Full text of "Christian science;"

See other formats

tm**il***mmimniiiinmmam

mmmmtm^

ljRfVMMMfHMMnlM^flilMiMiM*ili«MMvi|iiU;

,:''." • - •• •■« ,

R 1

CHRISTIAN

?A |

vi Li 1.4 W La

Exp 8 stt II

IHBHHn9HipM****P*MB>BMi

Siti

[<^nMHMHMHHH!

"Library of congress.

- —

Chap, Copyright No...

Shelt..i

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

ft*

-J
<

tu
X

—

-J

C/3

Cju

c£

u-s
5T

Cju

Christian Science

An Exposition of Mrs. Eddy's Wonderful Discov-
ery, including its Legal Aspects

A Plea for Children and other
Helpless Sick

WILLIAM A. PURRINGTON

Lecturer in the University and Bellevue Hospital Medical College y and

in the New York College of Dentistry upon Law in Relation

to Medical Practice, one of the Authors of

"A System of Legal Medicine"

NEW YORK

E B. TREAT & COMPANY

241-243 West 230 Street
1900

•"Tg

u Christian Science demonstrates that the patient who pays whatever he
is able to pay for being healed is more apt to recover than he who with-
holds a slight equivalent for health."

— From Preface to Miscellaneous Writings of Mrs. Eddy.

TWO COPIES RECEIVED,

Library af Conge$#%
Offfc* of tN

m 2- 1900

RegUter of Copyrights

53793

By E. B. Treat & Co

1900

SECOND COPY,

PREFACE.

It has seemed worth while to collect these papers,
expounding the dangerous teachings of our latter-day
delusion, Christian Science, and the theory and limita-
tions of medical legislation, if only for the sake of
children and helpless adults. Thanks are due to the
Proprietor and Editors of the North American Review
for permission to reprint the articles written for that
periodical at the instance of my friend David A.
Munro, Esq., and to the publisher and editor of the
Medical Record, and the New York Sun for the use
of the matter copyrighted by them. They have
proved less tenacious of their copyrights than is the
discoverer of Christian Science of hers.

The papers have not been altered from their origi-
nal form in order to avoid in the bound volume
repetitions due to treating the same subject before
different audiences. When line upon line and precept
upon precept are needed repetitions are not vain.

Four of these papers deal with the exposition of
Mrs. Eddy's teachings, her own account of herself and
the status of her cult before the law. Another treats
of the educational effect and policy of medical legisla-
tion, and the last shows how by enforcement of medical
laws not consonant with public opinion the apothecary
in England became a general practitioner of medicine.

The best proof that the articles in the Worth Ameri-
can Review are fair expositions of Mrs. Eddy's biogra-
phy and teachings is that their accuracy has not been
denied, so far as their author knows. How could it
be when they consist for the most part of her own
words quoted by book and page so that error might

4 CHBISTIAN SCIENCE.

be easily corrected? No willful misstatement has
been made, and none, it is believed, unwittingly. The
patient reader wrill see that there is here no denial,
but rather explicit and repeated admissions of the ex-
traordinary influence of suggestion, expectant atten-
tion and mental excitation however caused upon the
body. It is not denied that hysterical patients, the
morbidly introspective, the worriers, the malades im-
aginaires, the victims of obscure nervous ailments
have been helped by Faith Cure, Christian Science,
Mental Healing, Mesmerism, Hypnotism, Vitapathy,
and the like. But it is denied that every post hoc is a
propter hoc, and that because, for instance, asthma,
which often yields to a change of residence, or wears
out by lapse of time, and childbirth, a normal func-
tion, sometimes run successful courses under such
methods, therefore gross ignorance and presumption
are to be substituted without restraint or liability in
daily life for demonstrably efficient skill and science.
We know that a surgeon can staunch the gush of
blood from a severed artery, that the physician has
sweet oblivious antidotes for pain, and, if called in
time, can, often counteract the deadly work of poison.
Eddyism cannot do these things. Will Mrs. Eddy or
any of her disciples venture by personal experiment
under test conditions to prove that Christian Science
can counteract by its arguments the effects of mor-
phine, atropine or strychnine ?

What must be obvious to any one who will think
but a moment is that suggestion, expectant attention
and such mental stimuli cannot operate upon babies
&s tkey do upon adults ; and accordingly, as one would

PEEFACE. 5

naturally expect, we find some of the most horrible
instances of criminal wickedness on the part of Chris-
tian Scientists, Peculiar People and like faddist in
their treatment of children. One object lesson is
worth a wilderness of words, and the photograph
prefixed to these papers is a volume in itself. I am
indebted for its use to Charles H. Tag, M. D., of
Brooklyn. The case, referred to on page 113, was
one of gangrene of the left foot of a child twelve years
old ; the lower ends of tibia and fibula being exposed
and the foot attached to the leg only by the internal
lateral ligaments of the ankle. Physicians advised am-
putation ; but an ignorant woman was called in who
guaranteed by prayers, passes and salves to effect a
cure. She professed belief in Christian Science and
mental treatment, but also in the efficacy of remedies,
the use of which made her conviction possible under
the law of New York. She was not a strict Eddyite,
but had a system and book of her own. Eventually
amputation was performed by Dr. Blaisdell assisted
by Drs. Tag and Caffrey. The operation was success-
ful and the child is now in good health. Is it not
horrible to think of cases of this sort, of contagious
diseases, of severed arteries and fractured limbs falling
into the hands of ignorant and audacious " Scientists "
even when patients are conscious and willing to accept
the treatment? How much worse it is when the
patients are little children or unconscious adults
whose lives are put by misguided kin or friends into
the deadly keeping of those who lightly and boldly
assume with ignorance, what the learned attempt
with care and misgiving.

6 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

The questions submitted to Mr. Carol Norton as set
out in the appendix remain unanswered by him.
They are the crux of Eddyism. Would Mrs. Eddy
treat her own severed artery by arguing with it like
a congressman? Would Mr. Norton discuss a fish-
bone out of a child's throat ? If not, who will deny
that the pretensions of the cult are humbug and sham
of the commonest, wickedest sort ?

It is by no means asserted that the disciples of Mrs.
Eddy are ignorant or unintelligent. On the contrary
their sincerity is willingly admitted, as well as that
among them are persons of unusual intelligence. But
persons of intelligence and honesty, ever since the
world began, have been deluded in amazing fashions
by vulgar and ignorant impostors in religion, medicine
and finance. Hope tells its flattering tale to rich and
poor, wise and foolish. All conditions of men blindly
follow false beacons of health and wealth, set for them
by fanaticism, greed and cunning. Fortunate are they
who find the true light before shipwreck.

If this exposition turns one Ephraim from his idols ;
if it saves one child, one woman in peril of childbirth,
one strong man in delirium from unnecessary suffering
and death at the hands of the ignorant and criminally
reckless, it will not have been written in vain. And
because it may happen that some reader might wish
to find again a droll absurdity of Christian Science's
discoverer wherewith to confound him who accepts
Mrs. Eddy's teaching on faith without knowledge, a
sufficiently copious index has been made, and a table
given of the cases cited from law reports.

W. A, PUKKINGTON,

jg Wall Street, New York City,
Pecctqber Jithx j8gq,

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

Table of Cases Cited 10

I. Christian Science and its Legal Aspects 1 1

II. The Case Against Christian Science 37

III. Manslaughter, Christian Science and the Law 69

IV. Christian Science before the Law 91

V. How Far can Legislation Aid in Maintaining a Proper Stand-
ard of Medical Education 123

VI. The Evolution of the Apothecary . 145

APPENDIX

A. The Claims of Christian Science 165

B. Christian Science and the Law . . 175

Index 183

ILLUSTRATIONS
Photograph of child treated by incantations and salves . . . Frontispiece
Copy of Charter of Massachusetts Metaphysical College . . 8

Table of Reported Cases Cited in this Book

Apothecaries Co. v. Nottingham, 34 L. T. R

(N. S.) 76 .
Apothecaries Co. v. Lottinga, 2 M. & R. 500
11 " " Harrison, 67 L. T

PAGES

232 .
College

757

148

Attorney-General ex rel. Apoth. Co. v
of Physicians, 30 L. J. (N. S.) Ch.

Bailey v. Mogg, 4 Den. 60

Bibber v. Simpson, 59 Me. 181 .

Commonwealth vs. Thomson, 6 Mass. 134

Corsi v. Maretzek, 4 E. D. Smith 1

Davison v. Bohlman, 37 Mo. App. 576

Dent v. U. S., 129 U. S. 114

Eastman v. State, 6 Ohio, Dec. 296

Eastman v. People, 71 111. App. 236

Eastman v. State, 10 N. E. Rep. 97

Handey v. Henson, 4 C. & P. 110

Marsh v. Davison, 9 Paige 580

Morgan v. Hallen, 8 Ad. & El. 119

Mormon Case, (Reynolds v. U. S.)

Nelson v. Harrington, 72 Wis. 591

Pierce v. Commonwealth, 138 Mass. 165

People v. Phippin, 70 Mich. 6 .

Regina v. Wagstaffe, 10 Cox. Cr. Cas. 530

44 Senior, L. T. & L. J.; Dec. 17, 1898

Rice v. State, 8 Mo. 561 .

Rex v. Long, 4 C. & P. 398

Revnolds v. U. S., 98 U. S. 145 .

Rose v. College of Physicians, 3 Salk 17 ; 6 Mod

44 ; 5 Bro. Pari 553. . . 133, 152, 154, 155

Smith v. Lane, 24 Hnn. 632 . . 79, 106, 110, 153, 177

State v. Buswell, 40 Neb. 158 . . . 82

" " Mylod, 49 Atl. 753 . . 16,84,85,116

" " Schulz, 55 Iowa 628 . . . 75

Toune v. Lady Gresley, 3 C. & P. 581 . . 155

154

-159
160
160

158

31,71,112

134

155

30,86,173

31,76

31, 88

30,86

Christian Science.

" CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE " AND ITS LEGAL ASPECTS.1

It is asked if existing laws impose any restraint
upon treatment of the sick by soi-disant " Christian
Scientists," and if further legislation in that regard is
desirable.

Mere charlatanism, unrelated to the general wel-
fare, is not a proper subject for legislation, but quack-
ery imperilling the public health is. Whether
Christian Science falls within either category, every
intelligent reader will readily determine when aware
of its pretences — charlatanism being false pretension
to knowledge, skill, power or achievement, and every
one being a charlatan who falsely advertises himself
as achieving greater results than his fellows, whether
he be a medical man boasting of mysterious and im-
possible cures, a religious teacher preaching what he
does not believe, or a lawyer proclaiming achieve-
ments that he has not accomplished or insuring re-
sults beyond his power. The term is not used offen-
sively, nor with any desire to impute insincerity to
honest believers in this new cult.

1 From the North American Review > March 1899.
11

12 CHKISTIAN SCIEKCE.

To answer the questions propounded, we must
clearly understand, (1) the true purpose and proper
scope of legislative control over medical practice and
matters affecting the public health ; (2) the methods
taught and adopted for the treatment of the sick by
Christian Scientists; (3) the status of these people
under existing law.

For the argument's sake let these concessions be
made at the outset : (1) mental stimulus exercises,
and has been always known to exercise, enormous in-
fluence over the body, whether incited by such slight
causes as " a harmless, necessary cat," or " woollen bag-
pipe," or by such powerful emotions as hope, fear or
faith; and not only malades imaginaires, but sick
persons, especially those afflicted with hysterical dis-
orders, have been and will be restored to normal
health by such stimulus ; (2) the wisest physicians, as
they will be first to admit, not having yet attained
the limits of medical or psychical knowledge, are
fallible, and often make errors of diagnosis ; (3) the
vis medicatrix naturae is great, and, if there should
be called to the treatment of a sick man two ignorant
and incompetent persons, one a gloomy believer in dos-
ing by rule, the other merely a cheerful prophet, the
latter would be, probably, the more helpful, or at least
the less dangerous ; (4) Socrates, Galileo, Jenner and
many other persons met with opposition in promulgat-
ing truth, just as Simon, the sorcerer, Jack Cade,
Cagliostro and other impostors eventually came to
grief in their propaganda of lies.

These concessions are made because, in the writer's
experience, no charlatan or enthusiast has yet appeared

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 13

before a legislative committee to plead for the substi-
tution of ignorance in place of medical learning, whose
argument has not been, in substance, this : There are
mysterious powers not possessed or fully understood
by physicians, who frequently make grave mistakes ;
cures often follow the ministrations of clairvoyants,
mediums, mind and faith curers ; new truth is always
opposed; therefore, medical practice should be un-
trammelled, and every one, regardless of character,
intelligence, education or training, should be permitted
to engage in the business of treating the sick for hire.
A postulate must also be laid down, and he who denies
it need read no further ; the acceptance of new doc-
trines, or of old ideas revamped, by a large number of
persons, of whom some may be very intelligent, is not
of itself sufficient reason for general acceptance of
such doctrines or ideas, or for toleration of practices
founded upon them ; especially if the former be con-
trary to ordinary experience and observation, and the
latter be injurious to the public health, morals or
safety. It was happily said by Dr. Oliver "Wendell
Holmes, of Bishop Berkeley's belief in tar water as a
specific for pretty nearly all the ills of man, that it
" exhibits the entire insufficiency of exalted wisdom,
immaculate honesty, and vast general acquirements to
make a good physician of a great bishop ; " while, of
Berkeley himself, the wise and witty Doctor said :
" He was an illustrious man, but he held two very odd
opinions ; that tar water was everything and that the
material universe was nothing."

Public health laws, including therein statutes regu-
lating medical practice, should be and are framed

14 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

solely to protect the public, by providing against such
harmful practices as adulterations of food and drugs,
the spread of contagious diseases, maintenance of un-
sanitary conditions and medical treatment of the sick
by unqualified persons. That the state may constitu-
tionally and justly exercise its police power to protect
health is by adjudication established beyond cavil, and
by common consent so thoroughly accepted that if a
pest-house or open cess-pool were established near the
residence of the founder of Christian Science, she
would doubtless apply, successfully, to the Courts or
the Health Board to abate the nuisance, notwithstand-
ing her teaching that a " calm Christian state of mind
is a better preventive of contagion than a drug, or any
possible sanative method." l The justification of med-
ical licensing laws is that the overwhelming majority
of sensible men, at all times, have believed that knowl-
edge and training are essential to qualify a man to
cope with disease ; and, for this reason, the highest
courts of many States and the Supreme Court of the
United States, in Dent's case,2 have affirmed the con-
stitutional power of a State to enact laws forbidding
unqualified persons to practice medicine, and establish-
ing general tests of such qualification.

This is not the occasion to review the Medical Acts
of the several States. It is enough to say that none
of them prohibits or prescribes any special system of
therapeutics or practice. To do that would block

1 Misc. Works, p. 229. Where in these foot notes only a page is cited
the reference is to " Science and Healthy with Key to the Scriptures" the
text-book of the cult, edition of 1887.

2 Dent v. West Virginia, 129 U. S. 114.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 15

scientific progress and discourage investigation. It is
not for legislatures to say how either bodies or souls
shall be cured, to enact pharmacopoeias into statutes
or crystallize theories, medical or religious, into law.
But it is entirely right and proper for them to declare
that no man shall enter upon the business of treating
the sick until he is of full age and has shown, upon
examination, that he has studied for a prescribed time,
and acquired competent knowledge of those branches
of true science, familiarity with which is, by universal
consent, necessary to equip one into whose hands life
and health are to be committed — physiology, anatomy,
surgery, obstetrics, hygiene, chemistry, pathology, di-
agnosis. The licensed medical practitioner may act
in any case upon any theory of therapeutics commend-
ing itself to his judgment ; allopathy — if there be such
a theory — homeopathy, hydropathy, electropathy, vi-
tapathy, venopathy, osteopathy, Baunscheidtismus,
magnetic healing, the Christian Science of Mrs. Eddy,
the pagan science of the Yoodoo Queen, or a general
Eclecticism.

In short, the law aims, and should aim, to require,
as the only prerequisite of a medical license, satisfac-
tory proof that the candidate is of good character and
average equipment through study and training. In
New York, for example, there are three Boards of
Medical Examiners, representing the regular practi-
tioners, and the Homeopathic and Eclectic Schools.
Examinations are uniform in physiology, anatomy, and
all the other branches of science above enumerated,
wherein there is no medical schism. In therapeutics,
where opinions diverge, candidates for license may de-

16 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

mand examination according to their schools. Rhode
Island's Supreme Court said lately, in Mylod's case,1
by way of reductio ad absurdum, that Christian Scien-
tists, were they held to be practitioners of medicine,
would be entitled under the constitution of that State
to a separate Board of Examiners — offering this as one
argument for not holding them to be such practition-
ers. But whv should not Christian Scientists, who

%j 7

make a business of attempting to cure the sick, be re-
quired to submit to examination in general medical
science, quite as much as homeopaths from whose loins
they have sprung ; going, as do candidates from other
schools, before their own board in therapeutics ? It
is said that they give no drugs, but they must and do
make diagnosis,2 and their " Mother " says that they
often give medicine.3 Is it unreasonable to infer that
their actual objections to being classed as medical
practitioners subject to license are : (1) that to pre-
pare for examination requires years of study in real
science ; (2) that no one with a fair knowledge of the
human economy, and equipped to practice medicine

1 State v. Mylod, 40 Atl. 753. See the paper " Christian Science before
the Law," p. 91.

2 Although Christian Scientists deny, in order to escape prosecution un-
der medical laws, that they make diagnosis of disease, yet upon their own
theory they must do so ; for their teacher bids them mentally to address by
name the disease to be treated, and argue with it. They sometimes call
"diagnosis " "discernment," and Mrs. Eddy says of herself, " I have dis-
cerned disease in the human mind, and recognized the patient's fear of it
many weeks before the so-called disease made its appearance in the body.
. . . / am never mistaken in my scientific diagnosis of disease" (P.
194.)

3 "Departing from my instruction, many learners commend diet and
hygiene. They even administer medicine for certain diseases^ thinking
thereby to initiate the cure which they think to complete with mind ! "

(p- 376.)

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 17

intelligently, would adopt the vagaries of their pseudo
science ?

Such being the purpose and proper scope of medical
laws, the second inquiry is, What is so-called Chris-
tian Science?

The answer may, best and most fairly, be given by
quoting the very words of the remarkable lady, Mrs.
Eddy, who, in 1866, made the somewhat belated dis-
covery of this branch of healing. This is the more
important because many who, without having read
the text-book, fancy they know, in a general way,
what it teaches, would be surprised, on looking into
the volume, at the vagueness of expression, hopeless
confusion of thought, vain boasting, complacent asser-
tion of impossible occurrences, virulent denunciation
of all other systems, and systematic, commonplace ad-
vertising that everywhere appear. The publications
to be quoted from are " Science and Health, with Key
to the Scriptures" (Edition of 1887, published by the
author), and " Miscellaneous Writings, 1883-1896."
The former, being the text-book wherein the new dis-
covery is expounded, is read at the church service of
the Scientist alternately with the Bible, and, if its au-
thor is to be credited, the mere reading of it, under-
standing^, has cured and will cure the most malig-
nant diseases, even cancer, and indeed is the chief
factor in all treatment.

At the threshold of this magnum opus, we are told :
" The time for thinkers has come." 1 Hitherto, the
world has got along in a thoughtless fashion ; but
at last the thinkers are upon us — not only those who

>P.5.

18 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

think they think, but real thinkers ; and it behooves
us to heed their thought. Perhaps it is this state-
ment, as much as any other in the book, that gives to
Christian Science what vogue it has. The more
ignorant the disciples, the more flattered he is to
esteem himself a thinker wiser than all who have
gone before. A cubit is added to his stature and he
glows with self-satisfaction. When the author wrote
of the Saviour : " Though Jesus is the impetus and
pulse of Christianity, yet Christianity is larger than
its human founder ;"* and again of Bishop Berkeley :
" He was a great natural Scientist in his day, and held
opinions concerning ' absolute idealism ' which ad-
vance his memory near to the border-land of Christian
Science," 2 she, too, doubtless felt this glow, and failed
to apprehend in the words what was blasphemous to
the pious, humorous3 to the merely instructed and of-
fensive to good taste.

Another reason why this text-book impresses the

i p. 229. 2 p# 230.

3 The poems of Mrs. Eddy, published in Miscellaneous Writings, Ch.
XI., afford evidence at once of her literary craftsmanship and of her en-
tire lack of humor. Two verses from one of them, " Isle of Wight," (p.
393), may serve to illustrate her pellucid thought and style:
" Soul, sublime 'mid human debris
Paints the limner's work, I ween,
Art and Science, all unweary,
Lighting up the mortal dream."

" Students wise, he maketh now thus
Those who fish in waters deep,
When the buried Master hails us
From the shores afar, complete."
However trite or obscure her prose teachings, no one will deny the
novelty and originality of rhyming " debris " with " unweary," " ween "
with "dream," "now thus" with "hails us" and " deep " with " com-
plete," and, to quote Calverley's saying of other poetry, " As to its mean-
ing, it's what you please,"

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 19

superficial as containing oracles of wisdom is, that it
so often, like Dr. Holmes's katydid, says " an undis-
puted thing in such a solemn way ; " for example,
that those who are sick, or think themselves sick,
should be cheered up ; that fear strongly affects the
system and even predisposes the timid to the sickness
they stand in dread of ; that children should not be
coddled over-much, and that men ought to be good ;
trite sayings all, but to the thoughtless thinker reve-
lations.

Yet another reason that commends the book and its
disciples to the credulous is their boastful assurance
of impossible results. Reputable practitioners of
medicine or law do not insure success. Undoubtedly,
however, such assurance inspires hope, especially in
credulous minds. Mrs. Eddy does not hesitate to say
that she cures the hundred cases where physicians
lose the ninety-and-nine ; l and her disciples have been
known to give equal assurances to a patient already
in the death agony.

A review of these books might be entertaining, and
even profitable, if it served to enlighten any who may
have accepted the " Science " without study of its
genesis, by showing how, out of the time-worn specu-
lation of idealism that matter does not exist apart
from mind, a lady of Lynn, Mass., has spun a web of
incoherent words 2 contradicting themselves on every

i P. 387,

2 As if realizing how incoherent, vague and self-contradictory is her
writing, Mrs. Eddy says, somewhat in the manner of Mr. Bunsby, " In the
spiritual sense of my subject lies the elucidation of it, and this sense you
must gain in order to reach my meaning " (p. 391). And again, " Mortal
mind does not at once catch my meaning, and can only do so as thought
is educated up to my spiritual apprehension " (p. 392). And finally to

20 CHKISTIAN science.

page, and yet so attractive to the credulous as to form
the nucleus of a cult and of an excellent source of rev-
enue for the writer, and for those of her disciples
who, in absolute ignorance of medical science, assume
to cure every human malady ; not only treating adults,
but even helpless children, preventing the attendance
of qualified medical men in critical cases, and even
condemning observance of the rules of cleanliness,
hygiene, diet and exercise. But with the metaphysics
of the book we have here to do only in so far as it af-
fects the practical system of treating the sick.

