of Minnesota, and who shall then be duly registered on the books of the board created by said Act of March 3d, 1885. No certificates of license to practice dentistry shall be issued after the second Wednesday in July, 1889, under said Act of March 3d, 1885. It shall be the duty of the said Secretary of the first board hereby created to send to each person so reg- istered prior to August 5th, 1889, a certificate of his en regis- tration signed by the President and Secretary of such Board of Examiners. Sec. 5. Any person, or persons, who shall desire to be- gin the practice of dentistry in the State of Minnesota on and after September 1st, 1889, shall file his name, together with an application for examination, with the Secretary of the State Board of Dental Examiners, and at the time of making such application shall pay to the Secretary of said board a fee of ten dollars, and shall present himself at the first regular meeting thereafter of said board, to undergo ex- amination before that body. In order to be eligible for such examination such person shall present to said board his di- ploma from some dental college in good standing, and shall give satisfactory evidence of his rightful possession of the same ; 'prodded also, that the board may, in its discretion, admit to examination such other persons as shall give satis- factory evidence of having been engaged in the practice of dentistry ten years prior to the date of passage of this Act. Said board shall have the power to determine the good stand- ing of any college or colleges from which such diplomas may have been granted. The examinations shall be elementary and practical in character, but sufficiently thorough to test the fitness of the candidate to practice dentistry. It shall include, written in the English language, questions on the fol- lowing subjects : Anatomy, physiology, chemistry, materia medica, therapeutics, metallurgy, histology, pathology, op- erative and surgical dentistry, mechanical dentistry, and also DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 267 demonstrations of their skill in operative and mechanical dentistry. All persons successfully passing such examina- tions shall be registered as licensed dentists in the board register provided for in section 4, and also receive a certificate of such enregistration, said certificate to be signed by the President and Secretary of the board. The examination fee shall in no case be refunded. Sec. 6. Recipients of said certificate of enregistration shall present the same for record to the Clerk of the District Court of the county in which they reside, and shall pay a fee of fifty cents to said Clerk for the registration of the same. Said Clerk shall record said certificate in a book to be provided by him for that purpose. Any person so licensed removing his residence from one county to another in the State, before engaging in the practice of dentistry in such other county, shall obtain from the Clerk of the District Court of the county, in which said certificate of registration is recorded, a certified copy of such record, or else obtain a new certificate of registration from the Board of Examiners, and shall, before commencing practice in such county, file the same for record with the Clerk of the Court of the county to which he removes, and pay the Clerk for recording the same the fee of fifty cents. Any failure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person holding such certificate or copy of record to file the same for record as hereinbefore provided, for six months from the issuance thereof, shall forfeit the same. Such board shall be entitled to a fee of one dollar for the reissue of any certificate, and the Clerk of the Dis- trict Court for any county shall be entitled to a fee of one dollar for making and certifying a copy of the record of any such certificate. Sec 7. All persons shall be said to be practicing den- tistry within the meaning of this Act, who shall for a fee or salary, or other reward paid either to himself or to another person for operations or parts of operations of any kind, treat diseases or lesions of the human teeth or jaws or cor- rect malpositions thereof. But nothing in this Act con- tained shall be taken to apply to Acts of bova fide students 208 APPENDIX. of dentistry done in the pursuit of clinical advantages, under the direct supervision of a preceptor or a licensed dentist in this State, during the period of their enrollment in a dental college and attendance upon a regular, uninterrupted course in such college. Sec. 8. Out of the funds coming into the possession of the board, the members of said board may receive, as com- pensation, the sum of five dollars for each day actually en- gaged in the duties of their office, and mileage, at three cents per mile, for all distances necessarily traveled in going to and coming from meetings of the board. Said expenses shall be paid from the fees and assessments received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the salary or other expenses of the board shall ever be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys received in excess of said per diem allowance and mileage as above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting ex- penses of said board and carrying out the provisions of this Act, he giving such bond as the board may from time to time direct. And said board shall make an annual report of the proceedings to the Governor by the fifteenth of De- cember of each year, which report shall contain an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them pursuant to this Act. Sec. 9. Any person who shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, may be fined not less than twenty dol- lars, nor more than one hundred dollars, or to be confined not less than one month or more than three months in the county jail, or both. And all fines thus received shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which such conviction takes place. Sec. 10. Any person who shall knowingly or falsely claim, or pretend to have or hold a certificate of enregistra- tion, diploma, or degree granted by a society or by said board, or who shall falsely, and with the intent to deceive the public, claim or pretend to be a graduate from any incorpo- rated dental college, not being such graduate, shall be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 269 deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to the penalties provided in section 9 of this Act. Sec 11. .Justices of the Peace and the respective munici- pal courts shall have jurisdiction over violations of this Act. It shall be the duty of the respective County Attorneys to prosecute all violations of this Act. Sec. 12. Any person who shall be licensed under the provisions of this Act, and who shall practice dentistry under a false name, with intent to deceive the public, shall be liable to have said license revoked upon twenty days' notice of such proposed revocation, and of the time and place of considering such revocation by order of the State Board of Dental Examiners. And any person who, after revocation of his license, shall continue to practice dentistry in the State of Minnesota, shall be deemed guilty of a violation of the provisions of this Act, and shall be subject to the penalties provided therein. !Nor shall a certificate to a person under one name be any defense to an action brought against him for practicing without a certificate under another, unless it be shown that such practice under such other name was done without intent to defraud or deceive. Sec. 13. Every registered dentist shall in each and every year after 1889 pay to said Board of Examiners the sum of one dollar as a license fee for such year. Such payment shall be made prior to May 1st in each and every year ; and in case of default in such payment by any person, his certificate may be revoked by the Board of Examiners upon twenty days' notice of the time and place of considering such revocation. But no license shall be revoked for such non-payment, if the person so notified shall pay before or at such consideration his fee and such penalty as may be imposed by said board ; provided, that said board may impose a penalty of five dol- lars, and no more, on any one so notified, as a condition of allowing his license to stand ; provided farther, that said Board of Examiners may collect any such dues by suit. Sec 14. The Board of Examiners created by this Act may sue or be sued, and in all actions brought by or against it, it shall be made a party under the name of the Board of 270 APPENDIX. Dental Examiners of the State of Minnesota. And no suit shall abate by reason of any change in the membership of said board. Sec. 15. Chapter 199 of the General Laws of 1885, being an Act, entitled "An Act to Insure the Better Education of the Practitioners of Dental Surgery, and to Regulate the Prac- tice of Dentistry in the State of Minnesota," approved March 3d, 1885, is hereby repealed, such repeal to take effect Sep- tember 1st, 1889. Sec. 16. All effects and property whatsoever of the Board of Dental Examiners created by said Act of March 3d, 1885, shall on said first day of September, 1889, be and be- come the property of the Board of Examiners created by this Act, and said board hereby created is hereby declared to be the legal successor of the board created by said Act of March 3d, 1885. Sec. 17. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. MISSISSIPPI. An Act to Beg (date the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Mis- sissippi. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Mississippi, That it shall be unlawful for any person, who is not, at the time of the passage of this Act, engaged in the practice of dentistry, to begin such practice, unless such person shall have received a diploma from the faculty of some reputable dental college, duly authorized by the laws of this State, or some other of the United States or of some foreign country, in which college, granting such diploma, there was, at the time of such grant, annually delivered a full course of lectures and instructions in dental surgery, and unless such person shall also comply with the other provi- sions of this Act ; provided, however, that the provisions of this Act shall not apply to any person holding the diploma DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 271 of Doctor of Medicine from any reputable medical college ; and provided further, that nothing in this Act shall be so con- strued as to prohibit any person from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. That a Board of Dental Examiners, consisting of five practicing dentists, be hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes, and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said Board of Dental Exam- iners shall be appointed and commissioned by the Governor of this State. Their term of office shall be for five years, ex- cepting that the members of the Board of Examiners first appointed shall be appointed for one, two, three, four and five years, respectively, as designated by the Governor, until their respective successors shall be duly appointed and commis- sioned. Any vacancy occurring in the said Board of Exam- iners may be filled by the Governor at any time. Sec 3. That said Board of Dental Examiners shall elect one of their number President and one the Secretary thereof, and shall meet at least once a year at the State Capitol, al- ways giving thirty days' previous notice of such meeting, by publication in some public newspaper, published in the city of Jackson. A majority of said board shall constitute a quorum. Full minutes of their proceedings shall be kept* which shall be always subject to public inspection as any other public records. Sec. 4. That every person engaged in the practice of den- tistry in this State shall, within ninety days from the date i >f approval of this Act, cause his or her name and residence, or place of business, to be registered with said Board of Ex- aminers, who shall keep a suitable book for that purpose, and every person who shall be so registered, may continue the practice of dentistry in this State, without incurring the penalties provided for in this Act. Sec. 5. That any person now engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, failing to register as provided for in section 4 of this Act, shall not be permitted to continue such practice until such person shall have been examined by said Board of Examiners, and regularly licensed in accordance with the provisions of this Act. 272 APPENDIX. Sec. 6. Tlmt if the said Board of Examiners shall will- fully fail, or refuse, to register any name presented to them within the time, and in pursuance of section 4 of this Act, and issue a certificate to such person, the members of said Board of Examiners so failing, or refusing, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, be punished accord- ingly. Sec. 7. That any person who may desire to do so, and being of lawful age and good moral character, may appear before said Board of Examiners at an}' of its meetings, regu- lar or called, and be examined touching such applicant's knowledge, skill, and proficiency in dental surgery ; and, up- on such examination proving satisfactory, said Board of Ex- aminers shall issue a license, signed by the President, and countersigned by the Secretary, to such applicant, to practice dentistry in this State. And such license shall be impressed with the seal of the Mississippi State Dental Association. Any graduate of any reputable dental college may obtain at any time, without examination, such license, upon presenta- tion of his diploma, and the payment of a fee of two dollars to said Board of Examiners. Sec 8. That any member of said Board of Examiners may issue a temporary license to any applicant, after a satis- factory examination, touching the skill and proficiency of the applicant, the license to remain effective only until the next regular meeting of the board ; provided, that no such temporary license shall be granted to any applicant who has been rejected by the Board of Examiners. Sec 9. That said Board of Examiners may charge, and collect, from any person appearing before them for examina- tion for license to practice dentistry, a fee of five dollars ; and for every license issued to graduates from dental col- leges, a fee of two dollars, as hereinbefore provided ; and all such fees shall be paid over into the treasury of the Missis- sippi State Dental Association. Out of the fund thus created, said Board of Examiners may receive such compensation as may be fixed by said State Dental Association, subject to be changed, from time to time, as said association may deter- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 273 mine. But no part of such compensation, or any of such ex- penses, shall ever be paid out of the State Treasury. Sec. 10. That any person licensed by said Board of Ex- aminers, shall, before beginning to practice dentistry, pay the privilege tax which may be required by the General Statutes of this State, and have his license from said Board of Ex- aminers recorded in the deed records of every county in which he may desire to practice his profession. Sec. 11. That any violation of the provisions of this Act shall be a misdemeanor, and punishable as such, the fine in no case being less than ten dollars. Sec. 12. That this Act take effect from and after its passage. Approved February 25th, 1882. Following is the text of an Act amendatory and supple- mental to an Act entitled, "An Act to regulate the practice of dentistry in the State of Mississippi," approved February 25th, 1882 : "Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Mississippi, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall not be lawful for any person, whether a gradu- ate of a dental college or not, to begin the practice of den- tistry in this State of Mississippi, unless such person shall have first been examined and obtained a license from the 'Board of Dental Examiners,' duly authorized and ap- pointed under the provisions of an Act entitled, 'An Act to regulate the practice of dentistry in this State,' " approved February 25th, 1882, etc. Approved February 21st, 1890. MISSOURI. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Mis- souri. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows : It shall be unlawful for any per- son to practice dentistry, or dental surgery, in the State of 274 APPENDIX. Missouri, without first having; received a diploma from a reputable dental college, or a university, duly incorporated or established under the laws of souk- one of the United States, or of a foreign government; provided, that nothing in section 1 of this Act shall apply to any l>ict, That it shall be unlawful for any person, except regu- larly authorized physicians and surgeons, to commence the practice of dentistry, unless said person has been graduated and received a diploma from the faculty of a reputable insti- tution where this specialty is taught, and chartered under the 300 APPENDIX. authority of some one of the United States, or of a foreign government, acknowledged as such, or shall have obtained a certificate from a Board of Examiners duly appointed and authorized by the provisions of this chapter to issue such certificate. Sec. 2. The said Board of Examiners, hereinbefore pro- vided for, shall consist of six members of the North Carolina Dental Society, to be elected by the said society at its next annual meeting, and shall hold office as follows : Two for one year, two for two years, and two for three years, or until their successors are elected. The said board shall also have power to fill all vacancies for unexpired terms, and they shall be re- sponsible to said State society for their acts. Sec. 3. The Board of Examiners shall meet, annually at the time and place of the meeting of the Norn Carolina State Dental Society, and at such other times and places as the said board or any four members thereof shall agree upon, to con- duct the examination of applicants, thirty days' notice of said meeting being given by advertising in at least three news- papers published in this State. Sec. 4. Said board shall grant a certificate of proficiency in the knowledge and practice of dentistry to all applicants who shall undergo a satisfactory examination, and who shall receive a majority of votes of said board upon such profi- ciency, which certificate shall be signed by the members of the board conducting said examination, and shall bear the seal of the said North Carolina Dental Society ; provided^ that any person wishing to engage in the practice of dentistry at any time prior to the regular meeting of said board, may be examined by any one member of said board, and, if competent, may receive a temporary certificate, which shall be in force only until the next regular meeting ; and no member of said board shall grant a temporary certificate a second time to the same person. Sec. 5. Said board shall keep a book, in which shall be entered the names and proficiency of all persons to whom certificates shall be granted under the provisions of this chapter, and the date of granting such certificate, and the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 30 L book so provided shall be deemed a book of record, and a transcript of any such entry therein, certified to under the hand of the Secretary and seal of the North Carolina Dental Society, shall be admitted as evidence in any court, when the same shall be otherwise competent. Sec. 6. Four members of said board shall constitute a quorum thereof for the transaction of business, and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for the meeting of said board, those present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum is present. Sec. 7. Any person who shall practice dentistry in this State without having first stood the examination, and ob- tained the certificate hereinbefore provided, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, shall be fined twenty- five dollars ; provided, that any person so convicted shall not be entitled to sue for, or recover, any fee or charge for dental service in any court, and any sum of money paid to a per- son so convicted, for dental service rendered, may be recovered by the person so paying the same, or his legal representative ; provided, that no one applying for a license to practice den- tistry shall be denied such license on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude. Sec 8. All fines and penalties so recovered shall be ap- propriated to the school fund of the county in which the same shall have been recovered. Sec 9. Nothing in this chapter shall apply to any per- son engaged in the practice of dentistry before the seventh day of March, one thousand eight hundred and seventy -nine, or to prevent any one from extracting teeth. In February, 1883, the General Assembly amended sec- tion one, so it now reads thus : "It shall be unlawful for any person, except regularly authorized physicians and surgeons, to commence the prac- tice of dentistry, unless said person shall have obtained a certificate from a Board of Examiners duly appointed and authorized by the provisions of this chapter to issue such certificate." 302 APPENDIX. NORTH (AND SOUTH) DAKOTA. An Act to Revise and am< nd an Aet entitled "An Act to Insure the Better Education of Practitioners of Dental Surgery, and to RegulaU th Practice of Dentistry in tht Territory of Dakota." Section 1. B< it < naeted by the Legislative Assembly of the Stak of North Dakota, That it shall be unlawful for any per- son who is not, at the time of the passage of this Act, law- fully entitled to practice dentistry in this State, pursuant* to the provisions of the Act of which this Act is a revision and amendment, to practice or attempt to practice dentistry in this State, unless such persons shall have first received a license to practice dentistry from the Board of Dental Exami- ners, as hereinafter provided. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners, to consist of five practic- ing dentists, is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Governor. The term for which the members of said board shall hold their oflices shall be five years, except that the members of the board appointed by the Governor pursuant to the provi- sions of the Act to which this is an amendment, residing in North Dakota, and acting as such at the time this Act shall take effect, shall hold their respective offices until the close of the term for which they were respectively appointed. The offices of those living in South Dakota are hereby declared vacant and shall be filled as in case of any other vacancy. Any vacancy in said board, whether by removal, death, res- ignation, or otherwise, shall be filled by the Governor. No person who shall be in any manner pecuniarily interested in, or who shall be officially connected with, any dental college or dental department of any school or university, shall be ap- pointed a member of said board. Sec 3. Said board shall have power to make reasonable rules and regulations for carrying into effect and maintaining the provisions of this Act. It shall choose one of its mem- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 303 !>ers President and one Secretary thereof, and shall hold regu- lar meetings twice in each year, and such other regular and special meetings as said board may by its rules provide. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quorum thereof for the transaction of business, but a less number may adjourn from time to time. The board shall keep full and complete minutes of its proceedings, and of its receipts and dis- bursements, and a full and accurate list of all persons licensed and registered by said board, and such records, together with the list of licensed and registered dentists, to be kept as afore- said, shall be public records, and shall, at all reasonable times, be open to public inspection, and such records, or a transcript of the same, or of any part thereof, under the seal of the board, duly certified by the Secretary thereof, shall, at all times and places, be competent evidence of the facts therein stated or recited. A sworn statement by the Secretary, under the seal of the board, stating that any person is or is not a registered dentist, shall be prima facie evidence that such per- son is or is not entitled to practice dentistry in this State. The President of the board and the Secretary thereof shall have authority to administer oaths, and the board shall have power to hear testimony as to all matters relating to the duties imposed upon it by law. Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of every person who, at the time this Act shall take effect, is a legally qualified practi- tioner of dentistry in this State, as shown by the books of registration kept by said board, under the provisions of the Act of which this is an amendment, and who is desirous to continue such practice, and of all persons who shall there- after be licensed by said board to practice dentistry, to procure from the Secretary of said board, on or before the thirty-first day of May, 1890, and annually thereafter, a certificate of registration as a practitioner of dentistry in this State. Such i ertincate shall be issued by the Secretary upon payment of a registration fee, to be fixed by the board, which fee shall not exceed the sum of two dollars. All certificates so issued shall expire on the thirty-first day of May in each year, and shall be prima facit evidence of the right of the holder thereof 304 APPENDIX. to practice dentistry in this State during the time for which they were issued. Any certificate or license granted hy said board may be revoked by the board, upon conviction of the party holding it, of a violation of any of the provisions of this Act. Every person receiving such certificate shall con- spicuously expose the same in his place of business. Sec. 5. Any person having pursued the study of den- tistry in the office, or under the supervision of some regularly practicing dentist, for at least three years before applying for such examination, not lawfully entitled to practice dentistry at the time when this Act shall take effect, who shall there- after desire to practice dentistry in this State, shall appear be- fore said board and be examined with reference to his knowl- edge and skill in dentistry, and if, upon such examination, such person be found, in the judgment of said board, to possess suitable qualifications to practice dentistry, and, if the board shall be satisfied that the applicant has a good moral character, it shall issue to such person a license to practice dentistry in accordance with the provisions of this Act; pro- vided, that any person desiring to commence the practice of dentistry in this State, and having a diploma issued or pur- porting to be issued by any reputable dental college or dental department of any university, shall present the same to the State Board of Examiners, and said board, being satisfied as to the genuineness of the diploma and the qualifications of the applicant, shall issue a license to such person to practice dentistry in this State without examination, on payment of the license fee hereinafter provided for. All licenses issued by said board shall be signed by the several members thereof, and be attested by its President and Secretary, and the seal of said board. Sec. 6. Any member of said board may issue a tempo- rary license to any applicant, upon the presentation by such applicant of satisfactory evidence that he possesses the neces- sary qualifications to practice dentistry, on the payment of ten dollars, which license shall remain in force until the semi- annual meeting of said board occurring next thereafter, and no longer; but such license shall not be renewed, nor shall it DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 305 be granted to any applicant who has, within six months pre- vious to his application, been rejected by said board. Such license shall not be valid until it shall be attested by the Sec- retary of the board, under its seal, and the Secretary shall keep a record of such licenses, the date of their issue, and the name of the members by whom each license was issued. Sec. 7. Any person shall be regarded as practicing den- tistry within the meaning of this Act, who shall perform upon the human teeth, or parts adjacent thereto, any operation or operations such as are commonly known and designated as dental operations, or operations in dental surgery ; or who shall hold himself or herself out, by means of signs, cards, advertisements, or otherwise, as a dentist or dental surgeon. Any legally qualified practitioner of dentistry who has com- plied with the provisions of this Act, or any properly organ- ized and equipped and reputable dental college, or dental department of any reputable school or university, may take into preceptorship a student or students who shall be per- mitted to perform such operations in the offices or infirmaries of such preceptors and under their immediate supervision, and not otherwise : during the term of three years from the com- mencement of such pupilage, and no longer, unless for special reasons such time shall, in the discretion of the board, be thereafter extended for a period not exceeding one year ; pro- vided, nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent any legally qualified resident physician and surgeon from extract- ing teeth, or to prevent any person from using any domestic remed\ r or other proper means for the relief of pain in case of an emergency. Sec. 8. In order to provide means for carrying into effect and maintaining the provisions of this Act, said Board of Dental Examiners may require each person appearing before it for examination, as aforesaid, to pay said board a fee not < weeding ten dollars, which shall in no case he returned to such applicant ; and if the applicant shall receive a license to practice, he shall thereupon pay the further sum of five dol- lars, which shall entitle him to receive also a certificate of registration as a practitioner of dentistry in this State for the 300 APPENDIX. current or registration year in which such license Bhall be issued, alter the termination of which he shall annually ob- tain a certifieate as hereinbefore provided. All moneys re- ceived by the board shall be held by the Secretary thereof as a special fund for paying the necessary expenses and the com- pensation of the board and its Secretary, as herein provided, and for enforcing the provisions of this Acl ; and the Secre- tary shall give such bond as the board may from time to time require. Xo part of the salaries or other expenses of the board shall be paid out of the State treasury, but the annual report of the board shall be printed by the State. The Secretary of the board shall receive a salary which shall be fixed by the board, in addition to the necessary and legiti- mate expenses by him incurred in the discharge of his duties,, and each member of the board shall receive as compensation the sum of five dollars per day for each day actually enployed by him in attending meetings, or in performing any special duty assigned to him by the board, and shall be reimbursed for all legitimate and necessary expenses by him incurred in the performance of any official duty. Said board shall, on or before the first day of December in each year, make an annual report of its acts and proceedings to the Governor y which report shall contain, among other things, an accurate statement of all moneys received and disbursed during the previous year. Sec. 9. Any violations of any of the provisions of this Act shall subject the part}' violating the same to a penalty of not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than fifty dollars, for the first offense ; of not less than fifty dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars, for the second offense, and of not less than one hundred dollars, nor more than two hundred and fifty dollars, for the third or any subsequent offense, and such penalties shall be sued for and recovered in any court of com- petent jurisdiction in the name of the people by the State's- attorney of the county wherein such offense shall have been committed, or in which the offender may be found, and said penalty, when recovered, shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which the suit shall be brought ; DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 307 and in ease of the non-payment of such penalty, the party so offending shall be liable to imprisonment for a period not ex- ceeding six months, in the discretion of the court having cognizance thereof; provided, that either party may appeal in the same time and manner as appeals may be taken in other cases, except that where an appeal is prayed in behalf of the people, no appeal bond shall be required to be filed, whether the appeal be from a Justice of the Peace or from the County or District Court, or from the Appellate Court. But it shall be sufficient in behalf of the people of the State of ISTorth Dakota, for the use of the Board of Dental Ex- aminers, to pray an appeal, and thereupon an appeal may be had without bond or security ; provided further, that no pro- ceeding shall be commenced against any party for failure to procure the annual certificate of registration provided for in section 4, until after such party shall have been served with proper notice of such failure, and the penalty thereby in- curred. Every operation performed and each patient treated,, contrary to the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed and held as a separate offense. Sec. 10. Any person who shall willfully and falsely claim or pretend to have or hold a certificate of license or registra- tion of this board, or of any similiar board of any other State, or who shall willfully and falsely, with intent to de- ceive the public, claim or pretend to be a graduate of or hold a diploma granted by any incorporated dental society or dental college, shall be subject to the penalties provided for in section 9 of this Act, to be sued for and recovered and paid out as in said section provided. Sec. 11. All laws or parts of laws in conflict with this Act are hereby repealed. Approved February 6th, 1890. 308 APPENDIX. OHIO. A Law to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Ohio. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, That it shall be unlawful for any person to practice dentistry in the State of Ohio for compensation, un- less such person has received a diploma from the faculty of a dental college duly incorporated under the laws of this or any other State of the United States or foreign country, or a certificate of qualification issued by the State Dental Society or by any local society auxiliary thereto ; provided, that noth- ing in this section shall apply to persons now engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State before the first day of January, 1873. Sec. 2. Any person who shall practice dentistry without having complied with the regulations of this Act, shall be deemedguilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars ; ])rovided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent physicians and surgeons from extracting teeth. Sec 3. All prosecutions under this Act shall be by in- dictment before the Court of Common Pleas in the county where the offense was committed, and all fines imposed and collected under the provisions of this Act shall be paid into the treasury of the county where such conviction shall take place, for the use of the common schools within such county. Sec 4. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. The above Act was passed May 8th, 1868, but was after- wards amended, as follows : An Act to amend Section one of an Act entitled 'An Act to Regu- late the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Ohio" passed May 8th, 1868. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, That section 1 of the above-named Act be so amended as to read as follows : That it shall be unlawful for DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 309 an\' person to practice dentistry in the State of Ohio for com- pensation, unless such person has received a diploma from the faculty of a dental college duly incorporated under the laws of this or any State of the United States or foreign country, or a certificate of qualification issued hy the State Dental Society ; provided, that in all cases where any person has been continuously engaged in the practice of dentistry for a period of five years or more, such person shall be considered to have, complied with the provisions of this Act and the Act to. which this is amendatory. Sec. 2. Any person who shall practice dentistry without having complied with the regulations of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than fifty dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent physicians and surgeons from extracting teeth. Sec. 3. All prosecutions under this Act shall be by indict- ment before the Court of Common Pleas in the county where the offense was committed, and all fines imposed and collected under the provisions of this Act shall be paid into the treas- ury of the county where such conviction shall take place, for the use of the common schools within such county. Sec 4. That said original section 1 be and is hereby re- pealed. Sec 5. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. Passed March 10th, 1873. OKLAHOMA. Following is the Text of the Law which went into effect Decem- ber 25th, 1890. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Oklahoma, That it shall be unlawful for any person to practice or attempt to practice dentistry or dental 310 APPENDIX. surgery in the Territory of Oklahoma without having first received a license from the Board of Dental Examiners, as hereinafter provided. Sec. 2. A Board of Dental Examiners is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purpose and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of such board shall be appointed by the Governor, and shall consist of five prac- ticing dentists, residents of Oklahoma Territory, who shall have been engaged in the continuous practice of dentistry or dental surgery for at least two years prior to the passage of this Act. In case of a vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by the Governor. Sec 3. Said board shall keep a record, in which shall be registered the names and residence and place of business of all persons authorized under this Act to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this Territory. It shall elect one of its members as President, one as Secretary, and one as Treasurer thereof, which election shall hold during: the term for which the incumbent was appointed, or during his or her residence in the Territory. It shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener, and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. A majority of such board shall, at all times, constitute a quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall, at all reasonable times, be open for public inspection. Sec. 4. Every person who holds a diploma from a re- cognized college of dentistry, or who was engaged in the prac- tice of dental surgery in the Territory three months previous to the passage of this Act, and who has been regularly en- gaged in the practice of dentistiy for three years next pre- ceding the passage of this Act, shall, within six months there- after, cause his or her name, residence, and place of business to be registered with the Board of Dental Examiners and pay the fee hereinafter provided, whereupon the board shall issue a license duly signed by a majority of said board, and such license shall be prima facie evidence of the right of the holder thereof to practice dentistry or dental surgery in the Territory of Oklahoma. Sec. 5. Any person desiring to commence the practice DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 311 of dentistry or dental surgery in the Territory of Oklahoma after the passage of this Act, shall, before commencing such practice, file for record, in a book kept for that purpose, with said Board of Dental Examiners, his or her diploma, or a duly authenticated copy thereof, and pay the fee as herein- after provided, whereupon the said board shall issue to such person a license, the same as provided in section 4 of this Act ; provided, however, that any person who shall pass a satisfactory examination before the said board regarding his or her qualifications to practice dentistry or dental surgery, and pay the fee as hereinafter provided, shall also be granted a license as provided in section 4 of this Act. Sec. 6. To provide for the proper and effective enforce- ment of this Act, said Board of Dental Examiners shall be entitled to the following fees, to wit : For each license issued to persons engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental sur- gery in this Territory three months previous to the passage of this Act, the sum of three dollars ; for each license issued to persons not engaged in such practice three months pre- vious to such passage, the sum of ten dollars. Sec. 7. The members of said board shall each receive the compensation of three dollars per day for each and every day actually engaged in the duties of their office, which, together with all other legitimate expenses incurred in the performance of such duties, shall be paid from fees received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the expenses of said board shall at any time be paid out of the Territorial treasury. All moneys in excess of said per diem allowances and other expenses shall be held by the Treasurer of said board as a special fund for meeting the ex- penses of said board, he giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct, and such board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the fifteenth day of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them in pur- suance of this Act. 8eo. 8. Any person who shall violate this Act by prac- ticing or attempting to practice dentistry or dental surger} r 312 SlPPBNDix. in this Territory without first complying with the provisions of this Act, shall he deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in a sum not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars, or by confinement in the county jail for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the dis- cretion of the court; provided, that nothing in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent physicians and surgeons or other persons from extracting teeth, and all fines collected under this Act shall belong to the common school fund of the county where the offense was committed. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after the final adjournment of this legislative assembly. PENNSYLVANIA. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry, and to Protect the People against Empiricism in Relation thereto, in the State of Pennsylvania, and Providing Penalties for the Violation of the Seime. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and Souse of Repre- sentatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be un- lawful for any person except regularly authorized physicians and surgeons to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of Pennsylvania, unless said person has graduated and received a diploma from the faculty of a reputable institution where this specialty is taught, and chartered under the au- thority of some one of the United States or of a foreign government, acknowledged as such, or shall have obtained a certificate from a Board of Examiners duly appointed and authorized by the provisions of this Act to issue such cer- tificate. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 313 Sec. 2. That the Board of Examiners shall consist of six practitioners of dentistry who are of acknowledged ability in the profession. Said board shall be elected by the Penn- sylvania State Dental Society at their next annual meeting, as follows : Two shall be elected for one year, two for two years, and two for three years, and each year thereafter two shall be elected to serve for three years, or until their suc- cessors are elected. The said board shall have power to fill all vacancies for unexpired terms, and they shall be responsi- ble to said State Dental Society for their acts. Sec 3. That it shall be the duty of this board, First, To meet annually at the time and place of meeting of the Pennsyl- vania State Dental Society, and at such other time and place as the said board shall agree upon, to conduct the examina- tion of applicants. They shall also meet for the same pur- pose at the call of any four members of said board at such time and place as may be designated. Thirty days' notice must be given of the meetings by advertising in at least three periodicals, one of them being a dental journal, and all pub- lished within this State. Secondly, To grant a certificate of ability to practice dentistry, which certificate shall be signed by said board, and stamped with a suitable seal, to all appli- cants who undergo a satisfactory examination, and who re- ceive at least four affirmative votes. Thirdly, To keep a book in which shall be registered the names and the qualifi- cations, as far as practicable, of all persons who have been granted certificates of ability to jDractice dentistry under the provisions of this Act. Sec 4. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the seal of said Board of Examiners, shall be evidence in any court of this State. Sec 5. That four members of this board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business ; and should a quorum not be present on any day appointed for their meet- ing, those present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum is present. 314 APPENDIX. Sec. 6. That any person who shall in violation of this Act practice dentistry in the State of Pennsylvania, shall be liable to indictment in the Court of Quarter Sessions of the proper county, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars ; provided, that any person so convicted shall not be entitled to any fee for ser- vices rendered ; and if a fee shall have been paid, the patient or his or her heirs may recover the same as debts of like amount are now recoverable by law. Sec. 7. That all fines collected shall inure to the poor fund of the county in which the prosecution occurs. Sec. 8. That nothing in this Act shall apply to persons who shall have been engaged in the continuous practice of dentistry in this State for three years or over at the time of or prior to the passage ol this Act. Sec 9. That to provide a fund to carry out the pro- visions of the third section of this Act, it shall be the duty of the said Board of Examiners to collect from those who receive the certificate to practice dentistry the sum of thirty (30) dollars each, of which sum, if there be any remaining after liquidating necessaiy expenses, the balance shall be paid into the treasury of the said Pennsylvania State Dental Society, to be kept as a fund for the more perfect carrying out of the provisions of this Act. Signed April 17th, 1876. Supplementary to the foregoing Act is the following Act in reference to the registration of dentists : An Act for the Registration of Dentists, Supplementary to the Act Entitled u An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry, and to Protect the People Against Empiricism in Relation Thereto, in the State of Pennsylvania, and Providing Penalties for the Same." Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre- sentatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 315 same, That it shall be the duty of any person practicing dentistry within this Commonwealth within three months after the passage of this Act, and of any person intending to practice dentistry within this Commonwealth, before com- mencing the same, to have recorded in the Recorder's Office in the county in which he or she practices or intends to practice, the diploma or certificate provided for in the Act to which this is a supplement. Sec 2. Any person beginning to practice dentistry in this State after the passage of this Act, having a dental diploma issued or purporting to have been issued by any college, university, society, or association, shall present the same to the State Examining Board provided for in the Act to which this is a supplement for approval ; such Examining Board, being satisfied as to the qualifications of the appli- cant and the genuineness of the diploma, shall, without fee, indorse the same as approved, after which the same may be recorded as aforesaid. Sec 3. Any person who is entitled to practice dentistry in this Commonwealth without a diploma or certificate, under the provisions of the eighth section of the Act to which this is a supplement, shall make written affidavit be- fore some person qualified to administer an oath, setting forth the time of his continuous practice, and the place or places where such practice was pursued in this Common- wealth, and shall, within three months after the passage of this Act, have such affidavit recorded in the Recorder's Office of the county in which he is practicing ; and it shall be the duty of the Recorder to record such diplomas, certificates and affidavits in a book provided for such purposes. Sec 4. Any person who shall violate or fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Act or of the Act to which this is a supplement, or who shall cause to be recorded any diploma or certificate which has been obtained fraudulently, or is in whole or in part a forgery, or shall make affidavit to any false statement to be recorded as aforesaid, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be sentenced 316 APPENDIX. to pay a line of not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars for each offense for the use of the proper county. Sec. 5. All Acts or parts of Acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. Approved June 20th, 1883. RHODE ISLAND. The following is an "Act to Establish a Board of Registration in Dentistry for the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations," passed June 1st, 1888: Section 1. R is enacted by the General Assembly, as fol- lows: The Governor of the State shall, on the passage of this Act, appoint five graduates in dentistry residing and do- ing business within the State, who shall constitute a Board of Registration in dentistry. The term for which such mem- bers shall hold their office shall be three years ; except that one of the members first appointed under this Act shall hold his office for one year, two for the term of two years, and two for the term of three years respectively, and until their successors shall be duly appointed. In case of a vacancy oc- curring in said board, it shall be filled by the Governor in conformity with this section. Sec 2. Said board shall choose one of its members Presi- dent and one Secretary thereof, and three of its members shall constitute a quorum. It shall meet at least once a year, or oftener, at the call of three members. Sec. 3. Within three months from the time of the pas- sage of this Act, it shall be the duty of every person engaged in the practice of dentistry at that time in the State to cause his or her name and place of business to be registered with said board, who shall keep a book for that purpose ; and per- sons so registering shall receive a certificate to that effect from the board. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 317 Sec. 4. All persons, not graduates of regular dental col- leges, who may desire to enter the practice of dentistry in this State, subsequent to the passage of this Act, may appear before said board and be examined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dentistry ; and to such as undergo a satisfactory examination certificates to that effect, signed by said board, shall be issued. All persons holding diplomas from reputable dental colleges may present the same to said board, and, on such presentation, shall receive certificates with- out examination. Sec 5. Each person receiving a certificate shall pay to said board the sum of $2.00, and each person applying for an examination shall pay, in addition to the fee for certificate, if granted, twenty-five dollars, which shall in no case be re- turned. The fees received for examinations, registration, and certificates, shall be appropriated to defray the expenses of the Board of* Registration in dentistry. Sec. 6. Any person who shall practice or attempt to practice dentistry in this State, in violation of the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and liable to indictment therefor, and, upon conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars, for each and every offense; and such person's failure to duly register with the Board of Registration in dentistry shall be evidence of such violation. Sec. 7. This Act shall take effect upon its passage. SOUTH CAROLINA. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry, and Protect the People against Empiricism in Relation thereto, in the State of South Carolina. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- resentatives of the State of South Carolina, now met and sitting in General Assembly, and by the authority of the same, That 318 APPENDIX. from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person, or persons, to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of South Carolina, unless said person, or persons, shall have received a diploma from the faculty of some den- tal college, duly incorporated under the laws of this or some other State in the United States, or foreign Government, in which is annually delivered, in good faith, a full course of lectures and instructions in dentistry, or shall have obtained a license, from a Board of Dentists, duly authorized and ap- pointed by this Act to issue such license. Sec. 2. It shall he the duty of the South Carolina State Dental Association, at the next annual meeting thereof, after the passage of this Act, to elect a Board of Examiners, to consist of five members, to be known by the title of the Board of Dental Examiners in the State of South Carolina. The members of this board shall, at the first election, be elected for terms of one, two, three, four and five years, respectively, or until their successors shall have been elected. And it shall be the duty of the South Carolina State Dental Asso- ciation, at each subsequent annual meeting thereof, to elect a person for the term of five years, to fill the place of the member of the board whose term of office shall at that time expire, and also to fill such vacancies in the board as may have occurred during the year. And if, at any regular meet- ing of the board, any member, or members, shall fail to be present, the South Carolina State Dental Association may, at its discretion, declare the office of such absentee to be vacated, and may proceed to elect a new member, or members, for the unexpired term of such person, or persons, or it may elect a member, or members, to fill, temporarily, the place, or places, of such absentees. This board shall be organized by the election of a President and a Secretary. Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of the Board of Examiners First, to meet, annually, at the time and place of meeting of the South Carolina State Dental Association, giving thirty days' notice in the public newspapers, published in not less than three different places of the State, viz. : one in Charleston, one in Columbia, and one in Greenville, of such annual meeting. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 319 Secondly, to prescribe a course of reading for those who study dentistry under private instructions. Thirdly, to grant a license to any applicant who shall furnish satisfactory evi- dence of having graduated, and received a diploma from any incorporated dental eolleg e in good standing with the pro- fession, without fee, charge, or examination. Fourthly, to grant licenses to all other applicants who undergo a satisfac- tory examination. Fifthly, to keep a book in which shall be registered all persons licensed to practice dentistry in the State of South Carolina. The expenses of said license shall be fifteen dollars, to be paid by the licensee. And that all persons who do now hold, or may hereafter hold, a license to practice dentistry in this State, shall become members of the South Carolina State Dental Association, immediately upon the obtaining of said license ; provided, he shall be al- lowed to waive his right of membership. Sec. 4. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal, shall be evidence in any court of the State. Sec. 5. That three members of said board shall consti- tute a quorum for the transaction of business, and should a quorum not be present on the day appointed for their meet- ing, those present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum is present. Sec. 6. That one member of said board may grant a license to an applicant to practice until the next regular meeting of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time the temporary license shall expire ; but such temporary license shall not be granted by a member of the board after the board has rejected the applicant. Sec 7. That every dentist in this State be required to keep a record of all cases treated in his practice, in accord- ance with a form to be designated by the South Carolina State Dental Association, and furnish his patient with a copy of the same, if so desired by the patient. Sec 8. That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in the State of South Carolina, for 320 APPENDIX. fee, or reward, shall be liable to indictment, ami, on convic- tion, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than three hundred dollars ; provided, that nothing; in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent any person from extracting teeth. Sec. 9. That on trial of such indictment, it shall be in- cumbent on the defendant to show that he has authority, un- der the law, to practice dentistry, to exempt himself from such penalty. Sec. 10. That all fines collected shall inure to the edu- cational fund of the county where the offender resides. Sec 11. That those who have been in the regular prac- tice of dentistry in the State, prior to the passage of this Act, are exempt from the provisions of the same, except sec- tion 7 of this Act. Sec. 12. That the South Carolina State Dental Associa- tion is hereby made a body politic and corporate, shall have and use a common seal, sue and be sued, plead and be im- pleaded, and be empowered to make all necessary by-laws not inconsistent with the State Laws and Constitution. Sec. 13. That this Act shall continue in force until re- pealed. Ap] .roved February 23d, 1875. TENNESSEE. Following is the Text of "An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Tennessee, and to Punish Violators thereof^ enacted March 23d, 1891. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, That it shall be unlawful for any person to practice, or attempt to practice, dentistry or dental surgery in the State of Tennessee without first having received a di- ploma from some reputable dental college, school, or univer- sity department, duly authorized by the laws of this State, or some other of the United States, and in which college, or DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 321 school, or university department there are, at the time of issu- ance of such diploma, annually delivered a full course of lec- tures and instructions in dentistry and dental surgery ; pro- vided, that nothing in section 1 of this Act shall apply to any person engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in the State at the time of the passage of this Act, except as hereinafter provided ; and provided, further, That nothing in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent phy- sicians, surgeons, or others from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners consisting of six practi- cing dentists of acknowledged ability, as such, two of whom shall be residents in each of the three sub-divisions of the State, East, Middle, and West Tennessee, is hereby created, who shall have authority to issue certificates to persons in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in the State at the time of the passage of this Act ; and also to decide upon the validity of such diplomas as ma}' be subsequently presented for registration, as hereinafter provided, and issue certificates to all applicants who may hereafter apply to said board and pass a satisfactory examination. Sec 3. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Governor, and shall serve for a term of three years, excepting that the members of the board first appointed shall be made, as follows : Two for one year, two for two years, and two for three years, respectively, and until their successors are duly appointed. In case of vacancy occurring in said board by resignation, removal from State, or death, such vacancy may be filled for its unexpired term by the Governor as provided by this Act. Sec. 4. Said board shall keep a record, in which shall be registered the names and residences, or places of business, of all persons authorized under this Act to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this State. It shall elect one of its mem- bers President and one Secretary thereof; and it shall meet at least once in each year, at the time and place fixed for the meeting of the State Dental Association, and as much oftener and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. A majority of the members of said board shall constitute a 322 APPENDIX. quorum, and the proceedings thereof shall be open to public inspection. Sec. 5. Every person engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery within this State at the time of the passage of this Act, shall, within six months thereafter, cause his or her name, residence, and place of business to be registered with said Board of Examiners, upon which said board shall issue to such person a certificate duly signed by a majority of the members of said board, and which certificate shall entitle the person to whom it is issued to all the rights and privileges set forth in section 1 of this Act. Sec. 6. Any person desiring to commence the practice of dentistry or dental surgery within this State after the passage of this Act, shall, before commencing such practice, tile for record in a book kept for such purposes with the said Board of Examiners, his or her diploma, orduly authen- ticated copy thereof, the validity of which the said board shall, have the power to determine. If accepted, said board shall issue to the person holding such diploma a certificate, duly signed by all or a majority of the members of said board,, and which certificate shall entitle the person to whom it is issued to all the rights and privileges set forth in section 1 of this Act ; provided, that any person, whether holding a diploma aforesaid or not, shall have the privilege of making application to said board, and, upon undergoing a satisfac- tory examination, shall be entitled to a certificate in like manner as a person holding a diploma, and upon the same terms. Sec 7. To provide for the proper and effective enforce- ment of this Act, said Board of Examiners shall be entitled to the following fees, to-wit : For each certificate to persons engaged in the practice in the State at the time of the pas- sage of this Act, the sum of one dollar ; for each certificate issued to persons not engaged in the practice of dentistry in the State at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of five dollars. Sec. 8. The members of said Examining Board shall re- ceive the compensation of five dollars per day for each day DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 323 actually engaged in the duties of their office, which, together with all other legitimate expenses, incurred in the perform- ance of such duties shall be paid from the fees and penalties received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the expenses of said board shall at any time be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys in excess of said per diem allowance and other expenses shall be held by the Secretary of the said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giving such bond as the board may from time to time direct, and said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor by the fifteenth day of December of each year, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them in the pursuance of this Act. Sec. 9. Any person who shall violate this Act by prac- ticing or attempting to practice dentistry or dental surgery within the State, without first complying with the provi- sions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor^ and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in a sum not less than twenty-five nor more than three hundred dollars. Sec. 10. This Act shall take effect from and after its passage, the public welfare demanding it. TEXAS. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Texas. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of Texas, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlaw- ful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the State of Texas, unless said person has obtained license from a Board of Examiners, duly appointed and authorized by this Act to issue such license ; provided, that dentists who have been in the regular practice of dentistry in this State for three years next preceding the passage of this Act, shall not be re- "-lit APPENDIX. quired to submit to an examination, and shall !).• entitled to a license, without fee, which shall be transmitted to him, by mail or otherwise, upon application accompanied by satis- factory evidence to the fact of his having been in theregulai practice for the time required. Sec. 2. That the Board of Examiners shall be appointed by the Judge of each judicial district, and shall be composed of three reputable dentists, residing in said district, who shall liold their offices two years from the date of appointment, -jind any vacancy shall be filled by the District Judge, as aforesaid. Sec. o. The board shall, immediately after appointment, select one of their number as President and one as Secre- tary, and adopt all rules necessary for the transaction of the "business that may come before them. Sec. 4. Said board shall meet annually at some central point in their resj »ecti ve districts, to conduct examinations and grant licenses. Xotice of the time and place of such meeting shall be given, for one month, by publication in some newspa- per published in the district! Sec. 5. Any applicant who shall furnish satisfactory evi- dence of having graduated and received a diploma from any reputable dental college, and any applicants under the pro- visions of the first section of this Act, and all other appli- cants who undergo a satisfactory examination as to their qualifications, and shall pay to said board a fee of five dollars, to be used for the advertising and incidental expenses, shall be granted license, which license shall entitle the person to whom granted to practice dentistry in any county where the same has been recorded, as required by section twelve. Sec 6. Said board shall keep a book of record, in which shall be registered the names of all persons licensed to prac- tice dentistry by said board. Sec. 7. The book so kept shall be a book of record, and a transcript from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the common seal of said board, shall be evi- dence in any court in this State. Sec 8. That two members of said board shall consti- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 325- tute a quorum for the transaction of business, and should a quorum be not present on the day appointed for its meeting, the member present may adjourn, from day to day, until a quorum be present. Sec. 9. That one member of said board may grant a license for an applicant to practice, until the next regular meeting of the board, when he shall report the fact, at which time such temporary license shall expire ; but such tempo- rary license shall not be granted by a member of the board within one year after the board has rejected the applicant. Sec 10. That any person who shall, in violation of the provisions of this Act, practice dentistry in this State for a fee or reward, shall be liable to indictment, and, on convic- tion, shall be fined not less than one hundred nor more than two hundred dollars; nor shall it be construed to prevent persons from extracting teeth, nor in any way to interfere with physicians and surgeons in their practice of such. Sec 11. That all fines collected from prosecutions under this Act shall be appropriated to the common school fund in the county where collected. Sec 12. That every person to whom license is issued by said Board of Examiners, shall, within thirty days from the date thereof, present the same to the Clerk of the county in which he resides, who shall officially record said license in a book in his office, and shall be entitled to demand a fee of fifty cents for his services ; but a temporary license, issued under section nine of this Act, need not be recorded. Sec 13. That on the trial of any person indicted under the provisions of this Act, it shall be incumbent upon the defendant, in order to exempt him from the penalties of this Act, to show that he has authority, under the law, to prac- tice dentistry in this State. Sec 14. That all laws or parts of laws in conflict with tliis Act be and the same are hereby repealed. A]. proved March 27th, 1889. 326 APPENDIX. VERMONT. An Act Regulating the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Vermont. Section 1. It is hereby enacted, etc., There shall be a Board of Dental Examiners. The Board shall consist of five dental graduates, or practitioners of dentistry, to be appointed by the Governor, in the month of November, 1882, and in the month of November, biennially, thereafter. The term ot office of members so appointed shall commence on the first day of December following their appointment, and continue for two years, and until their successors are appointed. The Governor shall fill vacancies in the board. Sec. 2. The board shall meet annually, or oftener. Meet- ings shall be held on the call of three members. Thirty days' notice of each meeting shall be given, by mail, to each prac- t cing dentist in the State known to the board. Sec 3. The board shall, at their meetings, examine ap- plicants for licenses to practice dentistry, and shall grant a license to each one whom they find qualified, on payment to the board by each person, the sum of five dollars. The board shall grant a license without fee to any person who has received a diploma from any incorporated dental college, and to each person residing and engaged in the practice of dentistry within the State, at the time of the passage of this Act, on application of such person, accompanied by satisfac- tory proof of the facts which entitle him to such license. Sec. 4. Any member of the board may, when the board is not in session, grant a license to practice dentistry to a person whom such member finds, on examination, to be qualified, on the payment of the sum of two dollars by such person. A license so granted shall be valid until the next meeting of the board, but no longer. Each member shall make a report of licenses so granted by him at the meeting of the board next following the granting of the license. A member shall not grant a license under the provisions of this section to one who has been rejected by the board as un- qualified. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 327 Sec. 5. Members of the board shall receive three dollars, each, a day for time spent in examining applicants and granting licenses, if the fees received from applicants during the biennial term, in which such services are rendered, shall be sufficient therefor ; and at the end of each biennial term, the board shall file with the State Auditor a statement of their receipts and disbursements, verified by oath, and shall, at the same time, pay into the State treasury any excess remaining in their hands. Sec. 6. A person who, without a license in force, prac- tices dentistry in this State for a compensation, or reward, shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars. But no penalty shall attach to a person for merely extracting teeth. Sec. 7. The Board of Dental Examiners shall keep a book in which they shall cause to be entered the name of each person to whom a license has been issued under the provisions of this Act. Sec. 8. A person receiving a license from the Board of Dental Examiners shall, within thirty days from the time of receiving the same, cause it to be recorded in the office of the Secretary of State, who shall be entitled to twenty-five cents for recording each license. Sec 8. A person who does not cause his license to be recorded within the time required by the preceding section, shall forfeit the license, and shall not be re-licensed until he has paid to the board the sum of ten dollars. Sec 10. This Act shall take effect from its passage, except section 6, which shall take effect on the first day of January, 1883. Approved November 29th, 1882. I'.L'N APPENDIX. VIRGINIA. The Following is the Text of An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the State of Virginia^ which was Approved February 06th, 1886. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Vir- ginia, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person, except regularly authorized phy- sicians and surgeons, to engage in the practice of dentistry in the Commonwealth of Virginia, or to receive license from any Commissioner of the Revenue, unless such person has graduated and received a diploma from the faculty of a repu- table institution where this specialty is taught, and char- tered under the authority of some one of the United States, or of a foreign government, acknowledged as such, or shall have obtained a certificate from a Board of Examiners duly appointed and authorized by the provisions of this Act to issue such certificates ; provided, that nothing herein con- tained shall prevent any person from extracting teeth for any one suffering from toothache. Sec. 2. That the Board of Examiners shall consist of six practitioners of dentistry, who are of acknowledged ability in the profession. Said board shall be appointed by the Gov- ernor, who shall select from twelve candidates named by the Virginia State Dental Association at their next annual meet- ing, of whom two shall serve one year, two for two years, and two for three years, and to reside in different sections of the State ; and each year thereafter, two shall be appointed in the same manner from four nominees, to serve for three years or until their successors are elected. All vacancies for unexpired terms shall be rilled by the Governor from names furnished him by the board. Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of this board, First, To meet annually at the time and place of meeting of the Vir- ginia State Dental Association, and at such other time and place as the said board shall agree upon, to conduct the ex- amination of applicants. They shall also meet for the same DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 329 purpose, at the call of any four members of said board, at such time and place as may be designated. Thirty days' notice must be given of the meetings by advertising in at least two of the daily papers published in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Secondly, To grant a certificate of ability to practice dentistry, which certificate shall be signed by said board and stamped with a suitable seal, to all applicants who undergo a satisfactory examination and who received at least four affirmative votes. Thirdly, To keep a book in which shall be registered the names and qualifications, as far as practicable, of all persons who have been granted certificates of ability to practice dentistry under the provisions of this Act. Sec. 4. That the book so kept shall be a book of record, and transcripts from it, certified to by the officer who has it in keeping, with the seal of said Board of Examiners, shall be evidence in any court of this Commonwealth. Sec. 5. That four members of this board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business ; and should a quorum not be present on any day appointed for their meeting, those present may adjourn, from time to time, until a quorum is present. Sec 6. That any person who shall, in violation of this Act, practice dentistry in the Commonwealth of Virginia, shall be liable to indictment in the circuit, county, or corpor- ation courts, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars ; provided, that any person so convicted shall not be entitled to any fee for ser- vices rendered ; and if a fee shall have been paid, the patient or his or her heirs may recover the same as debts of like amount are now recovered by law. Sec 7. That all fines collected shall inure to the public school fund of the county or corporation in which the prose- cution occurs. m-c 8. That nothing in this Act shall apply to persons who shall be engaged in the practice of dentistry in this 330 APPENDIX. Commonwealth at the time of, or prior to, the passage of this Act. Sec. 9. To provide a fund to carry out the provisions of the third section of this Act, it shall he the duty of said Board of Examiners to collect from those who shall appear before them for examination the sum of ten dollars each. Sec. 10. This Act shall be in force from its passage. WASHINGTON TERRITORY. Following is the text of u An Act to Regulate the Practice of Den- tistry, and to Protect the People against Empiricism in Rela- tion thereto, in the Territory of Washington : " ' Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Washington, That from and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the Territory of "Washington, unless said person has graduated and received a diploma from the faculty of a dental college, chartered under the authority of some one of the United States or foreign governments, or shall have obtained a certificate from a Board of Dentists, duly authorized and appointed by the provisions of this Act to issue such certificate. Sec 2. That a Board of Dental Examiners, consisting of five practicing dentists, be hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said Board of Dental Examin- ers shall be appointed and commissioned by the Governor of the Territory. Their terms of office shall be for two years, and until their respective successors shall be duly appointed and commissioned. All vacancies occurring in said Board of Examiners may be filled by the Governor at any time. The said Board of Examiners shall be appointed by the Governor on or before the first Monday in February. The term of office shall begin the first Monday in March, excepting that DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 331 the term of the first board shall begin from the time they are appointed and commissioned. Each member of said board shall take the following oath before entering upon the duties of said office: TERRITORY OF WASHINGTON, 1 COUNTYOF J I, , do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and the laws of Washington Territory and the organic Act thereof, and that I will faithfully perform the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God. [Signed] Sec. 3. Said board shall choose one of its members President and one the Secretary thereof, and it shall meet at least once in each year, or oftener, at the call of any three mem- bers of said board. Thirty days' notice must be given of the time and place of meeting of said board, said notice to be mailed to all practicing dentists in the Territory. Three mem- bers of said board shall constitute a quorum, and the pro- ceedings thereof shall, at all reasonable times, be open to public inspection. Sec. 4. Within three months from the time this Act takes effect, it shall be the duty of every person who is, at the time of the passage of this Act, engaged in the practice of dentistry in this Territory, to cause his or her name and resi- dence, or place of business, to be registered with said Board of Examiners, who shall keep a book for that purpose. The statement of every person shall be verified under oath, be- fore a Notary Public or Justice of the Peace, in such manner as may be prescribed by the Board of Examiners. Every person, who shall so register with said board as a practitioner of dentistry, shall receive a certificate to that effect, and may continue to practice as such without incurring any of the liabilities or penalties provided in this Act, and shall pay the Board of Examiners for such certificate a fee of two dollars and fifty cents. 332 APPENDIX. Sec. 5. Any and all persons who shall so desire may ap- pear before said board at any of its regular meetings, and be examined with reference to their knowledge and skill in dental surgery, and if the examination of any such person, or persons, shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons as they shall find to possess the requisite qualifications to practice dentistry a cer- tificate to that effect, in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Said board shall also indorse, as satisfactory, diplo- mas from any reputable dental college, when satisfied with the character of such institution, upon the holder furnishing evidence satisfactory to the board of his or her right to the same, and shall issue a certificate to that effect upon the pay- ment of two dollars and fifty cents to said board for said certificate. All certificates issued by said board shall be signed by its officers and stamped with the seal of said board, and such certificates shall be ^rma/acfe evidence of the right of the holder to practice dentistry in the Territory of Wash- ington. Sec. 6. Any person who shall practice dentistry contrary to the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction, may be fined in any sum not less than fifty dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars, or be confined for any period not exceeding six months in the county jail, for each and every offense. All fines recovered under this Act shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which the conviction is had. Sec 7. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provisions of this Act, the said Board of Examiners shall charge each person applying to or appear- ing before them for examination for a certificate of qualifi- cations a fee of twenty-five dollars, which fee shall in no case be returned, and out of the funds coming into the possession of the board from the fees so charged, the sum of five dollars for each day actually engaged in the duties of their ofhVe, and all legitimate and necessary expenses incurred in attend- ing the meetings of said board. Said expenses shall be paid from the fees and penalties received by the board under the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 333 provisions of this Act, and no part of the salary or expenses of said board shall be ever paid out of the Territorial treas- ury. All moneys received in excess of salaries and expenses, as above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board and carrying out the provisions of this Act, he giving such bond as the board may, from time to time, direct ; and said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Governor on or before the 15th day of October of each year, together with an account of moneys received and disbursed by them pursuant to this Act. Sec. 8. Any person who shall receive a certificate from said board to practice dentistry, shall cause his or her cer- tificate to be registered with the County Auditor of the county in which such person may desire to engage in the practice of dentistry, and the Recorder of Deeds in the several counties in this Territory shall be entitled, for registering such cer- tificate, to a fee of one dollar. Any failure, neglect, or refusal on the part of any person holding such certificate to register the same with the Recorder of Deeds, as above directed, for a period of six months, shall work a forfeiture of the certifi- cate ; and no certificate, when once forfeited, shall be restored, except upon payment to said Board of Examiners the sum of twenty-five dollars as a penalty for such neglect, failure or refusal. Sec. 9. Any person who shall knowingly and falsely claim, or pretend to have, or to hold, a certificate of license, d iploma, or degree granted by any society, or who shall falsely, or with intent to deceive the public, claim or pretend to be a graduate from any incorporated dental college, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to the same penalties as provided in section 6 of this Act. Sec 10. Any two members of the Board of Examiners shall issue a temporary certificate to any applicant upon the presentation by such applicant of the evidence of the neces- sary qualifications to practice dentistry. Such temporary certificate shall remain in force until the regular meeting of said board occurring next after the date of such temporary 334 APPENDIX. certificate, and no longer; but such temporary certificate shall not be granted by any two members of said board after said board lias rejected the applicant. All members of said Board of Examiners shall, at the regular meeting of said board, make a report of such temporary certificate issued by them. Sec. 11. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage by said board. Approved January 28th, 1888. WEST VIRGINIA. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in this State, and to Protect the People against Empiricism in Relation thereto. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Vir- ginia, It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry, for compensation, in this State, unless such person shall have received a diploma from some dental college, duly incorporated under the laws of this State, or some of the United States, or foreign government, in which is annually delivered, in good faith, a full course of lectures and instructions in dentistry ; or shall have obtained a license from a Board of Dentists, duly authorized and appointed by the authorities of this State, or some one of the United States, in the manner hereinafter mentioned. Sec 2. It shall be the duty of the Board of Public "Works to appoint nine dentists, learned in the profession, three of whom shall be appointed in each Congressional Dis- trict, w T ho shall constitute a board for the examination of applicants in their own district, and before which all appli- cants for license to practice dentistry shall appear and be ex- amined touching his proficiency in said art, or profession, and if two, or more, of said board deem the said applicant qualified to practice said profession, they shall sign said DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 335 license. For making which examination the said examiners shall have a fee of two dollars each, to be paid by the appli- cant ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall prevent any person from extracting teeth, or in any manner interfere with any person now engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State. The term of office of such board shall be five years. Sec. 3. Any person violating the provisions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than ten nor more more than one hundred dollars. Approved February 21st, 1881. An Act to amend and re-enact Section two, of Chapter XL V, of the Acts of one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, Con- cerning Dentistry. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Vir- ginia, That section 2, of chapter XLV, of the Acts of one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, be amended and re- enacted so as to read as follows : Sec 2. It shall be the duty of the Board of Public "Works to appoint twelve dentists, learned in the profession, three of whom shall be appointed in each Congressional Dis- trict, who shall constitute a board for the examination of applicants in their own district, and before which any appli- cant for license to practice dentistry shall appear and be ex- amined touching his proficiency in such art, or profession, and if two or more of said board shall deem the said applicant qualified to practice said profession, they shall sign said license. For making which examination the said Examin- ers shall have a fee of two dollars each, to be paid by the ap- plicant ; provided, that nothing in this Act shall prevent any person from extracting teeth, with or without compen- sation, or in any manner interfere with any person who was engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State on the four- teenth day of May, one thousand eight hundred and eighty- one. The term of office of such board shall be five years. Approved February 22nd, 1883. 836 APPENDIX. WISCONSIN. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry, and to Establish a Board of Dental Examiners. Section 1. The jyeople of the State of Wisconsin, repre- sented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: It shall be unlawful for any person who is not, at the time of the pas- sage of this Act, engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, to commence such practice, unless he shall have ob- tained a license as hereinafter provided. Sec 2. A Board of Examiners, to consist of five prac- ticing dentists, is hereby created, whose duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said board shall be appointed by the Gov- ernor. Three members of this board, at least, shall be members of the Wisconsin State Dental Society. The terms for which the members of said board shall hold their offices shall be five years, except that the members of the board first to be appointed under this Act, shall hold their offices for the terms of one, two, three, four and five years, respectively, and until their successors are appointed and qualified. In case of vacancy occurring in said board, such vacancy shall be filled by the Governor. Sec. 3. Said board shall choose one of its members Presi- dent and one Secretary thereof, and it shall meet at least once in each year, and as much oftener and at such times and places as it may deem necessary. A majority of said board shall at all meetings constitute a quorum, and the pro- ceedings thereof shall, at all reasonable times, be open to public inspection. Sec 4. It shall be the duty of every person who is en- gaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, within six months from the date of the passage of this Act, and annu- ally thereafter, to cause his or her name and residence, or place of business, to be registered with said Board of Ex- aminers, who shall keep a book for that purpose ; and every person who shall register with said board as a practitioner DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 337 of dentistry, may continue to practice the same as such with- out incurring any of the liabilities or penalties provided in this Act. The Board of Examiners shall furnish to the •County Clerks a certified list of those registered, and it shall be the duty of the County Clerks to register such names in a book kept for such purpose. Every person registering with the Board of Examiners shall pay, as a fee therefor, the sum of one dollar. Sec. 5. Any and all persons, who shall so desire, may appear before the said board at any of its regular meetings, and be examined with reference to the knowledge and skill in dental surgery, and if the examination of any such per- -son or persons shall prove satisfactory to said board, the Board of Examiners shall issue to such persons, as they shall find from such examination to possess the requisite qualifica^ t ions, a license to practice dentistry, in accordance with the provisions of this Act. But said board shall at all times is- sue a license to any regular graduate of any reputable, legally incorporated dental college, which requires that the candidate for graduation shall attend two full courses of lectures, of five months each, the last of which shall be attended in the insti- tution granting the diploma, without examination, upon the payment by such graduate to the said board of a fee of one dollar. All licenses issued by said board shall be signed by the members thereof, and be attested by its President and •Secretary ; and such license shall be prima facie evidence of the rights of the holder to practice dentistry in the State of Wisconsin. Sec. 6. Any person who shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act shall be liable to prosecution before any court of competent jurisdiction, upon information, or by indictment, and, upon conviction, may be fined not less than fifty dollars, nor more than two hundred dollars, for each and every offense. Sec. 7. In order to provide the means for carrying out and maintaining the provisions of this Act, the said Board of Examiners may charge each person applying to or appear- ing before them for examination for license to practice den- IPPENDIX. tistry a fee of ten dollars. And out of the funds coming into their possession, from the fees mentioned in this Act, the members of said board may receive all legitimate and necessary expenses incurred in attending the meetings of said board and in conducting the business thereof. Said expenses shall be paid from the fees received by the board, under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the expenses of said board shall be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys received in excess of said expenses, above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giving such bond as the board shall, from time to time, direct. And said board shall make an annual report of its proceedings to the Gov- ernor, on the thirtieth day of September in each year, to- gether with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by them pursuant to this Act. Sec. 8. This Act shall take effect, and be in force, from and after its passage and publication. Approved March 23d, 1885. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 339 DENTAL LAWS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. There is no special enactment regulating the practice of dentistry in Austria-Hungary further than the requirements that every dentist who seeks to practice the profession in that country, must be an Austrian-Hungary citizen, and a graduated physician or doctor possessing a diploma from a recognized college ; or, who has complied with the legal re- quirements, after which he can practice any medical specialty he may select: either, surgeon, oculist, dentist, etc. There are no special universities for dentists only. Besides the dental specialists, there are established me- chanical dentists who, while not recognized by the govern- ment, are suffered to perform the mechanical operations in the laboratory, such as the making of artificial dentures r etc., but legally they have no right to perform dental opera- tions in the mouth of a patient. BELGIUM. According to the statutes of Belgium, no person, other than a registered medical practitioner, is entitled to take, or use, the name or title of dentist, either alone or in combina- tion with other words, or of dental practitioner, or in any wise practice the profession of dentistry, unless he or she shall have passed the examinations of the Board of Dental Examiners in the county in which he or she will practice the profession of dentistry. The Board of Examiners is usually composed of medical practitioners. 340 APPENDIX. The examinations are theoretical, including such subjects as anatomy, physiology, histology, etc. The examinations in, these branches are conducted in a thorough manner, whereas the practical examinations in operative and prosthetic den- tist ly are lax. Belgium is divided into nine counties. Each county has its Special Board of Dental Examiners. Dentists desiring to practice in a neighboring county must again pass an examination before the County Board of Examiners. BRAZIL. The candidate for admission to practice dentistry in Brazil must present a reputable diploma from a recognized foreign dental college. He is then required to pass an ex- amination before the Medical Faculty at the college either at Rio de Janeiro or Bahia. The candidate must pass two series of examinations, viz.: First, anatoni}-, physiology, his- tology, etc. ; secondly, hygiene, therapeutics, operative and prosthetic dentistry. The examinations are : written, practical demonstrations, and oral. The latter are the final examinations, and are conducted by three professors of the Faculty of Medicine in the French or Portuguese language. The examinations can be obtained within one month from the time of application. After satisfactorily passing the examinations of the Medical Faculty, the diploma held by the candidate must first be recorded by the Board of Hygiene, before he can commence the practice of dentistry in Brazil. If the candidate does dot possess a recognized dental diploma, he must take three courses in the dental department of the Medical College. Before matriculating, he must pre- sent a certificate showing that he has taken a collegiate course, or has passed a satisfactory examination in such branches as algebra, geography, French, etc. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 341 CUBA. The laws and plans of the studies which a student is subjected to before he can practice dentistry in Cuba are as follows: The student is required to undergo three years of study and practice to complete his course. There is no den- tal department connected with the university, hence the studies pertaining to the dental course are conducted in academies specially authorized for this purpose by the Gen- eral Government and the Royal University. The candidate must inscribe his name in the university each year after having passed successfully the preliminary studies, that he be allowed to enter the above mentioned academies. After three years of study and practice acquired during that time, either at the academy, in hospitals, State prisons, public establishments, or in the office of a practicing dentist, the candidate must submit to a final examination for his degree. This examination is held in the Royal University, at Havana, Cuba, and under the supervision of three doctors, professors of the university, and two dentists. The examinations in anatomy, physiology, pathology, therapeutics and materia medica are conducted by the Doctors in Medicine ; whereas the examination in operative and mechanical dentistry and metallurgy are in charge of the dentists. Before passing this theoretical examination, the candidate must undergo the examinations in operative and prosthetic dentistry. The student is required to perform some dental operation, gen- erally the extraction of a tooth, because of its brevity. This operation is performed in the aforesaid public establishments, and under the observance of the above mentioned tribunal, who inspect the operation. The prosthetic examination then follows. The student is required to make an artificial den- ture, or some similar mechanical operation. This denture, together with the patient for whom it is destined, are pre- sented at the university. lie must present a certificate from some academy or practicing dentist, at "whose office he has performed the work, certifying that the denture was made by himself. 342 APPENDIX. He must then pass the theoretical examination, consist- ing as above mentioned of the following studies: Anatomy, physiology, pathology, therapeutics, materia medica, pro- tesis and metallurgy. The examination on each branch lasts ten minutes. When these are finished the aforesaid tribunal decides whether the candidate be passed or rejected. The expenses of the course are as follows: To the academies must be paid the amount of $8.50 to $17 in Spanish gold, monthly ; the official examination costs $25.75 in Spanish gold. This amount is required for acquiring the right to be examined. The final examination for the degree incurs an expense of $120, Spanish gold. If these requirements are not complied with, the degree is void, and the profession cannot legally be practiced. A practicing dentist is required to pay the Government a tax of $60, Spanish gold, annually. However, the dentists of Cuba have formed an association, and thus the tax is re- duced, pro rata, varying from $30 to $100, Spanish gold, annually. DENMARK AND DANISH PROVINCES. Any person desirous of practicing dentistry in Denmark or its Provinces, must first pass a preparatory examination in Danish history, geography, geometry, algebra, English or French, and two exercises. The regular dental examination is conducted by mem- bers of the Medical Faculty and several dentists appointed by the Board of Health. These examinations are held semi- annually, in May and December. In the technical or practi- cal trial, the candidate must give proof of his dexterity in the setting and insertion of a single artificial tooth and six partial or full dentures. In operative dentistry, he must also, by practical demon- stration, prove his ability to creditably perform the various operations in the mouth. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 343 He must procure the patients and the necessary materials himself; whereas tools and the use of the laboratory, forcer- tain hours daily, will be designated by the dentists of the Board of Examination, who will have special control over the practical trial. The work must be finished within four- teen days, and be judged by the whole board. The dentist appointed as special supervisor of this trial, receives 20 R.* The theoretical trial is conducted by the whole board, and the examinations are verbal, consisting of the subjects as follows : a. Anatomy and physiology of the face, teeth, gums, and the whole mouth. • b. Pathology of the mouth, more especially of the teeth, gums and jaw-bones ; also of the diseases of the teeth and gums. c. The preparation and effects of the medicines, gener- ally used in dentistry. d. A knowledge of dental instruments and their appli- cation. Indications for the different operations, and their practical execution. In each of the verbal branches, the ex- amination lasts for half an hour ; that on the operations and instruments, not more than one hour. 20 R. entrance-fee is charged for examination. The candidate may be re-examined within five months if he fails to pass in the first trial ; but he need not again be examined in the technical branch, if its results have pre- viously been satisfactory. No dentist is allowed to admin- ister an anaesthetic without the presence of a medical practi- tioner, who is entitled to a fee for his services from the dentist who employs him. * 1 Riss is about T 5 s °44 APPENDIX. FRANCE. In France,no person is allowed to practice the profession of dentistry, unless he or she possess a recognized dental or medical diploma. It is stipulated that none but a doctor of medicine, officer of health, or one who has passed an examination for the title of dental surgery, have such rights. The dentist is forbidden to use anaesthetics, either gen- eral or local (cocaine, nitrous oxide or ether spray), without the assistance of a recognized physician or surgeon. Below is given the text in extenso of the projected law concerning the practice of medicine, which has been agreed upon by the committee of the Senate. This text is complete, definite, and will not be modified until the public discussion. It has already been communicated to the deputies who form part of the committee of the Chamber of Deputies, and to the Government Commissioner, M. Brouardel,andithasbeen the subject of various discussions between the committee of the Senate, the representatives of the Chamber and the Minis- try, and as a result a series of modifications have been added. [Note. — There have been many inquiries as to what time the discussion of this project before the Senate w T ill take place. It is impossible that it shall be discussed in 189 1, because the moment the discussion on the custom duties will have closed, the Senate will take up the financial laws, which will occupy the attention of the High Assembly till January 1st, provided it can finish their examination by that time. "We are informed that M. Cornil will introduce his report at the end of this month or in the beginning of January. The discussion will then seriously come before the Senate during the month of January. After the vote of the Senate, the law will return to the Chamber. Placing things at their best, if it passes the Chamber, as it is to be hoped that it will, after the agreement between the delegates of the Cham- ber and the Senate, the law can be promulgated in March or April. It must not be forgotten that, according to article 36, it will be applicable only one year after its promulgation. The regulations, consultations of the Committee on Hygiene,, the Academy of Medicine and the Superior Council of Pub- lic Instruction, decreed by diverse articles of this project, w T ill necessitate that delay, at least. Therefore, it will not be DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 345 executed before the month of April, 1893, at the earliest. — Revue Odontoloyique.] [Extracts from the text of the project of the law on the practice of* medicine, proprosed by the committee of the Senate. Published by the Semaine Medicate.'] CHAPTER II. Conditions for the Practice of the Profession of Dentistry. Art. 2. The practice of dentistry is prohibited to any person who does not possess a diploma of a doctor of medi- cine, or that of an officer of health, or a dentist. The diploma of dentist will be issued by the French government after an examination passed at an establishment of superior medical instruction of the state, and following a course of studies decided upon by the Superior Council of Public In- struction. Those dentists who are not provided with this special diploma cannot practice general anaesthetics without the assistance of a doctor of medicine, or an officer of health. CHAPTER III. Practice of Medicine, Dentistry and Midwifery. Art. 5. From the time prescribed by the article 37 for the application of the law, doctors, dentists and midwives coming from foreign countries, whatever their nationality, can only practice their professions in France on condition of having obtained a diploma of a doctor of medicine, or midwifery, or dentist, with the stipulations contained in articles 1, 2 and 3. Dispensations can be granted by a Minister, conform- able to the regulation of the Superior Council of Public Instruction. Art. 9. Doctors of medicine, officers of health, dentists and midwives are obliged, after one month's sojourn in the place selected for their residence, to register their title, free of charge, in the prefecture or sub-prefecture, and also at the registry of the civil court of their district. 346 APPENDIX. The change of residence to another one necessitates a new registry of title within the same space of time. Those who have never practiced or have ceased to prac- tice since two years, and desire to devote themselves to the practice of their profession, must equally register their title, and in the same manner. Art. 10. Each year separate lists are prepared by the prefects and the judicial authorities, bearing the names and surnames, residences, dates and places of reception of doctors, dentists and midwives, provided by articles 1 and 2. These lists are exposed every year, about the first half of January, in all the public buildings of the district. Cer- tified copies of same are transmitted to the Ministers of In- terior, Public Instruction and Justice. The statistics of the medical stafF in France and the colonies are prepared each year under the care of the Minis- ter of Interior. Art. 11. The simultaneous practice of the professions of medicine, dentistry or midwifery with that of a pharmacist or herbalist, is prohibited, even in case the person possesses the necessary titles for the practice of those professions. This rule has no retroactive effect.* CHAPTER VI. Transitory Provisions. Art. 30. Foreign doctors and midwives who have been authorized to practice their profession before the promulga- tion of the present law, will continue to enjoy this privilege under the conditions as it has been given them. Art. 31. Officers of health accepted prior to the present law, and those accepted under the conditions determined by * At the meeting of the Senate, March 18th, 1892, all the articles of the law were passed, with the exception of the second paragraph of Article 2, which is printed above in Italics, and which has been returned to the Chamber of Deputies for revision, after a spirited discussion, which lasted two days. The general opinion seems to be opposed to the restrictions of the right of a qualified dentist to administer anaesthetics. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 347 article 33 below, have the right to practice medicine in all parts of the Republic. Art. 32. A dispensation from the Superior Council of Public Instruction will determine these conditions, when «, an officer of health can obtain the degree of doctor of medi- cine ; and b, a dentist who complies with the transitory dis- pensations can obtain a diploma of dentist. Art. 33. Scholars who, at the time of the promulgation of the present law, will have just entered upon the studies" for the position of an officer of health, can continue their medical studies, according to the rules previously in force, and obtain the diploma of an officer of health. Art. 34. The right to practice dentistry, by the transitory dispensation, is granted to every dentist upon the production of proof that he has been practicing for two years up to the day of the promulgation of the present law. This privilege, however, does not give the right to a dentist, in the circum- stances indicated in the preceding paragraph, to practice anaesthetics in any case. Art. 35. The right to continue the practice of their pro- fession is maintained for midwives of the first and second classes, accepted by virtue of articles 30, 31 and 32 of the law of the 19 ventose, xi, or by succeeding ministerial decrees. Art. 36. The present law is ■ applicable after one year from its promulgation. Art. 37. The present law is applicable in Algiers and the colonies, without prejudice to the special provisions by laws, decrees and regulations concerning the practice of medi- cine in their respective territories. 348 APPENDIX. GERMANY. Laws Regulating the Practice of Dentistry and the Examination of Dentists in the German Umpire. Section 1. The following are authorized to confer the degree of dentist for the Empire : 1. The central authorities of those federal states which have one or more state universities, and the respective Minis- tries for the empires of Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony and Wiirtem- berg ; the grand dukedoms of Baden, Hessen and Mecklenburg- Schwerin ; and in common with the Ministries of the grand dukedom and dukedoms of Saxony. 2. The Ministry for Elsas-Lorraine. Sec 2. The degree is conferred on those who have passed satisfactorily the dental examination, according to the regu- lations mentioned below. Sec. 3. The examination . of dentists takes place before one of the committees formed for the examination of phy- sicians, to which committee at least one practical dentist is added for that purpose. The chairman conducts the exami- nations, is entitled to be present at all of them, takes care that all the rules concerning the order of examinations are strictly observed, fills the vacancy in case of a member being absent, reports immediately after the close of each examina- tion period to the proper authority about the actions of the committee, and gives account of the fees. Each year there are two examinations, one in the summer and the other in the winter semester. The applications for examination are to be made to the proper authorities before the 1st of April and the 1st of November, respectively. Delayed applications will only be considered for exceptional causes. Sec 4. To be admitted to examination, the following conditions must be fulfilled by the applicants : 1. He must be a graduate of a German gymnasium, or real school, or have passed a similar examination before an Examining Board attached to the above educational institu- tions ; "2. Must have served at least one year's apprenticeship DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 349 at some higher dental institution or with some qualified dentist; 3. Followed a course of dental studies for at least four semesters at the universities of the German Empire. To the application for examination must be added the proofs, in original, of the fulfillment of the above conditions, and also a short autobiography. Sec. 5. The examination consists of four divisions : I. In the first division, the candidate is given, by the chi- rurgical member of the Examining Board, to examine a case where the teeth and gums are affected, to establish the diag- nosis and prognosis, as well as the remedy in the case, the re- sult to be entered at once in a protocol countersigned by the examiner; which, together with a critical report on the sick case, made and signed the same day, is to be delivered on the next morning to the examiner. II. The second division has three parts : 1. Anatomy and physiology ; 2. General pathology, therapeutics and the healing art, including toxicology ; 3. Local surgical-dental pathology and therapeutics. In each part, the candidate must answer, privately, in writing, two questions under the special supervision of a member of the Examining Board, without the use of any expedients. The questions are determined by lot. III. In the third division, which consists of two parts, the candidate has to prove, in the presence of the examiner: 1. His practical knowledge of the application of different dental instruments, as well as in the performance of a den- tal operation on a living subject, and besides make at least two fillings — one of them in gold — two extractions, and one cleaning of the teeth ; 2. His practical knowledge of " substitutes " and regula- tion apparatus, and also prepare at least one " substitute " piece and an apparatus for the mouth of a living person. IV. In the fourth division, the candidate is examined, 350 APPENDIX. orally, in anatomy, physiology, pathology and diathesis of the teeth, the diseases of same and of the gums, the prepara- tion and action of dental medicines, and the application of the different dental operations. The examination in this division is public. Sec. 12. Qualified physicians who desire to receive the degree of dentist are only required to pass an examination in the first, third and fourth divisions, the others being dis- pensed with. Sec. 13. The fees for the whole examination are seventy Marks, the charges being made for every department sepa- rately. If any person withdraws from examination in some parts, or is not admitted to the same, the money paid is re- funded. Sec. 15. The Chancellor of the Empire, in consultation with the proper central authorities, decides cases where special dispensations are to be granted. The above rules take effect on November 1st, 1889. Any person who, without being qualified for it, assumes the title of doctor or dentist, or adds any similar title by which the belief is created that the possessor thereof is a qualified medical person, shall be fined three hundred Marks, or, in default, shall be imprisoned for a length of time stipu- lated in these statutes. (Statutes regulating the professions in the German Empire, 1886.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 351 GREAT BRITAIN. ENGLAND AND THE BRITISH POSSESSIONS. The Dentists' Act, 1878, U and 1$ Vict, Cap. XXXIII. An Act to amend the Laic relating to Dental Practitioners, {July 22nd, 1878.) Whereas, it is expedient that provision be made for the registration of persons specially qualified to practice as dentists in the United Kingdom, and that the law relating to persons practicing as dentists be otherwise amended ; Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with advice and consent of the Lord's Spiritual and, Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : Section 1. This Act may for all purposes be cited as the Dentists' Act, 1878. Sec 2. In this Act, " General Council " means the General Council of Medical Education and Registration of the United Kingdom, established under the Medical Act of 1858, and " Branch Council " means a branch of the said Council as constituted by the same Act : " General Registrar " means the person appointed to be the Registrar by the General Council, and " Local Registrar " means the Registrar appointed by a Branch Council under the Medical Act, 1858 : " British Possession " means any part of Her Majesty's dominions exclusive of the United Kingdom : " Medical Authorities " means the bodies and univer- sities who choose members of the General Council. REGISTRATION. Sec. 3. From and after the first day of August, one thou- sand eight hundred and seventy-nine, a person shall not be en- titled to take or use the name or title of " dentist " (either alone or in combination with any other word or words), or of 352 APPENDIX. "dental practitioner," or any name, title, addition, or descrip- tion, implying thatlie is registered under this Act, or that he is a person specially qualified to practice dentistry, unless he is registered under this Act. It is hereby declared that the words " title, addition, or description" where used in the Dentists' Act, 1878, include any title, addition to a name, designation or descrip- tion, whether expressed in icords or hy letters, or partly in one way and partly in the other: 1 ' Any person who, after the first day of August, one thou- sand eight hundred and seventy-nine, not being registered under this Act, takes or uses any such name, title, addition, or description as aforesaid, shall be liable, on summary con- viction, to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds, provided that nothing in this section shall apply to legally qualified med- ical practitioners. Sec. 4. With respect to the offense of a person not regis- tered under this Act, taking or using any name, title, addition, or description as above in this Act mentioned, the following provisions shall have effect : 1. He shall not be guilty of an offense under this Act — (a.) If he shows that he is not ordinarily a resident in the United Kingdom, and that he holds a qualification which entitles him to practice dentistry or dental surgery in a British possession or foreign country, and that he did not represent himself to be registered under this Act; or (6.) If he shows that he has been registered and contin- ues to be entitled to be registered under this Act, but that his name has been erased on the ground only that he has ceased to practice. 2. A prosecution for such offense shall be instituted only as hereinafter mentioned. If a person takes or uses the designation of any quali- fication or certificate in relation to dentistry or dental sur- gery, which he does not possess, he shall be liable, on sum- mary conviction or such prosecution as hereinafter mentioned, to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds. A prosecution for any of the offenses above in this Act *A11 words in Italics were enacted by the Medical Act, 1880, sec. 2. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 353 mentioned (shall not be instituted by a private person, except with the consent of the General Council, or of a Branch Coun- cil, but) may be instituted by the General Council, by a Branch Council, or by a medical authority, if such Council or authority thinks fit, or by a private person. Sec 5. A person registered under this Act shall be enti- tled to practice dentistry and dental surgery in any part of Her Majesty's dominions, subject to any local law in force m that part, and, from and after the first day of August, one thou- sand eight hundred and seventy-nine, a person shall not be entitled to recover any fee or charge, in any court, for the performance of any dental operation, or for any dental attend- ance or advice, unless he is registered under this Act or is a legally qualified medical practitioner. Sec. 6. Any person who — (a) Any person who is a licentiate in dental surgery or dentistry of any of the medical authorities ; or (b) Is entitled, as hereinafter mentioned, to be registered as a foreign or colonial dentist ; or (c) Is at the passage of this Act bona fide engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery, either separately or in conjunction with the practice of medicine, surgery or pharmacy, shall be entitled to be registered under this Act. Sec 7. Where a person entitled to be registered under this Act produces or sends to the General Registrar the document •conferring or evidencing his license or qualification, with a statement of his name and address, and the other particu- lars, if any, required for registration, and pays the regula- tion fee, he shall be registered in the dentists' register. Provided, that a person shall not be registered under this Act as having been, at the passing thereof, engaged in the practice of dentistry, unless he produce or transmit to the Registrar, before the first day of August, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, information of his name and address, and a declaration signed by him in the form in the schedule to this Act, or to the like effect ; and that the Registrar may, if he sees fit, require the truth of such decla- ration to be affirmed in manner provided for by the Act of 354 APPENDIX. the session held in the fifth and sixth years of the reign of King William the Fourth, chapter sixty-two, entitled "An Act to repeal an Aet of the present session of Parliament, [entitled 'An Act for the more effectual abolition of oaths and affirmations taken and made in various departments of the State, and to substantiate declarations in lieu thereof, and for the more entire suppression of voluntary and ex- trajudicial oaths and affidavits,'] and to make other pro- visions for the abolition of unnecessary oaths."* A person resident in the United Kingdom shall not be disqualified for being registered under this Act by reason that he is not a British subject; and a British subject shall not be disqualified for being registered under this Act by reason of his being resident or engaged in practice beyond the limits of the United Kingdom. Sec. 8. Where a person who either is not domiciled in the United Kingdom, or has practiced for more than ten years elsewhere than in the United Kingdom, or in the case of persons practicing in the United Kingdom at the time of the passing of this Act for not less than ten years either in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, shows that he holds some recognized certificate (as hereinafter defined) granted in a British possession, and that he is of good character, such person shall, upon payment of the registration fee, be en- titled, without examination in the United Kingdom, to be registered as a colonial dentist in the dentists' register. Sec. 9. Where a person who is not a British subject, or who has practiced for more than ten years elsewhere than in the United Kingdom, or in the case of persons practicing in the United Kingdom at the time of the passage of this Act for not less than ten years, either in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, shows that he obtained some recognized certificate (as hereinafter defined) granted in a foreign country, and that he is of good character, and either continues to hold such certificate, or has not been deprived thereof for any *A11 the words inclosed between brackets have been repealed by the Med- ical Act, 1886, section 26, in which it is enacted that "a prosecution for any such offense may be instituted by a private person accordingly." DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 355 cause which disqualifies him from being registered under this Act, such person shall, upon payment of the registration fee, be entitled, without examination in the United King- dom, to be registered as a foreign dentist in the dentists* register. Sec. 10. The certificate granted in a British possession or in a foreign country, which is to be deemed such a recog- nized certificate as is required for the purposes of this Act, shall be such certificate, diploma, membership, degree, license, letters, testimonial, or other title, status, or docu- ment, as may be recognized for the time being by the Gen- eral Council as entitling the holder thereof to practice den- tistry or dental surgery in such possession or country, and as furnishing sufficient guarantees of the possession of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient practice of dentistry or dental surgery. If a person is refused registra- tion as a colonial dentist or as a foreign dentist, the General Eegistrar shall, if required by him, state in writing the rea- son for such refusal, and, if such reason be that the certificate held or obtained by him is not such a recognized certificate as above defined, such person may appeal to the Privy Coun- cil, and the Privy Council, after hearing the General Council, may dismiss the appeal, or may order the General Council to recognize such certificate, and such order shall be duly obeyed. Sec 11. A register shall be kept by the General Regis- trar, to be styled the dentists' register, and that register shall — ■ (a.) Contain in one alphabetical list all the United King- dom dentists — that is to say, all persons who are registered under this Act as having been, at the passing thereof, en- gaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery, and all persons who are registered as licentiates in dentistry or den- tal surgery, of any of the medical authorities of the United Kingdom ; and (b.) Contain in a separate alphabetical list all such colo- nial dentists as are registered in pursuance of this Act; and, (c.) Contain in a separate alphabetical list all such colo- nial dentists as are registered in pursuance of this Act. 356 APPENDIX. The dentists' register shall contain the said lists made out alphabetically, according to the surnames, and shall state the full nanus mid addresses of the registered persons, the description and date of qualification in respect of which they are registered, and, subject to the provisions of this Act, shall contain such particulars, and be in such form, as the General Council from time to time direct. The General Council shall cause a correct copy of the dentists' register to be, from time to time, and at least once a year, printed under their directions, and published and sold, which copy shall be admissible in evidence. The dentists' register shall be deemed to be in proper custody when in the custody of the General Registrar, and shall be of such a public nature as to be admissible as evi- dence of all matters therein on its mere production from that custom. Every Local Registrar shall keep such register and per- form such duties in relation to registration under this Act as the General Council from time to time direct, and receive such remuneration out of the registration fees as the General Council assign him. Every Registrar shall, in all respects, in the execution of his discretion and duty in relation to register under this Act, conform to any orders made by the General Council under this Act, and to any special directions given by the General Council. The General Council may, if they see fit, from time to time make, and, when made, revoke and vary orders from the registration in (on payment of the fee fixed by the orders) and the removal from the dentists' register of any additional diplomas, memberships, degrees, licenses, or letters held by a person registered therein, which appear to the Council to be granted after examination by any of the medical authori- ties in respect of a higher degree of knowledge than is re- quired to obtain a certificate of fitness under this Act. Sec. 12. The General Registrar shall, from time to time, insert in the dentists' register any alteration which DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 357 may come to his knowledge in the name or address of any person registered. 