Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 4 December 1924, Page 1

was

TIIK ,1 UDCIt’S Sl’Al.M INC UP. AUCKLAND. Dee. d. Summing up in the Salainan case. •Ittdge Stringer said that as lar as the law was concerned, il did not matter much whet her the defendant represented himself as a doctor or not. ll lie undertook treatment nl it case, lie was liable in law for the consequences. Defendant i-ortainh undertook to treat a ease of a medical kind, and represented lie was a I ile lo elite that ease. Altogether, he assumed to act as a medical man. Defendant admitted ho knew nothing ol the elleet ol drugs except herbs. Yet lie administered to plaint iff. over a long period, a considerable number and quantity of drugs, some of which were tmdoithlodly deleterious to her general health. R a man administered drugs, not knowing their use or elleet. in this haphazard way. he might rightly be termed a fraud. The jury might have no dillioult.v in arriving at the conclusion that defendant was responsible for damages. The real difficulty would be tin- measure ol damages awarded. Cfi,flfi DA HACKS AWARDED. In the claim for damages against, the Indian herbalist, fsilaman. the jury awarded the plaint ill' CfiDO, judgment being entered for that amount and costs. The jury retired at 12.15 p.m.. and returned about three hours later.