Originally, Mrs. Eddy seems to have been a home-
opathist of the " high potency " faction, and to have
been led by recognizing the medicinal inertness of high
attenuations to her present theories.1 She, herself,
says : " Homeopathic remedies, sometimes not contain-
ing a particle of medicine, are known to relieve the
symptoms of diseases. "What works the cure ? It is
the faith of mortal mind that changes its own self-in-
flicted suffering, and produces a new effect upon the
body." 2 This would be, at least, intelligible if she did
not also teach that " there is really no such thing as
mortal mind ; " 3 that " disease is an impression orig-
inating in the unconscious mortal mind, and becoming
at length a conscious belief that the body or matter
suffers, ... a growth of illusion springing from
a seed of thought, either your own thought or

her disciples and general readers she intimates that she can " explicate
spiritual meanings more fully " by " practical teaching," i. e., presumably
by attendance on her well paid lectures (p. 17).

1 " Homeopathy ; Its Friends and its Foes." Annual address by Dr.
H. M. Paine, President of the Homeopathic Medical Society of the State
of New York, 1888, Trans. Vol, XXIII.

2 P. 312, 3 P. 4I9.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 21

another's;"1 that body "is the seedling that starts
thought, and sends it to the brain for consciousness ; "2
that " the entire mortal body is evolved from mortal
mind," so that a bunion would be insanity if mortal
mind would only call the foot the brain ; 3 that matter
" is another name for mortal mind " 4 and " disappears
under the miscroscope of spirit ; " 5 and that pain, which
is presumably suffering, is " a belief without an ade-
quate cause." 6 We are also taught that " disease has
no intelligence to move itself about or change itself
from one form to another." 7 Taking again the sen-
tence just quoted, and substituting these definitions
for words, we have this remarkable result : " It is the
faith of mortal mind {i. e., nothing) that changes its
own self-inflicted sufferings (i. e.9 beliefs without ade-
quate cause) and produces a new effect upon the body"
(i. e., an evolution of mortal mind, or nothing, which
therefore is itself nothing).

Before this jargon one may fancy the delighted new
thinker, like dear Alice after reading the Jabberwock,
gloriously filled with ideas, but entirely ignorant of
the meaning. The most that can be made of her
theory is that disease does not exist save as a false
belief to be treated with argument ; and the positive
treatment of it is as follows : First of all, buy Mrs.
Eddy's books and have the patient do so.8 This will
increase the circulation— of the book, if not of the
patient. Next, deny that there is any disease, and
make the patient agree with you. " Remember that
all is mind and there is no matter. You are only

JP. 182. 2 p. !^I# 3 P. 300. 4 p. 542. 5 p. 1 j. 6 p. -342. 7 p. 301,

22 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

seeing or feeling a belief, whether it be cancer, de-
formity, consumption, or fracture that you deal with."1
Having thus established that the disease does not ex-
ist, you next proceed to "meet the incipient stage of
disease with such powerful eloquence as a Congress-
man would employ to defeat the passage of an inhu-
man law."2 No disease can stand that. Still more
oddly, you are to call this disease, whose existence
you deny, by name, but mentally, lest if the patient
hear its name, his mortal mind will hold on to the dis-
ease; for, apparently, the mortal mind, which itself
has no existence, although impressed by absent treat-
ment and the reading of Mrs. Eddy's book, cannot let
go any disease whose name is spoken out loud. But
if you only address the disease mentally and speak the
truth to it, " tumors, ulcers, tubercles, inflammation,
pains and deformed backs ... all dream shad-
ows, dark images of mortal thought, will flee before
the light." 3 To the practical mind it would seem that
the " healer " would need some medical knowledge to
make his differential diagnosis of " ulcers " and " tu-
mors," and to distinguish between abscess, aneurism,
and other abnormal conditions. And if disease does
not exist, and has no intelligence to move or change
itself, it does seem a bad waste of time to have anv
discussion at all with it.

If this were all of Christian Science, it might do lit-
tle or no harm. No one would object to letting a
" Scientist " hold mental conversations with the patient's
disease, or give " absent treatments," or encourage the
sick to " look on the bright side." And a kindly soul

IP. 297. 2 p. 322. 3 p. 301,

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 23

would no more restrain a " Scientist " from playing
with his metaphysics than he would interfere with a
hopeful kitten that whirls in happy pursuit of its own
elusive tail — always in sight, yet never quite attained.
But it is the negative teachings of the so-called Science
that render its disciples pestilent and dangerous to the
public health. Declaring the incantations of the Es-
quimaux to be " as effective in cure of the sick as the
modus operandi of civilized practitioners," Mrs. Eddy
goes on to teach that physiology is anti-Christian. " It
teaches us to have other gods before Jehovah. It
is neither moral nor spiritual." l In its place she would
substitute harmony ; for " discord is the nothingness
of error, harmony is the somethingness of truth."2
"Sickness is inharmony."3 This " new thought" is
even older than that famous little dinner given by
Agathon, where, notwithstanding the presence of Plato
and Socrates, Aristophanes got tipsy and asked Eryx-
imachus, the physician, why, if the latter really be-
lieved health to be only harmony and love among the
members, he should prescribe anything so inharmonious
as sneezing to cure hiccoughs.

No physician is to be called in by the sick. " The
Scientist who understands and adheres strictly to the
rules of my system ... is the only one safe to
employ in difficult and dangerous cases." 4

Every form of treatment, Homeopathy,5 Mind Cure,6
Movement Cure,7 Animal Magnetism, Clairvoyance,
Mediumship and Mesmerism,8 is impartially con-
demned. Against animal magnetism Mrs. Eddy is

IP. 171. 2 p. 22. 3 p. i77. 4 pp. ^6, 324. 5 p. jgj. 6 p. 376.
* P. 364. 8 pp. 212, 213, 219, 302.

24 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

particularly bitter, apparently because, having been
once " personally manipulated " by the late Mr. P. P.
Quimby, "an uneducated man, but a distinguished
mesmerist," it was thereafter stated that Mr. Quimby
was the " originator " of her writings.1 " It is morally
wrong to examine the body in order to ascertain if
we are in health," and " to employ drugs for the cure
of disease shows a lack of faith in God.2 " A Chris-
tian Scientist never recommends hygiene." 3 Dieting,
dosing and exercise are unscientific.4 It is foolish to
suppose that it is exercise that increases the muscles
of a blacksmith's arm ; for, if that were so the ham-
mer, which takes just as much exercise, would also
grow.5 This is one of the most powerful and char-
acteristic arguments of the new thinker. Bathing is
thus deprecated. " Bathing and rubbing, to alter the
secretions or remove unhealthy exhalations from the
cuticle, receive a useful rebuke from Christian Heal-
ing. We must beware of making clean the outside of
the platter only. A hint may be taken from the Irish
emigrant whose filth does not affect his happiness
when mind and body rest on the same basis." 6 " The
Scientist takes the best care of his body when he
leaves it most out of his thought, and like the Apostle
Paul is ' willing rather to be absent from the body
and present with the Lord.' " 7 " The daily ablutions
of an infant are no more natural and necessary than

i p. 6. a p. 38.

3 P. 374; Mrs. E. D. 0.,."at an early age learned hygiene (!) and
practiced it faithfully for over twenty years " with such poor results that
she " had once been laid out for dead " and " did not want to come to."
A partial reading of " Science and Health " made her " a well and hearty
woman." (Misc. W., pp. 401-403.)

4 P. 376. 5 p. 209. e p. 354. 7 p. 35S.

Its legal aspects. 25

it would be to take a fish out of water once a day and
cover it with dirt, in order to make it thrive more
vigorously thereafter in its native element." l Medical
study is harmful. "Anatomy, physiology, treatises
on health — sustained by what is called material law —
are the husbandmen of sickness and disease."2
Proper clothing is unnecessary ; for " you would never
conclude that flannel is better than controlling Mind
for warding off pulmonary disease, if you understood
the Science of being." 3 If one be only a Christian
Scientist he " may expose himself in a state of perspi-
ration to draughts of air without experiencing the us-
ual ill effects ; " 4 i. e., Christian Science is prophy-
lactic, and this is expressly asserted.5

The foregoing is all bad enough as to adults ; but,
when it concerns them only, something may be said
in favor of the decision, cited by Puff end orf, in the
case of a patient who sued a horse-doctor for blinding
him by applying to his eyes the same ointment that
was used for horses. The Cadi decided against the
suitor, because: "If the Fellow," says he, "had not
been an Ass, he had never applied himself to a Horse-
doctor." 6

But what is to be said of such advice as this to
mothers ? " Mind can regulate the condition of the
stomach, bowels, food, temperature of your child far
better than matter can do so. Your views and those
of other people on these subjects produce their good
or bad results in the health of your child." 7 " Your
child can have worms, if you say so, or whatever

i P. 159. 2 P. 183. 3 p. 160. 4 p. 314. 5 p.348, e puff. Book, V., Ch.
IV. *P. 158.

26 CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE.

malady is timorously holden in your mind relative to
the body. Thus you lay the foundation of disease and
death, and educate your child into discord ? l Even
if a child is attacked by contagious disease, Mrs. Eddy
attributes the cause to maternal fear.2 Thus the
mother is taught that her child's illness depends upon
her fancy, and that neither physicians, remedies nor
decent, cleanly care are necessary for its aid. And in
the record of deaths resulting from the treatment of
Christian Scientists, Faith Curers, Peculiar People, et
id genus omne, a large proportion are those of
neglected children suffering from acute inflammations
of the lungs, diphtheria, pneumonia and like com-
plaints. One horrible and typical case in Brooklyn
was brought to public notice by an undertaker called
in by a Faith Curer to bury the latter's child, six
years of age, dead from diphtheria. Two other chil-
dren, one about eight, the other less than two years
old, were found suffering from the same disease. The
father explained his failure to call in medical aid by
saying he did not believe in doctors since he believed
in Christ.3 Here his delusion caused not only the
death of his own child, but put in peril the public
health. The same neglect would have occurred had
the case been smallpox or scarlet fever.

A number of even more harrowing cases might be
cited, did space or inclination serve ; but their recital
is needless. i

Contrary to ordinary belief, even prayer is es-

1 P. 159. 2 P. 334. 3N. Y. papers, March I., 1890.

4 The New York World of Aug. 12, 1899, prints a list of forty-one per-
sons alleged to have suffered from this delusion. It omits many to be
found in a scrap-book kept by the writer.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 27

chewed. " The only beneficial effect of prayer is on
the human mind, making it act more powerfully on
the body through a stronger faith in God. This,
however, is one belief casting out another, a belief in
the unknown casting out a belief in sickness." l And
when we remember that " belief can only bring on
disease, it can never relieve it," the inefficacy of
prayer becomes manifest; and we are expressly
taught that "if we pray to God as a person, this
will prevent us letting go the human doubts and fears
that attend all personalities."2

The most ignorant persons set themselves up to
cure the sick under this system as a business and for
hire. Mrs. Eddy herself accumulates and publishes
certificates of cures by herself, by her disciples and
by the mere reading of her book, that are contrary to
all possibility in human experience and smack in
every line of the charlatan. Her volume of "Mis-
cellaneous Writings " is in part made up of certifi-
cates differing from those that usually accompany
quack nostrums, only in that they are more incredible
than those the ordinary charlatan ventures to put
forth. She cures cancers in one visit. A child of
eighteen months, suffering for months with ulceration
of the bowels, and given up by the " M. D.'s," is lifted
from his cradle and kissed, he at once begins to play
with his toys, and that night before retiring eats
heartily of cabbage ! 3 One Mrs. Armstrong writes,

i P. 488. 2 P. 492, cf. 484 and 393.

3 P. 200. This certificate dated "Lynn, June, 1873," savs "Mrs.
Eddy came in," etc., although Mrs. Glover-Patterson did not marry Mr.
Eddy until four years later, in 1877 — (See note to tne case against Chris-
tian Science, p. 60.)

28 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

without date or address, to enclose a check for $500,
in payment of an absent treatment by which heart
disease and dropsy, lasting from childhood, were
cured immediately upon Mrs. Eddy's receipt of a
letter from Mr. Armstrong. x Hood's case of " Mrs.
F., so exceedingly deaf," who purchased an ear
trumpet, "and very next day heard from her hus-
band in Botany Bay," becomes modest in comparison.
But, although Mrs. Eddy personally cures fractures —
did, in fact, by " absent treatment " cure the crushed
foot of Mr. R. O. Badgeley, of Cincinnati;2 and al-
though she expressly teaches that her Science cures
" acute and chronic forms of disease,3 and fractures " 4
as well as other deformities — nay more, has "raised
the dying to life and health " 5 — she nevertheless says :
" Until the advancing age admits the efficacy and
supremacy of Mind, it is better to leave the adjustment
of broken bones and dislocations to the fingers of sur-
geons, while you confine yourself chiefly to mental
reconstruction and the prevention of inflammations or
protracted confinement."6

Here Mrs. Eddy confesses the sham of her theory.
Earth often covers the physicians' mistakes, but not
so frequently those of the surgeon. The vast major-
ity of suits for malpractice are in surgical cases. The
results of operations often demonstrate the malprac-
tice. And is it not fair thus to paraphrase this sly
advice ; " Take any risk with the sick. If the patient
die, who can prove that you caused the death ? But
be wary in surgical cases, for there ignorance and lack
of skill, being demonstrable, may cause you to pay

»P. 199. 2 P. 199. 3 p. !86. < P. 358. 6 p. 3^, ept328.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 29

heavily for your persumption ? " The fitting climax
to this farrago of undigested metaphysics and vain
boasting l is, that hunger and thirst are also mental
impressions to be argued with,2 that food is not requi-
site to support life, although " it would be foolish to
stop eating until we gain more goodness / " 3 and, lastly,
that, as there is no mortal mind from which to make
a mortal body, immortality is already here.4

The methods of this extraordinary system of cure
for the sick have been set out thus fully and, it is be-
lieved, fairly, because in no reported law case have
they been brought before the Court, and the author-
ity of any adjudicated case depends upon the facts in-
volved. Obiter dicta are often as misleading as met-
aphysical speculation. Summed up, these methods
consist positively in reading Mrs. Eddy's book and
arguing with non-existent disease ; and negatively in
abstaining from everything that experience shows to
be of benefit to the sick, not only specific medication
and operative treatment, but diet, exercise and per-
sonal cleanliness. The evidence of the senses is not
to be heeded ; it is even forbidden to admit that a lit-
tle child needs medical care. Surely no well-balanced
mind will deny that this delusion is full of danger, no
matter how sincerely and honestly many believe in it.

Thus we are brought to our third inquiry : Do ex-
isting laws suffice us in dealing with this delusion and
its votaries, or is further legislation necessary in the

1 " There are certain self-evident facts. This is one of them that who-
ever practices the Science I teach, through which the Divine mind
pours light and healing upon this generation cannot pursue mal-practice,
or harm patient" (p. 219).

8 PP. 329, 334- 3 P. 332- 4 pP- 316-327.

30 CHEiSTIAlSr SCIENCE.

premises! With the metaphysical and religious as-
pects of the delusion, the law has no more concern
than with those of Mormonism, Voodooism, Shaker-
ism, Oneidaism or any of the myriad forms of God or
Devil worship. Ephraim may join himself to all the
idols he desires, the law lets him alone. But neither
in this life nor the life to come is every one who cries,
" Lord, Lord, have we not in Thy name done manv won-
derf ul works ? " to escape just punishment for working
iniquity, or to be received among the saints upon his
own uncorroborated testimony. By the Mormon cases,
the Supreme Court of the United States has made it
plain, if it were ever in doubt, that no one under the
cloak of religion can violate law to gratify lust or
greed, or for any other motive. Thugs may not kill
because murder is their creed. And there is no rea-
son why ignorant persons 1 should be allowed to trifle
with human life to the public peril, even though they
wish to do well and have no worse motive than to re-
ceive a fee.

The right of the State to forbid the ignorant to en-
gage in the business of healing the sick by any system

1 In order to be satisfied of the ignorance, recklessness, credulity, and
assurance of the " Scientists," one need only read the " certificates " pub-
lished in " Miscellaneous Works" along with Mrs. Eddy's " Poems." It
seems that the new gospel has been successfully preached in the Massa-
chusetts State Prison. One of Mrs. Eddy's correspondents, "J. B. H."
whether a temporary sojourner in the prison or not is not quite clear,
writes that after reading " Science and Health " for some days he was
" affected by drowsiness followed by vomiting. This lasted several
hours." He then slept and " awoke healed." Thereafter in three treat-
ments he cured a child " that the M. D.?s said was dying.of lung fever."
In two treatments he cured a ruptured child ; and in one treatment he
healed an old lady of heart disease and chills. To top off with and keep
his hand in, he, in two weeks of absent treatment, cured a lady of insanity
who never saw him, nor even suspected what he was up to. Misc. W.,
pp. 405, 406.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 31

whatever, is established; and therefore whether or
not such persons may practice Christian Science de-
pends entirely upon the phrasing of the statute.
Where, as in Nebraska, the law defines a medical
practitioner as one who " professes to heal " the sick,
the practice of Christian Science by unlicensed per-
sons is a violation of l&w ; but in jurisdictions where
medical practice is forbidden, yet the use of drugs or
instruments is made the test of such* practice, the
" Scientist " may pursue his business. So, too, the
liability of these people to penalties for their failure
to report contagious diseases or deaths of patients de-
pends on the phrasing of the law or ordinance, and
they certainly should be required, if allowed to prac-
tice, to make such reports, even though they believe
in neither disease nor death.

In England, unlicensed medical practice is not a
misdemeanor ; and, therefore, an illegal practitioner
cannot there, as with us, be found guilty, construct-
ively, of manslaughter, should his patients die. But
it is a general rule of law that a person undertaking a
duty must possess skill and knowledge competent for
its successful discharge. If a person engage in the
business of curing the sick without such competent
skill and knowledge, he becomes civilly liable in dam-
ages for injuries resulting from his incompetence ;
and if, by reason of his gross negligence, ignorance or
carelessness, his patient die, then he is guilty of man-
slaughter at least, and may be guilty of murder.
Upon these principles the famous quack, St. John
Long, was convicted of manslaughter at the Old
Bailev in 1830. And, in 1884, one Pierce was simi-

y ' ■

32 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

larly convicted in Massachusetts. This gross and
wicked negligence may manifest itself either posi-
tively, as when one administers recklessly or igno-
rantly a powerful drug, or negatively, as when a Chris-
tian Scientist or other fanatic, thrusting himself into
the place of a competent person and assuming the
duty of care, deprives the patient of proper attention,
and permits or advises unsuitable diet, improper cloth-
ing or other harmful violation of hygienic laws. The
fact that Christian Scientists, Faith Curers, Mind
Curers, and practitioners of like sort, do not custom-
arily administer drugs or use instruments, is not suf-
ficient reason why they should escape liability for in-
juries resulting from their treatment. It is said in a
very recent case that a shipmaster may be liable in
damages for negligently losing his brig, although his
negligence was due to temporary insanity ; the gen-
eral rule of law being that, as the results of his mis-
fortune should be borne by him, not by the equally
innocent, an insane person is to be held civilly re-
sponsible for " what in sane persons would be willful
and negligent conduct." Thus, the best plea that
could be made for a Christian Scientist, religious in-
sanity, would be of no avail in an action against him
for damages proven to have resulted from his negli-
gence.

The sum of the matter, then, is this : Under existing
laws, wherever the statute forbids' any oiue without
license to undertake to " heal " the sick, or uses equiv-
alent words, and wherever the phrase "practice of
medicine " is not construed by the Courts as applying
exclusively to the administration of drugs and the use

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 33

of instruments, Christian Scientists, undertaking the
cure of the sick without license to practice medicine,
become subject to the penalties of the law. They may-
be also, according to the phrasing of the statute, pun-
ishable for failure to report contagious diseases, and
for other violations of health ordinances. They are
civilly liable in damages for their malfeasances and
misfeasance ; and, if death can be shown to have re-
sulted from their gross ignorance or neglect, they may
be indicted for manslaughter. English cases appar-
ently to the contrary seem to proceed upon a theory
that the negligent persons owed no duty to the de-
ceased. The recent case, for example, of the news-
paper correspondent who died while in care of Chris-
tian Scientists establishes nothing. It was not prose-
cuted— for what reason does not satisfactorily appear,
but presumably because the fanatics in attendance on
decedent were only rendering friendly services and
did not owe deceased a duty. I may lawfully believe
in suicide and discuss the examples of Socrates and
Cato without being liable for the death of a friend
who imitates them, but I may not lawfully partici-
pate in the suicidal act. And Mr. Justice Hawkins is
said by the Lam Journal to have carefully guarded
himself against appearing to sanction the course
adopted in Frederic's case.

New legislation in the premises is not called for,
except, perhaps, to define "practice of medicine"
more broadly in some jurisdictions. Such a definition
was stricken from the New York Medical Act of 1887
by a Senator who feared it would operate against a
friend of his who kept a bathing house. Last year a,

34 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

bill of somewhat the same purport seems to have been
abandoned by the Senator having it in charge, for no
other reason, so far as can be learned, than that more
than the usual number of ladies appeared to oppose it.
Children are now very generally protected by special
laws. No statute can cure an adult of folly. Laws
specifically forbidding the practice of Christian Science
would only provide that cheap martyrdom which
would be welcomed by an advertising business, and
would be wrong, both in principle and policy. The
delusion itself is bound to die, as did that of John of
» Leyden and many another before and since that

prophet's time ; and it is quite certain to be succeeded
, by others.