2. The General Registrar shall erase from the dentists' register the name of every deceased person. 3. The General Registrar may erase from the dentists' register the name of a person who has ceased to practice, but not (save as hereinafter provided) without the consent of that person ; and the General Registrar may send by post to a person registered in the dentists' register, a notice inquiring whether or not he has ceased to practice, or has changed his residence ; and, if the General Registrar does not, within three months after sending the notice, receive any answer- thereto from the said person, he may, within fourteen days after the expiration of the three months, send him by post in a registered letter another notice, referring to the first notice,, and stating that no answer thereto has been received by the Registrar, and, if the General Registrar, either before the- second notice, receives the first notice back from the dead letter office of the Postmaster-General, or receives the second, notice back from that office, or does not, within three months after sending the second notice, receive any answer thereto from the said person, that person shall, from the purpose of the present section, be deemed to have ceased to practice, and his name may be erased accordingly. 4. In the execution of his duties the General Registrar shall act on such evidence as in each case appears sufficient. Sec. 13. The General Council shall cause to be erased from the dentists' register an entry which has been incorrectly or fraudulently made. Where a person registered in the dentists' register has- either before or after the passing of this Act, and either be- fore or after he is so registered, been convicted, either in Her Majesty's dominions or elsewhere, of an offense which, it committed in England, would be a felony or misdemeanor,. or been guilty of any infamous or disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, that person shall be liable to have his name erased from the register. The General Council may, and upon the application of •"-■Vs APPENDIX. any of the medical authorities shall, cause inquiry to be made into the case of a person alleged to be liable to have his name erased under this section ; and, on proof of such conviction, or of such infamous or disgraceful conduct, shall cause the name of such person to be erased from the register ; provided, that the name of a person shall not be erased under this section on account of his adopting or refraining from adopt- ing the practice of any particular theory of dentistry or den- tal surgery, nor on account of a conviction for a political offense out of Her Majesty's dominions, nor on account of a conviction for an offense which, though within the provi- sions of this section, does not, either from the trivial nature of the offense, or from the circumstances under which it was committed, disqualify a person from practicing dentistry. Any name erased from the register in pursuance of this sec- tion, shall also be erased from the list of licentiates in dental surgery or dentistry of the medical authority of which such person is a licentiate. Sec. 14. Where the General Council direct the erasure from the dentists' register of the name of any person, or of any other entry, the name of that person, or that entry, shall not be again entered in the register, except by direction of the General Council or by order of a court of competent juris- diction. If the General Council think fit in any case, they may direct the General Registrar to restore to the dentists' register any name or entry erased therefrom, either without fee or on payment of such fee, not exceeding the registration fee, as the General Council from time to time fix, and the Registrar shall restore the same accordingly. The name of any person erased from the dentists' regis- ter at the request of any such person, or with his consent, shall, unless it might, if not so erased, have been erased by order of the General Council, be restored to the register, on his appli- cation, on payment of such fee, not exceeding the registration fee, as the General Council from time to time fix. Where the name of a person, restored to the register in pursuance of this section, has been erased from the list of DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 359 licentiates in dental surgery, or dentistry, of any medical authority, that name shall be restored to the list of licentiates. Sec. 15. The General Council shall, forthe purpose of exer- cising in any case the powers of erasing from and of restoring to the dentists' register the name of a person, or an entry, as- certain the facts of such case by a committee of their own body, not exceeding five in number, of whom the quorum shall be not less than three, and a report of the committee shall be conclusive as to the facts for the purpose of the exer- cise of the said powers by the General Council. The General Council shall, from time to time, appoint and shall always maintain a committee for the purpose of this section, and, subject to the provisions of this section, may, from time to time, determine the constitution and the num- ber and tenure of office of the members of the committee. The committee, from time to time, shall meet for the dis- patch of business, and, subject to the provisions of this sec- tion and of any regulation from time to time made by the General Council, may regulate the summoning, notice, place, management, adjournment of such meetings, the appointment of a chairman, the mode of deciding questions, and generally the transactions and management of business, including the quorum, and, if there is a quorum, the committee may act, notwithstanding any vacancy in their body. In the case of any vacancy, the committee may appoint a member of the Gen- eral Council to fill the vacancy until the next meeting of that Council. A committee under this section may, for the purpose of the execution of their duties under this Act, employ, at the expense of the Council, such legal or other assessor or assist- ants as the committee think necessary or proper. Sec. 16. There shall be payable in respect of the registra- tion of any person who, before the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, applies to be regis- tered under this Act, a fee not exceeding two pounds, and, in re- spect of the registration of any person who after that day ap- plies to be registered, a fee not exceeding five pounds. Sec. 17. Subject to the provisions of this Act, the General 360 APPENDIX. Council may, from time to time, make, alter, and revoke such orders and regulations as they see lit for regulating the gen- eral register and the local registers, and the practice of regis- tration under this Act, and the fees to be paid in respect thereof. EXAMINATIONS. Sec. 18. Notwithstanding anything in any Act of Parlia- ment, charter, or other document, it shall be lawful for any of the medical authorities (hereinafter referred to as colleges or bodies), who have power for the time being to grant sur- gical degrees, from time to time to hold examinations, for the purpose of testing the fitness of persons to practice dentistry or dental surgery, who may be desirous of being so examined r and to grant certificates of such fitness ; and any person who obtains such a certificate from any of those colleges or bodies shall be a licentiate in dental surgery or dentistry of such college or body, and his name shall be entered on a list of such licentiates to be kept by such college or body ; each of the said colleges or bodies shall admit to the examinations,, held by them, respectively, under this section, any person desirous of being examined, who has attained the age of twenty-one years, and has complied with the regulations in force (if any) as to education of such college or body. Sec. 19. Subject to the provisions hereinafter contained with reference to a Medical Board, the Council, or the other governing body of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edin- burgh, and of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glas- gow, and of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and of any university in the United Kingdom, respectively, may, from time to time, appoint a Board of Examiners for the purpose of conducting the examinations and granting the certificates hereinbefore mentioned. Each of such boards shall be called the Board of Examiners in Dental Surgery or Dentistry, and shall consist of not less than six members, one-half of whom at least shall be persons registered under this Act, and such registration shall (not- withstanding anything in any Act of Parliament, charter, or DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 361 other document), be deemed the only qualification necessary for the membership of such board. The persons appointed by each such Council or other governing body shall continue in office for such period, and shall conduct the examinations in such manner, and shall grant certificates in such form, as such Council or other governing body may, from time to time, by by-laws or regulations, respectively, direct. A casual vacancy in any such Board of Examiners may be filled by the Council or other governing body which ap- pointed such board, but the person so appointed shall be qualified as the person in whose stead he is appointed was qualified, and shall hold office for such time only as the person in whose stead he is appointed would have held office. Sec. 20. Such reasonable fees shall be paid for the cer- tificate to be granted under this Act by the Board of Exami- ners of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, and of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and of any such uni- versity as aforesaid, respectively, as the Council or other gov- erning body of each of those colleges or bodies may, from time to time, by by-laws or regulations, respectively, direct. Sec. 21. The Royal College of Surgeons of England shall continue to hold examinations, and to appoint a Board of Ex- aminers in dentistry or dental surgery, for the purpose of testing the fitness of persons to practice dentistry or dental surgery, who may be desirous of being so examined, and to grant certificates of such fitness, subject and according to the provisions of their charter, dated the eighth day of Septem- ber, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-nine, and the by-laws made or to be made, in pursuance thereof; and any person who obtains such a certificate shall be a licentiate in dental surgery of the said college, and his name shall be entered on a list of such licentiates to be kept by the said college. Sec 22. Every medical authority shall, from time to time, when required by the General Council, furnish such Council with such information as such Council may require as to the course of study and examination to be gone through 302 APPENDIX. in order to obtain such certificates as arc in this Act men- tioned, and generally as to the requisites for obtaining such certificates; and any member or members of the General Council, or any person or persons deputed tor this purpose by such Council, or by any branch Council, may attend and be present at any such examinations. Sec. 23. AVhere it appears to the General Council that the course of study and examinations to be gone through in order to obtain such certificate, as in this Act mentioned, from any of the said colleges or bodies, are not such as to secure the possession by persons obtaining such certificate of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient practice of dentistry or dental surgery, the General Council may repre- sent the same to Her Majesty's Privy Council. Sec. 24. The Privy Council, on any representation made as aforesaid, may, if they see fit, order that a certificate granted by any such college or body, after such time as may be mentioned in the order, shall not confer any right to be registered under this Act. Any such order may be revoked by the Privy Council on its being made to appear to them, by further representation from the General Council or other- wise, that such college or body has made effectual provision, to the satisfaction of the General Council, for the improve- ment of such course of study or examination. Sec. 25. After the time mentioned in this behalf in any euch order in Council, no person shall be entitled to be reg- istered under this Act in respect of a certificate granted by the college or body to which such order relates, after the time herein mentioned, and the revocation of any such order shall not entitle any person to be registered in respect of a certifi- cate granted before such revocation. Sec. 26. If it appears to the General Council that an attempt has been made by any medical authority to impose on any candidate offering himself for examination, an obliga- tion to adopt or refrain from adopting the practice of any particular theory of dentistry or dental surgery, as a test or condition of admitting him to examination, or granting a certificate of fitness under this Act, the General Council may DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 363 represent the same to the Privy Council, and the Privy Coun- cil may thereupon issue an injunction to the authority so directing them to desist from such practice ; and, in event of their not complying therewith, then to order that such author- ity shall cease to have power to confer any right to be regis- tered under this Act so long as they continue such practice. Sec 27. A certificate under this Act shall not confer any right or title to be registered under the Medical Act, 1858, in respect of such certificate, nor to assume any name, title, or designation implying that the person mentioned in the certificate is by law recognized as a licentiate or practi- tioner in medicine or general surgery. Sec 28. In the event of a board being at any time after the passage of this Act established, whether under the name •of a medical board or otherwise, for nominating, on behalf of any two or more of the medical authorities, examiners of persons desirous of practicing medicine or surgery, whether such board (in this Act referred to as a medical board) is established under the Medical Act, 1858, or otherwise, a person shall not receive a certificate of fitness to practice as a dentist from any medical authority represented on such board, or, if such board is established for the whole of Eng- land, Scotland or Ireland, shall not be entitled to be' reeis- tered in respect of any certificate obtained in England, Scot- land or Ireland, as the case may be, unless he has obtained from such board a certificate that he has shown by examina- tion that he is qualified to practice dentistry or dental sur- gery ; provided, that one-half at least of the examiners at any such examination shall be persons registered under this Act. The Medical Board shall, in such manner as may be from time to time directed by the General Council, certify to the General Registrar and to the medical authorities the persons who have shown by examination that they are qual- ified to practice dentistry or dental surgery, and every per- son so certified shall, on application, receive from the Royal College of Surgeons of England, or the Royal College of Sur- geons of Edinburgh, or the Faculty of Physicians and Sur- geons of Glasgow, or the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland, 3».i4 APPENDIX. a certificate of fitness constituting such person a licentiate in dental surgery or dentistry of such college or faculty. If a medical authority certify to the General Registrar the names and addresses of the persons who, having been so cer- tified by a Medical Board, have received certificates from that authority, together with the other particulars required for the registration of such persons, the General Registrar may, upon payment of the registration fee, register every such person in the dentists' register without application from that person. The General Council shall have the same power of mak- ing rules respecting the examination of persons desiring to obtain certificates of being qualified to practice dentistry or dental surgery, as they have for the time being in respect of the examination of persons desiring to obtain a qualification to practice medicine and surgery, and there shall be the same right of appeal to the Privy Council against such rules. The General Council and the Privy Council shall have the same control over the medical board, so far as regards the examination of persons desiring to practice dentistry or dental surgery, as they have as regards the examination of persons desiring to practice medicine and surgery, and shall have the same power of dismissing the members of such board. The General Council may cause to be framed, and may approve, and, when approved, submit to the Privy Council a scheme to carry into effect the provisions of this Act, with respect to a medical board, and rules respecting examina- tions ; and for extending, with or without any exception or modification, to the examination of persons desirous of prac- ticing dentistry or dental surgery, the provisions of any Act for the time being in force, with respect to the examination of persons desiring to practice medicine or surgery, and any such scheme, when confirmed by the Privy Council, shall have full effect. Any such scheme may provide for the fees to be paid on admission to the examinations, and for the application of such fees for public purposes, and generally for such mat- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 365 ters as appear to be necessary or proper for carrying into effect the scheme and regulating the examinations. It shall be lawful for Her Majesty, at any time after the said appointed day, to declare by order in Council that section 28 of the said Dentists' Act, 1878, shall be in force on and after a day to be named in such order, but, in the meantime, until such order has been made, and before such day as last aforesaid, such section shall not be deemed to be in force. Enacted by the Medical Act, 1886, section 26. TABLE OF REGISTRABLE QUALIFICATIONS. (To Practice Dentistry in the United Kingdom.) WITH ABBREVIATIONS USED TO DENOTE THEM. OQ •A O Qualifications. Abbreviations. < O 5 ■< D -* O G United Kingdom Dentists. " Licentiate in Dental Surgery of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Licentiate in Dental Surgery of the Royal College of Surgeons in Edinburgh. Licentiate in Dental Surgery of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow. Licentiate in Dental Surgery of the Royal _ College of Surgeons in Ireland. Lie. Den. R. Coll. Surg. Eng. Lie. Den. R. Coll. Surg. Edin. Lie. Den. Surg. Fac. Phys. Surg. Glasg. Lie. Den. Surg. R. Coll. Surg. Irel. ■J g 5 5 c <^m [ Doctor of Dental Medicine of the Univer- 2 to 1 sity of Harvard. o a | Doctor of Dental Surgery of the Uni^er- ^ Q [ sity of Michigan. D. D. M. Univ. Harv. D. D. S. Univ. Mich. SUPPLEMENTAL. Sec. 29. A copy of the register of dentists for the time being, purporting to be printed and published in pursuance of this Act, shall be evidence in all cases (until the contrary be made to appear) that the person therein specified is registered 366 APPENDIX, according to the provisions of this Act, and the absence of the name of any person from such copy shall be evidence (until the contrary be made to appear) that such person is not registered according to the provisions of this Act ; pro- vided, that, in the case of any person whose name does not ap- pear in such copy, a certified copy, under the hand of the Registrar of the General Council, of the entry of the name of such person in the dentists' register, shall be evidence that such person is registered according to the provisions of this Act. The following copies of any orders made in pursuance of the Medical Act or Acts, or the Dentists' Act, 1878, shall be evi- dence; thai is to say, 1. Any copy purporting to he printed by the Queen's printer \ or by any other printer, in pursuance of an authority given by the General Council ; 2. Any copy of an order, certified to be a true copy by the Registrar of the General Councilor by any other person appointed by the General Council, either in addition to or in exclusion of the Registrar to certify to such orders. (Enacted by the Medical Act of 1886; section 26.) Sec. 30. Every person registered under this Act shall be ex- empt, if he so desires, from serving on all juries and inquests whatsoever, and from serving all corporate, parochial, ward, hundred, and township offices, and from serving in the militia; and the name of any registered person shall not be returned in any of the persons liable to serve in the militia, or any such office as aforesaid. Sec. 31. The powers, by this Act vested in the Privy Council, may be exercised by any two or more of the Lords and others of Her Majesty's Most Honorable Privy Council. Any order made by the Privy Council, or any appeal to them under this Act, may be made conditionally or uncon- ditionally, and may contain such terms and directions as to the Privy Council seem just. Sec 32. All moneys arising from fees paid on registra- tion, or from the sale of copies of the registers, or otherwise received by the General Council under this Act, shall be ap- plied in accordance with such regulations as may be, from DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 367 time to time, made by the General Council, in defraying the expenses of registration and the other expenses of the execu- tion of this Act, and subject thereto, towards the support of museums, libraries, or lectureships, or for public purposes connected with the profession of dentistry or dental surgery, or towards the promotion of learning and education in con- nection with dentistry or dental surgery. The Treasurers of the General and Branch Councils shall enter in books, to be kept for that purpose, a true account of all sums of money by them received and paid under this Act ; and such accounts shall be submitted by them to the General Council and Branch Council, respectively, at such times as the Councils may respectively require. Such ac- counts shall be published annually, and shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament in the month of March in every year, if Parliament be then sitting, or, if Parliament be not sitting, then within one month after the commencement of the next sitting of Parliament. Sec. 34. Any Register who willfully makes, or causes to be made, any falsification in any matter relating to any reg- ister under this Act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor in England, or Ireland, or in Scotland, of a crime or offense punishable by fine or imprisonment, and shall, on conviction thereof, be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceed- ing twelve months. Sec 35. Any person who willfully procures, or attempts to procure, himself to be registered under this Act, by mak- ing or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, either ver- bally or in writing, and any person aiding and assisting him therein, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor in Eng- land, and Ireland, and in Scotland, of a crime or offense pun- ishable by fine or imprisonment, and shall, on conviction thereof, be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceed- ing twelve months. Sec 36. Every Registrar of deaths in the United King- dom, on receiving notice of the death of any person regis- tered under this Act, shall forthwith transmit by post to the 3G8 APPENDIX. Registrar of the General Council, and to the Registrar of the Branch Council for that part of the United Kingdom in which the deaths occurs, a certificate under his own hand of such death, with the particulars of time and place of death, and may charge the cost of such certificate and transmission as an expense of his office. Sec. 37. Any person who has been articled as a pupil, and has paid a premium to a dental practitioner entitled to be registered under this Act, in consideration of receiving from such practitioner a complete dental education, shall, if his articles expire before the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, be entitled to register under this Act as though he had been in bonaf.de practice before the passing of this Act. Moreover, it shall be lawful for the General Council, by special order, to dispense with such of the certificates, examinations, or other conditions for registration in the dentists' register required under the provision of this Act, or under any by-laws, orders, or regulations made by its authority, as to them ma}' seem fit, in favor of any dental stu- dents or apprentices who have commenced their professional education or apprenticeship before the passing of this Act. Sec. 38. All by-laws, orders and regulations made by the General Council, or by any medical authority under the authority of this Act, shall be made, and may be, from time to time, altered or revoked in such manner, and subject to such approval or confirmation (if any) as in the case of other by-laws, orders, or regulations, made by such medical au- thority. Sec. 39. Subject to the other provisions of this Act, all notices and documents required by or for the purposes of this Act to be sent, may be sent by post, and shall be deemed to have been received at the time when the letter containing the same would be delivered in the ordinary course of the post ; and, if proving such sending it, shall be sufficient to prove that the letter containing the notice or document was prepaid and properly addressed, and put into the post- Such notices and documents may be in writing or in print, or partly in writing and partly in print, and, when sent DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 369 to the General Council, or a medical board or a medical au- thority, shall be deemed to be properly addressed if addressed to the General Council, medical board, or medical authority, or to some officer of such Council, board or authority, at the principal office or place of business of such Council, board or authority ; and, when sent to a person registered in the medical register, shall be deemed to be properly addressed if addressed to him according to his address registered in that register. Sec. 40. All fees under this Act may be recovered as or- •dinary debts due to the General Council, and all penalties under this Act may be recovered and enforced as follows, that is to say : In England, before two or more Justices of the Peace, in manner directed by the Act of the session of the eleventh and twelfth years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chap- ter forty-three, entitled "An Act to facilitate the perform- ance of the duties of Justices of the Peace," out of sessions, within England and Wales, with respect to summary convic- tions and orders, and any Act amending the same ; and in Scot- land, before the Sheriff or Sheriff's substitute, or two Jus- tices, in manner provided by the Summary Procedure Act, 1864, and any Act amending the same ; and in Ireland, within the police district of Dublin metropolis, in manner ■directed by the Acts regulating the powers and duties of Justices of the Peace for such district, or of the police of such district, and elsewhere in Ireland, before two or more Justices of the Peace in manner directed by the Petty Ses- sions (Ireland) Act, 1851, and any Act amending the same. SCHEDULE. Declaration required to be made by a person who claims to be registered under the Dentists' Act, 1878, on the ground that he was bona fide engaged in practice of dentistry at the date of the passing of the Dentists' Act, 1878. I, , residing at , hereby declare that I was bona fide engaged in the practice 370 APPENDIX. of dentist rv at , at the date of passing' the Dentists' Act, 1878. (Signed) (Witness) Dated this day of , 18 Note. — Any person who willfully procures, or attempts to procure, himself to be registered under this Act, by mak- ing or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, either ver- bally or in writing, and any person aiding and assisting him therein, is liable under the Dentists' Act, 1878, to imprison- ment for twelve months. (This Act is taken from the Dentists' Register, printed and published under the direction of the General Council of Medical Education and Registration of the United Kingdom.) NEW ZEALAND. The New Zealand Dental Act was passed by the Xew Zealand Parliament, and went into effect after the first day of June, 1881, provided for the registration of dentists quali- fied to practice in the country. The qualifications for registration are both for colonial and foreign dentists, that they shall show that they are of good moral character, and shall have been at the time of the passage of the Act bona fide engaged in the practice of den- tistry or dental surgery, either separately, or in conjunction with the practice of medicine, surgery or pharmacy ; or that they shall show that they hold some recognized diploma, membership, degree or license, letters, testimonial or other title, status or document, as may be recognized by the Board of Examiners (consisting of six persons appointed by the Senate of the University of Xew Zealand), as entitling the holder thereof to practice dentistry or dental surgery in that colony, and as furnishing sufficient guarantee of the posses- sion of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient prac- tice of dentistry or dental surgery. A fine of twenty pounds- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 371 is imposed upon those practicing without registration, and it is provided that they shall not be entitled to recover in any court any fee or charge for the performance of any dental operation. The Act provides for an appeal from the Board of Ex- aminers, when they have decided adversely to the claims of an applicant for registration, to the Governor in Council, who may, upon sufficient evidence, order the board to recognize the certificate or qualification of the applicant. A penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months is imposed upon any person who willfully pro- cures, or attempts to procure, registration under the Act by false or fraudulent representation. An Act to Provide for the Registration of Dentists Qualified to Practice in New Zealand. Whereas, it is desirable to provide for the registration of persons practicing as dentists; Be it therefore enacted by the General Assembly of New Zea- land in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : Section 1. The short title of this Act is " The Dentists' Act, 1880." Sec 2. In this Act, if not inconsistent with the context, " Senate " means the Senate of the University of New Zea- land ; " Dentist " means a person registered under this Act ; "Registration" and "registered," respectively, mean registra- tion under this Act and registered under this Act ; "The said Act" means and includes the Imperial Act, 41 and 42 Vict., cap. 33, and entitled " The Dentists' Act, 1878 ; " Registrar- General " means the Registrar-General of births, deaths, and marriages. Sec 3. From and after the first day of June, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, a person other than a legally qualified medical practitioner shall not be entitled to take or use the name or title of dentist (either alone or in combination with other words), or of dental practitioner, or any name, title, addition, or description implying that he is registered under 372 APPENDIX. this Act, or that lie is a person specially qualified to practice dentistry, unless he is registered under this Act. Any person who, after the first day of June, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, not being registered under this Act, takes or uses any such name, title, addition, or descrip- tion as aforesaid, shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine of not exceeding twenty pounds ; provided, that nothing in this section shall apply to any person registered under the said Act, or to any legally qualified medical practitioner. Sec. 4. A person registered under this Act shall be en- titled to practice dentistry and dental surgery in any part of ]S"ew Zealand ; and, from and after the first day of June, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, a person shall not be entitled to recover any fee or charge in any court for the per- formance of any dental operation, or for any dental attendance or advice, unless he is registered under this Act, or is regis- tered under the said Act, or is a legally qualified medical practitioner. Sec. 5. Any person who — (a) Is registered under the said Act ; (b) Is entitled to be registered under the said Act ; (c) Is at the passing of this Act bona fide engaged in the practice of dentistry and dental surgery, either separately or in conjunction with the practice of medicine, surgery, or phar- macy ; or (d) Is entitled to be registered as a foreign and colonial dentist, shall be entitled to be registered under this Act. Sec 6. Any person showing that he holds some recog- nized certificate, as hereinafter defined, granted in a British possession, and that he is of good character, shall, upon pay- ment of the registration fee, be entitled, without examination, to be registered under this Act. Sec 7. Any person showing that he holds some recog- nized certificate, as hereinafter defined, granted in a foreign country, and that he is of good character, and either contin- ues to hold such certificate or has not been deprived thereof for any cause which disqualifies him for being registered un- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 373 der this Act, shall, upon payment of the fees, be entitled, with- out examination, to be registered under this Act. Sec 8. The certificate granted in a British possession or in a foreign country, which is to be deemed such a recognized certificate as is required for the purposes of this Act, shall be such a certificate, diploma, membership, degree, license, letters, testimonial, or other title, status or document as may be recognized by the Board of Examiners as entitling the holder thereof to practice dentistry or dental surgery in such possession or country, and as furnishing sufficient guarantee of the possession of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient practice of dentistry or dental surgery. Sec. 9. If a person is refused registration as a colonial dentist, or as a foreign dentist, the Board of Examiners shall, if required by him, state in writing the reasou for such refusal ; and, if such reason be that the certificate held or obtained by him is not such a recognized certificate as above defined, such person may appeal to the Governor in Council, and the Governor in Council may, after hearing the Board of Examiners, order the Board of Examiners to recognize such certificate, and such order shall be duly obeyed. Sec 10. When a person entitled to be registered under this Act produces or sends to the Registrar-General the docu- ment conferring or evidencing his qualification, with a state- ment of his name and address, and the other particulars, if any, required for registration, and pays the registration fee, he shall be registered in the Dentists' Register ; 'provided, that a person shall not be registered under this Act as having been at the passing thereof engaged in the practice of dentistry, unless he produces or transmits to the Registrar before the first day of June, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, information of his name and address, and a declaration signed by him in the form of the Schedule to this Act. ' Sec. 11. The Senate may, from time to time, appoint a Board or Boards of Examiners for the purpose of conducting examinations and granting certificates under this Act. Each of such boards shall be called Board of Exami- ners in dental surgery or dentistry, and shall consist of not 374 APPENDIX. less than six members, who shall be either qualified medical practitioners or persons registered under this Act. Sec. 12. The persons appointed by the Senate shall con- tinue in office for such period, ami shall conduct the exami- nation- in such manner, and shall grant certificates in such form, as such Senate may, from time to time, by by-laws or regulations respectively direct. Sec. 13. A casual vacancy in any such Board of Exami- ners may he filled by the Senate which appointed such hoard, but the person so appointed shall he qualified as the person in whose stead he is appointed, and shall hold office for such time only as the person in whose stead he is appointed would have held office. Sec. 14. Such reasonable fees shall be paid for the certifi- cates to he granted under this Act by the Board of Examiners, as the Senate may, from time to time, by by-laws or regulations respectively direct. Sec 15. If it appears to the Senate that an attempt has been made by any Board of Examiners, to impose on any candidate offering himself for examination an obligation to adopt or refrain from adopting the practice of any particular theory of dentistry or dental surgery, as a test or condition of admitting him to examination or granting a certificate of fitness under this Act, the Senate may represent the same to the Governor in Council, and the Governor in Council may, thereupon, issue an injunction to the authority so acting, di- recting them to desist from such practice; and, in the event of their not complying therewith, then to order that such authority shall cease to have power to confer any right to be registered under this Act so long as they continue such prac- tice. Sec 16. Any person who willfully procures, or attempts to procure, himself or any other person to be registered under this Act, by making or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, either verbally or in writing, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction, be liable to be im- prisoned for any term not exceeding twelve months. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 375 Sec. 17. Any Registrar who willfully makes, or causes to "be made, any falsification in any matter relating to any reg- ister under this Act, shall be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding twelve months. REGISTRATION. Sec. 18. The Registrar-General shall keep in his office a hook in which shall be inserted the names and residences of all persons registered under this Act, which book is referred to herein as the "Register" or "Dentists' Register." Sec. 19. On application made to him at any time for that purpose by any registered dentist, the Registrar-General shall issue to such applicant a certificate of registration. Sec. 20. The hook as aforesaid shall he open to inspec- tion by the public. Sec. 21. The Registrar-General shall, from time to time, erase the names of all registered persons who shall have died, and shall, from time to time, make the necessary alterations in the addresses of the persons registered under this Act. Sec. 22. A true copy of the register aforesaid, certified by the Registrar-General to be a true copy, shall, in the month of December in each year, be sent to the Colonial Secretary, and shall by him be published in the New Zealand Gazette of the colony; and any copy of the register so pub- lished shall be evidence in all courts of law, and before all Resident Magistrates and Justices of the Peace and others, that the persons therein specified are registered according to the provisions of this Act. Provided, that, in the case of any person whose name does not appear in such copy, a certified copy, under the hand of the Registrar-General, of the entry of the name of the person, shall be evidence that such person is registered. Sec. 23. The Registrar-General shall take and receive the under-mentioned fees : On application One pound. Certificate of registration Five shillings. Any alteration of register Five shillings. Inspection of register Two shillings. 