BREACH OF THE MEDICAL PRACTIONERS ACT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1466, 16 April 1873, Page 3

BREACH OF THE MEDICAL PRACTIONERS ACT.

At Akaroa, on the 4th inst., before Mr Pilliet, R.M., D. B. Barclay was charged by the police with having practised at ! Akaroa as a medical practitioner: without, possessing any qualifications. He pleaded " Not Guilty." Sergeant of Police Ramsay handed in a. copy of a notice he had served tipoh 'the defendant to produce any diplomas or certificates of practice. an<J called the following evidence : — Rev. William Aylmer said he resided at Akaroa. Sometime in July last he published in the Lyttelton Times an advertisement stating that a qualified; medical man was required at Akaroa. <In answer to it defendant called upon him at his house, representing himself to be a medical man possessing all necessary qualifications. He requested some money to be paid in advance before coming. Thereupon a committee' was formed to procure it for him. ..Witness was chairman of the committee, and. saw a good deal of defendant. He believed his representions, had him as a guest at his house, and even presented him with a meerschaum pipe. Shortly afterwards, defendant Trent to Christchurch, and from thence wrote for money to pay' the passage of himself and wife to Akaroa. He received a sum of money from Mr Garwood on behalf of the committee, who had agreed to give him a bonus of LIOO. Subsequently the com- . mittee met for the purpose of obtaining from defendant his diplomas or credentials. They wero not produced. Defendant did not appear. Whereupon the committee resolved to withhold the payment of the balance due to him, as they were of opinion that defendant had failed to establish his position as a medical man. Upon his proving himself possessed of the qualifications necessary, it had been agreed to pay him the balance due. When asked by the committee fcr his diplomas, he referred them to Dr Parkerson, at the Christchurch hospital, who, he said, had them for the purpose of having them registered. Defendant also admitted he was not registered, but was about being so. Subsequently defendant admitted , that his diplomas were in England. He told me he had received the appointmeut of Provincial Vaccinator, from the Deputy Superintendent, which appointment I saw •gazetted in the newspapers. T. B. Chadwick said he was a chemist and druggist at Akaroa. Had had considerable experience. J as such. He knew defendant when the latter was practising as a medical man at Akaroa. Defendant procured prescrip- , tions from witness ; sometimes they were written in his establishment, sometimes - sent to be made up. Def endan t gave m c to ■ understand that he was a registered medical practitioner. When he first came I -had strong doubts of his being a medical man at all from the manner in which he wrote his prescriptions. Medical men differ in the mode of writing them, ' *but peculiarities which I cannot explain./made me feel defendant was .not/a medical man. He told me he was an M.B. .The prescriptions produced are Signed "D. B. Barclay, M.D." : Sergeant Ramsay applied for a remand as some of the witnesses he required were not yet forthcoming. Defendant said that he had. signed the prescriptions M.D. instead of M.B. by mistake. He stated that he was a Bachelor of. the Royal College of Surgeons, and possessed a diploma as.siich. He con tended that it was for .^police to prove that he did not hotty suchi diploma, and disputed the legal, right of the prosecution to call upon him to produce his certificates. He had been brought up from Hokitika ac great inconvenience, and quoted the sec-tion-of "the Act under which he was charged} to show that there was no justifi- : cation : for the proceedings. The Magistrate fciid he did not see how the onus of 1 /prqqf'.CQuld well' be placed upon defendant,- "The Act was silent on the subject, althpugli it was very possible that the Legislature had intended that it should be otherwise.; As it stood, the clause of the Act was inoperative. The prosecution could easily procure proofs of nourregistry with regard to registration entered in the colony, but not with reference to that entered in other countries. There was em- ; bodied in the information a charge of falsely pretending to take a name and description, implying that defendant was registered under the New Zealand Act, and besides the evidence already adduced v had disclosed facts which might lead to another charge of obtaining money under false pretences. Therefore, the application for remand would be granted. Remanded to the 7th instant. On the 7th instant, the defendant was brought up on remand for further examination. Sergeant Ramsay re-called the Rev. W. Aylmer. Mr Aylmer refused to be sworn before giving his evidence, saying he was a clergyman of the Church of England, and as such could testify without being sworn. He had inadvertantly allowed himself to be sworn at the previous hearing. The Magistrate said he had never heard such an objection before ; the witness must be sworn. The Roy. W. Aylmer, sworn, deposed : It was upon defendant representing he had his di-; plomas lying at Dr Parkerson'a for registration, that the Barclay Committee paid defendant part of the bonus he received. By defendant : Some weeks afterwards you,said that Dr Parkersoh would receive them from England. I cannot remember ; whether you said they were coming from England, after your return from Christchurch. Clement Ij. Wiggins deposed: He was a teacher, residing at Akaroa. Was secretary, and also a member of the Barclay Committee. The advertisement to. which defendant answered stated that the services of a duly qualißed medical practitioner were required by the Committee, of which the Rev. . W. Aylmer was chairman. Defendant was selected by the committee because he represented himself duly qualified. Defendant did not tell him he'waa registered in New Zealand, but he said distinctly that his diplomas were at Dr Parkerson's for the purpose of being registered. Defendant received part of the bonus, L 22, in two sums': It was public money col- ' lected by public subscription for defendant. He was positive defendant would .not have been paid, had he not represented he had diplomas with him, which he jiad deposited for registration with the . registrar, Dr Parkerson. He was uecretary of the committee and was certain of it. He /produced the receipts of moneys paid by the committee to defendant. On the 20th of August, defendant admitted in the presence of one Beamish that he had left his diplomas in England because he did npt intend to practise in New Zealand. ; jJy defendant : You told me repeatedly your diplomas were in, the hands of Dr

Parkerson for the purpose of being regis-. tered. Alexander T. M'Gregor deposed having been a member of the Barclay Committee. Defendant had told witness distinctly he had diplomas deposited with Dr Parkersyn, at Christchurch, fo^ registration. He said they showed he wa3 an M.B. of the University of London, and a gold medallist of the "University of! Edinburgh. Inc onsequence of his statements, a bonus was collected by public' subscription and part of it paid to defendant. By defendant : lam positive you told mo not more than four days after! your arrival at Akaroa that your diplomas were atDr Parkerson's, Robert Townsend deposed remembering defendant practising as a medical man at Akaroa. Defendant told witness his diplomas were with Dr Parkerson to be registered, and that he would be gazetted in a day or two. It was shortly after his arrival at Akaroa he made these statements. The Magistrate said that however disgraceful the conduct of the accused was proved to have been, as shown by the evidence, he could not convict him of the charge brought against him. The prosecution had proved that the accused did not hold the diplomas he alleged he possessed, and as the statute failed to make provision that the onus of proof should be thrown on the accused, he must rule that it was for the prosecution to substantiate the affirmative of the issue, which it had not done. The information would be dismissed.