In New York city about 1832, a period of "great
awakening " that begat Mormonism and many other
sects — among them one in Kentucky, whose members,
in order to win Heaven by making themselves as little
children, used to crawl on their hands and knees in
church, play marbles, trundle hoops and otherwise
manifest their infantile madness — one Matthews,1 a
carpenter, having assumed the name Matthias, pro-
claimed himself to be God, the Father. He found be-
lievers, most of them ignorant but some intelligent,
procured much money and ruined many persons. He
and his disciples claimed to heal the sick quite as suc-
cessfully as the Scientists now do. One of them, a
Mr. Pierson, a victim of religious delusion, even before
the coming of Matthias, had endeavored under most
distressing and pathetic circumstances publicly to raise
his wife from the dead, accepting literally the verse

1 Matthias and his Impostures, Harpers, 1836.

ITS LEGAL ASPECTS. 35

of the General Epistle of St. James directing the elders
to anoint and pray over the sick, and promising that
" the Lord shall raise him up." Matthias, being even-
tually indicted for procuring $630 from a Mr. Folger
under the false pretence that he was God, able to re-
mit sins, and would communicate the Holy Ghost to
said Folger, the District Attorney entered a nolle
prosequi for these reasons : To maintain the indict-
ment, he said, I must prove that defendant's pretences
were false and would deceive a man of ordinary intel-
ligence and prudence, but no sane person would believe
that Matthias is God, nor can I establish the falsity of
his statement by legal evidence. Matthias was, how-
ever, convicted on lesser charges.

The memory of the adventuress, Diss de Bar, is
fresh. In 1888 she was convicted by a New York
jury of fraud in obtaining money from a lawyer of
admittedly large attainments, and a former associate
of Mr. "Webster. She, too, sought to cloud the real
issue by claiming that the right to believe in Spiritual-
ism was involved. During her trial, the usual train
of " ladies " and " intelligent persons " attended her,
one of her satellites being a former diplomat and an
ex-Regent of the University of the State. Since her
imprisonment her star has waned. These cases illus-
trate at once the difficulty and possibilities of dealing
with religious fanatics through existing laws, when
wrong theory is reduced to harmful practice.

That Christian Scientists frequently offend against
the criminal law seems to be clear, and their prosecu-
tion in such cases would be of value if it enlightened
the public as to their real teaching; for it seems

36 CHKISTIAST SCIENCE.

scarcely possible that an intelligent person, becoming
fully acquainted with " Science and Health " and its
teachings, could fail to visit Mrs. Eddy's cult with
condemnation as strong as that which she unsparingly
lays upon the competing cults of Faith Curers, Mind
Curers, Animal Magnetists and Clairvoyants ; or that
any one of taste or humor, after reading the
" Poems " and quack advertisements of the " Miscella-
neous Writings," would not blush to confess himself a
disciple of the new " thought." Publicity will destroy
the cult far more quickly than legislation.

II.

THE CASE AGAIISTST CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.1

Iisr the March number of the North American Re-
view, it was essayed in the article, " Christian Science
and its Legal Aspects," to state clearly, as far as that
is possible, the teachings of Mrs. Eddy ; using, in order
to be scrupulously fair, her own words, and referring
each citation to its page in her text-book, " Science
and Health, with Key to the Scriptures."

It was there said : " Publicity will destroy the cult
far more quickly than legislation." In that belief it is
proposed here, with equal fairness, by quotations from
her books, " Miscellaneous Writings " and " Ketrospec-
tion and Introspection," the latter being autobiograph-
ical in character, to show something of the life, pre-
tensions, methods and literary output of this remarkable
woman, leaving the reader to judge from her own
words whether she is, as her partisans assert, learned,
modest, truthful and generous, or, as her adversaries
declare, ignorant, irreverent, boastful, and greedy.
We assume that candid, intelligent persons, interested
in her teachings and alleged marvellous cures, are
willing to learn the truth and try the teacher upon
her utterances in the forum of common sense. * If
Mrs. Eddy did nothing more than teach a philosophic
or religious theorv we should waste no time in aca-
demic discussion of it. But she teaches a practice
that daily puts the lives of adults and, more horrible

1 From the North American Review.

38 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

still, of little children at the mercy of persons ignorant
both of medical and mental science.

Some of her quondam friends and disciples have
published matter denouncing Mrs. Eddy and attribut-
ing her theories and her cure of a severe illness to a
Mr. P. P. Quimby,1 deceased, whom she disparages as
"an uneducated man." To our apprehension, a fair
representation of the woman and her works will be
more profitable than heated controversy or labored
argument. "We concede to her, for what it is worth,
the discovery of Christian Science, and ask no more
than that the reader, friendly or hostile, examine
judicially these gleanings from her works and form
his own conclusions.

It has been said that the best corrective of judg-
ment is the sense of humor, the faculty of appreciat-
ing one's own absurdities. Mrs. Eddy and her disciples
take themselves very seriously. But that Mrs. Eddy
considers the rival system of Faith Cure ridiculous,
appears from this merry jest of hers : -

" When looking deeply into the effects of faith
based on corporeal personality instead of the Divine
Principle, the following colloquy is suggested :

" ' Have you ever tried the faith-cure ? ' asked a
solemn looking stranger of a gentleman in a. street
car. ' I have," was the answer. 4 Do you believe in
it ? ' ' I do.' ' May I ask of what you were cured ? '
1 Certainly ; I was cured of my faith.' " 2

Thus, by example, she invites a display of her own
drolleries.

1 See two articles in the Arena for May, 1899, by Horatio W. Dresser
and Josephine C. Woodbury.

2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 68,

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 39

Who, then, and what is Mrs. Mary Moss Baker
Glover Patterson Eddy, who in 1866, threw light
upon the Gospels for lack of which saints, sages and
poets, stumbling in darkness through the ages, have
failed to apprehend the Saviour's teaching ; who has
written a book the mere reading of which cures
cancer ; to whom churches are built wherein is read
the Lord's Prayer expanded and improved by her
interpolations ?

One of her foremost apostles, Mr. Carol Norton, a
young gentleman belonging to "The International
Board of Lectureship of the Mother Church of Chris-
tian Science in Boston, Mass.," in a lecture copyrighted
in 1898,1 presumably with her approval, thus describes
her— he uses the past tense, but the lady still lives as
mortal mind understands the term :

" A quiet dignity and a divine perseverance were
her conspicuous characteristics. Her life motives were
essentially unselfish, philanthropic and idealistic. As
a student she was penetrating, inquiring, progressive.
Perhaps her strongest point was that she always
worked in a direct line. One of her most marked
characteristics was that, if she had worked mentally in
a wrong direction, she could turn about with intelli-
gent ease. . . . While from the human standpoint
she inherited the refinement that goes with culture of
family and moral rectitude, yet there was a marked
degree of spiritual grace, delicacy and elegance which
comes not from human ancestry, neither from commun-
ion with nature. It was the exquisite coloring of the
touch of the hands of divine Mind which opens the
petals of thought, as it does of the opening rose, and
evolves a symmetry of disposition, temperament and

1 Printed in the Troy Record, February 28, 1899.

40 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

poise which is at once recognized as of Divine not
human origin. . . . She spent no time in intellec-
tual drifting. Intuition and logic she united in her
mental processes of reasoning. . . . Adherence
to the impersonal and scientific deductions of the phil-
osophical teachings of Mary Baker Eddy represents
nothing different from the loyalty of a mathematician
to the unchanging rule of mathematics."

The italics are ours. If the description seems per-
fervid, it should be remembered that Mrs. Eddy calls
herself and is called by her disciples " Mother," * and
Mr. Norton's words are little stronger than those
addressed by pius ^Eneas to his dam, "Haud tibi
voltus mortalis, nee vox hominem sonat: 0, dea
certe ! "

Any reader of Mrs. Eddy's books will admit the
ease with which she turns about ; whether it be intel-
ligent or consistent with logic and loyalty to unchang-
ing rules is another matter.

An apostle worthy of the name should have a some-
what extraordinary childhood, and Mrs. Eddy writes :

" For some twelve months, when I was about eight
years old, I repeatedly heard a voice calling me dis-
tinctly by name, three times in an ascending scale."

Her mother persistently ignored this occurrence,
until one day a cousin, Mehitable Huntoon, also heard
the voice. Then Mrs. Baker told Mary of little Sam-

1 Thus an alleged disciple writes : " Dear Mother : The most blessed
of women ! Oh, how I long to sit within range of your voice and hear
the Truth that comes to you from on High ! for none could speak such
wondrous thoughts as have come from your pen, except it be « the Spirit
that speaketh in you.' " " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 415.

Mrs. Eddy constantly applies the title to herself, for example : " I, for
one, would be pleased to have the Christian Science Board of Directors
itemize a bill of this church's gifts to Mother." " Miscellaneous Writ-
ings," p. 131.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 41

uel and bade her answer when next she heard the
voice, " Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth." The
child obeyed ; but the result was disappointing :

" When the call came again I did answer, in the
words of Samuel, but never again to material senses
was that mysterious call audibly repeated." l

Apparently the voice had nothing particular to say.

At the age of twelve, Mary was admitted to the
Congregationalist Church, after much perturbation
over the doctrine of unconditional election or predes-
tination, due to very creditable unwillingness to be
saved if her brothers and sisters were to be damned.
Her mental distress brought on fever, so the physician
said; and her mother bade her seek God in prayer.
Obedience this time brought an excellent result :

" A soft glow of ineffable joy came over me, the
fever was gone, and I arose and dressed myself in a
normal condition of health. Mother saw this and
was glad. The physician marvelled ; and the ' horri-
ble decree ' of Predestination — as John Calvin rightly
called his own tenet — forever lost its power over
me."2

Notwithstanding her refusal to accept Calvin's doc-
trine, the good pastor insisted that she had been
" truly regenerated ; " and she was received into the
communion, of which she says :

"My connection with this religious body was re-
tained till I founded a church of my own, built on
the basis of Christian Science, Jesus Christ himself
being the chief corner stone."2,

1 Under the caption, " Voices not our own " (" Retrospection and Intro-
spection," pp. 16-18).

2 " Theological Reminiscences," " Retrospection and Introspection," pp.
20-24.

42 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

In telling of her Early Studies,1 Mrs. Eddy accounts
for her constant disregard of the once respected shade
of Lindley Murray :

" My father was taught that my brain was too large
for my body, and so kept me much out of school, but
I gained book-knowledge with far less labor than is
usually requisite. At ten years of age I was as
familiar with Lindley Murray's Grammar as I was
with the "Westminster Catechism ; and the latter I had
to repeat every Sunday. My favorite studies were
Natural Philosophy, Logic and Moral Science. To
my brother Albert I was indebted for lessons in the
ancient tongues, Hebrew, Greek and Latin. My
brother studied Hebrew during his college vacations.
After my discovery of Christian Science, most of the
knowledge I had gleaned from school books vanished
like a dream."

This unfortunate effect of Mrs. Eddy's discovery,
apparent on almost every page of her writings, ac-
counts for her early defence of her system against
the charge of Pantheism upon the assumption that
"the word Pantheism was derived from the sylvan
God Pan," and also for her confusion of Gnosticism
with Agnosticism.2 These errors of mortal mind are
quite understandable when we consider that the
teacher, if she ever knew anything of history, reli-
gion, or philosophy, had forgotten all that she had
learned from books.

Miss Mary Moss Baker in 1843 married Col. George
Washington Glover, of South Carolina,3 of whom she
says :

1 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 19.

2 May "Arena," p. 561.

3 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 24.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 43

" He was spared to me for only one brief year. He
was in Wilmington, North Carolina, when the yellow
fever raged in that city, and was suddenly attacked by
this insidious disease^ which in his case proved fatal." l

This admission that " insidious disease " exists and
can rage must be a slip of the pen. We are all
aware now that Disease and Death are only errors
of mortal mind.

Upon Col. Glover's death, his widow returned to
New England, where a child was born who, at the
age of four years, was sent away and not seen by her
again until, at the age of thirty-four, he visited her in
Boston. Upon their separation she wrote the poem
" Mother's Darling," of which she gives us only one
verse :

" Thy smile through tears,, as sunshine o'er the sea,
Awoke new beauty in the surge's roll !
Oh, life is dead, bereft of all, with thee, —
Star of my earthly hope, babe of my soul.'/2

Mrs. Mary Moss Baker Glover contracted second
nuptials with a gentleman whose name does not ap-
pear in " Eetrospection and Introspection," although
the event is thus referred to :

"My second marriage was very unfortunate, and
from it I was compelled to ask for a bill of divorce,
which was granted me in the city of Salem, Massachu-
setts. My dominant thought in marrying again was
to get back my child. The disappointment which fol-
lowed was terrible. His stepfather was envious ; and
although George was a tender-hearted and manly boy,
he hated him as much as I loved him."3

Adherence to Mr. Murray's forgotten rules might

1 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 24.
2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 26.
3" Retrospection and Introspection," p. 27.

44 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

have made clearer who hated whom ; and it is cer-
tainly unfortunate that anybody hated any one; for
hate, we are taught, is, like fear, a cause or form of
disease. It appears, however, from a letter of the
lady who is now Mrs. Eddy, written on March 7,
1883, to the Boston Post and quoted by Mr. Dresser1
that this second consort was Dr. Patterson, " a distin-
guished dentist " who, while his wife was away from
home, undergoing Mr. Quimby's treatment, eloped
" with a married woman from one of the wealthiest
families." The distinction of the doctor and the
wealth of the erring lady might seem to have been
mentioned as softening the blow, were it not that, in
reality, there was no blow to soften, as transpires
from these words of the apparently deserted wife :

" It is well to know, dear reader, that this bit of
material history is but the record of dreams, not of
real existence, and the dream has no place in Chris-
tian Science. It is as ' a tale that is told,' and as ' the
shadow when it declineth.' "2

Notwithstanding— perhaps, indeed on account of —
this unreality of marriage, Mrs. Mary Moss Baker.
Glover-Patterson, thirty-four years after her first al-
liance, and when somewhere about sixty years of age,
as nearly as we can compute, entered upon a third, of
which she says under the caption, " A True Man : " 3

" My last marriage was with Asa Gilbert Eddy, and
was a blessed and spiritual union, solemnized at Lynn,
Massachusetts, by the Rev. Samuel Barrett Stewart, in
the year 1877. Dr. Eddy was the first student to

1 May " Arena" p. 545.

2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 27.

3 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 54.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 45

publicly announce himself a Christian Scientist, and
place these symbolic words on his office sign. He
forsook all to follow in this line of light. He was the
first organizer of a Christian Science Sunday-school,
which he superintended. He also taught a special
Bible-class ; and he lectured so ably on Scriptural
topics that even ministers listened to him with mingled
surprise and approbation. He was remarkably suc-
cessful in Mind-healing, and untiring in his chosen
work. In 1882 he passed away, with a smile of peace
and love resting on his serene countenance." l

To our natural instinct, this dealing with a lady's re-
peated dreams is distasteful. We lack sympathy with
the common desire to pry into love affairs of the great.
But when philosophers like Jean Jacques and Mrs.
Eddy insist on taking us behind the veil, there is nothing
for it but to drop our sandals and trot along. Indeed,
unless we yielded our scruples in the present case, we
should by excess of delicacy lose the " nexus " and be
plunged into obscurity. This is Mrs. Eddy's avowed
reason for relating these three " dreams " and shadows
that declined :

1 It is said in the May Arena (p. 563) : " The physician who con-
ducted the autopsy says that the death was the result of distinctly de-
veloped heart disease ; but Mrs. Eddy declared that it was the result of
arsenical poisoning mentally ad?7iinistered''\f However that may be, it is
true that Christian Science did not save Mr. Eddy, although, if we may
believe these words of his wife, it would have saved her. " When the
mental malpractice of poisoning people was first undertaken by a mesmer-
ist, to test that malpractice, I experimented by taking some large doses of
morphine, to see if Christian Science could not obviate its effect ; and I
say with tearful thanks, « The drug has no effect upon me whatever.' The
hour has struck, ' If they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.' "
" Miscellaneous Writings," topic " Falsehood," p. 249. This surpasses
Cagliostro's challenge to the Empress Catherine's physician, who de-
nounced him as a quack and his elixir as a humbug. Prepare, said
Cagliostro, the most deadly poisons of which you know and I will do the
same. I will take your poison and then swallow a dose of my antidote.
You shall take mine and save yourself as best you can.

46 CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE.

"Mere historic incidents and personal events are
frivolons and of no moment, unless they illustrate the
ethics of Truth. To this end, but only to this end,
such narrations may be admissible and advisable ; but
if spiritual conclusions are separated from their prem-
ises, the nexus is lost, and the argument, with its
rightful conclusions, becomes correspondingly ob-
scure." l

In view of her concrete experiences, Mrs. Eddy's
opinions upon marriage in the abstract become inter-
esting. In reply to the question, " What do you think
of marriage ? " she answers :

"That it is often convenient, sometimes pleasant,
and occasionally a love affair. Marriage is susceptible
of many definitions. It sometimes presents the most
wretched condition of human existence. To be nor-
mal it must be a union of the affections that tends to
lift mortals higher." 2

That her so-called " science " does not fully accord
with the prevalent views of decent men she admits by
replying in this manner to the question : " Is marriage
nearer right than celibacy ? "

"Human knowledge inculcates that it is, while Sci-
ence indicates that it is not. But to force the con-
sciousness of scientific being before it is understood is
impossible, and believing otherwise would prevent
scientific demonstration. . . .

"Eights that are bargained away must not be re-
taken by the contractors, except by mutual consent.
Human nature has bestowed on a wife the right to be-
come a mother ; but if the wife esteems not this priv-
ilege, by mutual consent, exalted and increased affec-
tions, she may win a higher. Science touches the

1 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 28.
•"Miscellaneous Writings," p. 52.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 47

conjugal question on the basis of a bill of rights. Can
the bill of Conjugal Rights be fairly stated by a magis-
trate or by a minister ? " l

The abolition of marriage she seems to consider pos-
sible, if not desirable, although not now practicable.

" To abolish marriage at this period, and maintain
morality and generation, would put ingenuity to
ludicrous shifts, yet this is possible in Science, al-
though it is to-day problematic" 2

Quitting gladly these recitals of " personal events,"
that have given us " the nexus" we may turn to Mrs.
Eddy's account of her priceless discovery that the
study of Anatomy, Physiology and every branch of
Medical Science, the practice of Medicine, according to
any School, or of Animal Magnetism, Movement Cure,
Clairvoyance, Mind Cure and Faith Cure, even the
taking of exercise and observance of hygienic rules,
are all wrong and harmful, Christian Science being the
sole curative.3 She savs :

" This discovery was so new, — the basis it laid
down for physical and moral health was so hopelessly
original, and men were so unfamiliar with the sub-
ject, that I did not venture upon its publication until
later."

But eventually she published her first book, " The
Science of Man," and she tells us that when " people
were healed by simply reading it, the copyright was
infringed. I entered a suit at law and my copyright
was protected." 4

Here we see that Mrs. Eddy's " Key to the Scrip-

1 " Miscellaneous Writings," pp. 288, 289.

2 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 286.

3 See p. 23 for citations upon this point.

< "First Publications," "Retrospection and Introspection," p. 47.

48 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

tures" does not interpret literally the command,
" Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that
would borrow of thee turn not thou away ; " or the
other, " And if any man will sue thee at the law and
take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also."
She vociferously cries "copyright, copyright," lest
her students or the Quimbyites nest, Bathylluslike,
where she has builded. Fear is disease ; yet in terror
lest her own disciples filch her discovery, she sets up
this scarecrow on her literary domain.

" If you should print and publish your copy of my
works you would be liable to arrest for infringement of
copyright, which the law defines, and punishes as theft !
. . . Your manuscript copy is liable, in some way,
to be printed as your original writings, thus incurring
the penalty of the law, and increasing the record of
theft in the United States Circuit Court." *

Thus, while claiming supernatural knowledge of
God's laws, Mrs. Eddy, to protect her pocketbook,
grossly misstates the law of the land, under which in-
fringement of copyright is not theft or punishable as
crime.

It was high time for some one to discover Mrs.
Eddy's discovery ; for she says with that modesty of
which we are in quest :

" Even the Scripture gave no direct interpretation
of the Scientific basis for demonstrating the spiritual
Principle of healing, until our Heavenly Father saw
fit, through the ' Key to the Scriptures,' in 4 Science
and Health,' to unlock this 'mystery of godliness.'"2

1 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 300. See also " Retrospection and In-
trospection," under the titles "The Precious Volume," pp. 49-51, and
"Plagiarism," p. 93.

2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 51.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 49

This fear lest her copyright be infringed constantly
haunts Mrs. Eddy. As late as June 4, 1899, in her
address to the First Church at its annual communion,
she says : u All published quotations from my works
must have the author's name added to them ; quota-
tion marks are not sufficient. Borrowing from my
copyrighted works without credit is inadmissible." *

Unless she had found the key to this mystery no one
else could have done so :

" It is often asked why Christian Science was re-
vealed to me as one Intelligence analyzing, uncover-
ing, and annihilating the false testimony of the phys-
ical senses. . . . No one else can drain the cup
which I have drunk to the dregs, as the discoverer . and
teacher of Christian Science ; neither can its inspira-
tion be gained without tasting the cup." 2

P. P. Quimby in particular, Mrs. Eddy says, could
not have originated her system because :

" No mortal could first have informed the human
mind of what the mortal and carnal cannot discern."3

That is to say, Mr. Quimby being mortal and carnal
never could have discovered what Mrs. Eddy found
out because of her immortality and uncarnality. But
from this position, when it suits her purpose, she turns
with " intelligent ease," and claims for herself health
and other carnal attributes. Thus answering allega-
tions that she was " sick, and unable to speak a loud
word," Mrs. Eddy says :

" Lecturing, writing, preaching, teaching, etc., give

1 "New York Times, June 5, 1899, anc* other journals of the time.

2 " Retrospection and Introspection," pp. 38, 39.
3" Retrospection and Introspection," p. 44.

50 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

fair proof that my shadow is not growing less and sub-
stance is taking larger proportions." l

This boast puts her in a "parlous state" under her
own definitions :

"The physical senses or sensuous nature I called
error and shadow. Soul I denominated substance be-
cause soul alone is truly substantial." 2

Having discovered Christian Science, it next became
necessary to exploit the discovery and Mrs. Eddy went
about the task systematically.

" In 1867 I introduced the first purely metaphysical
system of healing since the Apostolic days. I begun
by teaching one student Christian Science Mind-heal-
ing. From this seed grew the Massachusetts Meta-
physical College in Boston, chartered in 1881. No
charter was granted for similar purposes af *ter 1883.
It is the only College hitherto for teaching the pa-
thology of spiritual power, alias the Science of Mind-
healing." 3

She does not recite her charter or its purpose ; and
what she omits to say is often more significant than
what she says. But the records of the Commonwealth
contain the instrument, which does not mention either
Christian Science or any new discovery, but simply
incorporates a College for the purpose of " teaching
pathology, ontology, therapeutics, moral science, meta-
physics and their adaptation to the treatment of dis-
ease." This charter 4 was granted under an Act con-
cerning Associations for Eeligious, Charitable, Educa-

1 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 238.