376 APPENDIX. Sec. 24. All fees accruing under this Act shall form part of the Consolidated Fund of the colony. SCHEDULE. Declaration required to be made by a person who claims to be registered on the ground that he was bona fide engaged in the practice of dentistry at the date of the passing of "The Dentists' Act, 1880." I, , residing at , hereby declare that I was bona fide engaged in the practice of dentistry at , at the date of the passing of " The Dentists' Act, 1880." (Signed) (Witness) Dated this day of , 18.... An Act to amend "The Dentists' Act, 1880" Be it enacted by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : Section 1. The short title of this Act is " The Dentists' Act, 1880, Amendment Act, 1881." Sec 2. In this Act, if not inconsistent with the context, "The said Act" means " The Dentists' Act, 1880." Sec 3. In addition to the persons mentioned in the fifth section of the said Act, as being entitled to be registered under the said Act, the following persons shall be entitled to be registered : 1. Any person who, for at least three consecutive years, has been the apprentice or pupil of a person registered under the said Act, or the Imperial Act forty-one and forty-two Victoria, chapter thirty-three, or of one or more such persons, and who has been continuously and wholly engaged during that period in studying the theory and practice of dentistry or dental surgery, and shall have obtained a certificate under the eleventh section of the said Act. 2. Any person who shall satisfy the Registrar-General DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 377 that lie has been continuously engaged in the practice of den- tistry or dental surgery in lS"ew Zealand for the period of five years immediately preceding the coming into operation of the said Act. Sec. 4. In all cases where any person shall apply to be reg- istered under the said Act, the Registrar-General may ex- amine any such applicant, and any person whom he may deem capable of giving evidence respecting such applicant, and may conduct any such examination upon oath, and for such purpose may administer oaths ; and he may decline to register such person if for any reason he is of opinion that such appli- cant is not really entitled to be registered under the said Act. Provided, that any person whose application has been re- fused under this section may appeal to a Judge of the Supreme Court on summons in a summary way ; and such Judge may either order the Registrar-General to register such applicant, or may support the Registrar-General's decision, and may in his discretion award costs against the Registrar-General, or against the said applicant. Sec. 5. If any person shall have procured himself to be reg- istered by making or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, either verbally or in writing, or if any person not entitled to be registered shall have been registered, or if any registered person shall be convicted of any felony or misdemeanor in Great Britain or Ireland, or in any of the British dominions, the Registrar-General shall erase the name of any such per- son from the register, and such erasure shall be notified by the Registrar-General in the Isnw Zealand Gazette. Sec 6. The words "Any Registrar who," in the first of the seventeenth section of the said Act, are hereby struck out, and the words" If the Registrar-General" inserted in place thereof , and the word " he " shall be inserted before the word " shall " in the second line of the said section. Sec 7. Registration under the said Act shall be effected by the entry in the dentists' register of the name, qualification, and residence of any person entitled or claiming to be regis- tered thereunder. 378 APPENDIX. YI< TOE! \. An Act to Provide for the Registration of Dentists Qualified to Practice in Victoria. WTiereas, it is expedient that provision be made for the registration of persons qualified to practice as dentists with- in the colony of Victoria : Be it, therefore, enacted by the Queen's Most Excellent Maj- esty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly in this present Parlia- ment assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows (that is to say) : Section 1. This Act may, for all purposes, be cited as "The Dentists' Act, 1887." Sec 2. In the construction and for the purposes of this Act, the following terms shall, if not inconsistent with the context, have the respective meanings hereby assigned to them (that is to say) : " Dental Board " shall mean the Dental Board appointed under the provision of this Act. " Dentist " shall mean a person registered under this Act. "Minister" shall mean the responsible Minister of the Crown for the time being administering this Act. " Register " shall mean the dentists' register for quali- fied dentists, to be kept in pursuance of the provisions of this Act. " Registrar" shall mean the Registrar appointed under the provisions of this Act. DENTAL BOARD AND OFFICERS. Sec. 3. The Governor in Council may appoint a board consisting of eight members, under the style of " The Den- tal Board of Victoria," hereinafter in this Act termed " The Dental Board." Sec 4. !No person shall be appointed or elected President or member of the Dental Board for more than three years, but any person appointed or elected a member of the Dental Board shall, upon the expiration of the term for which he DENTAL JCRISPRCDEXCE. 6t\) was so appointed or elected, be eligible for re-appointment or re-election. The Governor in Council may from time to time remove the President or any member of the Dental Board. Sec. 5. A quorum of the Dental Board shall consist of not less than three members thereof. In the absence of the President from any meeting of the said Board, one of the members present shall be elected Chairman of that meeting. Sec. 6. The first members of the Dental Board, includ- ing the President, shall be appointed by the Governor in Council, without previous election, for a period of three years ; provided, that at least four of the person- so appointed shall be persons who appear to be eligible for registration as den- tists under this Act, and three shall be legally qualified med- ical practitioners, registered under the " Medical Practitioners' Statute, 1865." If any vacancy occurs in the office of member of the Dental Board during the period for which the first members of the said board are appointed, the Governor in Council may fill such vacancy by appointing, without pre- vious election, any dentist ; and the person so appointed shall hold office until the expiration of three years from the date of the appointment of the first members, and no longer. Sec. 7. On the expiration of the period for which such first members are appointed to hold office, no person shall be eligible to be appointed a member of the Dental Board, un- less he has been elected to act as a member of the said board "by the dentists; and no person shall be appointed President, unless he be a member of said board, and has been elected by the other members thereof to act as President. At least four members of the said board shall be dentists, and three shall be legally qualified medical practitioners, registered under the u Medical Practitioners' Statute, 1865." Every election of a person to act as a member of the said board shall be held in the manner prescibed by regulations to be made by the said board, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council. Sec. 8. The persons appointed by the Governor in Council shall conduct examinations for the purposes of this Act in such manner, and shall grant certificates in such form, 380 APPENDIX. as the Governor in Council, from time to time, by regulation directs. Sec. 9. The Dental Board may from time to time appoint a Registrar and any officers they may think tit for the pur- poses of this Act, and may, at any time, remove any person so appointed ; and may, from time to time, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, make, alter and repeal by-laws regulating their proceedings and sittings and the election of a Chairman and, generally, as to the conduct of their business. REGISTER. Sec 10. A register shall be kept by the Registrar to be called the " Dentists' Register," and the said register shall contain in one alphabetical list, according to surnames, the names of all dentists who are registered under this Act, and shall state the full names and addresses of the registered per- sons, the description and date of the qualifications in respect of which they are registered, and, subject to the provisions of this Act, shall contain such particulars and be in such form as the Governor in Council from time to time directs, and the said register shall be open to inspection by the public on payment of the fees prescribed in the First Schedule hereto. Sec. 11. The Registrar shall from time to time insert in the register any alteration which comes to his knowledge in the name or address of any person registered therein, and he shall erase from the register the name of every deceased per- son ; and in the execution of these duties the Registrar shall act in each case on such evidence as appears sufficient. Sec 12. Any entry in the register which appears to the Registrar to have been irregularly or fraudulently made may be by him erased if the Minister so direct. If any person registered under this Act has, either before or after the pass- ing thereof, and either before or after he is so registered, been convicted either in Her Majesty's dominions or elsewhere, of an offense which, if committed in Victoria, would be a felony or a misdemeanor, such person shall be liable to have his name erased from the register. The Dental Board may cause inquiry to be made into- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 381 the case of a person alleged to be liable to have his name erased under this section, and, on proof of such conviction, shall make representation of the same to the Governor in Council, who may thereupon direct the Registrar to erase the name of such person from the register ; provided, that the name of a person shall not be erased under this section on account of a conviction for a political offense out of Her Majesty's dominions. Sec. 13. Any person who willfully makes, or causes to be made, any falsification in any matter relating to the register, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on con- viction thereof, be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding twelve months. Sec 14. A true copy of the register aforesaid, certified by the Registrar to be a true copy, shall, in the month of January in each and every year, be sent to the Minister, and shall by him be published in the Government Gazette, and shall be published and sold by the Dental Board, and any printed documents purporting to be a copy of such register shall be prima facie evidence in all courts of law in all legal proceedings whatsoever, and before all justices and others, that the persons therein specified are registered according to the provisions of this Act, and the absence of the name of any person from the latest of such printed copies for the time being, shall he prima fade evidence (until the contrary be made to appear) that such person is not so registered ; provided, that, in the case of any person whose name does not appear in such copy, a certificate under the hand of the Registrar to the effect that such person is registered under this Act, shall be evidence that such person is registered under this Act. Sec. 15. On application made to him at any time for that purpose, the Registrar shall, if so directed by the Dental Board, issue to any applicant a certificate to the effect that he is registered under this Act. registration. Sec 16. From and after the first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, no person other 382 APPENDIX. than a legally qualified medical practitioner, shall be entitled to take or use the name or title of " dentist," or of " dental practitioner," or of " dental surgeon," or any name, title, addition or description, implying that he is registered under this Act, or that he is a person specially qualified to practice dentistry (either alone or in combination with any other word or words), unless he be registered under this Act. Any person who, after the first day of March, one thou- sand eight hundred and eighty-eight, not being a person registered under this Act or a legally qualified medical prac- titioner, takes or uses any such name, title, addition or de- scription as aforesaid, shall be liable, on conviction, to a pen- alty not. exceeding twenty pounds. Sec. 17. Every person registered under this Act, and every legally qualified medical practitioner, shall be entitled to practice dental surgery and dentistry in any part of Vic- toria, and to sue in any court of law within Victoria, to the extent of the jurisdiction of such court, for the recovery of his fees, or other renumeration for his professional services in dentistry, or in the performance of any dental operation, or for any dental attendance or advice ; and it shall be sufficient to state in the particulars of demand the words " for dental services," which shall include every demand for any dental operation, attendance, and advice, and for any articles supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant for dental purposes. From and after the first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, no person shall be entitled to recover any fee or charge in any court of law for the performance of any dental operation, or for any dental attendance or advice, or shall hold any appointment as a dentist or dental practitioner or dental surgeon in any hospital, infirmary, dispensarj^, or lying-in hospital, or in any lunatic asylum, gaol, penitentiary or other public institution, unless he is registered under this Act, or is a legally qualified medical practitioner. Sec. 18. Any person who : (a.) Is registered, or is entitled to be registered, in the United Kingdom in accordance with the law for the time being in force therein, as a dentist or medical practitioner ; DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 383 (b.) Is entitled, as hereinafter mentioned, to be registered under this Act as a dentist ; (c.) Is at the passing of this Act bona Jide engaged in any part of Victoria in the practice of dentistry or dental sur- gery, either separately or in conjunction with the practice of medicine, surgery or pharmacy ; (d.) Has attained the age of twenty-one years, and has been engaged continuously during a period of not less than four years in the acquirement of professional knowledge, and has passed an examination before the board in the subjects prescribed b}' them, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, shall be entitled to be registered under this Act. Sec. 19. Any dental student who has been studying with, and any apprentice of any person entitled to be registered un- der this Act, who has commenced his professional education or apprenticeship at least six months before the passing of this Act, and has served as a pupil or apprentice for not less than three years, shall be entitled, on making a declaration in the form in the Third Schedule hereto to be registered under this Act, as though he had been, at the passing of this Act, bona Jide engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in Victory. Sec 20. Any person, who either is not domiciled in Victoria, or has practiced dental surgery or dentistry for more than ten years elsewhere than in Victoria, showing that he holds some recognized certificate, as hereinafter defined, granted in some portion of the British possessions other than the United Kingdom, and that he is of good character, shall, upon the payment of the registation fees, be entitled, with- out examination, to be registered as a dentist under this Act. Sec 21. Any person who is not a British subject, or who either is not domiciled in Victoria, or has practiced dental surgery or dentistry more than ten years elsewhere than in Victoria, showing that he holds some recognized certificate, as hereinafter defined, granted in a foreign coun- try, and that he is of good character, and either continues to hold such certificate, or has not been deprived thereof for any 384 APPENDIX. cause which disqualifies him from being registered under this Act, shall, upon payment of the registration fees, be en- titled, without examination, to be registered as a dentist un- der this Act. Sec. 22. The certificate granted in a British possession, or in a foreign country, which is to be deemed such a rec- ognized certificate as is required for the purposes of this Act, shall be such certificate, diploma, membership, degree, license, letters, testimonial, or other title, status or document, as may be recognized by the Dental Board, as entitling the holder thereof to practice dental surgery or dentistry in such possession or country, and as furnishing sufficient guarantee of the possession of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient practice of dental surgery or dentistry. Sec. 23. If any person is refused registration under this Act as a dentist, the Dental Board shall, if required by him, state in writing the reason for such refusal ; and, if such reason be that the certificate held or obtained by him is not such a recognized certificate as above defined, such person may ap- peal to the Governor in Council, and the Governor in Coun- cil may, after hearing the said board, dismiss the appeal or order the said board to recognize such certificate, and such order shall be duly obeyed. Sec. 24. The Dental Board may, from time to time, sub- ject to the approval of the Governor in Council, make, alter and repeal regulations specifying what certificates, diplomas, memberships, degrees, licenses, letters, testimonials, or other titles, status or documents granted in a British possession, other than the United Kingdom, or granted in a foreign country, will be recognized by the said board as qualifying persons holding them, or any of them, to be registered under this Act as dentists. The Dental Board may, when any person makes appli- cation to be registered in respect of any certificate, diploma, membership, degree, license, letters, testimonial, or other title, status or document, not specified in such regulations, entertain such application and deal with it specially, and may, if they think fit, give to such applicant a certificate of DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 385 recognition setting forth that he is the holder of a recognized certificate, and the Registrar shall take such certificate of recognition as an authority to register such applicant. Sec. 25. "When a person entitled to be registered under this Act produces or sends to the Registrar the certificate, diploma, license, letters, testimonial, or other document or writing conferring or evidencing his qualification, with a statement of his name and address, and all other particulars {if any), required for registration under this Act, and pays the registration fees, he shall be registered, and such regis- tration shall consist in the entry by or on behalf of the Reg- istrar in the register of such name, address, and other par- ticulars ; provided, that a person shall not be registered un- der this Act as having been before the passing thereof engaged in the practice of dental surgery or dentistry in Victoria, unless he produces or transmits to the Registrar, before the first day of March, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, information of his name and address, and a declaration signed by him in the form set out in the Fourth Schedule to this Act. A person resident in Victoria shall not be disqualified for being registered by reason only that he is not a British subject. EXAMINATION. Sec. 26. The Dental Board shall, at such times as are prescribed by the Governor in Council, hold examinations for the purpose of testing the fitness of persons to practice dental surgery or dentistry, and may grant certificates of such fitness to those who have satisfied the said board thereof on examination. The Dental Board shall admit to the examinations held by them under this section, any person desirous of being ex- amined who has attained the age of twenty-one years, and has complied with the regulations in force (if any) made by the said board as to the education of such persons. Sec. 27. Such reasonable fees shall be paid for the cer- tificate to be granted under this Act by the Dental Board, and for examination by the said board, as the Governor in Council, from time to time, by regulation directs. 380 APPENDIX. Sec. 28. If it appears to the Governor in Council that an attempt lias been made by the Dental Board to impose on any candidate, offering himself for examination, an obliga- tion to adopt or refrain from adopting the practice of any particular theory of dental surgery or dentistry, as a test or condition of admitting: him to examination or granting a certificate of fitness under this Act, the Governor in Council may thereupon issue an injunction to the said board directing them to desist from such practice. MISCELLANEOUS. Sec. 29. Any person who willfully procures, or attempts to procure, himself or any other person to be registered under this Act, by making or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declara- tion, either verbally or in writing, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction thereof, be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding twelve months. Sec 30. The Dental Board may question any person who attends before it, and any witness who may be produced before the said board, and may examine any person upon oath, or take a solemn declaration from such person ; and, if any person willfully, knowingly or corruptly make any false statement upon such examination, or in such declaration, or utter or attempt to utter, or put off as true, before the said board any false, forged or counterfeit certificate, diploma, license, letter, testimonial, or other document or writing, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, being thereof duly convicted, he shall be liable to be imprisoned for any period not exceeding one year. All offenses under this Act shall be heard and deter- mined, and all penalties imposed by this Act shall be recov- ered, in a summary manner before two Justices of the Peace in Petty Sessions, and all penalties when recovered shall be paid to the Dental Board, to be applied toward the expenses of carrying this Act into effect. Sec 31. Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Gov- ernor in Council ma}', from time to time, fix the times at DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 38T which examinations are to be held under this Act, and may- make, alter and revoke such orders and regulations as he thinks fit with respect to the examination of persons desiring to obtain certificates of fitness to practice dental surgery or dentistry ; the granting of certificates of recognition and of fitness by the Dental Board ; the keeping of the register ; registration therein, and the payment of fees in respect of certificates granted by the said board under this Act, and in respect of examinations held by the said board, and generally for carrying this Act into effect. Sec. 32. The fees mentioned in the First Schedule to this Act shall be payable by persons applying to be registered or obtaining certificates of registration under this Act, or in- specting the register, respectively, by the Registrar, and shall be applied by the Dental Board in such manner as they think fit in defraying the expenses of carrying out the provisions of this Act. Sec. 33. All persons registered under this Act shall be exempt from serving on juries and inquests, and from serving in the militia. Tasmania has a Dentists' Act, similar to that of Victoria. The colony of New South "Wales has no dental law. DOMINION OF CANADA. NORTHWEST TERRITORIES. An Ordinance to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the Northwest Territories. The Lieutenant- Governor, by and with the advice and con- sent of the Legislative Assembly, enacts, as follows : Section 1. That no person shall practice the profession of dentistry or dental surgery in the Northwest Territories without having first received a certificate, as hereinafter pro- vided, entitling him to practice dentistry or dental surgery. Sec. 2. That such certificate shall be issued by the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, upon production to him of a. diploma of graduation in dental surgery from the faculty 388 APPENDIX. of any Canadian dental college, or the faculty of any Cana- dian university having a special dental department, or from any such institution, duly authorized by the laws of Great Britian, or any of her dependencies; or a license to practice dental surgery issued by any of the Provinces of the Domin- ion of Canada; or a diploma or license from a foreign dental institution which required, at the time of issue of such diploma or license, attendance at a regular course of lectures, and an apprenticeship of not less than two and one-half years ; or who has been in regular practice in the Northwest Terri- tories as a dentist or dental surgeon for a period of one month immediately preceding the passing of this ordinance, and it shall be the duty of the persons claiming to be entitled to the certificate required by this section, to produce to the said clerk evidence, satisfactory to him, of his being entitled thereto. Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require physicians, surgeons, or others to take out such certificates for the purpose of qualifying them to extract teeth. Sec. 3. That, before any such certificate is granted, the applicant shall pay to the general revenue fund of the Terri- tories the sum of twenty-five dollars, unless he is a person who, at present and for one month immediately preceding the passing hereof, has been in actual practice of dentistry and dental surgery in the Northwest Territories, and in such case he shall pay into said fund the sum of five dollars. Sec. 4. After the period of six months from the passing of this ordinance, any person not holding a valid certificate issued by the said clerk, as aforesaid, who practices dentistry or dental surgery, except extracting teeth, shall be guilty of an infraction of this ordinance; and, upon conviction by any Justice of the Peace within the Territories in a summary manner, pay a fine of not less than twenty dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars, in the discretion of said Justice, and costs. Sec. 5. That no person who has not received the certificate required by this ordinance, shall recover in any court of law DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 389 any fees or money for any materials provided by him in the practice of dentistry, or dental surgery, excepting for extract- ing teeth. BRITISH COLUMBIA. An Act to Regulate the Practice of Dentistry in the Province of British Columbia. Whereas, the profession of dentistry is extensively prac- ticed in Europe, the United States and the Dominion of Can- ada ; and whereas the said profession of dentistry is protected by law in Europe, the greater portion of the United States, and in parts of Canada ; and whereas, it is expedient for the protection of the public, that there should, by enactment, be established a certain standard of qualification required of each practitioner of the said profession or calling, and that certain privileges and protection should be afforded to such practitioners ; Therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and con- sent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Colum- bia, enacts, as follows: Section 1. That it shall be unlawful for any person to practice, or attempt to practice, the profession of dentistry or dental surgery in the Province of British Columbia, without having first received a diploma from the faculty of some reputable dental college, school or university department duly authorized by the laws of Great Britain and its dependencies, or the laws of some foreign government, and in which col- lege, school or university department there was, at the time of issuance of such diploma, annually delivered a full course of lectures and instructions in dentistry or dental surgery, and without having had issued to him a certificate under the provisions of this Act ; provided, that nothing in section 1 of this Act shall apply to persons who have been three months in actual practice in this Province, previous to the passage of this Act, except as hereinafter provided, and noth- ing in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent physicians, surgeons or others from extracting teeth. 390 APPENDIX. Sec. 2. A Board of Examiners consisting of three prac- ticing dentists, residents of this Province, is hereby created, who shall issue certificates to persons in the practice of den- tistry or dental surgery in this Province, who have been three months in actual practice in said Province previous to the passage of this Act ; and also to decide upon the validity and sufficiency of character of such diplomas as may be subse- quently presented for registration as hereinafter provided. Sec. 3. The members of said Board of Examiners shall be appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, upon the passage of this Act, and shall serve for a term of three years, excepting that the members of the board first appointed shall hold their offices as follows : One for three years; one for two years; one for one year, respectively, and until their suc- cessors are duly appointed. In case of any vacancy occurring in said board, such va- cancy shall be filled by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, from those in actual practice in the said Province. Sec 4. The said Board of Examiners shall keep a record in which shall be registered the names, residences, or places of business of all persons authorized under this Act to prac- tice dentistry in this Province. The said board shall elect from its members a President and a Secretary, and shall meet at least once a year, and whenever applications for certificates shall be made. A majority of the members of said board shall constitute a quorum. Sec 5. Every person engaged in the practice of dentistry within this Province at the time of the passage of this Act, shall, within three months thereafter, cause his name and residence and place of business to be registered with the said Board of Examiners, upon which said board shall issue to such person a certificate duly signed by a majority of the members of said board, and which shall entitle the person to whom it is issued to all the rights and privileges set forth in this Act. Sec 6. To provide for the proper enforcement of this Act, the said Board of Examiners shall be entitled to the following fees, to wit : For each certificate issued to persons DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 391 ■engaged in the practice of dentistry in this Province at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of ten dollars ; for each certificate issued to persons not engaged in the practice of dentistry at the time of the passage of this Act, the sum of twenty -five dollars. Sec. 7. There shall be allowed and paid to each of the members of the said Board of Examiners such fees for attend- ance, in no case to exceed ten dollars per day, and such rea- sonable traveling expenses, as the said board shall allow from time to time. Said expenses shall be paid out of the fees and penalties received by the said board under the provisions of this Act. Sec. 8. All moneys in excess of necessary expenses shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for meeting the expenses of said board, he giving such bonds as the board may, from time to time, direct. Sec. 9. The said board, at its first meeting, and from time to time thereafter, shall make such rules, regulations, and by-laws, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, as may be necessary for the proper and better guidance of the said board, which rules, regulations, and by-laws shall first be published for one month in the British Columbia Oazette, and in one or more newspapers circulating in the Province. Any or all of such rules, regulations and by-laws shall be liable to be cancelled and annulled by an order of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. Sec 10. The Secretary of said board shall, on or before the fifteenth day of January, in each and every year, inclose to the Provincial Secretary an annual report of its proceed- ings, together with an account of all moneys received and disbursed by said Board of Examiners ; also a list of the names of all persons to whom certificates have been granted and the qualifications therefor, and such lists shall be pub- lished in the Gazette. Sec. 11. If any person, after the period of three months after the passage of this Act, not holding a valid certificate, practices the said profession or calling of dentistry or dental eurgery,or willfully and falsely pretends to hold a certificate 302 APPENDIX. under this Act ; or takes or uses any name, addition, or de- scription implying that he is duly authorized to practice the profession or calling of dentistry or dental surgery, he shall, upon a summary conviction thereof before any Justice of the Peace, for any and every such offense, pay a penalty not ex- ceeding one hundred dollars, nor less than twenty-five dollars, and the half of any such penalty shall he paid to the Board of Examiners; and it is further provided that no person who is not qualified under the provisions of this Act shall recover in any court of law for any work done or any materials used by him in the ordinary work of a dentist. Sec. 12. Any British subject being a resident of this Province (not entitled to the privileges and benefits of this Act under section 1), desirous of entering the profession or calling of dentistry, shall be apprenticed to a practitioner, duly qualified under this Act, for a period of three years,, and shall file his articles of apprenticeship with the Secretary within one calendar month after the said articles have been executed. Sec. 13. Any such person having been so apprenticed as aforesaid shall, at the completion of the term of his appren- ticeship, and upon the production to the Secretary of satis- factory evidence of his having served his said apprenticeship r and of his good moral character, be entitled to be examined as to his fitness to practice the profession or calling of den- tistry before the Board of Examiners appointed under this Act, and shall, upon passing such examination to the satis- faction of the said board, receive a certificate, upon the pay- ment of a fee of ten dollars, which shall entitle him to all the rights and privileges of this Act. Passed April 6th, 1886. MANITOBA. An Act to Incorporate the Manitoba Dental Association. "Whereas, the profession of dentistry is extensively prac- ticed in the Province of Manitoba, and it is expedient for the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 393 protection of the public that a certain standard of qualifica- tion should be required by each practitioner of said pro- fession, and that certain privileges and protection should be afforded to such practitioners ; lherefore,Her Majesty, by and uith the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Manitoba, enacts, as follows : Section 1. The following persons, that is to say : James Lee Benson, Samuel Fowell Buxton Reid, Robert Ardea Harvie, John C. Bowers, H. D. Burritt, George F. Bush, Major C. Clark, Robert R. Dalgleish, Archie Doherty, Edward William Emmons, T. J. Jones, James A. McCaus- land, Daniel McPhee, A. G. McLean, R. W. Stark, Jule "Witharn Norton, Robert Hutcheson Robertson, J. B. Vos- burgh, J. Johnson White, Nicholas Franklin White, and every other person who holds a valid and unforfeited certifi- cate of license to practice dentistry which has been granted to him by any Board of Directors, duly elected under this Act, shall- form the Dental Association of the Province of Manitoba. Sec. 2. The said Association is hereby incorporated under the name and style of " The Manitoba Dental Association," and the said Association shall be deemed to be a body cor- porate and politic, and by the same name shall have per- petual succession and a common seal, with power to break, alter, change or make new the same, and by the name afore- said may sue and be sued, implead and be impleaded, answer and be answered unto in all courts and places whatsoever, and may have, hold, receive, enjoy, possess and retain for the purposes of said corporation, all such sums of money as may at any time be given or bequeathed to and for the use of the same, and by the said name purchase, take, hold and enjoy any real estate or any estate or interest, derived or arriving out of real estate for the purpose aforesaid, and for no other purpose, and may sell, grant, lease or otherwise dis- pose of the same, but the real estate so held by the said cor- poration shall at no time exceed in annual value the sum of five thousand dollars. 394 APPENDIX. Sec. 3. The Board of Directors of said Association shall consist of five members, who shall hold office for three years; any member may at any time resign by letter directed to the Secretary, and, in the event of any such resignation, or a vacancy occurring by death or otherwise, the remaining members of the board shall elect some fit and proper person from among the licentiates, being members of this Associa- tion, to supply such vacancy. Sec. 4. The first Board of Directors shall be composed of the following persons : Jas. L. Benson, Samuel F. B. Reid and Robert A. Harvey, dentists, of the city of Winnipeg; H. D. Burritt, of the town of Emerson ; 'and J. Johnson "White, of the town of Portage la Prairie, and their terms of office shall continue for three years from the passing of this Act. Sec. 5. Every subsequent election of directors shall be held in the city of Winnipeg on the second Tuesday of January in every third year, and one month's notice by circular of such intended election shall be given by the Secretary to each member of the Association. Sec. 6. The persons qualified to vote at the said election shall be those licentiates who have obtained certificates of license under the provisions of this Act. Sec. 7. The election of Directors shall be by ballot, and the licentiates receiving the highest number of votes shall be the directors for the then ensuing term. Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Association shall publish in the Manitoba Gazette the names of those persons who have been elected members of the Board of Directors, such publi- cation to be in two successive issues of said Gazette next after the said election shall be held. Sec. 9. The Board of Directors shall meet once a year on the second Tuesday in January, in the city of Winnipeg, and such meeting may be continued by adjournment from day to day until the business of the board is finished, but no session shall exceed one week. Sec. 10. The said board shall have no power to transact any business of the Association, unless a majority of the mem- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 395 bers are present ; and, at their first meeting, the said Board of Directors shall elect from among themselves a President, a Secretary -Treasurer and Registrar. Sec 11. All moneys forming part of the funds of this Association shall be paid to the Secretary-Treasurer, and shall be applied to carry on the objects of this Act. Sec 12. All persons in the Province of Manitoba who are and have been in regular and continuous office practice as dentists for a period of not less than six months preceding the passing of this Act, shall have the right to practice in the Province of Manitoba the profession of dentistry; pro- vided, that such others shall have the same right, who here- after obtain certificates of license under the provisions of this Act. Sec 13. Any person who is a member of any college of dentistry of any of the Provinces of the Dominion of Canada, having authority by law to grant certificates of license or diplomas to practice dentistry, or who is a member of any association or school of dentistry having the like powers, and who produces sufficient evidence of such membership and testimonials of good character and conduct, shall, upon ]:>ayment of the required fees, be admitted as a member of this Association, and be entitled to receive a certificate of license to practice dentistry in this Province, under the pro- visions of this Act. Sec 14. The Board of Directors shall, from time to time, make such rules, regulations and by-laws as may be necessary for the better guidance, government and regulation of the said board, and said profession of dentistry, and the carrying out of this Act. Sec 1 5. The said board shall have power and authority to appoint one or more examiners for the matriculation or pre- liminary examination of all students entering the profession; such examination shall be passed prior to entering into articles of indenture with a licentiate of dentistry, and the commence- ment of study shall date from the signing of said articles. Sec 16. The said board shall also have the power and 896 APPENDIX. authority to fix and determine from time to time a curriculum of studies to be pursued by students, and to fix and determine the period for which every student shall be articled and em- ployed under some duly licensed practitioner, and the exami- nation necessary to be passed before the board, and the fees to be paid into the hands of the Secretary-Treasurer of said board, before receiving a certificate of license to practice the profession of dentistry. Sec. 17. The Board of Directors of said corporation shall also have authority to examine candidates and grant certifi- cates of license to practice dental surgery in this Province. Sec. 18. The said board shall hold one meeting in each and every year, in the city of Winnipeg, at such place as may from time to time be fixed by the board for the purpose of exam- ining students, granting certificates of license, and doing such other business as may properly come before them ; such meetings shall be held on the second Tuesday of January of each year, and shall continue from day to day until the busi- ness before the board is finished, but no such meetings shall continue for more than one week. Sec. 19. Every person being desirous of being exam- ined by the said board touching his qualifications for the practice of the said profession of dentistry, shall, at least one month before the sitting of the said board, pay into the hands of the Secretary-Treasurer the required fees, together with satisfactory evidence of his term of apprenticeship having been fulfilled, and as to integrity and good morals; and it shall be the duty of the board to hold a sitting for the purpose hereinbefore mentioned, on the second Tuesday of January, in each year next ensuing the said payment. Sec. 20. If the board is satisfied by the said examina- tion that the person is duly qualified to practice the profes- sion of dentistry, and is further satisfied that he is a person of integrity and good moral character, it shall grant him a certificate of license, subject to the rules, regulations and by- laws promulgated under the authority of this Act, and the title of Licentiate of Dental Surgery, which certificate and title shall entitle him to all the rights and privileges of this DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 397 Act, but no diploma or certificate of license shall be granted to any person under the age of twenty-one years. Sec. 21. Every certificate of license shall be sealed with the corporate seal of the Association and signed by the Presi- dent and Secretary-Treasurer and Registrar of said board, and the production of such certificate of license shall be prima facie evidence in all courts of law, and in all proceed- ings of whatever kind of its execution and contents. Sec 22. The Secretary -Treasurer of the said board shall, on or before the first day of February in each and every year, enclose to the Provincial Secretary a certified list of the names of all persons to whom certificates of license have been granted during the preceding year. Sec 23. Every person whose name is registered in this Act is hereby granted the license to practice dental surgery in the Province of Manitoba, and to receive the title of licentiate of dental surgery and the diploma incident thereto, upon payment of the required fees. Sec 24. In case a charge is made against any licentiate of unprofessional conduct or other misconduct, provided for by the by-laws to be passed under the provisions of this Act, the Board of Directors shall have power to hear and deter- mine the same, and for this purpose to summon witnesses be- fore them, and to administer an oath or affirmation to such witnesses ; and, if any licentiate shall be found guilty of the charge preferred against him, he shall forfeit his certificate and title, and the same shall be cancelled ; such forfeiture, however, may be annulled, and the said license and all rights and privileges thereunder fully renewed and restored by- said board in such manner and upon such conditions and terms as the said board shall think fit ; provided, however, that nothing in this Act contained shall empower the said board to deal with any criminal or other offense provided for by law. Sec 25. Any licentiate who shall be convicted of any malpractice shall forfeit his license, and the same shall be can- celled ; but the board shall have power to restore the same if it shall think fit and proper, notice of such restoration to 398 APPENDIX. be given for two weeks in some local paper to be determined upon by the board. Sec. 26. It shall not be lawful for any person not hold- ing a valid certificate of license under this Act to practice the profession of dentistry within the Province of Manitoba for hire, gain or hope of reward, and, if any person, after the passage of this Act, not holding such certificate of license, shall practice, or profess to practice, within this Province, the said profession of dentistry, either publicly or privately for hire, gain or hope of reward, or voluntarily and falsely pre- tend to be a duly qualified licentiate of dentistry, or assumes any title, addition or description other than he actually pos- sesses and is legally entitled to, or shall use any name, title, addition or description implying or calculated to lead people to infer or believe him to be a duly qualified licentiate of dentistry, he shall be liable, upon conviction in a summary manner before any Justice of the Peace having jurisdiction where the offense is committed, to a penalty not exceeding two hundred dollars and not less than fifty dollars for the first offense, and for each and every subsequent offense to a penalty of four hundred dollars. Sec. 27. All-prosecutions under the provisions hereof may be brought and heard before any Justice of the Peace having jurisdiction where the offense is committed, and such Justice of the Peace shall have power, in addition to the aforesaid penalty, to award payment of costs, and in case such penalty and costs be not paid forthwith after conviction, he shall have power to issue a warrant of distress therefor against the goods and chattels of the party so convicted. Sec. 28. In any such prosecution and trial, the onus of proof as to being a legally qualified licentiate of dentistry is upon the person charged. Sec. 29. Any penalties imposed by this Act may be also proceeded for or recovered by suit in any court of law hav- ing jurisdiction, and one-half of all penalties recovered shall go to the prosecutor, and the remainder shall be paid to the Secretary -Treasurer of the Association and form part of the funds of the Association. Any person may be complainant DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 399 or prosecutor, provided always that every such prosecution shall he commenced within six months of the alleged offense. Sec. 30. No person shall be entitled to recover in any court of law for any professional services rendered or ma- terials provided by him in the exercise of the profession of a dentist, unless he be a duly and legally qualified licentiate of dentistry under the provisions of this Act. Sec. 31. Nothing in this Act contained shall interfere with the privileges conferred upon physicians and surgeons by the various Acts relating to the practice of medicine and surgery in this Province ; but in case a regular physician or surgeon shall desire to practice dentistry as a profession, and to publicly avow himself as a practitioner of said profession of dentistry, he shall first obtain a license from said Board of Directors by paying the necessary fees and passing an examination in operative and mechanical dentistry only. Sec 32. This Act shall be cited as the Manitoba Dental Association Act. Assented to July 7th, 1883. NEW BRUNSWICK* An Act Relating to the Registration and Qualification of Dental Surgeons. Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor, Legislative Coun- cil, and Assembly, as follows : Section 1. This Act may be cited as " The New Bruns- wick Dental Act, 1890." Sec 2. All persons who are qualified to register under section 23 of this Act, and who do register after the passing of this Act, shall constitute " The New Brunswick Dental Society," hereinafter called the " Society." Sec 3. The officers of the Society shall be a President, a Vice-President and a Secretary. * The copy of the laws lurnished by kindness of Dr. Geo W. Beers, {of Dominion Journal.) 400 APPENDIX. Sec. 4. There shall be a Dental Council composed of seven registered dentists, or dental surgeons, three of whom shall be nominated and appointed by the Governor in Council, and four by the Society, of which Council any five shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act. Sec. 5. The Dental Council shall be styled and named " The Council of Dental Surgeons of New Brunswick," in this Act called " The Council." Sec. 6. No dentist or dental surgeon shall be appointed a member of the Council, unless he shall have practiced den- tistry within the Province for a period of five years, or has obtained a degree from some university or college of dentistry entitling him to be registered under this Act. Sec. 7. The first four members of the Council appointed by the Society, shall be appointed by nomination and ballot, at the first meeting of the Society hereinafter provided for in section 45 of this Act, and such four members, together with the three members appointed by the Governor in Coun- cil, shall meet immediately at the close of such meeting, and organize for the purpose of fully carrying out the provisions of this Act. Sec 8. The members of the Council appointed by the Governor in Council shall hold office for a term of four years from the date of their appointment or until voluntary resig- nation, if such resignation takes place before the expiration of the four years, or until other members are duly appointed in their place and stead ; and the members appointed by or on behalf of the Society for three years from the date of the appointment or until voluntary resignation, if such resigna- tion takes place before the expiration of the three years or until other members are duly appointed in their place and stead ; provided, that it shall be lawful for the Governor in Council, at any time, to remo ve any member of the Council upon written request of two-thirds of the remaining mem- bers of the Council, and due cause shown. Sec 9. The Council shall immediately, upon the occur- rence of a vacancy therein communicate the fact to the Gov- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 40 L ■ernor in Council or to the Society, according as such vacancy shall have to be filled by the one or the other of those bodies, and shall also notify either of such bodies of any other busi- ness requiring the attention of the same under this Act. Sec. 10. Every vacancy in the Council, whether caused by death, resignation, removal from ofiice, or otherwise, shall be tilled up by the body or authority which shall have nom- inated and appointed the person causing such vacancy with -as little delay as possible, so that, as far as practicable, the Council shall always consist of seven members, three ap- pointed by the Governor in Council, four by the Society. In case of neglect or refusal of the Society to fill up a vacancy which they are empowered and directed by this section to supply, within three months after such vacancy shall have been caused, the remaining members of the Council shall nominate and appoint a properly qualified person to fill such vacancy. In case of a similar neglect or refusal on the part of the Governor in Council, the Council shall exercise the like power. Sec. 11. The Council shall hold a meeting, called the an- nual meeting, every year at such place as a majority of the •Council may decide, to transact all necessary business, and such meeting may be continued by adjournment from day to -day until the business before the Council is finished. The •Council shall also have power, and it shall be their duty, to hold such other meetings as may be necessary in addition to the annual meeting. Sec 12. The books and accounts of the Council shall at all times be open to the examination of such persons as the Governor in Council or the Society shall appoint to inspect the same, and also of all the members of the Council, and the accounts shall be annually published or filed in the ofiice of the Provincial Secretary. Sec. 13. The Council shall have power, and it shall be their duty : First, to elect a Secretary from among the mem- bers of the Society to act as Secretary of the Council, who shall, among other things, attend the meetings of the Council, and keep a record of the proceedings of the same in a book, 402 APPENDIX. or books, to be provided by him for that purpose. Secondly r to elect a President, Treasurer and such other officers as may be necessary. Thirdly, to cause every member of the pro- fession practicing in New Brunswick to register his name, place of residence, the date of his diploma, if he has one, and the place where be obtained it, in the dental register herein- after provided for. Fourthly, to make all such orders, rules, regulations and by-laws for carrying this Act into effect as to the Council shall seem proper or necessary, which orders, rules, regulations and by-laws shall not be inconsistent with this Act, and may be disallowed by the Governor in Council. Sec. 14. The rules and regulations, if any, as to the times and places of the meetings of the Council, and the mode of summoning the same by the Council, shall remain in force until altered by any subsequent meeting. In the absence of any rule or regulation as to the summoning of meetings of the Council, it shall be lawful for the President thereof to summon, at such time and place as to him shall seem fit, by circular letter mailed to the address of each member so far as known to him ; he shall in like manner summon a meeting of the Council upon the requisition of a majority of the mem- bers thereof ; provided always, that at least ten days' notice of such meeting shall be given ; in the event of the absence of the President from any meeting, some other member, to be chosen from among the members present, shall act as Presi- dent. All acts of the Council shall be decided by a majority of the members present. At all meetings, the President shall vote only in case of a tie. Sec. 15. All moneys forming part of the funds of the Council shall be paid to the Treasurer, and shall be applied to carrying this Act into execution. Sec. 16. Each applicant for registration shall, if required by the Council, pay before registration to the Registrar of the Council, or any person deputed by said Registrar to re- ceive it, such fee as may be determined on by by-law of the Council, not less than one dollar, nor more than five dollars, which fee shall thereupon be paid by said Registrar to the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 403 Treasurer, and payment of such fee shall be. a condition pre- cedent to registration. Sec. 17. Each registered dentist or dental surgeon shall, if required by the Council, pay to the Treasurer, or any person deputed by the Treasurer to receive it, such annual fee as- may be determined by by-law of the Council, not less than one dollar, nor more than three dollars. Sec 18. If any registered dentist or dental surgeon do not pay the annual fee required by the Council under section 17, prior to the first day of January in each year, he shall thereupon cease to be deemed registered ; and, if any such fee remains due from any dentist or dental surgeon on the first day of January in any year, the name of such person shall not be printed or published in the Royal Gazette in such year, as provided in section 22, but any such practitioner, upon the payment of all arrears of such fees, shall thereupon be registered and be deemed registered from the time of such payment. Sec 19. The Secretary of the Council shall also be the Registrar of the Council, herein called "The Registrar," and shall be paid such salary as the Council may determine. Sec 20. The Registrar shall make and keep a correct register in the form set forth in Schedule A to this Act, of the names in alphabetical order, according to the surnames cf the persons registered under the provisions of this Act, with the other particulars required by said schedule, which regis- ter shall be called the " Dental Register," herein called the "• Register." Sec 21. It shall be the duty of the Registrar to keep his register correct, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and the rules, orders and regulations of the Council, and to erase the names of all registered persons who shall have died, left the Province without any intention of return- ing, or ceased to practice for a period of five years ; and he shall, from time to time, make the necessary alterations in the addresses or qualifications of the persons registered un- der this Act ; provided always, that the name of any person 404 APPENDIX. erased from the register shall he restored by order of the Council upon sufficient cause duly shown. Sec. 22. The Registrar shall, before the firsl day of May in every year, cause to be printed and published in the Royal ■Gazette of this Province, and in such other manner, if any, as the Council shall appoint, a correct copy of the register as existing on the first day of January next preceding such publication, and any printed copy of the register purporting to be so printed and published as aforesaid, or a certified copy, under the hand of the Registrar of the entry of the name of any person on the register, shall be prima facie evi- dence that the person or persons mentioned in such printed copy or certificate, are registered under the provisions of this Act at the date mentioned in such printed copy or certificate, and such certificate shall be admitted in evidence, without proof of the signature of the Registrar. Sec. 23. No person shall be entitled to be registered un- der this Act, unless he shall satisfy the Registrar by proper evidence : 1. That he has fulfilled all the requirements for gradu- ation in any one of the colleges or dental schools in the United States of America recognized by the National Association of Dental Faculties, or in any other college or dental school recognized by the Council ; or, 2. That he was practicing dentistry in this Province before the first day of January, A. D. 1889, and has since that time continued regularly to practice as a dentist or den- tal surgeon therein ; provided, however, that temporary absence from practice in the Province while attending a dental col- lege or school since that date, shall not prevent his being registered hereunder; prodded, that, if any applicant for registration or any registered dentist or dental surgeon is dis- satisfied with the decision of the Registrar, the question shall be referred to the Council for its decision, and any person objecting to the decision of the Council may appeal to the Governor in Council. The Governor in Council is hereby empowered to affirm, alter in any way, or reverse the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 405 decision of the Council, and the Council shall forthwith give effect to such decision on appeal. Sec. 24. Every person registered under this Act, who may have obtained any higher degree or qualification other than the qualification in respect of which he may have been registered, shall be entitled to have such higher degree or additional qualification inserted in the register in substitution for or in addition to the qualification previously registered, on the payment of such fee as the Council may demand. Sec 25. Xo qualification shall be entered upon the register either upon the first registration or by way of an addition to a registered name, unless the Registrar shall be satisfied, by the proper evidence, that the person claiming is entitled to it, and appeal may be made as in section 23. Sec. 26. If in any case it shall be proven to the satis- faction of the Council, on appeal by registered dentist or dental surgeon, that any entry in the register was fraudu- lently or incorrectly made, the Council may order the entry to be erased or amended, as the case may be, and, if it shall be proven to their satisfaction that any person has fraudu- lently registered, or attempted to register, the name of such person may, at the discretion of the Council, be published in the Royal Gazette. Sec 27. Any registered dentist or dental surgeon who shall have been convicted of any felony in any court, or shall, after due inquiry, be judged by the Council to have been guilty of infamous conduct in any professional respect, shall thereby, subject to an appeal to the Governor in Council, forfeit his right to registration, and, by direction of the Council, his name shall be erased from the register. Sec 28. Subject to the exceptions hereinafter named, no person not registered under this Act shall practice dentistry or dental surgery in this Province, or be entitled to any of the rights or privileges conferred by this Act. Sec 29. Every person who shall be registered under this Act shall be entitled to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this Province, and to demand and recover, in any court of law of competent jurisdiction, reasonable and customary 400 APPENDIX. charges for professional services, and the cost of any medicine supplied by him as dentist or dental surgeon to his patients. Sec. 30. No person shall be entitled to recover any charges in any court of law for services as dentist or dental surgeon, or for any medicine which he shall have both pre- scribed and supplied, unless he shall prove upon the trial, that, at the time the services were performed or the medicine prescribed and supplied, he was registered under this Act. Sec. 31. The words, "legally qualified dental prac- titioner," or, " duly qualified dental practitioner," or any other words importing a person recognized by law as a den- tist or dental surgeon, or member of the dental profession, when used in any Act of the Legislature, or legal or public document, shall be construed to mean a person registered under this Act. Sec. 32. No person shall be appointed as dental officer or dental surgeon in any branch of public service, or in any hospital or other charitable institution, unless he be registered under this Act. Sec 33. No certificate required by an}' Act now in force or that may hereafter be passed, from any dentist or dental surgeon, shall be valid, unless the person signing the same shall be registered under this Act. Sec. 34. If any person not registered under this Act prac- tices dentistry or dental surgery in any form for hire, gain or hope of reward, he shall thereby forfeit a sum of twenty dol- lars for each day upon which he so practices. Sec. 35. Any person who attempts to evade the law by causing his services as a dentist or dental surgeon to be in- directly paid for in any manner, whether by the sale of drugs or medicines or otherwise, shall forfeit the sum of twenty dollars for each offense. Sec. 36. If the Registrar make or cause to be made any willful falsification in any matter relating to the register, he shall forfeit the sum of one hundred dollars. Sec. 37. If any person shall willfully procure or attempt to procure himself to be registered under this Act by making or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 407 fraudulent declaration or representation, either verbally or in writing, every such person so doing, and every person knowingly aiding or assisting him therein, shall forfeit the sum of one hundred dollars. Sec. 38. Any person who shall willfully and falsely pre- tend to be registered under this Act, or take or use any name, title, addition or description implying that he is so registered, shall forfeit the sum of one hundred dollars. Sec. 39. Any sum forfeited under any section of this Act shall be recoverable, with costs, and may be sued for and recovered in the same manner as a private debt, in the name of " The New Brunswick Dental Society," at the instance of the President or Secretary thereof, and, being recovered, shall belong to the Council ; provided, that where the information leading to such recovery shall have been given by any person not registered under this Act, such person shall be entitled to receive one-half of the sum so recovered. Sec 40. Upon the trial of such cause, the burden of proof as to the right of the defendant to practice dentistry or dental surgery shall be upon the defendant. Sec. 41. No suit shall be commenced under this Act after one year from the date of the offense or cause of action. Sec. 42. Nothing in this Act shall prevent any person from giving necessary aid as dentist or dental surgeon to any one in urgent need of it, provided that such aid is not given for hire, gain or hope of reward, nor the giving of it made a business, or way of gaining a livelihood either directly or indirectly by such person. Sec 43. This Act shall not apply to or be construed to oxtend to any duly qualified medical practitioner extracting teeth, nor any paid assistant not registered under this Act employed by any registered dentist or dental surgeon in his office ; but this section shall not be construed to permit any such assistant to act as dentist or dental surgeon outside of the office of his employer. Sec 44. For the purpose of organization of this Society, all persons who at the passing of this Act are entitled to and claim the right to register hereunder, shall file a memoran- 408 APPENDIX. dum of their names and places of residence and practice, with their post-office address and qualification, in the office of the Provincial Secretary, at Fredericton, on or before the tirst day of August, A. D. 1890, and the Governor in Council shall, on or before said day, appoint from the persons who shall have filed such memorandum three Scrutineers, who shall meet in the city of Fredericton, on the second Tuesday in said month of August, at two o'clock in the afternoon, there to receive, examine and decide as to the sufficiency of the certificates, or other evidences of qualification, of those claiming to be entitled to take part in the organization of the Society, who have filed the memorandum aforesaid. Only those persons decided by said Scrutineers, or a majority of them, to be qualified for registry under section 23, shall be so entitled. Sec. 45. The first annual meeting of the Society shall be held on the second Tuesday in August, A. D. 1890, at three o'clock in the afternoon, in the city of Fredericton, at a place to be appointed by said Scrutineers, at which time and place those persons decided by the Scrutineers under the next preceding section to be entitled to take part in the organization of the Society, shall meet and organize by elect- ing: from anions; their number a President, a Vice-President and a Secretary ; they shall have power, and it shall be their duty, to adopt by-laws not inconsistent with this Act, and a code of dental ethics for the guidance of the members of the Society, and to transact such other business as may be neces- sary under this Act, or under the by-laws by them adopted. Passed April 23d, 1890. NOVA SCOTIA* Assented to this 19th day of May, 1891. 31. B. Daly, Lieu- tenant-Governor. PREAMBLE. Whereas, by petition it has been represented that the profession of dentistry is extensively practiced in the Pro- * The copy of the Utws furnished by kindness of Dr. Geo. W. Beers, (of Dominion Journal.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 409 vince of Novia Scotia, and that it is expedient for the pro- tection of the public that there should, by enactment, be es- tablished a certain standard of qualification required of each practitioner of the said profession, and that certain privileges and protection should be afforded to such practitioners ; Be it therefore enacted by the Governor, Council and Assem- bly, as follows: I. INCORPORATED NAME. Section 1. The persons named in section II of this Act shall be incorporated and known as " The Dental Associa- tion of the Province of Novia Scotia." Sec. 2. Until such other persons be elected as hereinafter provided, Alfred Chipman Cogswell, William Clark Delaney, Hibbert Woodbury, Frank Woodbury, James Albert Mer- rill, Arthur Wellesley Cogswell, Robert William McDonald, Raymond Hays Mulloney, Charles Henry Fluck, Clarence Ulysses Smith, Cyrus Kingsbury Fisk, of Halifax ; C. S. Marshall, of Liverpool ; George Hyde, M. K. Langille, of Truro ; A. J. McKenna, John Edward Mulloney, of Kentville ; J. R. Fritz, of Digby ; Charles E. Wolff, of New Glascow ; Frederick William Stevens, of Dartmouth ; W. A. Payzant, of Wolfville ; A. C. Harding, of Yarmouth ; James Primrose, of Annapolis ; E. L. Fuller, of Amherst ; Charles Wilson Muir, of Shelburne ; S. W. Eaton, of Canning ; F. H. Parker, of Harborville ; Henry Fraser, of Pictou ; George A. Polly, of Lunenburg ; Frederick Primrose, of Bridgeton ; Horace E. Eaton, of Parrsboro ; M. P. Harrington, of Liverpool ; shall be Trustees, six of whom Bhall form a quorum. 410 APPENDIX. They shall have power to appoint three of their mem- bers, who, with four others, to be a] (pointed by the Gov- ernor in Council, shall form a Board which Rhall he known as the "Provincial Dental Board of No via Scotia." Sec. 3. The board shall have power and authority to take, receive, hold and enjoy real and personal property donated, given, granted, devised, bequeathed or otherwise bestowed upon or conveyed to them, and shall hold the same in each case in trust for such purpose as may be mentioned by the donor, and, if no' such purpose is so mentioned, then the board may mortgage, lease or otherwise dispose of any such property for the furtherance of the " Dental Association of the Province of Novia Scotia." And that the Association shall have a common seal, with power to change, amend, cancel or renew the same. II. THE PROVINCIAL DENTAL BOARD. Sec. 4. The Provincial Dental Board shall consist of seven members, as hereinbefore stated, who shall hold office for two years, four of which shall form a quorum. Any member may resign by letter directed to the Secretary, and, in the event of a vacancy occurring by death or otherwise ot an appointee of the association or board, the remaining members of the board shall elect some fit and proper person from the licentiates to supply the vacancy, and, in the event of a vacancy by death or otherwise of an appointee of the Governor in Council, the Governor in Council shall appoint a proper person from among the licentiates to fill the vacancy. The Provincial Dental Board shall have power and it shall be their duty : 1. To elect a President and such other officers, includ- ing the Secretary and Registrar, as may be necessary to the working of this chapter. 2. To regulate the study of dentistry, operative and prosthetic, by making rules not inconsistent with this chap- ter, with regard to the preliminary qualification, course of Btudy to be followed, the final examination and the nature DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 411 of the evidence to be produced before the board upon those subjects. 3. To appoint fit and proper persons to conduct the preliminary or matriculation examination, and to fix the remuneration, if any, to be paid to such examiners. 4. To examine all degrees, diplomas, licenses and other credentials presented or given in evidence under this chapter, for the purpose of enabling the owner of such credentials to attest on oath or by affidavit that he is the person whose name is mentioned therein, and that he became possessed thereof honestly. 5. To cause every member of the profession practicing in Novia Scotia to register his name, age, place of residence, place of nativity, the date of his license or diploma, and the place where he obtained it with the Registrar of the Board. 6. To make orders and regulations for regulating the registers to be kept under this chapter. 7. To make all such rules, regulations and by-laws for carrying this chapter into effect, as to the board shall seem proper or necessary, which rules, regulations and by-laws shall not be inconsistent with this chapter. 8. To appoint as many examiners to hold final exami- nations when necessary, as the board shall deem proper, such examiners to be regularly qualified dental practitioners of not less than three years' professional standing, and three years' residence in this Province. Sec. 6. The Provincial Dental Board, or a majority of members composing the same, shall appoint from time to time a regularly qualified dental practitioner, resident in Halifax, to act as Secretary of the board, who shall attend the meet- ings of the board and keep a record of the proceedings of the same in a book, or books, to be provided for that purpose, together with all such matters and things as to the board shall appertain. Sec. 7. The Secretary shall also be the Registrar of the Provincial Dental Board, and shall be paid such salary out of the moneys to be received as hereinafter provided, as the 412 APPENDIX. board shall, with the approval of the Provincial Dental Association, determine. Sec. 8. The Registrar of the board shall, before the first day of September in every year, cause to be printed and pub- lished in the Royal Gazette of the Province, and in such other manner as the board shall appoint, a correct register of the names in alphabetical order, according to the surnames, with their respective residences (in the form set forth in Schedule "A " of this chapter, or to the like effect), and dental titles, diplomas and qualifications conferred by any college or body, with the dates thereof of all persons appearing on the register as existing on the first day of August in such year, and such register shall be called " The Dental Register," and a copy of such register for the time being, purporting to be so printed and published, as aforesaid, shall be prima facie evi- dence in all courts, and before all Justices of the Peace and others, that the persons therein specified are registered ac- cording to the provisions of this chapter, and the absence of the name of any person from such copy shall be 'prima facie evidence that such person is not registered according to the provisions of this chapter; 'provided always, that, in the case of any person whose name does not appear in such copy, a certified copy, under the hand of the Registrar of the board, of the entry of the name of such person on the register, shall be evidence that such person is registered under the provi- sions of this chapter. Sec, 9. The books and accounts of the board shall at all times be open to the examination of any practitioner, duly qualified under this chapter. Sec. 10. The rules and regulations, if any, as to the times and places of the meetings of the board and the mode of sum- moning the same already made by the board, shall remain in force until altered at any subsequent meeting. In the ab- sence of any rule or regulation as to the summoning of future meetings of the board, it shall be lawful for the President thereof to summon the same at such time and place as to him shall seem fit, by circular letter to be mailed to each member ; provided always, that at least ten days' notice of such meet- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 413 ing shall be given. In the event of the absence of the Presi- dent from any meeting, some other member, to be chosen from among the members present, shall act as President. Sec 1 1 . Hereafter no person shall begin or enter upon the study of dentistry in any or all of its several branches, for the purpose of qualifying himself to practice the same in this Province, unless he shall have obtained from the Provincial Dental Board a certificate that he has satisfactorily passed a matriculation or preliminary examination in the subjects specified in Schedule U B" to this chapter. Sec. 12. No candidate shall be admitted to such matricu- lation or preliminary examination, unless he shall have, at least fourteen days previous to such examination, given notice to the Registrar of the board of his intention to present himself for such examination, and transmitted to the Registrar a certificate showing that he has completed his sixteenth year, and shall, before the examination, have paid a fee of ten (10) dollars to the Registrar. Sec 13. Subject to the exceptions hereinafter made, no person shall practice dentistry in all or any of its several branches in Nova Scotia, unless his name shall be registered in the book of registry of the Provincial Dental Board, and unless he shall have received from such board a license to practice. Sec 14. No person shall be entitled to have his name en- tered in the register of the Provincial Dental Board, or to re- ceive a license to practice from such Board, unless he shall satisfy the board that he has passed the matriculation or preliminary examination; and after passing such examination he has followed his studies during a period of not less than three years (12 months of which may be under the direction of one or more regularly qualified dental practitioners) ; that during such three years he has attended at some university, college or incorporated school of dentistry in good standing, courses of lectures, amounting together to not less than twelve months, on general and practical anatomy, physiology, chem- istry, operative dentistry, mechanical dentistry on dental therapeutics ; and that he has attended the clinics, both in 414 APPENDIX. operative and mechanical dentistry in some university or dental college recognized by the board, for a period of not less than two years ; that he has, after examination in the subjects of the course, obtained a degree or diploma from such university, college, or incorporated school of dentistry, or, for want of such degree or diploma, that he has satisfac- torily passed an examination in the various branches herein- before specified, before examiners to be appointed by the Provincial Dental Board ; that he is not less than twenty-one years of age, and that he has paid to the Registrar of the board a fee of twenty (20) dollars ; provided, that the Provin- cial Dental Board shall have power, with the approval of the Dental Association, to make such alterations in the foregoing curriculum as may from time to time be required, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council. Sec. 15. The last preceding section shall not apply to any person in actual practice in the Province of Nova Scotia, pre- vious to the passing of this Act, but such person shall be entitled to be registered and to receive a license to practice under this chapter by payment of five (5) dollars ; and, notwithstanding the provisions of such section, any person, upon producing to the Provincial Dental Board conclusive evidence that he has passed a matriculation or preliminary examination, such as is required by this chapter for persons beginning their dental studies in Nova Scotia ; that he has, before graduating or taking a diploma, studied for at least three years in the man- ner provided in section 14 of this chapter, or pursued what the board shall deem an equivalent course of study, and has passed a final examination in the subjects of such course, or, for want of any such requisitions, any one who may have commenced their studies before the passage of this Act, and shall have fulfilled such conditions as the board may determ- ine ; and shall pay a fee of twenty (20) dollars, shall be en- titled to be registered and to receive a license to practice. Sec. 16. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this chapter contained, any person who shall have commenced his dental studies before the passage of this Act, although he may not have passed a preliminary or matriculation examina- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 415 tion required by this Act, but has otherwise complied with the requisites of this chapter, shall be entitled to an exami- nation by the board. Sec. 17. All acts of the board shall be decided by a majority of the members present. At all meetings the Presi- dent for the time being shall have a casting vote only. Sec 18. All moneys forming part of the funds of the board shall be paid to the Treasurer, and shall be applied to carrying this chapter into execution. Sec 19. It shall be the duty of the Registrar to keep his register correct in accordance with the provisions of this chap- ter, and the rules, orders and regulations of the Provincial Den- tal Board, and to erase the name of all registered persons who shall have died, left the Province without any intention of returning, or cease to practice for a period of five years ; and he shall, from time to time, make the necessary alterations in the address or qualifications of the persons registered under this chapter ; provided always, that the name of any person erased from the register shall be restored by order of the board, upon sufficient cause duly shown to that effect. Sec 20. Any person residing in the Province, entitled to practice at the passage of this Act, must be registered under this chapter within sixty days after the passage of this Act, and any one who shall neglect or omit to be so registered shall not be entitled to any of the rights or privileges conferred by the provisions of this chapter so long as such neglect or omission shall continue. Sec 21. No qualification shall be entered on the register, either on the first registration or by way of addition to a reg- istered name, unless the Registrar shall be satisfied, by the proper evidence, that the person is entitled to it ; and any ap- peal from the decision of the Registrar may be decided by the board ; and any entry which shall be proven to the satisfaction of the board to have been fraudulently or incorrectly made, may be erased from the register by order, in writing, of the board. Sec 22. Any dental practitioner who shall, after due in- quiry, be judged by the board to have been guilty of infamous 416 APPENDIX. conduct in any professional respect, shall thereby forfeit his right to registration ; and his name shall, if registered by the direction of the Provincial Dental Board, be erased from the register. Sec. 23. Every person registered under this chapter, who may have obtained any degree or qualification other than the qualification in respect of which he may have been registered, shall be entitled to have such degree or additional qualifica- tion inserted in the register, in substitution for or in addi- tion to the qualification previously registered, on the payment of such fee as the board may appoint. Sec. 24. Any person who shall be registered under the provisions of this chapter, shall be entitled to practice dentistry or dental surgery, or any of them, as the case may be, in Nova Scotia, and to demand and recover in any court of law rea- sonable charges for professional aid and advice, and the cost of any medicinal, dental or surgical appliances rendered or supplied by him to his patients. Sec. 25. No person shall be entitled to recover any charge in any court of law for any professional advice or attendance, or for the performance of any operation appertaining to the practice of dentistry or dental surgery, or for any surgical or dental appliances which he shall have supplied, unless he shall prove, upon trial, that he is registered under this chapter ; pro- vided always, t\\&t this clause is not intended to interfere with the practice of regularly qualified medical practitioners, or to interfere with the legitimate business of qualified druggists or chemists. Sec 26. The words, " legally qualified dental practi- tioner," or, " duly qualified dental practitioner," or any other words importing a person recognized by law as a dental practitioner or member of the dental profession, when used in any Act of the Legislature, or legal or public document, shall be construed to mean a person registered under this chapter. Sec 27. If any person not registered or licensed under the provisions of this chapter practices dentistry or dental surgery for hire, gain, or hope of reward ; or willfully or DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 417 falsely pretends to be a practitioner of dentistry or dental surgery ; or takes or uses any name, title, addition or description, implying, or calculated to lead people to infer that he is registered under this chapter ; or professes, by public adver- tisement, card, circular, sign, or otherwise, to practice den- tistry or dental surgery ; or to give advice therein, or in any wise to lead people to infer that he is qualified to practice dentistry or dental surgery in this Province, he shall forfeit and pay the sum of twenty (20) dollars for each day that he so practices, or leads people to infer that he is practicing. Sec. 28. Any sum forfeited under the next preceding section shall be recoverable, with costs, and may be. sued for and recovered in the same manner as a private debt, by the Provincial Dental Board, or any registered dental practitioner, in any of the courts of the Province having jurisdiction in actions of assumpsit to the extent of eighty (80) dollars and upwards; and, being recovered, shall belong to the board, for the use thereof under this chapter ; provided, that when the information leading to such recovery shall have been given by any person unconnected with the dental profession, such person shall be entitled to receive one-half the sum re- covered. Sec 29. Upon the trial of such cause, the burden of proof as to the license or right of the defendant to practice dentistry or dental surgery in Nova Scotia, shall be upon the defendant. Sec. 30. If the Registrar makes or causes to be made, any willful falsification in any matters relating to the register, he shall forfeit a sum of not less than one hundred (100) dollars, to be recovered as hereinbefore provided as to persons prac- ticing illegally. Sec 31. If any person shall willfully procure or attempt to procure himself to be registered under this chapter by making or producing, or causing to be made or produced, any false or fraudulent representation or declaration, either verb- ally or in writing, any such person so doing, and any person knowingly aiding and assisting him therein, shall forfeit and 418 APPENDIX. pay a sum of not less than one hundred (100) dollars, to be recovered as a private debt as hereinbefore provided. Sec. 32. No suit shall be commenced under this chapter after one year from the date of the offense or cause of action. Sec 33. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent any person from giving necessary aid to any one in urgent need of it ; -provided, that such aid or attendance is not given for hire or gain, nor the giving of it made a business or way of gaining a livelihood by such person. Sec. 34. The Provincial Dental Board shall hold a meet- ing every year, at which annual meeting they shall have power to appoint examiners, fix time of examinations, and transact all business arising out of this chapter, and any such meeting may be continued by adjournment from day to day until the business before the board be finished ; but no such meeting shall be so continued by adjournment beyond the Saturday of the week in which the sitting commences. The board shall also have power, and it shall be their duty, to hold such other meetings as may be necessary, at which meet- ings they shall have the powers and duties herein conferred and imposed upon the board at the annual meeting. Sec 35. The privileges and exemptions conferred upon physicians and surgeons by the laws of this Province are hereby granted to licensed dentists. This Act to come in force on the day of its sanction. SCHEDULE " A." Name. Age. Residence. Qualification. A. B. 22 Halifax. D.D.S.,Univ. of Penm CD. 30 Windsor, Hants Co. D.M.D.,Harv'd Univ. SCHEDULE "B." Standard of matriculation or preliminary examination established under this chapter : Compulsory. — English language, including grammar, composition and writing, and decimal fractions and the extraction of the square root. Algebra, to the end of simple equations. Geometry, first three books of Euclid. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 419 1 Latin, one book translation and grammar. Elementary me- chanics of solids and fluids. And one of the following optional subjects : History of England, with questions in modern geography, French trans- lation, one Greek book, History of Nova Scotia, History of the Dominion of Canada. ONTAKIO. Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legisla- tive Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts, as follows: Section 1. — " The Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario," incorporated under the Act passed in the thirty- first year of her Majesty's reign, and chaptered thirty-seven, is continued, and every person who holds a valid and unfor- feited certificate of license to practice dentistry, which has been granted to him by any Board of Directors, duly elected under the said Act, or this Act, shall be a member of the said corporation. (40 V., c. 23, s. 1.) Sec. 2. The Board of Directors of said college shall con- sist of seven members, who shall hold office for two years, and of whom any four shall form a quorum. 2. Any member may at any time resign by letter di- rected to the Secretary, and in the event of such resignation,, or a vacancy occurring by death or otherwise, the remaining members of the board shall elect some fit and proper person from among the licentiates to supply such vacancy. (31 Y. r c. 37, s. 3 ; 35 V., c. 34, s. 1.) Sec. 3. Elections of the Board of Directors shall be held on the third Tuesday in July, in the city of Toronto, in every second year ; and the persons qualified to vote at any such election shall be such persons as have obtained certificates of license under the provisions of the Acts respecting dentistry heretofore in force, or who hereafter obtain certificates of li- cense under the provisions of this Act. (35 V., c. 34, s. 3.) Sec 4. Every board shall hold its first meeting on the day following the election of such board, at noon, at such 420 APPENDIX. place in the city of Toronto as may, from time to time, be fixed by the board. (35 V., c. 34, s. 2.) Sec. 5. The said board shall, at its first meeting, elect from among its members a President, Treasurer, Secretary, and Registrar, and such other officers as may be necessary to the working of this Act and the rules and regulations of said board ; and the said board shall, from time to time, in the event of the President being absent, from any cause whatever, elect from among its members, a person to preside at its meet- ings, who shall have the same powers and exercise the same functions as the President. (31 V., c. 37, s. 7.) Sec. 6. There shall be allowed and paid to each of the members of the board such fees for attendance (in no case to exceed five dollars per day) and such reasonable traveling ex- penses as may, from time to time, be allowed by the board. (31 V., c. 37, s. 8.) Sec 7. All moneys forming part of the fund of said board shall be paid to the Treasurer, and shall be applied to the carrying of this Act into execution. (31 V., c. 37, s. 9.) Sec 8. The said board shall have power and authority to make arrangements for the establishment of a School of Dentistry in the city of Toronto. (35 V., c. 34, s. 10.) Sec. 9. The said board shall have power and authority to appoint one or more examiners for the matriculation or preliminary examination of all students entering the profes- sion. Such examination shall be passed prior to entering into articles of indenture with a licentiate of dentistry, and the commencement of study shall date from the signing of said articles. (35 V., c 34, s. 4.) Sec 1 0. The said board shall also have power and author- ity to fix and determine, from time to time, a curriculum of studies to be pursued by students, and to fix and determine the period for which every student shall be articled, and em- ployed under some duly licensed practitioner, and the exam- ination necessary to be passed before said board, and the fees to be paid into the hands of the Treasurer of said board, before receiving a certificate of license to practice the profes- sion of dentistry. (35 V., c. 34, s. 4.) DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 421 Sec. 11. The Board of Directors of said college shall also have authority to examine candidates and grant certifi- cates of license to practice dental surgery in this Province. (31 V., c. 37, ss. Land 2.) Sec 12. With the view to encourage the attainment of a higher standard of education among licentiates of the said college, the board may by by-law provide that any licentiate of dentistry, being a member of said college of not less than five years' standing, shall receive the title of " Master of Dental Surgery " of said college, upon passing such exami- nations and complying with such regulations as the said Board of Directors may, from time to time, prescribe. (40 V., c. 23, s. 10.) Sec. 13. The said board shall, from time to time, make such rules and regulations and by-laws as may be necessary for the proper and better guidance, government and regula- tion of the said board, and said profession of dentistry, and the carrying out of this Act ; which said rules, regulations and by-laws shall be published for two consecutive weeks in the Ontario Gazette. 2. Any or all of such rules, regulations and by-laws shall be liable to be cancelled and annulled by order of the Lieu- tenant-Governor of this Province. (31 V., c. 37, s. 13 ; 35 V., c. 34, s. 7.) Sec 14. All persons being British subjects, by birth or naturalization, who were engaged on the fourth day of March, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, in the practice of the profession of dentistry, or who, not having been resi- dents of Ontario, have had three years' experience in the practice of dentistry, shall be entitled to a certificate of " Li- centiate of Dental Surgery," upon their furnishing to the said board satisfactory proof of their having been so engaged, and upon passing the required examination, and upon payment of the fees authorized and fixed by the said board (for the pay- ment of which the Treasurer's receipt shall be sufficient evi- dence), and all persons being British subjects, by birth or naturalization, who were constantly engaged for five years and upwards in established office practice, next preceding the 422 APPENDIX. s;iid fourth day of March, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, in the practice of the profession of dentistry in the Province of Ontario, shall, upon such proof us aforesaid, and upon the payment of such fees as aforesaid, be entitled to such certificate without passing any examination. (31 V., f Connecticut^ in general assembly convened, That the Governor shall appoint, on or before the first day of July, 1893, and biennially thereafter, five persons to be known as Dental Commissioners, who shall hold their respective offices for two years from the first day of July in the year of their respective appointments, and until their successors shall have been appointed and qualified. Sec. 2. No person shall be appointed a Dental Com- missioner who shall not have been, for at least ten years previous to such appointment, a practitioner in dentistry in this State and in good standing in said profession. Sec. 3. Said commissioners shall appoint one of their num- ber to be their official recorder, whose duty it shall be to keep a record of the official proceedings of said commissioners, and copies of said record certified by him shall be legal evidence. Sec. 4. On the request of said commissioners the comp- troller shall provide a suitable place in the capitol at Hart- ford for all meetings of said commissioners. Sec. 5. Said commissioners shall meet in May of each 3'ear, and at such other times as they shall designate, for the purpose of attending to their duties as prescribed by this Act. Sec. 6. Said commissioners shall give due notice of every meeting to be held by them pursuant to the provisions of this Act, by advertising the place of their meetings, for two weeks successively, in two of the daily newspapers published in said Hartford, and before the date of said meetings. Sec. 7. Said commissioners may make such rules of procedure for the regulation of all matters of application and hearing before them as they may think advisable. Sec. 8. No person, unless he has already commenced the practice of dentistry in this State before the passage and approval of this Act, and shall be engaged in said practice at the said time, shall engage in such practice in any town in this State, unless such person shall have first obtained from said commissioners a license therefor. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. IX Sec. 9. All applications for such license shall be in writing and signed by the applicant, and no license shall issue to any person unless he shall have received a diploma or other sufficient certificate of honorable graduation from some reputable dental college having a department in den- tistry,* and duly recognized by the laws of the State or States wherein the same is situated, or unless he shall have spent as a pupil or assistant at least three years under the instruction and direction of some reputable dentist, or unless he shall have had at least three years' continuous practice as a dentist, which facts must be shown to said commissioners by sufficient evidence. Sec 10. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as preventing any practicing physician or surgeon from the performance of any operation in dentistry on any patient under his charge. Nor shall any lawfully practicing dentist be prohibited hereby from availing himself of the services of any pupil, student, or assistant employed by him and under his immediate supervision. Sec. 11. Every applicant for a license shall be examined by said commissioners, as to his professional knowledge and skill, before such license shall be granted, and they may refuse to grant a license where they are satisfied that the applicant is unfit or incompetent ; they may for good and legal cause revoke any license that has been granted, and may prohibit any dentist in lawful practice from further practice, on satisfactory proof that such dentist has become unfit or incompetent therefor. Sec 12. Cruelty, incapacity, unskilfulness, gross negli- gence, indecent conduct toward patients, or any such pro- fessional misbehavior as shows unfitness on the part of the dentist, shall be sufficient cause for the revocation of a license, or prohibition to practice as above provided ; and whenever complaint shall be made to any of said commissioners against any dentist practicing in this State, said commissioners shall •Error.— The law, a« originally drafted, reads: "... reputable dental college or medical college having u dci>artment in dentistry." It will be changed at the next on ' nacted by th Legislative Assembly of the Territory of New Mexico: That it shall be unlawful for any person who is not at the time of the passage of this Act engaged in the practice of dentistry in the Territory of Xew Mexico to commence such practice, unless such person shall have received a certificate from the duly authorized Board of Dental Examiners hereinafter provided for. Sec. 2. A Board of Dental Examiners, to consist of five practicing dentists within the Territory of Xew Mexico, is hereby created, whose duty it shall he to carry out the pur- poses and enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of said hoard shall be appointed by the Governor. The term for which the members of said board shall hold their offices shall be four years, and until their successors shall be appointed. In case of a vacancy occurring in the membership of said board such vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the Governor. Sec 3. The said board shall, within sixty days after their appointment, meet at the capitol of the Territory of Xew Mexico, and organize by electing one of its members President and one Secretary thereof. Said board shall meet at least once in each year thereafter, and as often and at such times and places as it may deem proper and necessary. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quo- rum for the transaction of business. Sec 4. It shall be the duty of every person who at the time of the passage of this Act is engaged in the practice of dentistry in the Territory of Xew Mexico, within six months from the date of the passage of this Act, to cause his or her written application to be tiled with the Secretary of said board for a certificate to continue in the practice of dentistry within said Territory; and all persons whom the board may find to have been engaged in the practice of dentistry within the Territory of Xew Mexico for the period of one year next preceding the passage of this Act shall be entitled to receive a certificate from said Board of Examiners without further examination. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XV Sec. 5. No person whose name is not registered on the books of said board as a regular practitioner of dentistry, within the time prescribed in the next preceding section, shall be permitted to practice dentistry within the Territory of New Mexico until such person shall have been duly examined hy said board and regularly licensed in accord- ance with the provisions of this Act; provided, farther, that all persons presenting a diploma from a college recog- nized as reputable by the National Association of Dental Examiners and paying the sum of five dollars to the Secre- tary of the board shall be entitled to receive a certificate without further examination. Sec 6. In order to provide the means for carrying out and enforcing the provisions of this Act, said Board of Exam- iners shall charge each person applying for a certificate to continue in the practice of dentistry the sum of five dollars for said certificate, and all persons applyingfor an examination to procure a certificate to commence the practice of den- tistry within the Territory of New Mexico shall pay to the Secretary of said board, before submitting to said exami- nation, the sum of twenty-five dollars. Sec 7. Any person holding a license from said board who shall be charged with immoral or unprofessional con- duct may, if found guilty as charged, upon proper investiga- tion had by said board, have his or her license revoked by said board. Sec 8. All moneys received by the board shall be held by the Secretary thereof as a special fund for paying the nec- essary expenses and for enforcing the provisions of this Act. The Secretary shall give to the board a good and suffi- cient bond, to be approved by said board, and in an amount to be fixed by the board. Sec 9. No part of the salary or other expenses of said board shall be paid out of the Territorial treasury. Sec 10. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the board to make an annual report to the Governor of the Territory, ;it such times as may be directed by the board, and such report shall be Bigned and approved by the President of the board. XVI SUPPLEMENT. Sec. 11. Any person who shall violate any of the pro- visions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof may be fined not less than twenty dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, or he imprisoned in the county jail not less than one month nor more than three months, or by both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court trying said cause. Sec. 12. Any justice of the peace of the county in which such violation was committed shall have jurisdiction in all cases of violations of this Act, and it shall be the duty of the respective county attorneys to prosecute all violations of this Act. Sec 13. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to inter- fere with physicians and surgeons in their practice as such. Sec 14. This Act shall be in force from and after its passage. In effect February 23, 1893. NEW YORK. AMENDMENT. Section 1. The People of the State of New York, repre- sented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows, That no person shall practice dentistry either as principal, agent, assistant or employe in the State of New York, or advertise or hold himself out to the public as so practicing dentistry, who shall not be licensed and registered as prescribed by this Act. Any person who shall practice dentistry, or adver- tise, or hold himself out to the public as practicing dentistry in violation of this section, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon a first conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than fifty dollars ; and for every conviction of said misdemeanor subsequent to the first, the person con- victed shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hun- dred dollars, or imprisonment, or by both fine and imprison- ment. Sec 2. A person only shall be deemed to be licensed to practice dentistry in this State who shall have attained the DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XVII full age of twenty-one years, shall have had properly granted to him or her, either by the Dental Society of the State of New York, or by an incorporated medical or dental school or college, approved by the Dental Society of the State of New York, a proper diploma conferring a recognized medi- cal or dental degree, and shall have made the registration required by Section 3 of this Act ; provided farther, that no diploma shall be deemed valid within the provisions of this Act if conferred irregularly, through fraud or false represen- tation, or without substantial compliance by the person to whom it may have been granted, or the corporation confer- ring it, with the general statutory requirements of this State as to course and duration of preparatory and professional study, and also with the regulations of said State society and of the corporation conferring the diploma as to study, attend- ance, examination and character, or if conferred by a school or college not recognized by said society as reputable and providing an adequate course of insi ruction and maintaining a proper standard of attainment, character and attendance ; provided, also, that all persons lawfully licensed and registered at the time this Act shall take effect, shall be deemed law- fully licensed and registered hereunder, subject only to the provisions of Section 3 of this Act as to removal of practice. Sec. 3. Every person practicing dentistry in this State, shall register in the office of the Clerk of the County where his place of business is located, and in the office of the Clerk of any County into which he shall remove, or in which he shall "carry on his business, in a book to be prepared and kept by the Clerk for that purpose, his name, age, office and post-office address, legal authority for practicing dentistry in this State, and the date of such registration, which he shall be entitled to make only upon presenting to the County Clerk a certificate from the member of the State Board of Censors appointed by the State Dental Society for the judi- cial district in which said county is situated, to the effect that said applicant for registration has received a proper diploma as provided iii Section 2 of this Act, and upon the making by said applicant of an affidavit stating his name, XV111 SUPPLEMENT. age and legal authority to practice dentistry within this State Every such certificate of a Censor shall be filed by the County Clerk receiving it, and every person admitted to registration under the provisions of this Act shall be enti- tled, upon the payment of a fee of fifty cents to the County Clerk, to receive from that official a certified transcript of his registration. All the affidavits made in pursuance of the provisions of this Act shall be preserved in a bound volume by the County Clerk, in whose office they are made; pro- vided, however, that all registrations lawfully made prior to the taking effect of this Act, shall continue to be as valid and of the same effect as when made ; provided, also, that any registration procured by fraud or false statement of any kind shall be deemed null and void; and that the County Clerk, upon the presentation to him of a certified copy of the judgment convicting any person of a violation of the provisions of the dental law, shall note the fact and date of such conviction upon the registration. If any affidavit made pursuant of the provisions of this Act be wilfully false in any material regard, the affiant shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and punishable by imprisonment for not less than two, nor more than ten years. Any person who shall sell or barter, or offer, either orally, in writing or by printed adver- tisement, to sell or barter, or who shall by purchase, barter, fraud, false statements, bribe or promise of bribe, and with. out compliance with all provisions of law, any diploma pur- porting to confer a medical or dental degree, or any certifi- cate, transcript or registration provided to be given under this Act or the statutes regulating the practice of medicine; or who shall substitute on any such diploma, certificate or transcript for the same of the person to whom the same was given or granted, the name of a different person, or shall fraudulently alter such diploma, certificate, transcript or registration in any material regard, and any person who shall use or offer to use any such diploma, certificate or transcript as a license or color of license, or means of ob- taining license or registration as a practitioner of medicine or dentistry, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XIX conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment for not less than six months, or by both fine and imprisonment ; any person who, without a proper diploma conferring the same, shall assume the title of Doctor of Dental Surgery, or Master of Dental Surgery, or shall append to his or her name the letters D.D.S., or the letters M.D.S., or any other letters specially used by any medical or dental college, school, board or society to indicate that the person to whose name they are appended holds a recognized medical or dental degree, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than two hun- dred and fifty dollars, or by imprisonment for not less than three months, or by both fine and imprisonment; all fines and forfeitures of bail imposed and collected in consequence of violations of this Act shall be paid to the Dental Society of the State of New York; provided, that if at the annual meetings of the said society the Treasurer shall report an excess of the sums so paid, over the expenses of the society enforcing this Act, such excess shall be paid over by him to the Treasurer of the State, and become a part of the common school fund ; provided, also, that any such fine or forfeiture im- posed in an action brought by an incorporated county medical society for violation of the provisions of this Act, relating to medical diplomas, shall be paid to said prosecuting society. Sec. 4. Sections 8, 9 and 10, of Chapter 152, of the laws of 1868, shall read respectively as follows : Sec 8. The State Dental Society, organized as afore- said, having already at its first meeting appointed eight Censors, one from each of the said district societies, to con- stitute a State Board of Censors, divided into four classes, to serve one, two, three and four years, respectively, shall at each annual meeting appoint two Censors, to serve each four years, and until their successors shall be chosen, and fill all vacancies that may have occurred by death or otherwise. Each district society shall be entitled to one, and only one, member of said Board of Censors. Said Board of Censors -hall meet at least once in each year, at such time and place XX 3UPPLEMENT. as they shall designate and, being thus met they, or a majority of them, Bhall carefully and impartially examine all persons who are entitled to examination under the provisions of this Act, and who shall present themselves for that pur- pose, and report their opinion in writing to said State Dental Society, and on the recommendation of the said board it shall be the duty of the President aforesaid to issue a diploma to such person or persons, signed by the President, the Secretary and said Censors, and bearing the seal of said society, conferring upon him the degree of " Master of Dental Surgery" (M.D.S.), and it shall not be lawful for any other society, college or corporation to grant to any person the said degree of "Master of Dental Surgery." Sec. 9. The State Dental Society shall have the power to determine what medical and dental colleges maintain a course of education and training adequate in duration and standard to entitle their diplomas to be approved and certi lied by the Censors, as qualifying their holders to be licensed to practice dentistry in this State, and so registered. Said society shall admit to its examinations, provided for in Sec- tion 8 of this Act, only the following classes of persons, upon satisfactory proof of good moral character : First. All duly licensed and registered dentists of this State. Second. All persons coming from other States or coun- tries who . shall present to said society satisfactory proof of having been lawfully engaged in the practice of dentistry without the State for the term of six years. Third. All such persons as shall have studied dentistry for a term of four years in the office or offices of some repu- table and duly licensed and registered dentist or dentists of this State, and shall have in other respects conformed to the regulations governing such examinations, which regulations, not inconsistent with this Act, said society may make and must publish at least twice in each calendar year in a leading dental journal. Every person actually engaged at the time this Act takes effect in studying dentistry under private preceptorship, as aforesaid, must, within three months DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXI from the passage of this Act, file with the Secretary of the State Dental Society, a statement of his or her age, present address, commencement of terms of study, and the name and address of his or her preceptors, who shall also certify that said statement, so far as it relates to himself, is true. Any person beginning such a course of study after the Act takes effect shall file a similar certificate, and until it shall be made, the term of four years required by the statute shall not be deemed to be commenced. !N"o such student shall be eligible for examination for its diploma by said society, who shall not have filed one of said certificates, all of which shall be pre- served, bound and indexed by said Secretary. Any wilfully false statement in any such certificates shall preclude the person making it from the privilege of examination. The Censor for each judicial district of said society shall be em- powered to examine any applicant for the examination or certification of diploma granted under this Act, as to his or her age, identity, course of study, and if a diploma is offered for certification, as to the time, place and circumstance of its conferment. In so doing, the Censors are empowered to reduce the applicant's statements to the form of an affidavit, and administer the usual oath in respect thereto, taken by affiants as to the truth of depositions in legal proceedings. Sec. 10. Every student, before filing the certificate called for by this Act, shall pay to the Secretary of the said State Society a fee of five dollars. Every applicant for a Censor's certificate that his or her diploma is approved by said society as entitling the holder to registration, shall pay to the Secretary of said society, at the time of his application, a fee of ten dollars. Every applicant for examination by the Censors of said eociety shall pay to the said Secretary, at the time of his application, a fee of thirty dollars. Xone of these fees shall be returned to the applicant, but shall be paid into the treasury of said society. J3ut any applicant, for examination before said Censors, who may have failed to obtain his diploma, may, for good cause shown, be allowed thereafter to present himself for examination without pay- ment of a further fee. XXI l -I PPLEMENT. Sec. 5. Nothing- in this Act shall be construed to punish any person for performing merely mechanical work upon inert matter in a dental office or laboratory; or a registered student, who, for purposes of clinical instruction, in the presence and under the immediate supervision of his pre- ceptor, may assist the latter in dental operation, providing that such student Bhall not, under the pretense of so assisting a ]» receptor, practice dentistry by performing operations inde- pendently; or a duly licensed and registered physician and surgeon for his lawful acts in the practice of his profession. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to suspend or discon- tinue any prosecution already commenced under the laws in force prior to the taking effect of this Act, and any violation of the provisions of this Act forbidding the practice of den- tistry without lawful authority, committed by a person who shall have been previously convicted under the laws of which this Act is a codification, in any court within this State, of the misdemeanor of practicing dentistry without license or registration, shall be deemed a second offense within the meaning of this Act; such laws being to that extent kept in force. Sec. 6. The following Acts are hereby repealed: Chap- ters 331 of the Laws of 1870, 540 of the Laws of 1ST'.', 376 of the Laws of 1881, 280 of the Laws of 1888, and 337 of the Laws of 1889. Sec. 7. This Act shall take effect immediately. Approved May 12, 1892. NEW ZEALAND. An Act to amend the Acts relating to Dentists. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows, The short title of this Act is " The Dent; Act, Amendment Act, 1891." Sec. 2. Whenever any person is refused registration as a colonial dentist, or as a foreign dentist, under the circum- stances mentioned in Section. 9 of " The Dentists' Act, 1880," DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. xxiii the Board of Examiners shall, on the request of such person, appoint a time and place for his examination under the said Act and the by daws or regulations then in force thereunder, and such examination shall take place within thirty days. And if such person shall duly pass such examination in dentistry, he shall be entitled to a certificate and to be regis- tered under the said Act, and all the provisions of the said Act, so far as applicable, shall extend and apply to the case herein provided for accordingly. Sec. 3. " The Dentists' Act, 1880, Amendment Act, 1881," is hereby amended as follows, to wit : In line six of Subsection 1 of Section 3 thereof, the words " within one year " are hereby repealed. Sec. 4. Wherever the word "Senate" is used in "The Dentists' Act, 1880," or "The Dentists' Act, 1880, Amend- ment Aet, 1881," the words " Governor in Council " shall be read and substituted in lieu thereof ; and it is further pro- vided that the Governor in Council shall appoint a Board of Examiners for each of the cities of Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin, for the purpose of conducting examinations and granting certificates under the Dentists' Act and this Act. September 21, 1891. OHIO. To Amend Sections 4-^4- an d 6,991 of the Revised Statutes of Ohio. Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Shite of Ohio, That Sections 4,404 and 6,991 of the revised statutes of Ohio be so amended as to read as follows : Six. 4,404. From and after July 4th, 1892, it shall be unlawful for any person to practice dentistry in this State, unless such person shall have first obtained a certificate of qualification issued by the State Board of Dental Examiners of this State, as hereinafter provided : ]. A Board of Dental Examiners, to consist of five prac- ticing d en tists, resident in this State, is hereby created, whose xxiv -i PPLEMEKT. duty it shall be to carry out the purposes and to enforce the provisions of this Act. The members of the firsl Board of Dental Examiners, under the provisions of this Act, shall be appointed by the Governor of the State on or before the first day of May. 1892. The term for which members of said board shall be appointed shall be three years, and until then- successors shall be duly appointed and qualified, and no per- bod shall be appointed for or serve to exceed two terms in succession. All vacancies in said hoard, caused by expiration of term, or otherwise, shall be filled by the appointment of the Governor of the State. 2. Said board shall have power to make reasonable rule- and regulations for the purpose of carrying out and enforcing the provisions of this Act. It shall choose one of its members President, and one Secretary: and shall hold two regular meetings in the city of Columbus, on the last Tuesday of May and November in each year, and at such other times as may be deemed necessary by said board. A majority of said board shall at all times constitute a quorum thereof for the transaction of business, hut a less number may adjourn from time to time. The board shall keep full minutes of all its proceedings, and a full register of all persons licensed and certified as dentists by said board, which shall be public records, and at all reasonable times open to inspection as such. A transcript of any of the entries in such minutes and reg- ister, certified by the Secretary, under the seal of said board, shall, at all times and places, be competent evidence of the facts therein stated. The members of the board shall have power to administer oaths, and the board shall have power to hear testimony- in all matters relating to the duties im- posed upon it by law. 3. Any and all persons who shall desire to practice den- tistry in this State after July 4th, 1892, except such pers. as as have been regularly, since July 4th, 1889, engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, or who may hold, or may hereafter obtain diplomas from any reputable dental college, shall file application in writing with the Secretary of said Board of Dental Examiners for examination and license, and DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXV at the time of making such application shall pay to the Secretary of said board a fee of ten dollars; and each appli- cant shall present himself before said board at its first regular meeting, after filing his application for examination by said board. The examination shall be of an elementary and prac- tical character, but sufficiently thorough to test the fitness of the applicant to practice dentistry. The examination ma}' be written, or oral, or both, at the option of the board, and shall include the following subjects, to wit: Anatomy, physi- ology, chemistry, materia medica, therapeutics, metallurgy, histology, pathology, and operative, mechanical and surgical dentistry. All persons successfully passing such examina- tions, or who may legally hold diplomas from any reputable college of the United States, or an}' foreign country, or who may have been regularly, since July 4th, 1889, engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, of good moral character, shall be registered and licensed by said board as dentists, and shall receive a certificate of such registration and license duly authenticated by the seal and signature of the President and Secretary of said board ; and in no case shall the examination fee be refunded. 