2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 90.
3" Retrospection and Introspection," p. 55.
4 See frontispiece.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 51

tional and other purposes,1 under which were organ-
ized four other colleges mentioned in the Fifth Annual
Eeport of the Illinois Board of Health 2 as fraudulent.
This Act was subsequently merged into Chapter 115
of the Public Statutes. Owing to the shameless
manufacture and sale of diplomas, the so-called " anti-
diploma law" was enacted in 1883,3 prohibiting so-
cieties organized for medical purposes under that stat-
ute from conferring degrees or issuing diplomas, unless
specially authorized by the Legislature so to do. Con-
ferment of degrees in violation of this law was made
punishable by a fine of not less than $500 nor more
than $1,000 ; and here would seem to be sufficient ex-
planation of the facts that " no charter was granted
for similar purposes after 1883," and that Mrs. Eddy
came in the end, as we shall see presently, to enter-
tain "conscientious scruples about diplomas."

Mrs. Eddy's institution, if we may believe her,
prospered marvellously. Its course was short, its
faculty small, its tuition fees greater than those of
Harvard, Yale or Columbia. Its instruction was con-
tained in one text-book. Its classes were only three
in number, the primary, the normal and the obstetric.
Mrs. Eddy seems to have taught them all ; and why
not, since one principle applies to all cases, whether
of fevers, wounds, difficult labors or any other forms
of error in mortal mind ? So far as appears from
" Eetrospection and Introspection," the only other

1 Ch. 375, Acts 1874; embodied later in Ch. 115, Public Statutes.

2 Excelsior, Bellevue, Medical Department of American University of
Boston, First Medical College of American Health Society.

3 Act June 30, 1883. — Dr. Booth in 1893 was sent to prison for selling
in New York the Excelsior's diplomas.

52 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

teachers were her last husband, Asa G. Eddy, who
taught two terms, her adopted son, Ebenezer J. Foster
Eddy,1 who taught one term, and a military gentle-
man, of whom she says :

" General Erastus 1ST. Bates taught one primary
class in 1889, after which I judged it best to close the
institution." 2

It made no particular difference in what class stu-
dents studied. The primary instruction was all suffi-
cient, and even that was unnecessary ; for Mrs. Eddy
expressly says :

" A Primary class student richly imbued with the
spirit of Christ, is a better healer and teacher than a
formal class student who partakes less of his love.
Having received my instructions in the Primary class
and afterward studied thoroughly 'Science and Health ,'
the student should not hesitate to enter upon this priv-
ileged Gospel work, and so fulfil the command of
Christ. Yea, an apt Bible scholar and a consecrated
Christian by deeply dipping into my last revised
'Science and Health? may even enter this field of
labor without any personal instruction,— heneficially
to himself and the race." 3

The curriculum consisted of only twelve lessons,
lasting half a day each and extending over three
weeks. The tuition fee was three hundred dollars.
Mrs. Eddy admits that she was staggered when this
sum suggested itself to her. But God, notwithstand-
ing her unselfishness, led her to try the experiment
and it succeeded. We are not burlesquing; that is

1 This gentleman, according to the Arena^ has renounced both Mrs.
Eddy's name and her nonsense.

2" College and Church," " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 55.
3" College Closed," " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 60, 6i,

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 53

impossible; her own words fairly travesty bur-
lesque.

" When God impelled me to set a price on my in-
struction in Christian Science Mind-healing, I could
think of no financial equivalent for an impartation of
a knowledge of that divine power which heals ; but I
was led to name three hundred dollars as the price for
each pupil in one course of lessons at my college, — a
startling sum for tuition lasting barely three weeks.
This amount greatly troubled me. I shrank from
asking it, but was finally led, by a strange Providence,
to accept this fee.

" God has since shown me, in multitudinous ways,
the wisdom of this decision ; and I beg disinterested
people to ask my loyal students if they consider three
hundred dollars any real equivalent for my instruc-
tion during twelve half days or even in half as many
lessons. Nevertheless, my list of indigent charity
scholars is very large, and I have had as many as
seventeen in one class." x

Why should her " students " have grumbled at the
price ? Keputable medical colleges require their stu-
dents to study for years before conferring degrees
upon them. They also require of them, before ad-
mission, preliminary education. Most of the States
forbid unlicensed persons to practice medicine, and
some exact a State examination of medical graduates
as prerequisite to license. But here was a school pre-
tending to teach, under the guise of religion, an in-
fallible method of cure to any one able to read a
single book of nonsense. The head of the college,
having avowed that, by the very operation of her new
discovery, she had forgotten what little she had

* " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 64.

CHKISTIAltf SCIENCE.

learned from books, naturally required no preliminary
education of her disciples. On the contrary, she ex-
pressly discouraged it, as appears from this question
and answer :

" What can prospective students of the College take
for preliminary studies ? Do you regard the study of
literature and languages as objectionable ?

"* Persons contemplating a course at the Massachu-
setts Metaphysical College, can prepare for it through
no books except the Bible and ' Science and Health
with Key to the Scriptures.' Man-made theories are
narrow, else extravagant, and always materialistic." *

Again she says :

" I recommend students not to read so-called scien-
tific works, antagonistic to Christian Science, which
advocate materialistic systems ; because such works
and words becloud the right sense of Metaphysical
Science." 2

Having thus impressed the duty of ignorance upon
her disciples, she dubbed them, within three weeks or
less, in consideration of the fee of $300, doctors of
Christian Science, and bade them treat all diseases.
The price was cheap enough. Buchanan's notorious
college offered no easier terms ; and it was not strange if
her institution prospered ; but Mrs. Eddy probably does
not underestimate its prosperity when she says that
just before its dissolution, 300 students were clamor-
ing for admission. Assume this to be true, then, at
$300 each, these " students " would have paid $90,000
for twelve half-days' instruction, or $7,500 a half-day !
Why was this Golconda closed ? From unselfishness
and conscientious scruples about diplomas !

1 " Miscellaneous Writings, " p. 64.

3 « Admonition," " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 96,

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 55

" The apprehension of what has been, and must be,
the final outcome of material organization, which
wars with Love's spiritual compact, caused me to
dread the unprecedented popularity of my College.
Students from all over our Continent and from Eu-
rope were flooding the school. At this time there
were over three hundred applications from students
desiring to enter the college, and applicants were rap-
idly increasing. Example had shown the dangers
arising from being placed on earthly pinnacles. Even
goodness shuns whatever involves material means for
the promotion of spiritual ends.

"In view of all this, a meeting was called of the
Board of Directors of my college, who, being informed
of my intention, unanimously voted that the school be
discontinued. . . .

" The Massachusetts Metaphysical College drew its
breath from me, but I was yearning for retirement.
The question was, Who else could sustain this institute,
under all that was aimed at its vital purpose, the
establishment of genuine Christian Science Healing.
My conscientious scruples about diplomas, the recent
experience of the church fresh in my thoughts, and
the growing conviction that every one should build
on his own foundation, subject to the one builder and
maker, God, — all these considerations moved me to
close my flourishing school."1

Does not this explanation over-tax credulity ? Was
any other college ever closed because of its " unprec-
edented popularity " ? Was it the anti-diploma law
that was " aimed at its vital purpose " ? Why is it,
too, that notwithstanding these " conscientious scruples
about diplomas" a great number of persons, male and
female, still tack to their names the symbolic letters
"0. S." and " C. S. D." recently acquired upon what

i " Retrospection and Introspection," pp. 60, 61.

56 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

authority it is hard to say, unless it be the right of any
free-born citizen, in the absence of prohibitory legisla-
tion, to assume any title that strikes the fancy and
appropriate all the " symbolic letters " of the alpha-
bet ? Having thus fully equipped her pupils, Mrs.
Eddy encouraged them to settle down in great cities,
not alone for the glory of God, but for this practical
reason :

" The population of our principal cities is ample to
supply many practitioners, teachers and preachers
with work." *

And in order that they might " enter this field of
labor beneficially to themselves," the shrewd Mother
thus taught :

" Christian Science demonstrates that the patient
who pays whatever he is able to pay for being healed is
more apt to recover than he who withholds a slight equiv-
alent/or health" 2

And yet these people deny in Court, when arraigned
for unlawful practice of medicine and manslaughter,
that they demand fees for their services !

When was so sordid a doctrine ever preached by
medical men? What standing would a physician
have who should teach that the cure depends upon
the fee? Is this preachment inspired by God or
Mammon, by Unselfishness or Greed ? Whatever its
inspiration, it has been so well lived up to that its
" discoverer " proudly exclaims :

" In the early history of Christian Science, among
my thousands of students few were wealthy. Now

1 " Admonition," " Retrospection and Introspection," p, 102.
8 " Miscellaneous Writings," pp. 300, 301.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 57

Christian Scientists are not indigent ; and their com-
fortable fortunes are acquired by healing mankind,
morally, physically, spiritually" l

With one or two more quotations to illustrate the
divine elegance and grace, of which Mr. Norton
speaks, and the method by which the new system of
healing is advertised, we may leave behind us very
cheerfully Mrs. Eddy and all her works. The " Mis-
cellaneous Writings " are made up in about equal pro-
portions of answers to questions, letters and essays,
doggerel rhymes and advertising certificates ; one or
two excerpts will illustrate the author's facility in
each department of her work. To one who asks :
" Has Mrs. Eddy lost her power to heal ? " she replies
modestly :

" Has the sun forgotten to shine and the planets to
revolve around it ? Who is it that discovered, dem-
onstrated and teaches Christian Science ? That one,
whoever it be, does understand something of what
cannot be lost."2

To the pertinent question : " How does Mrs. Eddy
know that she has read and studied correctly if one
must deny the evidences of the senses ; she had to use
her eyes to read ? " She answers :

" Having eyes ye see not ! I read the inspired page
through a higher than mortal sense. As matter, the
eye cannot see • and as mortal mind it is a belief that
sees. I may read the Scriptures through a belief of
eyesight, but I must spiritually understand them to
interpret their science." 3

1 Preface to " Miscellaneous Writings," p. vii.

2 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 54.
9 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 58.

58 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

Comment upon this would gild refined gold.

Another answer we quote with hesitation, and only
because it is thoroughly typical. We fear that ordi-
nary mortal minds will find it not divinely graceful
and elegant but rather vulgar and grossly irreverent,
offensive to good taste and shocking to piety.

"-Are both prayer and drugs necessary to heal ? "
says the interlocutor, and Mrs. Eddy replies : "It is
difficult to say how much one can do for himself,
whose faith is divided between Catnip and Christ ; but
not so difficult to know that if he were to serve one
master he could do vastly more."1

Mrs. Eddy's rhetorical flowers are of the gayest,
and would have delighted Mrs. Malaprop. One of
the most " hopelessly original " occurs in a warning
against Animal Magnetism, the specialty of P. P.
Quimby, but now considered by Mrs. Eddy, his late
patient, to be the "chief delusion," of which the
" honest Christian Scientist " must rid himself before
he can heal :

"For it is a Delilah who would lead him into the
toils of the enemy, where Cerberus (the apt symbol of
Animal Magnetism) waits to devour the self -deceived."2

Against Delilah and Cerberus thus conspiring, one
would be justified in combining with " an allegory
from the banks of the Mle." She delights in original
martial similes, possibly from association with Gen.
Erastus jST. Bates. Thus she says :

" As the pioneer of Christian Science I stood alone
in this conflict, endeavoring to smite error with the

^'Miscellaneous Writings," pp. 51, 52.
2 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 73,

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 59

falchion of Truth. The rare bequests of Christian
Science are costly, and they have won fields of battle
from which the dainty borrower would have fled."1

This enlistment of " bequests " in active service is
more novel than Christian Science itself. In view of
their cost and courage they seem to be a sort of Hes-
sians. Again she writes :

" With armor on, I continue the march, command
and counter-command, meanwhile interluding with
loving thought this afterpiece of battle. Supported,
cheered, I take my pen and pruning- book, to ' learn
war no more,' and with strong wing to lift my readers
above the smoke of conflict into light and liberty." 2

Why should she persist in marching, fully armed,
commanding and counter-commanding " with intelli-
gent ease," if the battle is over ? If it is still on, why
interlude its afterpiece, grasp pen and pruning-hook
and, at the same time, lift readers on a strong wing ?
It is all sadly puzzling.

Criticism of Mrs. Eddy's poetry we shall not again
venture upon. The March Review timidly suggested
that, in rhyming " debris " with " un weary," " ween "
with "dream," "now thus" with "hails us," and
" deep " with " complete," 3 the gifted author, while
showing great boldness and originality, had departed
from ordinary rhyming conventions. But this posi-
tion was demolished by a shot from the Christian
Science Sentinel, of April 20th, 1899.

"His condemnations are exactly like those usually
applied to Browning in regard to rhyme and meaning,

1 " Retrospection and Introspection," p. 38.

2 Preface to " Miscellaneous Writings," p. x.

3 See page 18.

60 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

but no mother will find fault with the following coup-
let from ' The Mother's Evening Prayer ' :

"'Thou love that guards the nestling's faltering flight!
Keep thou my child on upward wing to-night.' "

We frankly admit that no mother would find fault
with that couplet — unless she knew how to parse sim-
ple English sentences ; and we despair of answering
the argument that because Browning nods doggerel is
poetry.

But however obscure Mrs. Eddy may be in her
poetry and controversial writings, she adopts, in that
part of " Miscellaneous Writings " devoted to adver-
tising her business, a clear style so remarkably like
that of another famous lady of Lynn that it has caused
her to be called " the Lydia Pinkham of the Soul."
The certificates of cures about to be quoted are in-
cluded in Mrs. Eddy's " copyrighted " works ; and we
assume this to indicate authorship, for one as scrupu-
lous as she on this point would scarcely copyright the
productions of others. l

J. B. H. writes :

" I am glad to tell you how I was healed. Beliefs
of consumption, dyspepsia, neuralgia, piles, tobacco,

1 Since this paper's first appearance, Mr. F. W. Peabody of Boston, has
called attention to certain dates, as evidence that Mrs. Eddy's testimonials
are not always written by their ostensible signers at the times alleged.
The March Review mentioned the cure by that lady, one afternoon, of a
long-standing bowel complaint, in a baby eighteen months old, which ate
heartily of cabbage that night before retiring. The certificate of this feat
appears on page 200 of Science and Health, edition of 1887. (See page
27.) It is signed L. C. Edgecomb, is dated " Lynn, June, 1873," and
attributes the cure to " Mrs. Eddy " eo nomine. But in 1873 Mother was,
presumably, named Patterson. She does not pretend to have married
Mr. Eddy until 1877. Is. this discrepancy of dates due to lapse of memory
on the part of the person in charge of the certificate department, or was
L. C. Edgecomb's gift of prophecy as remarkable as the Edgecomb baby's
digestive apparatus ?

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 61

and bad language held me in bondage for many years.
Doctors that were consulted did nothing to relieve me,
and 1 constantly grew worse. Nearly two years ago
a lady told me that if I would read a book called
' Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,' I
wrould be healed. I told her I would ' go into it for
all it was worth,' and I have found that it is worth
all. I got the book, and read day and night : I saw
that it must be true, and believed that what I could
not then understand would be made clear later.

"After some days' reading I was affected with
drowsiness followed by vomiting. This lasted several
hours; when I fell into a sleep, and awoke healed." l

Here is a letter bubbling with unconscious humor.
It purports to come from a gentleman who owes his
life to Mrs. Eddy's book, yet fears to imperil his health
by visiting the author.

" Dear Madam : — May I thank you for your book, * Science and Health
with Key to the Scriptures,' and say how much I owe to it — almost my
very life — at a most critical time. . . .

" If it were not for the heat of your American summers (I had nine at-
tacks of dysentery in the last one), and the expense, I should dearly like
to learn from you personally ; but I must forego this, — at any rate, for the
present. If you would write me what the cost would be for a course on
Divine Metaphysics, I would try to manage it later on.

" Meanwhile, I should be grateful if you would refer me to any one in
this country who is interested similarly, for I get more kicks than half-
pence in discussing it.

" Your obliged friend,

« (Rev.) I. G. W. Bishop.
" Bovington Vicarage,

" Hemel Hempstead, Herts, England."2

K. L. H. recites this remarkable and instantaneous
cure of a child by a few pages of " Science and
Health."

" A dear little six-year-old boy of my acquaintance
was invited by his teacher, with the rest of his class

1 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 405.
8 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 408.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

in Kindergarten School, to attend a picnic one after-
noon. He did not feel that he wanted to go ; seemed
dumpish, and, according to mortal belief, was not
well ; at noon, he said he wanted to go to sleep.

" His mother took him in her lap and began to read
to him from ' Science and Health, with Key to the
Scriptures.' Very soon he expressed a wish to go to
the picnic and did go" L

We have thus given overabundantly and tediously,
perhaps, sufficient citations in Mrs. Eddy's own words
to enable any intelligent person to judge whether he
is willing to accept her intellectual and spiritual lead-
ership, and to believe that God waited nineteen hun-
dred years for her to illuminate, by such jargon as
" Science and Health," the teachings of Christ, which,
she bluntly says, could not have been apprehended
from the Scriptures alone prior to the publication of
her " Key." It is with a sense of intellectual humilia-
tion that we have dealt with these dreary and vulgar
banalities. The excuse for so doing is found, however,
in such incidents as occurred in the City of ]STew York
on Sunday, the 28th day of May of this year, 1899,
when the Metropolitan Opera House was filled with
an audience, certainly of average intelligence, to hear
the lecturer already referred to, Mr. Carol Norton, in-
troduced by a gentleman holding judicial office in the
State, who declared that legislation directed against
Christian Science would infringe upon the constitu-
tional right to religious liberty. While a great num-
ber in that audience were animated by mere curiosity,
undoubtedly many accepted in good faith Mrs. Eddy's
claim to have discovered a new religious truth capable

1 " Miscellaneous Writings," p. 444.

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 63

of healing disease in marvellous fashion. It is because
we cannot bring ourselves to believe that such per-
sons appreciate the character of their teacher or the
nature of her pretences that we have been willing
to reproduce her own account of her life and her
methods.

"With those who can accept as divinely inspired the
absurdities, solecisms and incoherencies of Mrs. Eddy,
and who think to explain them by saying that ob-
scurities and errors are to be found in works of the
great writers, there can be no argument. " Intelligent
ease " in shifting premises precludes discussion. How
could the Bishop argue with the genial madman who,
after introducing himself as George Washington, said
a few moments later that he was Napoleon Bonaparte ?
" But," said the Bishop, " a moment ago you were Wash-
ington." "So I was," said the bedlamite with "in-
telligent ease," " but by another mother." It is en-
tirely possible, however, to state the case against this
pseudo philosophy convincingly to those who are in-
terested in it because of its alleged miraculous cures.

First. As a mere religious or philosophic theory,
Christian Science never would have had any vogue.
Its fascination lies in its pretended cures. No one
suggests taking action to restrain it as a form of wor-
ship. The most that has been suggested in regard to
it has been that its ignorant votaries should not be al-
lowed to trifle with the life and health of adults, chil-
dren and the entire community, by assuming the treat-
ment of all classes of disease, including surgical cases
and contagious and infectious maladies. To say it is in-
fringement of religious liberty to require the same skill

64 CHEISTIAK SCIENCE.

and knowledge of Christian Scientists, engaging in the
business of curing the sick for hire, as is required of
Presbyterians or Catholics in the same business shows
ignorance of the constitutional doctrine of the Mor-
mon cases, or carelessness of statement, or such wil-
ful misstatement as Mrs. Eddy personally was guilty
of when she said that infringement of copyright is
theft, punishable criminally.

Second. Christian Science has no healing power
peculiar to itself, as distinguished from faith cure or
any other method of diverting the mind from the ills
of the body. If it had such divine power, its applica-
tion would be universal ; it would be effective in sur-
gery as in physic. Mrs. Eddy pretends that this uni-
versal applicability exists ; but, in admitting that for
the present " it is better to leave the adjustment, of
broken bones and dislocations to the fingers of sur-
geons," l she confesses the falsity of her treatment and
the impotence of her method. Mr. Norton has re-
cently shown the same lack of faith and of ability to
match promise with performance. Having offered to
give medical proof of cures of cancer, locomotor
ataxia, etc., he was asked to name the diagnostician
and describe the treatment, the precautions to exclude
other factors of cure, and the patients' present condi-
tion. He produced in fact no testimony of evidential
force to trained minds, but only certificates of Christian
Scientists similar in kind and value to the " puffs "
above quoted from " Miscellaneous Writings." He
was asked how he would treat these cases of emer-
gency : a cranial wound caused by a falling brick ;

> Page 28.

THE CASE AGAINST CHKISTIAN SCIENCE. 65

strangulation of a child from swallowing a fish bone ;
exposure of a child to confluent smallpox ; severing
of a child's artery by a cable car accident ; fracture
of a baby's skull by a fall. He was also asked if in
curing cancers he made differential diagnosis between
them, boils, carbuncles, etc. Lest he be misquoted
his written words are given :

" I make no diagnosis except along the lines of con-
sistent mental therapeutics. An expert in mental
therapeutics will naturally know the character of this
diagnosis. Discord is discord. Pain is pain. Dis-
ease is disease. The principle that cures one if rightly
applied, will citre all. This is the beginning and end
of rational mental healing. In relation to mental
treatment for a severed artery, I said simply that 1 Re-
lieved- the proper application of Mind power would do
the same work, if not better, than any other method.
I beg that you quote me correctly, if you ever quote
me, and I most thoroughly disagree with the under-
standing you got about diagnosis. In reply to the
list of questions that you wrote to me in a recent let-
ter, I have but to repeat my recent utterances in a
letter to you, that I prefer to shelve them, because to
answer them would bring about wholly indifferent re-
sults."

The italics are his and ours. To say that Christian
Science is efficacious if rightly or properly applied
leaves open a wide door. To shelve the other ques-
tions confesses inability to answer them without mak-
ing fatal admissions. To say " Pain is pain. Disease
is disease " flatly contradicts Mrs. Eddy.1

1 The correspondence is more fully set out in a letter to the New York
Sun published on June 9, 1899, and appearing here in the appendix,
(pps. 165, 182). Mr. Norton has never, to the writer's knowledge, denied
the fairness or traversed the accuracy of its statements.

66 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

Third. Why is it then that Christian Science is
credited with these marvellous cures, if its foremost
professors cannot adduce any better proofs of them
than are afforded by certificates no better in manner
and degree than those accompanying every quack
nostrum that is advertised. The explanation is
simple. In perhaps the majority of cases to which
physicians are called, nothing more is needed than
regimen and the mental stimulus that comes to the
patient with knowledge that he is under skilled care.
If a physician falls ill, he calls another to attend him,
chiefly for the sake of this mental stimulus and to
eliminate the personal factor. Drugs and surgical
appliances may be needed in only a small proportion of
cases ; but, like a revolver in Texas, they are needed
greatly when the occasion arises. Many diseases are
self limited, many are feigned, or due to a fixed idea
which may operate even in surgery, as when a pa-
tient, under the erroneous impression that his leg is
broken, unconsciously inhibits muscular action and is
unable to put foot to the ground, until dispossessed of
the inhibitory idea by mechanical devices or any
method, even Christian Science, changing the mental
attitude. In all such cases, whatever removes the
mental tension may be beneficial. Many patients
would get well without any attendance at all. To
take an illustration: Child-birth, in which Christian
Scientists profess great success, is not a disease, but
the operation of a normal function. In the absence
of complications, attendance is not necessary although
it may be desirable. But in the presence of certain
complications, the very highest skill is necessary to

THE CASE AGAINST CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 67

save life. Will any sane person say that, because in
the vast majority of cases children may be brought
into the world safely under the attendance of a Chris-
tian Scientist, such a person is to be pardoned who
undertakes such a complication as that of placenta
praevia with neither medical skill nor knowledge?
Will any parent be willing, in case a child's artery is
severed, to call a Christian Scientist rather than a sur-
geon ? Upon the answers to these questions depends
the acceptance by reasoning persons of Mrs. Eddy's
theory and claim that her followers can cure all forms
of human maladies and injuries, and that they should
be allowed to treat medical and surgical cases without
the responsibility for malpractice that rests upon
medical men.

We devoutly believe that Mrs. Eddy is an instru-
ment in the hands of God, not for the healing of the
nations, but to humble us intellectually by showing
that, at the end of the nineteenth century, professedly
intelligent persons can be as easily duped by her as
their forebears were by Cagliostro at the close of the
eighteenth.

Ill

MANSLAUGHTER, CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE AND THE

LAW1

The recent death of Mr. Harold Frederic under the
treatment of a Christian Scientist, and the latter's in-
dictment by an English jury, have renewed the dis-
cussion by professional and lay journals of what is
and what should be the bearing of the law upon such
cases.

The New York Times, of which he was correspond-
ent, writes editorially of " Faith-Cure Murders ; " the
Sun of "Manslaughter by Christian Science." The
current law journals comment upon the case. Un-
fortunately such happenings are neither modern nor
rare.

Coincidently with Mr. Frederic's death from pneu-
monia in England, the newspapers also report the
deaths of Messrs. Kershaw in Tacoma, and McDowell
in Cincinnati, and Mrs. Brown of "Washington; the
first of pneumonia, the second of typhoid fever, the
last of an unnamed malady — all the diseases being
complicated with Christian Science. It is only Fred-
eric's prominence as a journalist and fiction writer
that brings his case nearer home to the multitude.

The ordinary quack is content to lay claim to some

* New York Medical Record, Nov. 26, 1898.

70 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

special skill or knowledge in the use of natural methods
or remedies. Thus in February, 1806, one John M.
Crous induced the same Legislature of New York that
in the following April chartered the existing county
and State medical societies to authorize by special act
the purchase for $1,000 and publication in the State
papers of his " perfect and infallible remedy and cure
for hydrophobia or canine madness." And a wonder-
ful remedy it was. x

In the following year an act (ch. 104, 11. 1807) was
passed prohibiting unlicensed practice of medicine;
with the proviso, however, that it should not be con-

1 Here is the prescription, and it certainly seems adequate to put an end
to hydrophobia or any other malady :

" First : Take one ounce of the jawbone of a dog, burned and pulver-
ized, or pounded to fine dust.

" Secondly: Take the false tongue of a newly foaled colt; let that be
also dried and pulverized ; and,

" Thirdly : Take one scruple of verdigris, which is raised on the sur-
face of old copper by lying in the moist earth ; the coppers of George I.
or II. are the purest and best. Mix these ingredients together, and if the
person be an adult or full grown, take one common teaspoonful a day,
and so in proportion for a child according to its age. In one hour after
take the filings of the one-half of a copper of the above kind, if to be
had ; if not, then a small increased quantity of any baser metal of the
kind ; this to be taken in a small quantity of water.

"The next morning, fasting (or before eating), repeat the same as be-
fore. This, if complied with after the biting of a dog, and before the
symptoms of madness, will effectually prevent any appearance of disorder;
but after the symptoms shall appear a physician must immediately be ap-
plied to, to administer the following, viz:

" Three drachms of the verdigris of the kind before mentioned, mixed
with half an ounce of calomel, to be taken at one dose. This quantity
the physician need not fear to administer, as the reaction of the venom
will then diffuse through the whole system of the patient, neutralize con-
siderably the powerful quality of the medicine ; and,

" Secondly : If in four hours thereafter the patient is not completely
relieved, administer four grains of pure opium or one hundred and twenty
drops of liquid laudanum.

" N. B. — The patient must be careful to avoid the use of milk for sev-
eral days after taking any of the foregoing medicine.

* John M. ■Crou^'

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 71

strued to debar any one from using, or applying for
the benefit of the sick, roots or herbs the growth
or product of the United States. This exception fa-
vored at once the principle of protection to the indus-
try of home herbs and the teachings of the Thomso-
nian or botanic school of medicine, founded upon the
simple, obvious theory that mineral remedies are in-
jurious because, their nature being to remain in the
earth, they tend to drag man down to the grave;
while herbs, having by nature an upward, skyward
thrust, tend, on the contrary, to the advancement of
those whose midst they penetrate.

This system, once as popular as Christian Science,
furnished the leading American case on manslaughter
by medical malpractice, that of Commonwealth v.
Thomson (6 Mass. 134). It there appeared that Sam-
uel Thomson, founder of the system, undertook to
cure " all fevers, whether black, grey, green, or yel-
low." His staple remedies were " coffee," so-called,
" well my gristle," and " ram-cats." Being summoned
on Jan. 2, 1809, to attend Ezra Lovett, ill of " a cold,"
he ordered a fire built, put Lovett's feet on a stove of
hot coals, wrapped him in a blanket, and, with a
powder given in water, " puked " him — to use the
simple language of the day — violently thrice within
half an hour, meantime administering copiously the
warm "coffee." He then put Lovett to bed, and
sweated and " puked " him pretty steadily for three
days, the patient growing weaker and weaker, until,
poor soul ! he could puke no more. Then Thomson
asked "how far down the medicine had got," and,
Lovett indicating his chest, the quack said that the

72 OHEISTIAK SCIEKCE.

medicine " would soon get down and unscrew his
navel." On the third day the patient " lost his mind
and went into convulsions," which condition lasted
until the eighth day, Jan. 10, when he died. The
" coffee " proved to be a decoction of marshrosemary
and the bark of the bay berry bush; the powder was
Indian tobacco or Lobelia inflata. There was no evi-
dence that defendant had killed any one else ; on the
contrary, there was testimony of benefit in one case
from his treatment. The court, therefore, did not put
him to his defence, but, ruling that the commonwealth
had failed to make out a case even of manslaughter,
charged the jury to this effect : Deceased, beyond
reasonable doubt, lost his life by defendant's unskil-
ful treatment. But there could be no murder, unless
the prisoner was wilfully regardless of his social duty
and determined on mischief, of which there was no
proof ; on the contrary, his intent was to cure. Nei-
ther could there be manslaughter ; for, although de-
fendant's ignorance was very apparent, nevertheless,
if he honestly intended to cure, he could not be guilty
of that crime on account of death unexpectedly ensu-
ing from his treatment, unless he was engaged in an
unlawful act ; and there was no law in Massachusetts
forbidding any man, honestly intending to cure, from
prescribing for a sick man with the latter's consent.
The court cited Lord Hale as authority for the propo-
sition that, " if a physician, whether licensed or not,
gives a person a potion, without any intent of doing
him any bodily hurt, but with intent to cure or pre-
vent a disease, and, contrary to the expectation of the
physician, it kills him, he is not guilty of murder or

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 73

manslaughter ; " and, accordingly, laid down this law
for the case :

" The death of a man, killed by- voluntarily follow-
ing a medical prescription, cannot be adjudged a
felony in the party prescribing, unless he, however
ignorant of medical science in general, had so much
knowledge or probable information of the fatal tend-
ency of the prescription that it may be reasonably
presumed by the jury to be the effect of obstinate,
wilful rashness, at the least, and not of an honest in-
tention and expectation to cure."

The court further said that if the solicitor-general
had proved, as he promised to do in his opening, that
Thomson had killed others by his treatment, it would
have been left to the jury to say whether on the
whole evidence they would sustain the charge of man-
slaughter ; which they might justly have done if they
had found that defendant acted from " obstinate rash-
ness and foolhardy presumption, although without in-
tent to do Lovett bodily harm ; " for it would not
have been lawful for him again to administer a
medicine of which he had such fatal experience."
Upon this reasoning Thomson was acquitted ; and his
case having proved, as a precedent, a strong shield for
manslaughtering charlatans, by establishing what has
been called the humane American rule as contrasted
with the strict rule of common law, it is well to state
succinctly the reasons why he escaped conviction,
viz : (1) because there was no statute in Massachu-
setts prohibiting medical practice by the ignorant
and unlicensed ; (2) because there was no proof that
Thomson (a) knew his treatment to be dangerous or
(b) had any other intent than to cure in good faith.

74 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

In 1842 the question arose in New York, upon an
application for a bill of discovery, in Marsh v. Davison
(9 Paige 580), whether it was slanderous to have said
of complainant that he was guilty of malpractice as a
cancer doctor and had killed a woman in Schoharie.
Davison not being licensed to practice, the court held
that— inasmuch as he might be guilty of man-
slaughter, for that reason, if the patient died under
his treatment — the words might be slanderous.

It thus appears that — even accepting the benign
rule of Thomson's case, which, as we shall see pres-
ently, was ill stated — wherever a statute makes the
unlicensed practice of medicine a misdemeanor, if
death result from the treatment of a non-licentiate he
is guilty of manslaughter at least, no matter how
honest his intent. This is the rule of common law
and of the New York penal code, which defines as
manslaughter the killing of one human being by the
act, procurement, or omission of another, without de-
sign to effect death, by a person engaged in commit-
ting or attempting to commit a misdemeanor affecting
the person or property, either of the person killed or
of another.

In 1844 the case of Eice v. The State (8 Mo. 561)
was decided in Missouri. Eice, a Thomsonian, under-
took by the same methods used on Lovett to cure Mrs.
Keithley of sciatica. She had not been so well for
years as when he began to treat her, and was within
six weeks of giving birth to her fourth child. Under
his system she fell into premature labor and died
within about ten days. He was convicted of man-
slaughter ; but the appellate court, adopting the rule

MANSLAUGHTER AKD THE LAW. 75

in Thomson's case, the facts being substantially the
same, reversed the judgment.

In 1881 another case arose, in Iowa, State v. Schulz
(55 la. 628). Schulz treated a sick woman by acu-
puncture and an irritating oil, according to the sys-
tem of Herr Baunscheidt, who, having been much
benefited by the bitings of small insects, sought to
give the world, for a consideration, a simulacrum of
his experience. Defendant admitted that he did not
know the composition of the oil, that being Baun-
scheidt's secret. The patient died. Schulz claimed
that if he had not been interfered with he could have
helped her, and produced twenty-three witnesses to
testify that Baunscheidtismus, as administered by him,
had benefited them. Schulz was convicted, but the
appellate court reversed the judgment, following the
cases of Thomson and Kice, and expressed this con-
clusion : " The interests of society will be subserved
by holding a physician civilly liable in damages for
the consequences of his ignorance, without imposing
upon him criminal liabilities when he acts with good
motives and honest intentions." The adoption of this
theory by the New York statute of 1844 enabled
quackery, in the words of Beardesley, J., to " boast its
triumphant and complete establishment by law"
(Bailey v. Mogg, 4 Den. 60). And the people of
Iowa, instead of adhering to it, have passed, since the
Schulz case, a law forbidding medical practice to the
unlicensed.

Notwithstanding these acceptances of the rule in
Thomson's case by other jurisdictions as sound law,
the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, wherein it

f6 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

originated, has since held, in Commonwealth v. Pierce
(138 Mass. 165, A. D. 1884), that the accuracy of its
report was doubtful and its law open to criticism.
The facts in Pierce's case were these : Defendant held
himself out as a physician. There was no more law in
Massachusetts to prevent him from so doing in 1884
than there had been to prevent Thomson's like preten-
sion in 1809. Being called to a sick woman, Mary
Bemis, he caused her, she consenting, to be kept for some
three days swathed in flannel underclothing, saturated
with kerosene. Under this treatment she died in great
misery. There was evidence in the case that in some
instances similar treatment by defendant had resulted
favorably, but also that in one it had burned and
blistered the flesh, as in the case of deceased. De-
fendant's counsel at trial asked the court to charge,
following the rule in Thomson's case, that defendant
could not be convicted unless it were proven beyond
reasonable doubt that death resulted from his treat-
ment and that he had such knowledge or probable in-
formation of the fatal tendency of his prescription as
to justify the jury in presuming that death was the
effect of his obstinate or wilful recklessness, and not
of an honest intent and expectation to cure. This re-
quest was refused, defendant was convicted, and his
conviction affirmed by the appellate court, who, by
Holmes, J., said that the language of Thomson's case
relied upon by defendant — viz, that " to constitute
manslaughter the killing must have been a conse-
quence of some unlawful act. Now there is no law
which prohibits any man from prescribing for a sick
person, with his consent, if he honestly intends to cure

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 77

him by his prescription " — was ambiguous and wrong,
if it meant that the killing must be the consequence
of an act which is unlawful for independent reasons
apart from its likelihood to kill." " Such," continued
the court, " may once have been the law ; but for a
long time it has been just as fully, and latterly, we
may add, much more willingly, recognized that a man
may commit murder or manslaughter by doing other-
wise lawful acts recklessly, as that he may by doing
acts unlawful for independent reasons, from which
death accidentally ensues." Thomson's case, it was
said, did not intend to lay down new law, but cited
and meant to follow Lord Hale, whom it had taken
too literally, since his lordship admitted that other
persons might make themselves liable by reckless con-
duct (I. P. C. 472) ; and why not a physician as well ?
As to what constitutes criminal recklessness in such
cases, the court said substantially that the standard is
not gauged by the actor's belief or idea of danger, but
by common experience. If the thing done " is gen-
erally supposed to be universally harmless and only a
specialist would foresee that in a given case it would
do damage, a person who did not foresee it and
who had no warning would not be held liable for
the harm. . . . The use of the thing must be
dangerous according to common experience, at least
to the extent that there is a manifest and appre-
ciable chance of harm from what is done, in
view either of the actor's knowledge or of his con-
scious ignorance. . . . Common experience is
necessary to the man of ordinary prudence, and a
man who assumes to act as the defendant did must

78 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

have it at his peril. . . . The defendant knew he
was using kerosene. The jury have found that it was
applied as the result of foolhardy presumption or gross
negligence, and that is enough. . . . Indeed, if the
defendant had known the fatal tendency of the pre-
scription, he would have been perillously near the line
of murder." The rule laid down in this carefully
reasoned case must commend itself to prudent men ;
for it really amounts only to this — that if one unversed
and unskilled in medical science and practice under-
takes, nevertheless, the cure of a patient, and in so
doing uses remedies or adopts a treatment — whether
positive or negative ought to make no difference —
from which there is a manifest and appreciable chance
of harm according to common experience, he shall be
held liable for his recklessness and shall not be excused
by the innocence of his intention. And certainly when
part of the treatment adopted is the exclusion of proper
treatment, this is just as harmful as if positively in-
jurious methods were adopted. It is just as much
homicide to cause death by starvation by keeping
food from the victim as to use an active poison.

How does this principle apply to " Christian
Science," "faith cure," or any eccentric treatment
of the sick — not excluding voudoo or the " scandal
cure " * — that by operating strongly on the mind may
restore the lost equilibrium ? Is the pursuit of any of
these methods " practice of medicine " ?

1 I knew once of a malade imaginaire who for years had drifted
feebly from bed to lounge and back again. Physicians were in vain.
One day a friend called and said that the newspapers had gotten hold of a
bit of history that would interest the nation on the following Sunday. The
patient leaped from the lounge, took a cab to the steamer office, and by
Sunday was on the ocean. This is the " scandal cure."

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 79

While the ordinary quack, who, as has been said,
pretends only to extraordinary human skill or knowl-
edge, is, therefore, generally held to be a practitioner
of medicine, Christian Scientists, who go further and
pretend to procure for lucre divine intervention by
their prayers, contend that in thus offering to heal the
sick, although for hire, they are not practicing medi-
cine, but observing religious rites, and are therefore
protected in their practices by constitutional safe-
guards. "We are thus brought to consider what is the
"practice of medicine." The answer to this query
must depend in most instances upon the words of the
statute and the peculiar circumstances of the case. In
the New York case of Smith v. Lane (24 Hun, 632, A.
D. 1881), plaintiff, apparently a masseur, sued for
agreed fees which defendant refused to pay on the
ground that plaintiff, not being licensed to practice
medicine, could not recover compensation for his treat-
ment, which, as the opinion of the court recites, " con-
sisted entirely of manipulation with the hand. It was
performed by rubbing, kneading, and pressure." The
court said :

" The practice of medicine is a pursuit very generally
known and understood, and so also is that of surgery.
The former includes the application and use of medi-
cines and drugs for the purpose of curing, mitigating
or alleviating bodily diseases ; while the functions of
the latter are limited to manual operations, usually
performed by surgical instruments or appliances.
. . . To allow incompetent or unqualified persons
to administer or apply medical agents, or to perform
surgical operations, would be highly dangerous to the
health as well as the lives of the persons who might

80 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

be operated upon, and there is reason to believe that
lasting and serious injuries as well as the loss of life
have been produced by the improper use of medical
agents and surgical instruments or appliances. It was
the purpose and object of the Legislature by this act
to prevent a continuance of deleterious practices of
this nature, and to confine the uses of medicine and
the operations of surgery to a class of persons who,
upon examination, should be found competent and
qualified to follow these professional pursuits. No
such danger could possibly arise from the treatment to
which the plaintiff's occupation was confined. While
it might be no benefit, it could hardly be possible thai
it could result in harm or injury.

" And for that reason no necessity existed for inter-
fering with this pursuit by any action on the part of
the Legislature. It may be that credulous persons
would be deceived into the employment of the
plaintiff, and in that manner subjected to imposition.
But it was no part of the purposes of this act to pre-
vent persons from being made the subjects of mere
imposition."

Either the italicized words are superfluous or they
contain an implication that if the treatment, in the
court's opinion, had been capable of causing injury
like improper medical treatment, the judges would
have classified it in the same category.

In Eastman v. State (10 N. E. 97), an Indiana case,
the court said, on the other hand : " It is the purpose
of the statute to prevent persons who do not possess
the necessary qualifications to practice medicine or
surgery from inflicting injury upon the citizens by
undertaking to treat diseases, wounds and injuries."
And again : "The State has an interest in the life and
health of all its citizens, and the law under examina*

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 81

tion was framed, not to bestow favors upon a par-
ticular profession, but to discharge one of the highest
duties of the State — that of protecting its citizens from
injury and harm." In People v. Phippin (70 Mich.
6), the defendant was held to have practiced medicine,
on proof that he held himself out as "Dr. W. W.
Phippin, magnetic healer," had attempted to cure the
sick, and in the case of a child's death had certified
the cause to be " canker, sore mouth. Duration of
disease: June 3 to July 22, 1887." In Bibber v.
Simpson (59 Maine 181), a clairvoyant who gave
remedies was said to be practicing medicine. So also
in Nelson v. Harrington (72 Wis. 591). And in New
York, De Leon, who prescribed for a child, drawing
its horoscope and giving some rhubarb, was convicted
of illegal practice of medicine. The administration
of electricity has also been held to constitute medical
practice — Davison v. Bohlman (37 Mo. App. 576).

The Ohio statute provides that " Any person shall
be regarded as practicing medicine or surgery, within
the meaning of this act, who shall append the letters
M. D. or M. B. to his name, or for a fee prescribe,
direct or recommend for the use of any person any
drug or medicine or other agency for the treatment,
cure or relief of any wound, fracture, or bodily injury,
infirmity or disease." That seems very broad ; but in
case of Eastman v. State (6 Ohio Dec. 296), it was
held, in January, 1897, that a "graduate of the school
of osteopathy of Kirkville, Mo.," was not practicing
medicine by kneading and manipulations, using only
his hands and no medicines. The court cited Smith
v. Lane, and held that the words, " any other agency,"

82 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

were too vague and were limited by the particular
words, " drug or medicine." *

The New York statute does not define medical prac-
tice. Such a definition was framed in the draft of the
act of 1887, but stricken out because a certain Senator,
who died shortly afterward, declared that it would in-
clude an eccentric healer who had saved him from the
grave. The definition was yielded to save the bill.

The Nebraska Medical Act defines as a practitioner
any one " who shall operate on, or profess to heal, or
prescribe for, or otherwise treat any physical or men-
tal ailment of another."

Under this statute arose, in 1894, the case of State
v. Bus well (40 Neb. 158). The defendant, charged
with unlawful practice of medicine, claimed to be a
Christian Scientist, graduated from the Metaphysical
College of Mrs. Mary B. G. Eddy, of Boston. De-
fendant offered testimony to cures wrought by him in
cases of rheumatism, rattlesnake bite, pneumonia and
scarlet fever — the last in the case of a child, four years
old. He testified that in eighteen months he had
treated about one hundred persons, of whom only two
had died. The accuracy of his diagnosis was not in
issue. He testified that the text-books of the Christian
Science Church are the Bible and Mrs. Eddy's work,
" Science and Health." He denied that in a medical
sense he treated physical or mental ailments, saying :
" I understand with God's laws, and not mortal man's."

1 As the book goes to press it is reported that the Ohio Supreme Court
has approved this ruling. (Alb. Law Journal, Nov. 1 8, 1899, p. 317.)
The Illinois Supreme Courts held otherwise, (Eastman v. People, 71 111.
App. 236), but since this article was written the law of that state has been
amended to give immunity to Christian senators.-

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 83

Questioned as to the privilege of patients or parents to
call in medical aid, he said : " We believe that every-
one has a right to express their wish, and it is always
understood that if they prefer some other treatment,
or some other mode, or some one else to aid them, it
is their privilege. "We always do that. It is taught
in our text-books. We never give any medicine ; that
is entirely contrary to the teaching of Christian
Science." And this counsel said : " The defendant,
and those of the same faith with him, believe as a
matter of conscience that the giving of medicine is a
sin ; that it is placing faith in the power of material
things, which belongs alone to Omnipotence. To the
Christian Scientist, it is as much a violation of the
laws of God to take drugs for the alleviation of suffer-
ing or the cure of disease, as for a Methodist clergy-
man to take the name of his God in vain to relieve his
overwrought feelings."