4. Every person receiving such a certificate of registra- tion and license as dentist shall, before engaging in the prac- tice of dentistry in this State, place and retain in place while engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, such certifi- cate of registration and license in a conspicuous position at his place of business, in such a manner as to be easily seen and read. 5. Every person who may legally hold a diploma from any reputable dental college in the United States, or any foreign country, or who has been regularly, since July 4th, 1889, engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State, shall, upon application and payment of a fee of two dollars, to the ictary of said Board of Dental Examiners, and producing -ati -factory and reasonable proof of the fact that he holds Buch diploma, or has been so engaged in the practice of den- tistry in this State since July 4th, 1889, receive a certificate of registration and license i<> practice dentistry in this State. Every applicant for license to practice dentistry under the XXVI SUPPLEMENT. provisions of this section shall, in person, by mail or otherwise, produce for the inspection of the Board of Dental Examiners his diploma, or the affidavits of himself and two freeholders, stating that he has been regularly engaged in the practiceof dentistry in this State, and at what place or places since July 4th, 1889; and if the Board of Dental Examiners Bhall, upon inspection thereof, find that the applicant is legally qualified under the provisions of this Act to practice dentistry in This State, the Secretary shall, without unnecessary delay, deliver to the applicant a certificate of registration and license to practice dentistry in this State, or forward the same, without expense to the board, in such manner as the applicant may direct. The certificate of the Secretary of said Board of Dental Examiners, under the seal of said board, stating that any person is, or is not, a registered and licensed dentist, shall be prima facie evidence that such person is, or is not, entitled to practice dentistry in this State. Sec. 6,991. All persons shall be said to be practicing den- tistry within the meaning of this Act, who shall, for a fee, salary, or other reward paid, or to be paid, either to himself or to another person, perform dental operations of any kind, treat disease or leisons of human teeth or jaws, or attempt to correct malpositions thereof. But nothing contained in this Act shall be taken to apply to acts of bona fide students of dentistry done in the pursuit of clinical advantages under the direct supervision of a preceptor who is a licensed dentist in this State, or while in attendance upon a regular course of study in a reputable dental college, or to the acts of legally qualified physicians and surgeons. 1. Out of the funds coming into the possession of the board as above specified, the members of said board may each receive a compensation in the sum of five dollars for each day actually engaged in the duties of their office as such Exam- iners ; and a mileage of three cents per mile for all distances necessarily traveled in going to and coming from the meetings of the board. Said expenses shall be paid from the fees and assessments received by the board under the provisions of this Act, and no part of the salary or other expenses of the board DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXY11 Bhall ever be paid out of the State treasury. All moneys received in excess of the said per diem allowance and mileage, as above provided for, shall be held by the Secretary of said board as a special fund for other expenses of said board and carrying out provisions of this Act, he giving such bond as the board shall from time to time direct. 2. Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon convic- tion thereof may be fined not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, or be confined not less than ten days nor more than one month in the county jail, or both. All fines thus received shall be paid into the common school fund of the county in which such conviction takes place. It is hereby made the duty of the prosecuting attor- ney of each county in the State to prosecute every case to final judgment, whenever his attention shall be called to a violation of the provisions of this Act. 3. Any person who shall knowingly or falsely claim or pretend to have or hold a certificate of registration, or who shall falsely and with intent to deceive the public, claim or pre- tend tot>e a registered or licensed dentist, not bein^ such a reg;- istered or licensed dentist, shall be deemed guilty of a misde- meanor, and shall be liable to the penalties provided in this Act. 4. The Board of Examiners created by this amended Act may sue or be sued, and in all actions brought by or against it, it shall be made a party, under the name of the Board of Dental Examiners of the State of Ohio, and no suit shall abate by reason of any change in the membership of said board. Sec 2. Said original Sections 4,404 and 6,991, to which this is amendatory are hereby repealed. Sec. 3. This Act shall take effect, and be in force, from and after its passage. OHIO DENTAL LAW. Attorney-General Richards has made the following decision regarding the construction of the new law governing the practice of dentistry: XXVlll SUPPLEMENT. "The words, ' regularly since July 4tb, l^ s '.'. engaged in the practice of dentistry in this State,' mean Bteadily or continuously engaged in Buch practice, and the practice of dentistry does uot include, I take it, a tuna of pupilage. Then- is a distinction between the study and the practice of dentistry, just as there is between the study and practice of law, or the study and practice of medicine. A person can- not be said to be engaged in the practice of dentistry who is simply a pupil, and is not qualified to do and does not do the work of a dentist on his own responsibility. The Act itself (Section 6,901) gives a good definition of what constitutes the practice of dentistry. A person who has been engaged in the practice of dentistry, as above indicated, since the 4th of July, 18*9, whether of age when he began the practice or not, came within the class of those entitled to a certificate on making the necessary proof and paying the prescribed fee. "A graduate of medicine must obtain the certificate of your board before engaging in the practice of dentistry. The exemption set out in Section 6,991 applies to dental operations performed by legally qualified physicians and surgeons in connection with their practice of surgery and medicine. The Act recos-nizes a distinction between such operations incidental to the practice of medicine and surgery, and the regular practice of dentistry requiring a certificate from your board. "A physician who, in the practice of his profession, performed occasional dental operations, cannot be said to have been regularly engaged in the practice of dentistry, and hence is not entitled to a certificate to practice dentistry under the time exemption of the Act. "The provision of Section 6,991, 'but nothing in this Act shall be taken to apply to acts of bona fide students of dentistry, done in pursuits of clinical advantages, under the direct supervision of a preceptor, who is a licensed dentist in this State,' does not authorize such student to be sent out by his preceptor to perform dental operations beyond his direct and personal supervision. The purport of the law is to protect the public against the work of those unskilled in DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXIX dentistry, by requiring proof of skill before power to practice dentistry is acquired. It permits, however, the performance of dental operations by students, so they may acquire the skill which in time, on the certificate of your board, will admit them to practice, provided the skill requisite for the protection of the patient is present in the person of the licensed dentist overseeing the work." ONTARIO. An Act to amend the Act respecting Dentistry in Ontario. Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legisla- tive Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts as follows: Section 1. Section 3 of the Act respecting dentistry is repealed, and the following inserted in lieu thereof: Sec. 3. There shall be a Board of Directors of the said Royal College of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario, to be consti- tuted in the manner hereinafter provided for in this Act, and referred to in this Act as the " Board." The board shall consist of eight members, all of whom shall be members of the said Royal College of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario, who shall hold office for two years, and of whom any four shall form a quorum. One member of the board shall be elected from each of the electoral districts, mentioned in schedule A to this Act, by the members of the college resident in such district ; and each member of the board shall be an elector in the electoral district he represents, and shall not be a member of the faculty of the school of dentistry constituted under Section 9 of the said Act respecting dentistry. When a vacancy occurs in the representation of the faculty, such vacancy shall be filled by the faculty. One member of the board Bhall be elected by and from the faculty of the school of dentistry constituted under Sec- tion '.• of the -;ii of the said Act is repealed, and the following substituted therefor: Every board shall at its first meeting elect a President, Treasurer and Registrar, and shall appoint a Secretary, who shall reside in the city of Toronto, and such other officers as the board may consider necessary. The Treasurer and Sec- retary shall receive such remuneration for their services as the board may decide. Sec. 5. Section 11 of the said Act is amended by strik- ing out the words "before the board" and adding to the section the words : " and to fix and determine the conditions upon which dentists residing elewhere than in Ontario, and students and graduates from other dental colleges may be admitted to membership in the Royal College, of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario." Sec 6. Each member of the college engaged in the practice of dentistry in the Province of Ontario shall pay to the Treasurer, or to any person deputed by the Treasurer, to receive the same on or before the first day of November of each year, such annual fee as may be determind by by-laws of the board, not less than one dollar nor more than three dollars toward the general expenses of the college, and such fee shall be recoverable with costs by suit in the name of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario, in the Division Court having jurisdiction where the member so in default resides, and such member shall not be entitled to recover in any court for any services rendered in the practice of dentistry while so in default ; but no funds collected under this section shall be disbursed otherwise than for the expenses o It 1 ) e board and the enforcement of the penal clauses of thi s Act. SCHEDULE "A." (Section 2.) Electoral District No. 1 shall be composed of the follow- ' ing counties: Addington, Carleton, D midas, Frontenac, xxxii 81 PPLEMENT. Glengarry, Lenark, Leeds, Lennox, Prescott, Russell, Ren- frew, Rtormont, < Irenville. Electoral Districl X<>. 2 shall consisl of the following counties: Algoma, Durham, Bastings, NTipissing, North- umberland, lyiuskoka, < )ntario, Prince Edward, Parry Sound, Petersboro, Victoria, York, except Toronto. Electoral District No. 3 shall consist of the city of Toronto. Electoral District No. 4 shall consist of the following counties: Ilalton, Dufferin, Lincoln, Peel, Simcoc, Went- wortli, Welland. Electoral District No. 5 shall consist of the following counties: Brant, Elgin, Haldimand, Norfolk, Oxford, Wa- terloo. Electoral District No. G shall consist of the following counties: Grey, Bruce, Huron, Wellington. Electoral District No. 7 shall consist of the following counties : Essex, Kent, Lambton, Middlesex, Perth. SCHEDULE " B." {Section 2.) Election 18 Electoral District No. I, of the of in the county of member of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario, do hereby de- clare: 1. That the signature affixed hereto is my proper hand- writing. 2. That I am a voter in the Electoral District No. , and that I vote for of the of in the county of a member of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons, of Ontario, and an elector in said electoral district, to be a member of the Board of Directors of the college for the said district. 3. That I have not in this election signed any other voting paper, and that this voting paper was executed on the day of the date thereof. Witness my hand this day of A. D. 18 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXXlli SUPPLEMENT TO DENTAL LAW OF PENNSYLVANIA. An Act nailing it unlawful for any person to engage in the practice or assume the title of Doctor of Dental Surgery, or advertise himself as a Doctor of Dental Surgery, without first procuring a Diploma from a reputable institution recognized by the National Board of Dental Examiners, and defining who shall be understood as practicing Den- tistry, and authorizing State Board of Dented Examiners to charge and collect certain fees. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep- resentatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That from and after the passage of this Act it shall not he lawful for any person in the State of Pennsylvania to engage in the practice of dentistry or assume the title of doctor of dental surgery, or advertise himself or herself as a doctor of dental surgery, without first having graduated and receiving a diploma conferring the degree of doctor of dental surgery or other recognized dental degree from a reputable institution recognized as of good repute by the National Board of Dental Examiners and legally competent to confer the same, and having said diploma indorsed by the State Board of Dental Examiners and recorded according to requirement of the Act of June 20th, 1883 ; provided, that physicians and surgeons may in the regular practice of their profession extract teeth for the relief of pain or make appli- cations for such purpose. Sec 2. Every person shall be understood as practicing dentistry within the meaning of this Act who shall for fee, salary or other reward, either to himself or another person, operate upon human teeth, furnish artificial substitutes, or perform those acts as assistant or principal usually under- stood as and called dental operations; provided, that bona fide Students of dentistry, under the immediate supervision of a preceptor who is in lawful practice, may assist him in operations during the usual term of pupilage, not to xxxiv SUPPLEMENT. exceed two and one-halt' years from the date of commence- ment. Sec. 3. The State Board of Dental Examiners is hereby authorized to collect a fee of not less than one dollar for each indorsement of a diploma required by the Act of June 20th, 1883; said amount to be paid by the holder of diploma as a prerequisite to indorsement. In all eases the members of the State Dental Examining Board shall, by written or oral examination or otherwise, satisfy themselves as to the fitness and qualifications of the holder of a diploma before indorsement is made, and in their discretion refuse to indorse the diploma of an applicant who is found incompetent. When an examination is' considered necessary, the said board is authorized to collect from the applicant a fee of five dollars, which sum shall be refunded in case his diploma is not indorsed. Sec. 4. In case a graduate of one of the dental schools of this State shall desire and intend to begin the practice of dentistry in a foreign country beyond the bounds of the United States, and shall make affidavit duly certified as to the fact, and shall ask for the indorsement of the State Board of Dental Examiners, then said State Board being satisfied as to the character and rpualifications of the appli- cant and the good repute of the institution issuing said diploma, may indorse the same, and for each such indorse- ment shall collect a fee of not less than ten dollars. Sec. 5. Any violation of the provisions of this Act shall constitute a misdemeanor, and shall subject the party violat- ing it to a penalty of not more than one hundred dollars for each offense. Sec 6. This Act shall not apply to persons who have been engaged in the active practice of dentistry in Pennsyl- vania from the date of the passage of this Act of June 20th, ISS3. Sec. 7. It shall not be L.wful for any Recorder to place upon record any diploma of date later than September 20th, 1883,. unless said diploma has been indorsed and approved DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXXV by the State Board of Dental Examiners or the Secretary of said board. Sec. 8, All Acts or parts of Acts inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed. SWITZERLAND. Lairs regulating the practice of Medicine, Surgery, Dentistry and Pharmacy in the Canton of Geneva. Article 1. No person can exercise in the canton of Geneva the professions of doctor, surgeon, pharmacist, veter- inarian, dentist, or midwife, if he is not authorized by the State Council. The authorization of the State Council will be accorded only upon an examination of qualification, or upon presentation of official titles or diplomas, giving the applicant the right to practice his profession in the country where they were obtained, and on condition that these diplo- mas be recognized as valid by the State Council. Art. 2. The scope, form and mode of examinations for qualifications will be determined by the regulations of the State Council. Art. 3. In case of refusal of such authorization, the decision of the State Council must state the reasons. Art. 4. Doctors, surgeons, pharmacists, veterinarians, dentists, and midwives, exercising legally their professions in the adjacent States, and domiciled in the neighborhood of frontiers, are allowed to practice in the parishes of the cantons near their residences. This privilege may be withdrawn indi- vidually by a justified order of the State Council. Art. 5. A special register of authorizations shall be kept in the Departments of Justice and Police. Art. 6. An abstract of this register shall be delivered by the State Council to all persons authorized to practice the above indicated professions. A list of said persons, with their addresses, shall be ex- hibited in all i\v\\y the General Assembly of Virginia, That Sections 1,769 and 1,772 of the Code of Virginia, and also Sections 1,767 and 1,774 of said code, as amended and re- enacted by an Act entitled "An Act to amend and re-enact Sections 1,767 and 1,774 of Chapter 79, Code of Virginia, relating to the practice of dentistry," be amended and re- enacted so as to read as follows : Section 1,767. From and after the passage of this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the practice of dentistry in the Commonwealth of Virginia, or to assist in the practice of dentistry as either assistant or employe, or to receive license from any commissioner of revenue, unless such person has graduated and received a diploma from the faculty of a reputable institution where this specialty is taught, and chartered under the authority of some one of the United States, recognized as of good repute by the Board of Examiners, duly appointed under the provisions of Section 1,768 of this chapter, and shall have obtained a certificate from said Board of Examiners, as provided in Section 1,769 of said chapter; provided, that persons who held license to practice dentistry in this Com- monwealth on the 28th day of January, 1890, and have DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXXV11 complied with the requirements of Section 1,774, shall be otherwise exempt from the provisions of this section ; and provided farther, that nothing contained in this section shall prevent any authorized physician or surgeon, or other person, from extracting teeth for any one suffering from toothache. Section 1,769. It shall be the duty of this board : First. To meet annually at the time and place of meet- ing of the Virginia State Dental Association, or at such other time or place as the board shall agree upon, to conduct the examination of applicants. They shall also meet for the same purpose at the call of any four members of the board, at such time and place as may be designated by said mem- bers. Thirty days' notice of the meetings shall be given by advertising in at least two of the daily papers published in the State. Second. To grant a certificate of ability to practice den- tistry to all applicants who undergo a satisfactory examina- tion, and receive at least four affirmative votes, which certificates shall be signed by the members of the board, and be stamped with a suitable seal (which they may adopt). Third. To keep a book in which shall be registered the name and qualification (as far as practicable) of every person to whom such certificate is granted. Fourth. Any member of the board, designated by the President thereof, may, upon presentation by any applicant of the evidence of the necessary qualifications to practice dentistry under this chapter, grant a temporary license to practice until the next meeting of the board, and no longer; ■provided, that no such temporary license shall be granted to any person who has been rejected on an examination by the board. All such temporary licenses shall be signed by the Secretary of the Board. SECTION 1,772. Any person who shall, in violation of this chapter, practice dentistry in this State, shall, on con- viction thereof, be fined not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars, and shall not be entitled to any fee for services rendered, and if a fee shall have been paid, the patient may recover back the same. <)n the trial of any XXXV111 81 PPLEMENT. person charged with the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, it shall be incumbent on the defendant to show that he has authority under the law to practice den- tistry in this State, in order to relieve himself from the penalties herein prescribed. Any commissioner of the revenue who shall, in violation of Section 1,767, issue a lieense to any person not authorized to practice dentistry by this chapter, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not less than twenty nor more than fifty dollars, and no license issued by any commissioner, in viola- tion of this chapter, shall be valid. Section 1,774. Every person practicing dentistry in the Commonwealth of Virginia at the time of the passage of this Act, shall register his name and post-office address, together with the name of the college from which he is a graduate, or the length of time he has been practicing in this Commonwealth, with the Board of Examiners before renew- ing his license, and it shall be the duty of the board to issue to each person so registered, a certificate of registration, stamped with the seal of the board, but no fee shall be collected from persons so registering. Eveiy person holding a certificate of qualification or registration from the Board of Examiners at the time of the passage of this Act, shall, within sixty days therefrom, have his certificate recorded in the clerk's office of the county or corporation court of every county or city in which he pro- poses to practice, and if in the city of Richmond, in the office of the Clerk of the Chancery Court of said city, and every person who shall, after the passage of said Act, obtain such certificate from the board, shall have said certi- ficate recorded in the same manner within sixty days after receiving the same, and before receiving a lieense from any commissioner of the revenue. The certificate shall be recorded in a book kept for the purpose, and properly indexed. The clerk's fee for recording such a certificate shall be fifty cents. This Act shall be in force from its passage, March 7, 1894. DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. XXXIX WYOMING. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming, That it shall be unlawful for any person to prac- tice dentistry or dental surgery in the State of Wyoming without first having received a diploma from a reputable dental college or university, duly incorporated or established under the laws of some one of the United States or some foreign government, which is recognized as such by the Na- tional Association of Dental Examiners; -provided, that nothing in Section 1 of this Act shall apply to any bona fide practitioner of dentistry or dental surgery in this State at the time of the passage of this Act; and provided, that nothino- in this Act shall be so construed as to prevent physi- cians or surgeons from extracting teeth. Sec. 2. Every person who shall hereafter engage in the practice of dentistry or dental surgery in this State shall file a copy of his or her diploma with the County Clerk of the county in which he or she resides, which copy shall be sworn to by the party filing the same ; and the Clerk shall give a certificate with the seal of the county attached thereto, to such party filing the copy of his or her diploma, and shall file or register the name of the person, the date of the filing, and the nature of the instrument, in a book to be kept by him for that purpose. Sec. 3. Every bona fide practitioner of dentistry or den- tal surgery residing in this State at the time of the passage of this Act, and desiring to continue the same, shall, within sixty days after the passage of this Act, file an affidavit of said facts as to the length of time he or she has practiced in this State, with the County Clerk of the county in which he or she resides ; and the said Clerk shall register the name of and give a certificate to the party filing the affidavit, in like manner and of like effect as hereinbefore provided. Sec. 4. All certificates issued under the provisions of this act shall be -prima facie evidence of the right of the holder to practice under this Act. xl SUPPLEMENT. Sec. 5. Every person violating the provisions of this Aci shall, upon conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misde- meanor, and be punished by a tine of not less than fifty dol- lars nor more than two hundred dollars, for each and every offense, or be imprisoned in the county jail for sixty days, or both tine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court -.and all tines collected shall belong to and be paid into the common- school funds of the county where the offense was committed. Sec. 6. Any person who shall have filed his or her affi- davit or diploma, as required in Sections 2 and 3 of tins Act, in one county, and remove to another county, shall, before entering upon the practice of his or her profession in such last-named county, procure a certified copy of the record of his or her former registry, and cause such transcript to be tiled and recorded in the dental register of such county in which he or she has removed. Sec 7. Tins Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. In effect February 18,1- DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 457 GENERAL INDEX. Affidavit at defense, the law of, in Pennsylvania 110, 111 American Hard Rubber Co. v. J. R. Dillingham 188 Anaesthesia, cause of, fatality from , 69 civil and criminal prosecution instituted — the character 69 comment of Dr. Litch on the fatality of 75, 76 the action of shocks on the nervous system while under 73, 74 when incomplete, may cause death by shock 73 Anaesthetics, administration of, when prolonged, demands the presence of an assistant 81 in dentistry, assistant usually not required 81, 82 examination of patients before the administration of 70 injuries and deaths from, the case of Bogle v. Winslow 71, 72, 73 legal inquiry as to the responsibility in cases of deaths or injuries from 70, 71 legal requirements in the administration of 69, 70, 74 legal rights of dentists in the administration of 35, 36 statistics of the fatality of .» 75 status of dentists in France, in the administration of 68, 69 the comparative fatality of 74, 75, 80 Appointments, case tried in Chicago court 105 the failure to keep, in dispute, case of Smith v. Tathani 104, 105 the right to charge for, when not kept 104 the rule as stated 104 the views of the courts on 104 Artificial teeth, held as security when fees are not paid 107 husband liable for payment when the wife is furnished with 168 Assistant, cannot imitate signs and cards of his employer 121 clauses in statutes relating to 119 must possess a diploma 120 dentist can recover for the services of. 120 " liable for injury to patients by 121 " liable for the contracts of 120 " liable for goods or materials ordered by 120, 121 restraining of, from practicing in same locality as former employer, 121, 122 Bacon v. Hill 188 " v. Wait 189 Beale, Dr., pardon of '.'7 Bills, difficulties attending the collection of Ill the case of Ambrose White Ill Book accounts, to be legal, entries must be made on same day 109, 110 method of keeping 109, 110 458 INDKX. Bridge dentures, claims granted J. E. Low in patents on 178, 179, 181 claims and specifications in Low patent for 179 continuous band, use of in dentistry 177, 208 " period of 205 limitations of the practice of 33 period of progress of, in 1840 209 progress of 34 Dentists, duties of :::; Dentists' Act, passed in the United Kingdoms in 1878 207 amendment of the law relating to 207 Diploma, difficulties attending prosecution for practicing without, and cases thereof cited 142, 1 43 in various States, quoted* 141, 142 liability for practicing without ' 141 Erroneous assertion by a dentist 33, 34 Error of judgment, dentist not liable for, when reasonable doubts exist.48, 49 quotation of decision in Boyle v. Winslow 47, 48 " " " Leighton v. Sargeant 48 " " " Percy v. Millardon 48 Etherization, capability of remembrance of occurrences, and possibility of resistance during the period of 93, 94, 95 consciousness of pain, with inability to resist, improbable in 96 illusion during 94 illustrations of 94, 95 muscular movement not entirely abolished in 95, 96 summary of action of, on will power and muscular movements 96, 97 the characteristics of the recovery from 93, 94 various periods and characteristics of 93 will power over muscular movement not abolished in 95 Experimentation with patents 34, 43, 44 the case of Slater v. Baker 43 with new instruments 43 " patents, dentists liable for 43 Expert and common witnesses, distinction between 15, ] 6, 17 Expert witness, compensation of 11, 15 dental 12, 13 Greenleaf on 12, 13 inquiry of the court as to qualification of. 14 observation of Mr. Smith on 13 requirements of . , 13 qualification required of \ 6, 13, 14, IS Extraction of teeth, citation of a death from 82 hemorrhage from 83 the case of Shaw v. Evans quoted 82, 83, 84, 85 Fees, limitation of amount of, recoverable 106 not recoverable, when no benefit is derived 105 regulated by circumstances, difficulties, and responsibilities 107 the amount of, legally recoverable 1(»5 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 463 when excessive and unjust, reduced by the jury 106 when increased by error of dentist, the additional amount not recov- erable lo© Fracture of the jaws, compromise of suits for, by dentists 6-i legal inquiries as to the extent and character of 60, 61 opinion of the author of the responsibility of the dentist in 62 particulars of the case of Dr. Westby 62 the case of Dr. B. F. Williams 1 63 " " Joice v. Howland and Mason 63 " " Messrs. Gabriel 63 " " Brooks v. Todd 64 plaintiff must prove defendant the causal of 60 " " " existence of 60 sometimes accidental 61 Fractures, sometimes due to natural and unforeseen causes 61 two teeth attached to one another may cause 61, 62 Goodyear, Nelson, patent of 188 vulcanite patents, a history of the litigations for the infringement and use of, without a license 187, 188 vulcanite patents, suits for the infringement of 188, 189 Identification, by means of teeth 17, :J2 difficulties attending 1 9 means available for positive 19 of criminals 18 " murderers 18 " corpse 18 " the body of Dr. Cronin 18 " Tascott 18 the case of Caroline Walsh 20, 21 " " Goss-Udderzook 23, 33 " " Madame Menetrel 22 " " Marchioness of Salisbury 10 " " Sir Peter Halkett 19, 20 " Timothy Monroe 21, 22 " " Webster Parkman 22, 23 " case reported by Dr. Guy 10 Injunction, granted by courts of equity to restrain infringement 158 Injuries, evidence submitted to prove 38 legal inquiry in proving 38, 39 resulting from want of care and diligence 49 1 the plaintiff must prove that he suffered 38 Internal medication, legal right of dentists to treat cases by 3ft knowledge of, required of dentists 36, 37 International Tooth-Crown Company v. Richmond, el al , decision in the case of 164, 176 appeal of the case of 176, 177 history of the litigation of the case of 176. 404 INDEX. the action of Supreme Court, U. S. A., in the appeal of. 177 Intel national Tooth- Crown Company, interpretation of decision in the suits of, by Messrs. < tordon and Beach 182, 183 Invention, accidental production of. 196 crude and imperfect experiments do not entitle to 193 he who invents first will have prior right to 193 Henry Ilowson on 192 mechanical advice does not give the right to 197 mere substitution of material does not give the right to 194, 195 on experimentation of. 1 92 requirements to constitute 193 who may be considered as having the prior right to 192 Inventor, reasonable diligence in perfecting invention necessary to preserve rights of, 195 Inventor, requirements of 192 who may be considered as the first 192, 193 Malpractice. Fracture of the jaws, during extraction of teeth, civil suits for 60, 61 definition of dental 37 " " ignorant 37 " "negligent 37 " " willful 37 may give rise to criminal and civil prosecutions 37 New York penal code of 38 the various forms of civil suits for dental 38 proof of injury necessary in cases of. 38, 39 various kinds of 37 Married women, in suits against, husband must be joined in the suit 108 liable for services on express promise binding her separate estates. . . 108 not liable for service, unless under a personal contract 108 Minors, according to statutes, under age of twenty-one years 109 circumstances alter the general rule of liability of 109 liability of infant for dental services 109 not liable for services contracted for 109 Negligence, damages for, may be recovered by heirs 51 damage suits for, the case of Grove v. Stewart and Sharp 51 " " " " Keily v. Colton 51 " Koskey v. P. & T. Tunstall 51, 52 " " " Matthews r. Conrad 52-56 definition of Slight 49 " " Ordinary 49 " " Gross 49 gratuitous service, no defense of 51 plaintiff must prove 50 production of evidence to prove 50 rebuttal evidence in 50 three degrees of. 49 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 465 where cause of has been mutual 51 ^New operations, liability of dentist performing 34, 35 the practice of, by dentists 43, 44 Nitrous oxide gas, administration of, when known to be dangerous 80, 81 citation of the case of Gramme v. Boerer 81 comparative safety of . . . < 5 - 80 examination of the patient before the administration of 80 history of the deaths following the inhalation of 77 injuries to health from 76, 77 report of cases of death from 77, 78, 79, 80 responsibilities assumed by dentist under such circumstances 81 the case of M. Duchesne, note on, by author 80 Ordinary skill, dentist must use 49 legal interpretation of ■*" Ordinary skill, proof of possession established by evidence 44 the opinion of the court in McCandless v. McWha 42, 43 the standard of 42 want of, decision by the jury 44, 50 Partnership, dissolution of Ill; 114 payment of debts of H4 the formation of m the period of existence of 114 the right to use the firm name after dissolution of (case of Morgan v. Schuyler) m » 112 Partners, mutual duties of Hl> H4 Patentable combination, may consist of parts new and old 192 Patent rights 144 > 204 abandoned application for 195, 196 action at law for infringement of, in what court brought 199 damages recoverable for the infringement of 199, 200 defense to action for infringement of 200, 201 " " the infringement of 198, 19 J definition of a claim in 19^ dentistry, with reference to 191 devices need not be similar to constitute infringement of. 197 different modes of operation, and an improved result, by substitution of one device for another, gives the right to 190 for composition of matter 1^ granted for useful inventions 191 infringement of, by making, using or selling. 196 " " not avoided by addition of new elements 197 " " the unauthorized use of 196 legality of 19° may be obtained by alien 190 jiot necessary that the invention be perfect beyond improvement to entitle to 194 patentee of improvement on must obtain license of prior patentee 196 466 INDEX. proof of the right to 190 purpose of granting 190 reason of indiscriminate grant of, in dentistry 190, 191 rebuttal evidence to prove prior right to 194 renewal of application for, when refused 195 requirements necessary to prove invention and the right to 191 special considerations in dentistry, with reference to 191 substitution of chemical equivalents are an infringement of 198 the use of an old process, with no change in manner of application, will not sustain the right to 198 to whom is granted 190 use of, after an injunction granted, constitutes contempt of court 200 " " process by defendant before issue of court, will not restrain him from continuing its use 197 Patent rights, when all parts, except one, were old, not using excepted part, escapes infringement of 1 98 when it gives a monopoly of the use of a well-known substance, in a well-known form, cannot be secured 198 Patentees, list of tooth-crown 1 63 Patents issued for operations in dentistry 146, 163, 183, 186 Surgical dental operations 146, 147, 148 Bigelow, E. A., granted to 147 Bonwill, W. G. A., " 147,148 Bruff, Thomas, " 147 Hayden, H. H., " 147 Eichmond, C. M., " 146,147 the invalidity of Richmond patent 147 Surgical mechanical dental operations 148, 163 methods of filling and restoring decayed teeth : Dartt, W. A. granted to 148, 149 Land, C. H., " 149, 150 Land, C. H., " 150 Land,C.H., " 150 Land.C.H., " 151,152 Land, C. H., " 152 Robinson, A, " 149 Taylor, E. C, " 148 devices for retaining fillings in teeth and metal cap-coverings for fillings : Osmond, E., granted to 152 Noble, R., " • 152 Weston, H., " 152, 153 methods of fastening tooth-crowns in prepared roots : Sheffield, L. T., granted to 153 bridge dentures — permanent: Beale, S. T., Jr., granted to 157, 158 Clowes, J. W., " 156, 157 DENTAL JURISPRUDENCE. 467 Grout, C. P., granted to 156 Grout, C. P., " • 155 Low.J.E., " 153,154 Low, J.E., " 154 Sheffield, L. T., " 153 Sheffield, L. T., " 155 Sheffield, W. S., " 156 bridge dentures — removable : Brown, G. V. I., granted to 160 Curtis, G. L., «' 159 Palmer, P. A., " 160 Kichmond, C. M., " 159 Throckmorton, J. A.," 158 Throckmorton, J. A., " 158 Mechanical dental operations : Bemis, M., granted to 184 Cool, G. W., " 184 Daly, J. A., " 186 Diefenbach, Geo., granted to 184 Folsom, N. T., " 185 Gillespie, J. P., " 185 McClelland, J. A., " 184 McClelland, J. A., " 184 Merrick, E. J., « 184 Miller, W.H., " 185 Phillips,T., " 186 Puroine (S. T.) & Smith (H.), granted to 186 Starr, E. T., granted to 186 Stedman, J. J., " 185 Twitchell, H., " 185 Wilkerson, B., " 186 Penal statutes, provisions of > 38 " " " "in New York 38 Professional men, not warrantors of their work 102, 103 services, dentists can not be compelled to render 99 the nature of 99 Prosecutions, criminal and civil 37, 38 Piape, accusation of a dentist of committing, on a female under anaesthesia, 87,88, 89 a dentist in Brandenburg, Prussia, indicted for 97 " " Montreal " " 97 cases recorded where the woman believes, was committed on her .... 88 defloration of plaintiff seldom established in prosecutions for 98 dentists exposed to accusation of committing 88 Jas. T. Grant, charged at the Jersey (Channel Isles) with commit- ting 97, 98 report of the prosecution of Dr. Beale on the charge of. . .89, 90, 91, 92 468 INDEX. remarks on 92 Services, claims for, must be proven 110 Skill, degree of, required of a dentist by law 39, 40, 41, 42 the general rule of, as stated 40 liability for the want of 41 the amount of, required of a dentist 31 the degree required, as stated in Simonds v. Henry 41, 42 the highest degree of, not required of a dentist 41 Wilcox, on the want of 40, 41 Specialists and non-specialists, the relative skill and knowledge of. 47 liability for lack of special skill 47 the degree of skill expected by patients 47 <: " " required by law 47 Standard of skill, more strict where life is endangered 46 Standard of skill, case of Small r. Howard 45 " Mailer v. Boynton 46 illustration thereof, case of Keily v. Colton 46 required of country dentists in comparison with those of practicing in cities and large towns 44, 45 varies according to circumstances and localities 44, 45, 46 " " " the condition of the patient 46 State Board of Examiners, authority and legality of 124 opinion of the Supreme Court in Dent v. State of West Virginia, in dispute of legality of 124, 125 the opinion of Judge McGary, with reference to legality of 125 the quotation of decision in Wilkins v. State of Indiana 125, 126 Student or other person can perform the mechanical operations in the lab- oratory without legal requirements 120 Subpoena 10, 12 must expert witness obey service of 11, 12, 15 service of, requires attendance in court of ordinary witnesses 10, 11 Third party, liability of, when services are requested for another 107 not liable for the same unless relationship exists 107, 108 Tooth-Crowns, a chart of, patented 161, 162 an interpretation of patents on 186, 187 a patent by John B. Beers on 186, 187 expiration of Beers' -patent on 187 with pivots ' 161 without pivots 162 Treatments, dentist's right to use his own judgment in 105 Unclean instruments, citation of cases of, reported by Drs. L. D. Buckley, C. W. Dulles, F. M. Otis, Lancereaux, etc 85, 86 innoculation of patients from 86, 86, 87 dentists unjustly accused of 86, 87 disinfection of, necessary 87 general rule as stated 87 the use of, by a certain class of dentists 87 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This book is due on the date indicated below, or at the expiration of a definite period after the date of borrowing, as provided by the rules of the Library or by special ar- rangement with the Librarian in charge. ^>WAw M RK751 Rehfus: COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES (hsl.stx) RK 751 R26 C.2 A treatise on dental lunsDrudence for d %■ M~ jUuy