Being asked if he took pay from his patients, he
said : " As a rule I do not. We tell them we leave
the question to them and God. . . . Jesus says
the laborer is worthy of his meat, and we expect that
those whom we spend our lives for to remunerate us
for it. If they are not willing to part with the sacri-
fice themselves, it is not expected that those should
reap the benefit."1 Considering that defendant de-
scribed his treatment as one of prayer, this intimation
that the answer to prayer would be contingent on
the payment of the Scientist's fee apparently seemed
rather blasphemous to the court, who very aptly cited

1 Cf. Mrs. Eddy's express teaching that patients who pay a good fee,
p. 56.

84 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

two cases from one of the science's text-books, the
Bible — the former, that of Simon the sorcerer (re-
ported in Acts viii. 18-23), to whom Peter said, " Thy
money perish with thee, because thou hast thought
that the gift of God may be purchased with money ; "
the second, that of Gehazi (II. Kings v. 20-27), servant
of Elisha, who, finding that his master had gratui-
tously cured of leprosy Naaman, the rich Syrian, thus
establishing a .precedent for dispensary abuses, re-
marked, " as the Lord liveth, I will run after him, and
take somewhat of him," and in the end took not only
a fee but the disease. Upon these precedents the
Nebraska court ruled thus :

" The exercise of the art of healing for compensa-
tion, whether exacted as a fee or expected as a gratu-
ity, cannot be classed as an act of worship. Neither
is it the performance of a religious duty, as was
claimed in the District Court." They further said :
" The object of the statute is to protect the afflicted
from the pretensions of the ignorant and avaricious,
and its provisions are not limited to those who at-
tempt to follow beaten paths and established usages."
This, it will be noticed, is very different from the
view of the New York law taken in the New York
case of Smith v. Lane and the Ohio case of Eastman
v. State (supra), as well as from the latest case of the
kind, State v. Mylod (40 At. 753), decided in Ehode
Island last July upon these facts: Defendant under-
took to cure one Hale of malaria arid one Vaughan of
grip, by apparently engaging in silent prayer ajid giv-
ing them pamphlets on Christian Science. He received
a fee of one dollar, but gave no medicines, made no

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 85

examination, or diagnosis. He testified that he did
not attempt to cure disease, had no knowledge of
medicine or surgery, and that his only method was
"prayer and effort to encourage hopefulness for all
who come to him in public or private, and whatever
diseases they imagine they have." The court held,
citing Smith v. Lane, that in the absence of diagnosis,
prescription of remedies, or surgical methods there
was no medical practice. They suggested that if
Christian Science is practice of medicine, then as a
school it is entitled to recognition by the State Board,
and that it would be absurd to hold, under the Ehode
Island statute which forbids discrimination against
medical schools, that requirements could be prescribed
which members of a particular school could not com-
ply with, since that would be not to discriminate only,
but to prohibit.1 And the court distinguished the
cases of clairvoyant physicians upon the ground that
therein the defendants had prescribed medicine and
professed to cure diseases. There seems to be fallacy
in the implication by the court that any educational
requirements as a condition of medical license are pro-
hibitory upon any persons except those who are un-
able to acquire an education ; and it is quite proper to
exclude such persons from the ranks of physicians.

The question is full of difficulty. Every one admits
the power of mental impulses in nervous diseases ; ad-
mits nature's healing force that so often cures without
any attendance at all ; and admits that it would be
wrong to forbid all recourse to any aid. But this
much being conceded, are we to admit also that any

1 See the paper " Christian Science before the Law." Page 91,

86 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

person should be entitled to take charge of the sick
merely because he pretends to act under religious be-
liefs and to abstain from using those remedies and
methods arrived at by study and investigation ? Are
we to punish the physician who fails to report yellow
and scarlet fevers, diphtheria, and other contagious
disorders, and allow a person who boasts his ignorance
of medical and sanitary science to treat and conceal
such cases ? The Christian Scientist, in his madness
or worse, says that there is no disease but only fear or
loss of relation to God, which he in his blasphemy
undertakes to restore, providing he is paid for his
services. What, then, would his death certificate be ?
Would it be that Jones was permanently scared ?
What would his report of a contagious disease be?
That Brown has a panic, which is likely to spread P1

In the case of Reynolds v. United States (98 U. S.
145, A. D. 1878), the Supreme Court of the nation ap-
plied common sense to the proposition, that the name
of religion may be used to cloak either lust or impos-
ture. Defendant, a member of the so-called Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, being indicted
for bigamy, pleaded in defence that the penalty im-
posed by his church upon its male members who failed
to practice polygamy " when circumstances would ad-
mit " was " damnation in the life to come." No such
dreadful penalty hangs over a Christian Scientist who
abstains from his lucrative practices. The Supreme
Court said in Reynolds' case : " Laws are made for

1 As we go to press an entire church of Christian Scientists in Georgia
has been fined for disobedience of the vaccination law, from which action
appeal has been taken.

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 87

the government of actions, and while they cannot in-
terfere with mere religious belief and opinions they
may with practices." Can it be seriously contended,
asked the court, that a civilized nation may not law-
fully suppress human sacrifices and the Indian custom
of suttee, because their votaries claim religious sanc-
tion therefor ; or polygamy for the same reason ? To
suffer such things, it was answered, " would be to
make the professed doctrine of religious belief superior
to the law of the land and in effect to permit every
citizen to become a law unto himself." Government
could exist only in name under such circumstances.
These wise words of the court apply even to honest
believers, whom we may respect, or, at least, sympa-
thize with, even in their delusions. But if the defence
of religion were allowed to the extent that the eccen-
trics claim, the deadly sin of lying would become
even more prevalent than it is, and the dangerous
classes would go over in a body to soi-disant religion.
There was an English case in 1868, Eeg. v. Wag-
staffe (10 Cox's Cr. Cas. 530), wherein parents were
charged with manslaughter of a child because, pur-
suant to their religion as members of the " Peculiar
People," they neglected to provide medical attend-
ance for it, in a case of acute inflammation of the
lungs ; instead they anointed and prayed over it.
The court charged that if they had let the child
starve for want of food, the case would have been
different; for everyone recognizes the need of food.
But it was not the same when the question was one
of medical attendance, for as to that opinions differed,
and he read to the jury from the general Epistle of

88 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

St. James (v. 14, 15) those words upon which the Ro-
man Church rests the doctrine of extreme unction,
and the Mormons and " Peculiar People " rest their
doctrine of healing the sick by anointing and prayer
only ; words which the learned and sensible commen-
tator, Adam Clark, forcibly argues to be an exhorta-
tion by the apostle to use the ordinary Eastern rem-
edy, oil, as well as prayer, in treating the sick. The
jury acquitted. Recently in a like case, Reg. v. Sen-
ior, they disagreed.1

Beyond doubt there are very honest, intelligent,
cultivated persons who believe in the efficacy of Chris-
tian Science and faith cure. Among some twenty
cases of death under such treatment, including cases
of contagious diseases, the writer has noted the names
of such persons. It is equally true that some " intel-
ligent persons " find no " fad " too extraordinary for
adoption. The writer knew of a most shrewd and
cultivated woman who consulted in Sing Sing prison
as to investment in stocks an "astrologer" convicted
not only of illegal medical practice, but of abhorrent
crime. It is said that where voudooism prevails, cul-
tivated people consult its priestesses, after the fashion
of Mcodemus. And when St. John Long, prince of
quacks, was convicted of manslaughter at the Old

1 This case seems to have turned upon the Act for prevention of cruelty
to children [(1894) 57 and 58 Victoria] which makes it misdemeanor
for one in charge of a child under sixteen years of age willfully to neglect it
so as to cause death. In imposing sentence Mr. Justice Wills said that he
did not think the punishment would have any effect upon the prisoner or
his co-believers, and certainly it would not with regard to the prisoner,
because it was the second child in respect of whose death he had been
convicted.

See Law Times and Law Journal of Dec. 17, 1898, also Law Journal,
Dec 14, 1898; and Medical Record, Jan. 21, 1899.

MANSLAUGHTER AND THE LAW. 89

Bailey (4 Car. and P. 398) among the twenty-nine pa-
tients who testified to the excellence of his treatment
were divers " ladies of quality," headed by the Mar-
chioness of Ormond, than whom, save royalty, only a
duchess could be better able to form a sound opinion
in such case.

But nothing is more false than to say that medical
laws forbid the practice of Christian Science, faith
cure, voudoo, vitapathy, or any other " pathy " or
cult. Those laws provide only, at most, that no per-
son shall practice medicine who has not pursued a
course in medical study. There is nothing in them to
prevent any licentiate from practicing as he pleases.
There is nothing to prevent a masseur without license
from washing and rubbing a man, if he confines him-
self to that. But there is no reason why unqualified
persons should be allowed to pretend to cure disease,
by their pretences deprive the sick of the benefits of
science, and yet escape the just consequences of their
imposture. The whole case of these people who de-
sire to earn a livelihood by treating the sick without
any adequate preparation therefor through study and
investigation was summed up in the grotesque false-
hood, circulated by way of petition to the New York
Legislature of 1885 for the repeal of the medical law,
which said :

"The law deprives from practicing in this State
persons who are gifted with the power of healing by
the laying of hands, through the presence and impart-
ing of vital magnetic force, and otherwise. Some of
these powers are natural to the practitioner and can-
not be imparted by the course of study required by

90 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

medical colleges." Could anything be more absurd?
The natural power to heal disease impaired by the
acquisition of knowledge concerning disease ! And
yet there were those prepared to believe even that, so
true is it to-day, as of old, that the wonderful is the
unknown and the credible that which is impossible of
belief.

It may be a question of policy whether Christian
Scientists should be prosecuted ; whether cheap mar-
tyrdom might not strengthen them. But there seems
no good reason, as matter of law, why they should
not be punished for the evil they actually do, prohib-
ited, if the policy seem wise, from treating the sick
without adequate preparation by study of medical
science, and convicted of manslaughter if death re-
sults from interference.

CHKISTIAN SCIENCE BEFOEE THE LAW1

About a hundred years ago at the close of the
eighteenth century, when as now men were proud and
boastful of their enlightened times, when from mis-
rule and free thought, the Age of Eeason and the red
harvest of Dr. Guillotin were about to come into
being, a man passed through Europe, captivating the
fancy of the great Catherine and the small Louis, the
reason of courtiers, the adoration of the mob. Read-
ing of Cagliostro, the mountebank, bedizened like a
stage wizard, wonderfully curing the sick, revealing
the past, foretelling the future and protected by royal
power from the prosecutions that the faculty and men
learned in the science of the day were eager to direct
against him, we are disposed from the height of our
greater attainments to smile at what we consider the
gullibility of the last fin de siecle. But charlatan, im-
postor and robber as he was, the vogue of Cagliostro,
or Balsamo, is understandable. Beside his natural
shrewdness he had, at least, the education that comes
to the observant from travel and association with the
intelligent, and seems to have possessed as well, a share
of the medical learning of the time. Not only were
his cures gratuitous s^ve when the rich rewarded him

1 Read by request of the Medical Society of this County of Westchester,
New York, at its annual meeting September 19th, 1899.

92 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

richly, but he distributed largesse among the crowd
with lavish hand. Presumptuous as his assumption
of superhuman knowledge and skill was, it was still
only the claim of the astrologer, the pretended adept
in Eastern lore, the master of Masonic mysteries.
He did not assume to be in the secret councils of the
most High, to supplement the work of Christ or to
found a religious cult. At the end of our wonder-
ful century of material progress that has covered the
world with iron roads for the steam monster and al-
ready harnessed his swifter successor, the lightning ;
that has enabled us to speak in a moment with the
antipodes and in medicine and surgery has wrought
wonders undreamed of in Cagliostro's day, lengthen-
ing the average span of life, dispelling pain from the
chamber where the knife works calmly, in vital re-
gions, undisturbed by the patient's agony, finding with
microscopic eye the causes of sickness, banishing, with
antiseptic magic, putrifying germs that so lately de-
feated the surgeon's skill, and checking once dreaded
plagues by wise sanitation; — at the end of this cen-
tury of ours, surpassing all others in the progress of
medical science and art, we have a more puzzling
phenomenon. A sickly New England woman, twice
widowed, once divorced and so without the vestal
sanctity usually claimed by those of her sex who as-
pire to lead religious thought, untravelled, unlearned,
and uncultivated, even in the use of the mother tongue,
has been able to impose upon many persons at home
and abroad, not only a flatulent, incoherent theory of
religion and metaphysics, which, as religion and meta-
physics, would concern us little, but also a system of

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 93

treating, or rather neglecting, the sick, that, founded
upon bold denial of obvious facts, and of conclusions,
harvested by the wise and learned from ages of obser-
vation, fattens the greedy coffers of herself and her
disciples, who follow it as a business, while leading
down to dusty death many credulous adults and de-
fenceless children. What is especially hard to under-
stand is that among Mrs. Eddy's honest followers are
persons of literary cultivation, who, we should sup-
pose, might guage at once her ignorance and preten-
tiousness by the ungrammatical ill-rhymed doggerel
which she puts forth as poetry ; men of the law who,
presumably, should be able to detect the contradiction
and lack of logical coherence in her soi-disant system ;
pious and refined souls, whom we would expect to find
disgusted with the blasphemy and vulgarity of much
that she has written. Pilgrimages are made to her
Concord home. Churches are built in which her book
of ineffable nonsense is solemnly read and her jargon,
interpolated into the Lord's prayer, is recited. Men
of judicial position have introduced her apostles to
large audiences, and legislators seriously inclined to
their tales of wonder. But although her followers
are many, being estimated by her disciples between
the rather wide limits of 60,000 and 600,000, it is
comforting to reflect that those not under her spell
are numbered by the millions. And although any
delusion that controls the minds and actions of a con-
siderable part of the community to its possible detri-
ment is a proper subject for careful examination, we
should not fall into the error of giving factitious im-
portance to what is intrinsically ridiculous, by over-

94 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

serious treatment of it. Examples of this mistaken
course are not far to seek. It is probably true that if
the ultra metaphysical theories of Hahneman, which
Mrs. Eddy accepted before launching her own non-
sense, had been consistently laughed at, homeopathy
as a system would not now exist. How many intel-
ligent homeopathists of our day believe in the efficacy
of the thirtieth, — not to mention the 200th — potency
of even the powerful drugs, leaving out of considera-
tion the inert substances that Hahnemanites have
proposed as curatives, dilutions expressed in figures
that the human mind is incapable of grasping ? Who
now believes that the power of these infinite dilutions
can be increased or diminished by the number and
direction of the shakes given to the vial containing
them ? In thus suggesting that strict Hahnemanism
is a delusion of the past, I but echo gentlemen of the
homeopathic school for whose ability and skill I have
great respect. Turn to the files of New York City
journals 1 when some years ago the homeopathic pro-
fession in that city was agitated over the ever vital
question of patronage, and you will find one of its
leaders, if not the leader, reported as saying, that
since Dr. Bayard's death there had not been one
practitioner of true Hahnemanism in that great city ;
while his opponent, at the head of the professedly
strict sect when taunted with the use in his practice
of morphine, antipyrine, quinine and like drugs in
large doses, retorted that he used them only as pal-
liatives, not as curatives, as forerunners of the homeo-

1 See New York Times, Sun, World, Dec. 12; Dec. 13, 20, 1889; Jan.
io, 14; Feb. 23; Herald, Feb. 24, 1890, and about those dates.

CHRISTIAN" SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 95

pathic remedies by which alone he effected his cures.
Again when in 1887 it was my duty to urge before
the New York Legislature the medical act of that
year, the passage of which it is but just to say was
largely aided by the hearty cooperation of the Homeo-
pathic Society, one gentleman of that body whose
friendship and confidence it was my pleasure and
privilege to gain, said to me, if you people, — mean-
ing the regular school I represented, — had good sense,
you could destroy us. If you would only establish
chairs in your colleges to teach what homeopathy is,
or even do what was lately done at Harvard, let
students formulate questions to be answered by a
homeopath, there would be no place for our colleges ;
but until you admit that we have done something for
medicine, and so long as you denounce us, we will
oppose you.

These things need to be said because they bear upon
the policy of legislation ; but this is neither the time
nor the place to discuss that thesis from its strictly med-
ical standpoint ; nor am I the person to espouse either
side of such a discussion ; and certainly neither you
nor I are here to deal intemperately or flippantly with
any honest belief or to belittle what good may lie in
any theory or system, even Christian science, — how-
ever nonsensical some of its tenets may seem to us, —
nor yet to be so foolish or discourteous as to deny the
general intelligence and mental vigor of any one
merely because he may accept some proposition that
to us seems bizarre and fantastic. Had I the honor
and privilege of being a physician — as fortunately for
my possible patients, perhaps, I have not, — it seems to

96 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

me that, so far as time and occasion served, I should
examine carefully every new thing that promised well
for poor humanity and be patient and long-suffering
with even the erratic thinker, if satisfied that he was
honestly striving to benefit his fellow-man, and not
merely to fill his purse by obtruding recklessly, and
with conscious ignorance, where only the learned
should be allowed. That I apprehend to be the stand-
point of the true physician, who above other men per-
haps, should prove all things, and hold fast that which
is true.

jSTow some of you may be thinking what has all this
to do with Christian science before the law ? The an-
swer is simple : in discussing actual law, or proposed
legislation it must be borne in mind that the aims of
the law are above all things practical. It has no
function to operate upon folly as folly ; and, pro-
verbially, it does not concern itself with trifles. It is
necessarily tolerant of widely divergent ideas and of
much that to many seems wrong. Religious beliefs,
in so far as they are merely beliefs not reduced to
criminal or dangerous practices, are not proper objects
of its control, — at least not in our country. We are
free, with a constitutional right of freedom, to work
out our own salvation without legislative aid. Over-
legislation to which, of late, there is an unfortunate
tendency, is itself, in our theory of government, a dis-
tinct evil, a disease of the body politic. Legislative
regulation of the minor actions of men, their beliefs,
their merely ethical conduct is intolerable. To legis-
late for the benefit of any scientific theory to the det-
riment of another would be, save perhaps in very

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 97

exceptional circumstances, a great wrong, unwise and
most harmful to the cause of true science and the ad-
vancement of human knowledge. A statute for ex-
ample ordaining that no person should worship except
according to the Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
scheme, or treat the sick except secumdum artem,
whether by regular homeopathic or any other rule,
would be an abomination, unwise and, God be thanked,
unconstitutional.

Because no well informed person disputes these
truisms, charlatanism, religious and medical, seeks to
make of them its refuge and strong bulwark. The
Mormon for his polygamy, the Oneida Communist for
his promiscuity, the Christian Scientist for his slaughter
of credulous adults and helpless babes, alike claims
protection from the law upon a theory that the free
right to worship according to conscience implies the
right to commit any act under the pretext of religion
which an evil or erratic mind may inspire. The osteo-
path, the venopath, the vitapath, the Kickapoo In-
dians and all the rabble of ignorant quacks, in like
fashion, seek exemption of their impostures from legal
regulation in the contention, that because the last
word has not been uttered in medical science, it is
therefore class legislation to enact any law prohibiting
the ignorant to assume, as a business, the entire charge
and cure, of the sick. At first blush this superficial
argument is plausible and influences many. When
^Esop's ass masqueraded under the lion's skin, all the
other animals, intelligent man included, stood for
awhile in awe of him; but when his tuneful note vi-
brated on the air, they tore off his disguise, and dis-

98 CHKISTIAIS' SCIENCE.

closed him once more an obvious ass. In the long
run the disguise must fall from pseudo — religious and
medical imposture. Christian Science will not be an
exception to the rule. Its mask of religion is very
thin but the animal below it is rather the cunning
fox than the honest useful ass. In tearing off its dis-
guise the law may play a part ; but the unmasking
will best be done by turning on the light and showing
what an amusing misfit the garb of religion is, and
what a greedy unscrupulous fox it covers.

The questions then present themselves whether Chris-
tian Science is such a phase of genuine religious belief,
or so trifling in its evil results that its daily practices
should be unrestrained by law ; and if not, whether
the present condition of the law is adequate to deal
with those practices or whether further legislation is
necessary.

Others as well as myself, have dealt so fully else-
where with this delusion that these questions may be
here answered in general terms without citation of
specific authority. We may consider general princi-
ples rather than particular cases.

That many intelligent persons accept Mrs. Eddy's
lucubrations as a religious and therapeutic system, has
been already admitted to be a puzzling fact, its most
probable explanation being that such persons accept
as true, without investigation, all the marvellous tales
of the Eddyites or generalize from particular cases
known to themselves without reading the farrago of
nonsense constituting the so-called system, and with-
out time or inclination, even if they have ability, to
investigate in true scientific spirit the causes of what

CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 99

arouses their astonishment. Having examined with
care her fundamental books, I am at a loss to know
what she has contributed to religious thought, meta-
physical speculation or therapeutical knowledge, or yet
what she says that is new. Even her doctrine that
cleanliness and hygienic life are detrimental, has long
been acted upon by the dirty fakirs of the Orient, and
the great unwashed of Christendom. Her magnum-
opus " Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,"
that costly and most lucrative text- book of innumera-
ble editions, pretends, as its name indicates, to be
founded upon and to interpret the Bible, but not to be
a new evangel. Mrs. Eddy's modest pretence is that
while the Bible is God's word, its, and therefore his,
meaning, utterly escaped the apprehension both of the
simple, and the learned, during the long ages, only to
be revealed to her in the year of grace, 1866. Pre-
sumably it is the version of King James that she in-
terprets, for she knows no Hebrew,1 no Greek, no
Latin and precious little English. She is not in the
babe or suckling class, from which, we are told, wis-
dom sometimes emanates to confound the wise, but is
said to be a mature dame of about eighty, having
nearly completed her first half century when it pleased
God, in his mysterious providence, to vouchsafe to her
that key to his meaning which he had theretofore
denied to saints and scholars. As nearly as one can
spell it out, this key, which, for purposes of lucre, Mrs.
Eddy has copyrighted, is the stale theory, as old as
philosophic speculation, familiar to Sophomores but
new to her, that everything is mind. Her corollary

1 Her brother Albert however studied Hebrew in vacations. See p. 42.

100 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

is that health is right thought, and disease, sickness
and every other evil only wrong thought. Upon this
theme, she rings her changes ; and it is safe to say,
that had she confined herself to this peculiar exposi-
tion of Scripture, her congregations would have been
small, and she would have remained an obscure eccen-
tric New England woman, confessedly feeble in health
and poor in pocket. Her trifling interpretation of
Scripture would no more have been suggested as mat-
ter for legal control, than the wit and satire of Colonel
Ingersoll or the broad learning of Dr. Briggs. Her
religious views would concern us no more than those
of the forgotten Matthias, John of Leyden, or Noyes,
and far less than the still somewhat prevalent doc-
trines of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

But it seems that feeble health led the lady to
dabble in medical theories, to accept at one time the
views of Hahneman and later the doctrine of animal
magnetism as expounded by one P. P. Quimby, whose
patient she was in his life, whose memory after death
she apparently execrates with all the hate of a jealous,
envious, covetous woman. It seems too, that in a
small way, she practiced homeopathy until becoming
convinced that there was no medicinal virtue in its
high potencies, and finding that their administration
was followed, nevertheless, by cures, she arrived at
her great discovery that health is Mind in capitals,
and disease, mortal mind in small letters ; for not the
least amusing part of her book is its use of different
fonts of type to differentiate Truth from error,
Health, or Ease, from Dis-ease ; a play of words that
appeals strongly to her. Here, of course, is the grain

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 101

of truth in her system. Perceiving that suggestion
plays an important part in the cure of certain dis-
eases, being probably ignorant or possibly advised
that this was no new thing, and, generalizing from
the particular as the rash, the ignorant and the im-
postor all do, she concluded and announced that be-
cause striking cures often follow an access of faith or
other strong mental excitation, therefore all diseases
and bodily injuries are merely false beliefs to be
treated by mental processes, and that all drugs, ma-
terial remedies and even hygienic measures are not
only ineffectual, but harmful. Her system of thera-
peutics, then, amounts to this : disease, sickness, bodily
injury of any kind do not exist except as mistaken be-
liefs to be removed by argument with them, which
argument is to be addressed to the disease silently,
lest, haply, the patient overhearing the discussion be
confirmed in his error. Diagnosis, as physicians and
ordinary laymen understand the term, does not exist
in her scheme. Under this principle it is quite unnec-
essary for the healer to come in contact with the pa-
tient. The one may be in Hong Kong, the other in
Terra del Fuego. The effect will be just as great as
if they were in conjunction. Now while as a theory,
this arrant nonsense is merely comical, a moment's re-
flection shows that its practice is obviously dangerous
in a high degree, not only to the particular victim but
to the community at large. That its promulgator is
either dishonest in advancing it or doubtful of its full
efficacy, seems apparent from her advice to disciples
to u leave the adjustment of broken bones and dislo-
cations to the fingers of surgeons," "until the ad-

102 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

vancing age admits the efficacy and supremacy of
Mind," a precept that suggests her conviction of the
truth of what worthy Quarles quaintly said : " Phy-
sicians of all men, are most happy ; whatever good
success soever, they have, the world proclaimeth ; and
what faults they commit, the earth covereth." Is not
this advice of hers the cunning of the fox rather than
a delusion of the other animal ? Is it not manifestly
a warning that while it is comparatively safe for her
ignorant followers to treat the sick for rich reward,
under the guise of religious aid, in cases of ordinary
ailments, yet surgery is to be shunned by them, only
because in that department of medicine malpractice
is more demonstrable to a lay jury than in physic,
where the healing force of nature may be relied upon
to give the Christianly scientific practitioner success
in many cases, while his failures are more likely to
escape detection.

It would seem to be perfectly clear from this sum-
mary of her doctrine — which is I believe and certainly
hope, entirely fair, and not travesty — travesty indeed,
being impossible — that while from the standpoint of
religion and philosophy, Mrs. Eddy's so-called science
is beneath contempt, a banality with which the law
should not concern itself ; it is on the other hand
from the standpoint of the public health, a serious mat-
ter, since it puts in peril not only credulous adults
and their innocent children, but in cases of contagious
and infectious diseases, great numbers of persons who
repudiate its nonsense, thus menacing the whole com-
munity. Let us concede, for argument sake, what the
Eddyites vehemently declare, that if it man.be willing

CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE BEFOKE THE LAW. 103

to subject himself to the treatment of Christian
Science for any sickness, even smallpox, he should be
allowed to do so ; are we also to concede that he
should be allowed to subject his infant children af-
flicted with that malady or scarlet fever, or malignant
diphtheria to the same and no other treatment ? Is
he to be suffered to sacrifice his own offspring and
also spread contagion? Common sense affords the
answer.

What is dangerous and pestilential in Christian
Science is its absolute denial in specific terms that dis-
ease or bodily injury exists except as a perverted
phase of thought ; its denial that any material remedy
appliances or hygienic measures are of any use in the
treatment of the sick, and its positive assertion that
the whole materia medica is harmful. A consistent
Christian Scientist must logically be opposed to vacci-
nation, to antiseptic methods, to bandages, to cauter-
ies, to prophylactics, to anesthetics — in short, to every
approved method of relieving pain, curing the sick
and protecting the public from contagion or infection.
Let us concede to the power of suggestion all that is
established and far more. Let us admit for the argu-
ment's sake, if not in fact, that even cancer may be
cured, by convincing the patient that there is no such
disease and that he is not afflicted with it ; still we
are not up with Mrs. Eddy. For that astounding
person distinctly says that the healer must not name
the disease, but must argue with it mentally ; that her
methods are as efficacious for infants, in whose minds
such suggestion cannot be planted, as for adults ; that
oceans may roll between healer and patient cutting

104 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

off communication and therefore suggestion by any
means that human science as yet admits to be pos-
sible. Thus she seems to eliminate from her theory
the only grain of truth we have found in it and deny
the very cause that produces what results follow its
application in the restoration of the sick to the
normal.

I cannot better illustrate in passing the disingenu-
ousness of the professional healer, the hyper sensitive-
ness of the healed and the difficulties in the way , of
investigating reported marvellous cures than by two
examples in my recent experience. Mr. Carol Norton
is one of the Board of Lecturers of the First Church
of Christ Scientist, "the mother church" so-called.
He delivers with some variations, a copyrighted
lecture, offering to give medical proof of the cure of
cancer, locomotor ataxia and other obstinate maladies.
I wrote some time ago for such proofs and also asked
specifically if Mr. Norton himself would venture to
substitute Christian Science for medical aid in the case
of a fractured skull, a severed artery or confluent
smallpox. After some correspondence he produced
so-called medical proof, consisting of brief statements
of conclusion, signed by Christian Scientists but of
little or no evidential value from either a medical or
legal standpoint ; not differing in kind from the cer-
tificates with which nostrum venders have made us
familiar. To my questions he replied that he " pre-
ferred to shelve them." Having written an account
of this effort at investigation to the New York Sun,1
a gentleman wrote in reference to it, asking if I had

1 See these letters in the appendix, pps. 165-182; also pps. 64, 65, 113.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 105

seriously examined Christian Science and saying, in
perfectly good faith, as I believe, that while he was
ignorant of its methods, he felt bound to testify to its
marvellous results in his own family upon a patient
" turned out to die " by a great hospital, and given up
by three physicians, whom he named, two being well-
known and one eminent. He expressed a desire to
put the facts before me. I replied courteously, as I
thought, expressing entire readiness to believe in the
existence of the disease and its cure, under the treat-
ment of Christian Science, but saying with perfect
frankness, inasmuch as my correspondent professed
ignorance of that cult's methods, that I should be dis-
posed to explain the cure by suggestion and not by
the theories of Mrs. Eddy, which it seemed to me im-
possible for a sane mind to accept ; and I also asked
that he would let me know all the facts. This gentle-
man was, I regret to say, so offended at my unfortu-
nate remark, that it did not seem to me any sane mind
could accept those theories of which he professed
to be ignorant, that he did not give me the informa-
tion which he had volunteered. And it appeared that
of the physicians he named, the eminent specialist had
been consulted only once and then had incurred odium
by charging an office fee of $10, while the other more
prominent physician told me that he knew of no such
person as the patient, although his brother might per-
haps have a patient of that name ; to my further in-
quiries I have had no answer.1

1 Since this paper was read I have had accurate information from the
attending physicians showing my correspondent to have been absolutely
misinformed in the premises, however honest in belief.

106 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

We are now at a point where we may consider
whether the law, as it is, can deal adequately with the
practices of Eddyism or whether further legislation is
desirable in the premises.

We have a statute in this state making it a misde-
meanor for any one not a licensed physician to prac-
tice medicine. There are also requirements as to re-
porting contagious diseases, deaths, etc., with all of
which you are familiar. Under the medical law, the
only puzzling question is, in a given case, whether the
acts proved constitute practice of medicine. A clever
saying I have had occasion to quote before, in this
connection is, that it is one thing to renounce the
devil and all his works, and a very different and more
difficult matter to recognize the devil and his works
when you encounter them. No effort has been made,
so far as I know to punish in our state's courts the
practice of Christian Science as an offence under the
Public Health Law, which contains no definition of
medical practice as do the statutes of some other
states. It is true that the daily press reported re-
cently the conviction of a Christian Scientist in
Brooklyn. The defendant in that case, however, was
not an Eddyite but some other species of divine or
mental healer, and moreover, had administered ma-
terial remedies, upon which fact a conviction was pro-
cured.1 On the other hand in a civil case, Smith v.
Lane, our Supreme Court held, some years ago, that a
masseur was not a practitioner of medicine and made
the test of such practice to consist in the prescription

1 This was the case in which the photograph forming the frontispiece
was taken. See preface. About the time this paper was read a similar
case decided in like manner was reported in Chicago. — People v. Bratseh,
Chic. Law Journal, Sept. 15, 1899, Vol. IV., N. O. 397.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 107

or administration of drugs or remedies or the use of
instruments. This is manifestly an imperfect defini-
tion ; and it would have been better perhaps, had the
court confined itself to deciding that the facts proven
in the particular case, did not constitute such practice,
without essaying to make a general definition, which
is a more difficult task than on its face it appears to
be. In the matter of business fraud courts have been
wiser and contented themselves in each case with de-
ciding whether the proven facts constitute a fraud,
avoiding a general definition of fraud itself ; with full
knowledge that to define that protean malfeasance
would only make easy the way of the transgressor.
So, then, although the point has not been specifically
decided in a criminal action under the medical law it
is probable that in such a prosecution our courts would
hold that the attempt to treat the sick by mental or
pseudo-religious methods alone does not constitute the
practice of medicine. In Rhode Island and Ohio, the
case of Smith v. Lane has been followed. In Ne-
braska and Illinois, it has been repudiated as incon-
sistent with the statutes of those states, but under the
new medical law of Illinois, it would seem that Chris-
tian Scientists have been influential enough to secure
exemption for their business.

We may assert then, that Eddy ism is not punishable
under the medical law of this state unless the defini-
tion of Smith v. Lane shall be repudiated.

So far as the reporting of contagious diseases, in-
flamed eyes of babies, births and deaths by medical
attendants in charge, the law is as you know substan-
tially as follows :

108 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

There are first the general laws authorizing the
creation of local boards of health with certain
powers, among them that of making and enforcing
proper ordinances, and providing a penalty for dis-
obedience.

§ 397 of the Penal Code provides that a fine not
exceeding $2,000 or imprisonment not exceeding one
year or both may be inflicted upon any one violating
a provision of the health law not otherwise punished,
or violating or refusing or omitting to obey, a lawful
order or regulation of such a board.

§ 288 of that code provides for the reporting of
inflamed eyes of an infant within the age of two
weeks by the medical attendant, midwife or person
having the child in charge. It also requires a person
having by law the duty of furnishing medical at-
tention to a child, so to do under the penalty of mis-
demeanor.

§ 1172 of the Greater New York charter authorizes
the Board of Health to make ordinances, violation of
which shall be a misdemeanor.

§§ 145 to 158 of the New York City Sanitary Code,
and I presume of other codes, provide for reports of
contagious diseases by physicians, lodging housekeep-
ers, masters of vessels, undertakers and others, and
§ 5 defines the term Physician to include " dentists and
every other person who practices about the cure of
the sick or injured, or who has the charge of, or pro-
fessionally prescribes for any person sick, injured or
diseased and any person who pursues the business of
or acts as a midwife ; " a definition as you see very
different from and much wider than that of Smith v.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFOKE THE LAW. 109

Lane, and quite broad enough to include Christian
Scientists.

We may now consider first what, if any, is the civil
liability of Christian Scientists for injuries resulting
from their ignorance and lack of skill, to their pa-
tients. Second, is a Christian Scientist guilty of man-
slaughter or murder in case his patient dies, as a result
of his neglect to use, or his prevention of, means that
demonstrably would have saved life ?

The rule of law is well established, that one who
with culpable ignorance or recklessness, undertakes a
duty requiring for its proper performance, special
knowledge, skill or care, is answerable for the ill
effects of his malfeasance. In the law of bailments
the degree of care required of the bailee has been
said to depend in some measure upon the compensa-
tion. Thus if A give to B, a warehouse man, valu-
ables for storage and pay therefor, more care is re-
quired of A than where B gives the goods to a friend
to be cared for gratuitously, — although even in the
latter case, the friend would not be absolved from all
care. It has been often sought to apply this doctrine
in cases of medical malpractice, the argument being
made that one who undertakes the cure of the sick
without fee should be held to a less degree of skill and
care than where compensation is given or promised.
But against this view the courts have set their faces ;
rightly holding to be barbarous the doctrine that a
medical man may be careless with the afflicted poor
but must be careful with the rich ; and although the
laws of some states only forbid unlicensed medical
practice in cases where fees are taken, still the re-

110 CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE.

ceipt of fee is not an essential element of such practice,
as a rule, and does not affect the liability for mal-
practice. It has been said also, that although the rule
is, that a physician's duty to his patient implies the
possession by the former of at least the average
knowledge and skill of his profession, — regard being
had to the state of medical science, — and the applica-
tion by him of that skill and knowledge with at least
the ordinary and usual care of his fellow-practitioners,
still where one professes to follow a certain school or
system of medicine, he is to be held to its standards
and not to those of another school; that a homeopath,
for instance, is to be judged by the standards of his
own system. The ancient judgment of the Cadi,
cited by Puff dendorf , is ordinarily given as an illustra-
tion of this point. A man having demanded damages
of a veterinary for blinding him with an ointment
used on the eyes of horses, the Cadi found for de-
fendant saying that if plaintiff had not been an ass, he
would not have gone to a horse doctor. This was
very much the line of thought taken by the court in
Smith v. Lane above alluded to as defining medical
practice in this state. It there appeared that the de-
fendant Lane had contracted for the services of Smith,
a rubber and manipulator, induced by the latter's pre-
tension that his treatment relieved the ills of life
marvellously, and almost robbed death of its terrors.
After taking the treatment, Lane refused to pay the
agreed price and Smith brought his action to recover
it. Our General Term held that the masseur was en-
titled to his pay, even though his pretences were pre-
posterous, since the patient had received the treat-

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. Ill

ment he bargained for, while the fact that he was fool
enough to believe the plaintiff's vain boasting was no
defence, and not the court's affair.1 The law merchant
recognizes a seller's right to praise his wares and to
utter any opinion of them, no matter how extravagant,
provided he does not mislead the purchaser of average
intelligence, by false statements or fraudulent conceal-
ment of facts as contrasted with conclusions. If he
has a broken down old horse for sale, the defects of
which are patent to any man of horse sense, he may
praise the brute to the skies as a beautiful creature.
And, in like manner, the law does not prohibit that
self -laudation known in medicine as quacking, which
may be unethical, but is not illegal. It is to be noted
however, that, in Smith's case, there was no conten-
tion that the patient had suffered from the treat-
ment any injury, damages for which he might have
offset against the bill ; and it might well be that a
Christian Scientist, although allowed to collect fees
under the doctrine of that case, might still be held
liable for injury resulting from his recklessness in
undertaking a duty without skill or knowledge to per-
form it.

It is, however, with the criminal or penal, not the
civil side of the law, that we are here concerned : and
in this domain of the law, the Cadi's judgment is
without authority ; for if a veterinary should assume
recklessly to prescribe an equine dose of cathartic for
a man, as in the merry tale we all have heard, it would
not be a defence in a criminal prosecution growing
out of the patient's death that the latter had assented

1 See pages 79 and 80 for a further statement of the Court's opinion. ~

112 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

to the treatment. In eases of manslaughter it is the
state, not the individual, that is offended against ; and
it is not to be presumed, even in the absence of specific
legislation, that the state assents to the taking of life
by gross recklessness or ignorance. In our own state
an attempt at suicide is felony. To aid or abet the
attempt is also felony, and to aid, abet, advise or en-
courage the suicide is manslaughter in the first degree
under the penal code, and has been held to be murder.
If A says to B, " I will give you $50 to kill me," and B
obligingly does so, the latter's felonious act is not the
less murder because of A's request or his payment of
the fee. And so if A is fool enough to submit to reck-
less and ignorant practice for the cure of his actual
or imagined maladies, his assent should not absolve an
ignorant or reckless practitioner from criminal liability
for the fatal result of his malpractice. Even if the rule
be sound that each practitioner is to be judged by the
system he professes, it should be at least established
that he follows a system based upon, or at least not
contrary to, ordinary observation and experience. He
cannot call his whims and vagaries a system. Ac-
cordingly in Massachusetts not long ago, when there
was no medical law in that state, a quack was held by
the Supreme Court, in a carefully reasoned opinion by
Mr. Justice Holmes, now its Chief Justice, to have
been properly convicted of manslaughter for causing
the death of a woman by keeping her swathed in
flannels, saturated with kerosene; and that learned
court, — repudiating as unsound, or ill-reported, the
earlier Massachusetts case, acquitting Thomson,
founder of the Botanic or Thomsonian School, a case

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 113

extensively followed in other states, — intimated that
the kerosene practitioner might have been properly
convicted of murder.1

In a case occurring in your own county, last
spring, the Grand Jury refused to indict, as I under-
stand, because, upon the evidence before it, the ac-
cused was not shown to have done more than render
the religious offices of the cult to the deceased, the
former testifying in her own behalf, that she received
no fee, did not assume care of the case, medically, and
had even suggested to the deceased, the propriety of
calling in medical aid. While tried by the ordinary
teaching and customs of the Christian Scientists, —
who do assume full charge of such cases, and not only
receive fees but teach that the patient gets well quicker
if he pays a fat one, — this statement of the accused
lacked veri-similitude, yet, if believed, it of course, ex-
culpated her. But, in the hypothetical case put to
Mr. Carol Norton, as to which he refused to commit
himself, there can be no doubt that a Christian Scien-
tist would be guilty of manslaughter if not murder. I
said to that gentleman, if a lad should accidentally
sever an artery and surgical aid were accessible, would
you presume to set that aid aside, and essay to staunch
the gush of arterial blood by your mental processes
alone? The question presented a dilemma; to say
that he would not do so, implied lack of faith in the
doctrine he teaches and practices for a livelihood ; to
admit that he would do so, would confess willingness
to commit felony. Is it any wonder that he preferred
" to shelve " the question ?

1 See contents for paper on Manslaughter, pp. 73 to 77.

114 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

On this point, then, we may feel assured that the
malpractice of a Christian Scientist resulting in death
would be a criminal offence under the law, and a ver-
dict by a jury finding one guilty thereof, would be up-
held; by malpractice I mean the substitution with
gross recklessness or ignorance, or both, of mental proc-
esses obviously inefficacious, for medical or surgical
processes demonstrably efficacious, resulting in the
death of the patient.

It remains to consider the desirability of further
legislation in the premises.

Personally, as already indicated, I am not and
never have been a zealous advocate of too much legis-
lation. Our statute book has already upon it many
laws that might be judiciously obliterated. A statute
to be effective should be enforceable, and enforced
with moderation, with wisdom, and without any sus-
picion of oppression, gain, or blackmail, upon the part
of those charged with its administration. It is safe to
say that the medical laws have been so enforced, oth-
erwise there would be a strong popular movement for
their repeal, such as has arisen and been successfully
carried out heretofore. There is no use in shutting
one's eye to facts. Many of the laws that are gotten
through ostensibly for the public welfare, are really
for the private good of individuals or organizations,
and they are intrinsically selfish rather than public
spirited. Medical legislation is in a sense, — a very
limited sense, — inderogation of the right of every man
to employ his knowledge and talents in winning his
bread freely ; obviously, therefore, there is a point be-
yond which it cannot go, and that. point. is, the limit

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 115

of what is necessary to protect the public health and
individual citizens against the evil effects of ignorance
and unskilfulness in the performance of a duty re-
quiring knowledge and skill of the highest standard.
To say that no one should practice Christian Science
or any other method of curing the sick, would not be
desirable, politic, or just. To require, as has been sug-
gested, that all sick men should call in physicians, is
too absurd a proposition for serious consideration.
The utmost that can be properly enacted as law is that
no one shall be allowed to engage in the business of
healing the sick and the injured, except those who
have procured licenses by demonstrating that they are
possessed of a fair knowledge of those branches of
general and special knowledge which the general opin-
ion of mankind agrees are requisite to fit them for the
proper discharge of the duty which they seek to assume.
All men whose opinions are worthy of consideration,
agree that to fit one to deal with human infirmities, a
course of study in, and knowledge of, certain branches
of science is necessary. One should know something
of anatomy, of physiology, of diet, of the action of
drugs and poisons, of remedies and antidotes, of the
mechanism of labor, — in short, of what is generally
known as medical science. By demonstrating such
knowledge he procures his license. He is not called
upon, and should not be called upon, to follow any
cut and dried system, but should be left to the exer-
cise of his judgment, being responsible to his patient,
and also to the community, for his abuse of that judg-
ment. He would be a very foolish man who did not
vary his treatment in different cases, who did not seek

116 CHKISTIAJST SCIENCE.

to widen his knowledge, who would belittle the great
force of suggestion, or refuse to save his patient by
some method that was not strictly secundum artem.
A person so licensed might practice Christian Science
regularly if he saw fit to do so, but, if I may be par-
doned borrowing the language of our sporting friends,
the odds are heavy, that he would not do so. This
then is the sum of the whole matter. The state has a
perfect right to require of persons practicing medi-
cine, essaying the cure and care of the sick as a busi-
ness, a requisite degree of knowledge. Of this princi-
ple the Supreme Court of the nation, and those of
most of our states, have expressed approval. The gen-
eral opinion of mankind approves of it.

But, the Christian Scientists say, no education
should be required of us because we do not practice
medicine. The Supreme Court of Rhode Island took
this view of the matter in the Mylod case, and even
went so far as gravely to suggest that if Christian
Scientists are to be considered as practitioners of
medicine, then they should be entitled to a State
Board of their own, as are homeopaths and eclectics.
A lawyer instinctively professes, or expresses the
highest respect for the court ; but in reading this
opinion one cannot help recalling the opening of a
distinguished Massachusetts lawyer, who began his ar-
gument by saying, " Your Honors, I have the highest
respect for the Court— except in a few gross cases."
It seems to me, and this is said with all due deference,
that the learned Rhode Island Court in making this
obiter suggestion missed the whole point of the mat-
ter. The Christian Scientists are not in the same

CHKISTIAK SCIENCE BEFOKE THE LAW. 117

category with homeopaths, eclectics, or any body of
men who, whatever their scientific opinions — call them
whims and vagaries if you will, — nevertheless profess
to found their systems upon human knowledge, ex-
perience, and belief in the laws of what we call mat-
ter, and to accept as a rule the fundamental knowledge
of mankind and the evidence of the senses. Why
should not the Christian Scientists have a State Board
of Examiners upon the same terms as other schools or
systems professing to cure the sick ? We have three
Medical Boards in this state, representing the regular
physicians and what are called the schools of home-
opathy and eclectism. These schools profess to differ
from the regular profession only or chiefly in their
methods of treatment. As a matter of fact we lay-
men believe, rightly or wrongly, that the learned
among them are in substantial accord. However that
may be, there is no pretence that there is any home-
opathic anatomy, or eclectic physiology, or that chil-
dren are born by different methods ; in short, these
differing schools are agreed upon the same funda-
mentals of what has been exactly achieved in medical
learning. They all recognize that no man can be
equipped for medical practice under any system, who
ignores the basic facts of life ; and our examining
boards subject all candidates for license to the same
examinations in every department of medicine except
in therapeutics. Now what objection would there be
to letting Christian Scientists have a state board under
these conditions, greater than the objection the Chris-
tian Scientists themselves would raise ? If Mrs. Eddy
or Mr, Norton, or any of the cult could demonstrate

118 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

the possession of that knowledge of anatomy, physi-
ology, hygiene, the action of drugs and poisons, ob-
stetrics and other matters which all men, worthy to
be called scientific, agree are necessary to fit one to
care for the sick, why should he and she not be allowed
to practice Mrs. Eddy's system, if, having attained to
such knowledge, they still believed that system to
contain the true therapeutic? Of course I do not
wish to be understood as favoring any such a proposi-
tion, or believing it practicable. I do not believe it
possible that persons conversant with the human
economy would be content to practice Eddyism ; but
on the contrary, believe that if such a board as the
Rhode Island Court suggested were established, it
would result in the practice of medicine by Christian
Scientists, even if they still kept to their name for the
sake of the clientelage it would bring.

But how can a State Board be constituted to ex-
amine in scientific matters a class of persons who deny
the existence of scientific knowledge as do the Eddy-
ites, who deny the existence of matter, of disease or
injury, of everything that is recognized throughout
Christendom as a material fact ? How that wise Pa-
gan Socrates would have laughed over the proposition
that man is fitted to cure sickness in proportion to
his denial of its existence ! How he would have rev-
elled in putting Mrs. Eddy and her board of lecturers
through such a cross examination as he gave to Eu-
thydemus ! Socrates, whose sane mind preached con-
stantly one gospel, that man must be trained and
fitted for his work in order to do it well, that a pilot
must know all about vessels and steering; a tailor

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BEFORE THE LAW. 119

about fabrics and cutting ; a statesman about govern-
ment and law ; and a physician about the human
economy. The solemn nonsense uttered by intelli-
gent men in support of this cunning and ignorant old
lady's money -making scheme would be enough to
make the gods shake with Olympian laughter, except
that tears and wrath chase away the smiles when we
contemplate how horrible it is to subject even the
willing and credulous to the treatment of these mad
people. It is bad enough to realize the mistakes of
diagnosis and treatment made by men of skill and
learning. No one but a fool believes that physicians
are infallible, or that medicine is a perfect science ;
no one with an atom of sense would consent to have
the present medical practice established by law and
the wheels of progress stopped. It is tiresome but
necessary to say this a thousand times, in answer to
the wearisome iteration of the quack fraternity, that
medical law is only designed to maintain the present.
How can we keep patience with the ever-recurring
argument that because the learned and skilful make
some mistakes, the ignorant and inept should have
free hand to make errors innumerable ? Why must
we forever answer seriously the argument, or rather
the asseveration, that there is something solemnly
precious in ignorance and something suspicious in
knowledge ? A schoolboy who has once read Cicero's
oration for Archias has the answer to this dismal pat-
ter forever on his lips.

Let us illustrate, with a few examples, just what
Christian Science demands the right to do ignorantly,
and what its opponents say should only be attempted

120 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

with knowledge and skill. Childbirth is not a dis-
ease or a sickness but the healthy operation of a
normal function. Without any attendance at all, or
with the attendance of a Christian Scientist,— it is the
same thing, — children are constantly brought into the
world with labor and great pain. But, in our modern
life especially, there are complications demanding the
highest skill for their safe treatment ; and pain, if not
banished, may be minimized. How horrible it is to
imagine a case of placenta praevia, or an abnormal
presentation in the hands of these mad people who
pretend that the mere reading of Mrs. Eddy's book of
jargon fits the reader to take care of any case of sick-
ness or obstetrics ! Is it much if anything short of
murder for an Eddyite, taught only by the contents
of that dreary book to attend such cases as those sup-
posed ? Again, a child swallows poison ; then there
is a possibility, — a probability, — it may be a certainty,
— that competent medical aid seasonably called in, will
save the child ; what is to be thought of the parent
who calls in the ignorant Christian Scientist, what of
the latter who mentally argues with the symptoms of
poisoning that he cannot recognize and excludes the
necessary and efficient aid ? Is he not a man slaugh-
terer, nay a murderer ? Once more, a case of small-
pox, malignant diphtheria, or scarlet fever breaks out
in a tenement house full of children; medical aid being
called may cure it, or, at all events, recognizing the
disease, may isolate the patient, disinfect the premises
and stop the spread of contagion. The Christian
Scientist comes, in his crass ignorance denies that there
is any disease present and sits down in solemn mad-

CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE BEFORE THE LAW. 121

ness to argue with what he calls an erroneous belief
of mortal mind — the contagion spreads and there is a
new slaughter of innocents. Is not the so-called
scientist a pest, and should he not be incarcerated in a
prison or a madhouse where the community may be
safe from him in the future ?

There is no further provision of law needed to deal
with these people than to widen the definition of
medical practice sufficiently to correspond with that
of the sanitary code — require of them before they are
permitted to take charge of the sick, the same degree
of knowledge that is required of a Roman Catholic, a
Protestant or a Mohammedan. Is it too much to ask
that the legislature do this, or shall we accept the
argument—and it is the only one that is made in be-
half of these people, that any scoundrel or sincere
fanatic may commit any wicked act for reward and
shelter himself under the plea that he considered it
his religious duty to commit the offence.

If all men were wise, if fallacies did not have a
fascination for intelligent minds, if in our own day as
ever since the world began, every unknown thing
were not for some minds a wonderful thing, if an age
of scepticism were not also notoriously an age of
credulity, there would not be need even of this much
legislation. It is for you and for other men of your
profession and for laymen as well to turn the light
into this reeking corner of superstition, strip the dis-
guise away and show what is below it and you will
not have need even of this much law, for after all the
law has never been able to protect a fool against the
consequence of his folly.

HOW EAR CAN LEGISLATION AID IN MAINTAINING

A PROPER STANDARD OF MEDICAL

EDUCATION ? '

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen : — I desire,
first of all, to express my indebtedness to those gentle-
men in the different States and Territories of this coun-
try and in the British Provinces to whose courteous
replies to a circular letter of inquiry upon the general
topic of Medical Legislation, sent to them in the
early part of the summer, it is due that the conclusions
of this paper may be said with fairness, I think, to rep-
resent not only the opinion of others besides myself,
but prevailing opinions among those whose chief in-
terest in medical legislation is that it shall confine the
practice of medicine to educated persons, regardless of
any particular views they may entertain as to ques-
tions of therapeutics.

It is not intended to present statistics here. My
correspondence has not yielded any from which I
should care to deduce conclusions, nor are they needed
to substantiate what I hope may prove fair reasoning
and sound deduction.

This paper must be, therefore, a statement of what
I conceive to be general principles and fair inferences
from an experience of some years, as counsel of the

1 Read before the American Social Science Association, Sept. 5, 1888.

123

124 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

medical societies of the State and of the county of
New York, in drafting and securing the enactment of
the present by no means perfect medical statute of
that State, and enforcing in the county of New York
obedience to its provisions.

It may be said, however, as the general result of the
inquiries, which were made in every State and Terri-
tory of this country, and also in the British Provinces,
that almost every reply to the circulars expressed ap-
proval of some system of regulating by statute the
practice of medicine ; and the opinion was also strongly
expressed that such legislation as has been already en-
acted crude and imperfect though it be, has perceptibly
improved the standard of medical education.

At the threshold of this inquiry, it is worth while
to lay down certain postulates.

First of all, let it be said distinctly that such legisla-
tion as we are about to consider is regarded by the
courts both as constitutional and as highly desirable.
It ought to be scarcely necessary to have to say this.
But the opponents of statutory regulation of medical
practice so constantly declare it to be an infringe-
ment of the liberties of the citizen, and therefore un-
constitutional, that one may well preface any remarks
of this nature with the assurance that, so far as any
principle can be considered as settled and approved by
judicial authority, the principle involved in this sort of
legislation stands settled and approved by the Su-
preme Court of the United States, and that of every
lesser commonwealth before which it has been
brought.

In the second place, it is necessary to state the only

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 125

principle upon which such legislation can be justified.
That principle is salus populi, — the principle of secu-
rity, of self -protection against fraud and ignorance. It
is a vulgar and frequent assertion of foolish persons,
who really believe in the ^^-supernatural powers
of the ignorant and depraved, and of knaves who,
professing to have such powers, prey upon the credu-
lity of their suffering fellow-creatures that the only
purpose of medical legislation is to increase the emolu-
ments of a favored class by obstructing entrance into
it with such barriers as will exclude many honest but
ignorant voters from the right to practice physic, and
so, by limiting the number of its practitioners to the
educated, lessen competition. It is not necessary to
demonstrate to you the falsity of this slander, or to
argue in favor of the propriety and justice in princi-
ple of throwing safeguards about a profession intrusted
more than any other with the health, honor, and life
of the citizen. Surely the State has a right to protect
the lives, health, and bodily welfare of its members
against the assault of the charlatan quite as much as
against the assault of a more courageous homicide.
Nor is it altogether an answer to this argument to say
that, inasmuch as a man voluntarily selects the char-
latan as his medical attendant, while he exercises no
choice as to the homicide, there is no analogy between
the two cases. It is quite impossible for me to see in
what regard, except cowardice, a man who, with ab-
solutely no knowledge of the human economy or the
effect upon it of drugs, attempts to practice medicine
for fee or reward differs, when his practice proves
fatal, from the less crafty murderer who for reward,

126 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

if not for fee, knocks his victim on the head. There
is this difference also between the two offences,— the
quack's is chronic, the homicide's sporadic. But, as
between the courageous homicide and the venders of
quack remedies compounded with morphia and like
poisons, the former seems admirable. It is said, in-
deed, that the patient having his choice of medical
advisers will exercise it wisely ; and, if he does not,
the civil remedy for malpractice, accruing to himself
or his representatives, is a sufficient remedy for one
foolish enough to seek such advice. But civil remedies
are expensive luxuries of doubtful result, and, besides
that, the interest of the community does not centre in
punishing an offence committed on one of its mem-
bers, but in preventing its repetition against others.
I am not aware that it is recognized as a defence to a
charge of homicide occurring, say, in the prize-ring,
that the deceased invited his antagonist to fight with
him in an amiable contention for a purse, which should
be the fee or reward of the victor; and, indeed, it
seems to me that the prize-fighter, unlucky enough to
kill his opponent, deserves more sympathy than the
charlatan ; for his antagonist had a chance to win the
fee and perhaps do the killing himself, whereas be-
tween quack and patient the former stands to win the
fee, while the latter will never compel his adviser to
swallow his own prescription.

In considering what legislation can do in bettering
any social condition, we must never forget that the
best law which can be framed is but an exceedingly
clumsy instrument for the enforcement of even the
elementary moral obligations that are clear to all of

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 127

us. Almost everybody of cultivation can see a reason
for prohibiting — not for the sake of those directly
interested, but as harmful to the community — prize-
fights, duels, bull-fights, bridge jumpings, and all other
performances, including suicide, whereby foolish men
not only risk their own lives, which might be no great
loss to us, but set a pernicious and demoralizing ex-
ample. The offence against society by such precedents
is so palpable and gross that a very crude mind will
assent to the justice of their punishment when com-
mitted and the forbidding of their occurrence. But
the transgression of the charlatan is somewhat more
subtle and a thousandfold more dangerous ; yet, be-
cause his services are sought by his victim in the
belief that they are a prevention, not a source of
danger, many consider his acts as matter of private
interest, and overlook the public wrong. From the
standpoint of morals alone, the quack, from whose
ignorance, and worse than ignorance, a patient's death
results, stands in the same relation to one who has
committed murder while engaged in robbery that the
subtle wrecker of a great corporation does to the un-
lucky scamp who has stolen the wherewithal to get
his daily bread or rum, as the case might be. The
difficulty of tracing the effect to its cause is the safety
of the former offender, and it is not unfair to say that
the chief wrongdoing punishable by law is clumsiness
in execution. To succeed in crime, one must be an
artist.

It is when we come to seek a legal remedy against
the immoralities of quackery that the difficulty of
reaching them without making laws themselves ob-

128 CHEISTIAK SCIENCE.

jectionable becomes apparent. Bentham has very-
well pointed out that moral and statutory law have
identical purposes and are governed by the same
principles, differing only in this : that, although both
are circumferences in the same plane, they are con-
centric and of unequal radii. Each circumference has
the same centre, — namely, the greatest happiness of
each and of all; but the circumference of morals
bounds the entire plane of human action, whereas that
of law, of which the radius may be said to be prac-
ticability of enforcement, has a much narrower scope.
Whatever is legal is, or certainly should be, moral.
But there are a thousand moralities the attempt to
enforce which by law would lead to evils far greater
than those sought to be obviated. In one sense, law
itself may be almost called an evil, since it is not only
a restriction of freedom in action, but a restriction
which unfortunately can often be enforced only at the
cost of inflicting lesser evils than it is designed to
prevent : thus, for example, the existing medical stat-
utes of most of our States recognize, as the sole
license for the practice of medicine, the possession by
the licentiate of a diploma from a chartered college
conferring the degree of doctor of medicine. And,
while it may be perfectly true that the probabilities
are greatly in favor of a beneficial result from these
laws in limiting the number of uneducated practition-
ers of physic, it is also quite as true that a factitious
value is given by such legislation to a mere parchment,
and a standard set which cannot be higher than that
of the poorest college the diploma of which is recog-
nized as a license ; and it is quite possible that in many

LEGISLATION 'AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 129

cases persons of fair attainments acquired through
extra collegiate study may be debarred, temporarily
at all events, from a right possessed by a far more
ignorant graduate of some contemptible school incor-
porated by a too complaisant legislature. These inci-
dental hardships under existing laws are more than
offset by the increased security of society against
ignorant pretenders ; but they show how necessary it
is to keep it in mind that a statute must be not only
right in its purpose, but must neither work greater
evil than it prevents nor be impracticable of enforce-
ment.

Of course, no penal or restrictive law can be effect-
ively enforced if its purpose does not commend itself
to the moral sense of the community ; and every en-
actment that cannot be vigorously enforced is an en-
cumbrance to the statute book, useless lumber, like
the purchases of Mrs. Toodles at auction-rooms of
coffins and door-plates that might be handy some day,
— nay, worse than useless, for, like lumber in a dark
garret, such statutes are stumbling-blocks for the un-
wary.

The law is a schoolmaster over and above all things.
Its chief value lies in the fact that its daily enforce-
ment is a constant voice crying in the wilderness
against the evils that it prohibits and punishes. Any
one so unfortunate, or perhaps I should say fortunate,
as to be called often to a police court must at times
feel that the attempt by legislation to check even the
gross and palpable crimes against person and property
is a never-ending toil of Sisyphus. The stone seems
to roll back every night as far as it is rolled up every

130 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

morning. The same faces turn up, the same crimes
are committed over and over by the same persons.
"We grow disheartened when we seek the good effect
of a penal statute among the individuals who have
felt its heavy hand, — and this is most sincerely to be
regretted, — but we pluck up heart when we see the
number of individuals who are deterred from crime
and educated to an appreciation of the common rights
by the law's enforcement.

The chief purpose of legislators in times past was
the punishment and remedy of evil committed. The
tendency of modern law is toward prevention. ¥e
are seeing more and more the wisdom of the clever
Irishman who "hollered before he was hurt," because
he could see little use in hallooing afterward.

What has been said up to this point may seem, per-
haps, if not irrelevant to the topic, nevertheless such
a statement of general principles as it is not necessary
to make before an audience of students of social
science. And, if the words uttered here found no
audience beyond these walls, it might have been well
to consider only the desirable features of a good
medical act. But I owe the honor of being asked to
address you to the fact that it has been my profes-
sional privilege for some years to advise those medical
societies that have been striving to protect both the
public and the medical profession of the State of New
York against pretenders. What is said here is carried
to many beyond reach of our voices. What to you
may be truisms are to many intelligent men theorems
to be demonstrated. Medical legislation is never
asked for, but a cloud of misunderstanding and mig-

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 131

statement at once arises, and the proposed measure is
attacked as unsound in principle and unfair in practice.

It has therefore seemed proper both to clear away
all such mistiness before answering in the most gen-
eral terms the question at the head of this paper, and
to make plain to every one who may hear or read these
words the spirit in which the medical societies of New
York are acting in this matter, — a spirit that must
commend itself to men of fair minds and common sense.

Starting, then, with these general principles, — that
under its police power the State has authority to reg-
ulate the practice of medicine, and that no law can be
of real utility that cannot be enforced actively, — we
may examine within what limits it is wise to exercise
that authority, and how far its exercise can aid in
maintaining a proper standard of medical education.

If no law can be effectively enforced that arouses
strong antagonism in the community at large, it is
manifest that a medical law enacted to favor any
special class of practitioners of medicine, to uphold or
suppress any theory of medical practice, to establish
any set of regulations as to fees, or that is otherwise
obnoxious to the great body of citizens would prob-
ably soon become a dead letter and positively harmful
to the whole medical profession. In the Medical Rec-
ord of September 11, 1886, I endeavored, in an article
entitled the " Evolution of the Apothecary," l to illus-
trate this point by tracing the struggle of the College

of Phvsicians to reserve to its licentiates the exclu-

sive right under its charter to prescribe medicine.
After some two hundred years of successful prosecu-

1 See page 145.

132 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

tions of apothecaries and others, the college met its
Waterloo in 1703, when Apothecary Rose, on his ap-
peal to the House of Lords from the judgment of the
courts in favor of the college, succeeded in having his
appeal sustained, not on points of law, but because the
system in vogue seemed to the Peers absurd, as neces-
sitating the employment in trifling cases of two or
three persons at large fees, — a physician to prescribe,
an apothecary to dispense, and perhaps a surgeon to
operate, — a state of things that a Peer would not sub-
mit to in the case of his sick servant, and would not
require a poor man to submit to in his own case. The
physicians had their fee system and their professional
pride to thank for their defeat in this as in some other
instances. This decision having made it possible for
every ignoramus to tinker with the health of John
Bull, it happened in time that the apothecaries, who had
routed the physicians on the point of fees and acquired
a right to prescribe as well as dispense their own
drugs, after a hundred years' experience of the results
of their freedom, during which period general medical
education had sunk to a dismal condition and quackery
had flowered abundantly, procured from Parliament
the amendment to their charter known as the Apoth-
ecaries Act, whereby their Hall was empowered to ex-
amine and license apothecaries. The enactment of
this statute according to Sir Henry Halford, who had
opposed its passage, "raised the standard of that
branch of the profession amazingly."

In other words, the very men who procured the ex-
tension to themselves of the right to prescribe, because
of the burdensome regulations of the physician, solic-

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 133

ited a restriction of that right when they found that
charlatanry and ignorance were rapidly getting con-
trol of general practice. In this page of history, we
find evidence that a law prescribing, with a view to
the general good, educational qualifications for practi-
tioners of physic will obtain favor where statutes par-
taking of a trades-union spirit, using that word not in
its better sense, will fail. I use the term " trades-
union " here for lack of a better, and not as one neces-
sarily conveying an objectionable idea. In the sense
that a trades-union is a combination of artificers to im-
prove their moral, physical, and mental condition by
all lawful means consistent with a due regard to the
rights of the community at large, it is a perfectly
proper organization, and much to be commended as an
element in the common welfare. In so far as such
a combination, however, seeks to carry out a plan for
procuring high wages by violently obstructing others
in their rights to earn a livelihood in legitimate ways,
it is an intolerable evil in society. What is true of
the trades-union of artificers is equally true of organi-
zations of capital similarly designed ; but, both in
handicrafts and trade, — the ostensible objects of which
are avowedly selfish, being the pursuit of wealth or
the earning of livelihood, — such combinations as these
are more understandable, if not more defensible, than
like combinations among men engaged in the quest of
scientific truth. The avowed object of incorporating
medical societies is stated in their charters, in New
York at least, to be "to contribute to the diffusion of
true science and particularly the knowledge of the
healing art." When they transgress these limits, and

134 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

seek to establish burdensome fee systems or to forcibly
check what they consider schismatic opinions, the law-
interferes to restrain them within their proper bounds.
The courts have wisely, in most instances, declined to
pronounce upon any questions of opinion or to inter-
pret the word " physician " in acts regulating medical
practice so as to favor the therapeutical systems of any
body of practitioners. It is all one to the law whether
the doctrine of similia or the doctrine of contraria
prevail, whether the patient be dosed with the highest
potency or the most heroic bolus ; and this point was
settled finally and wisely in the State of New York
by the case of Corsi vs. Maretzek (4 E. D. Smith, 1),
where the court refused to accept the contention that
a homeopathist was not a physician in the legal sense
of the term because he followed a system of healing
disapproved of by the majority of practitioners of
medicine. No statute can be effective that is even
suspected of the design to shackle or suppress opinion.
Free thought is the breath, the life, of the scientific
search for truth, as humility is its badge. "When a
man or a profession reaches the point where intoler-
ance and self-satisfaction take the place of humility
and fair inquiry, paresis of the soul has commenced.
It is the law of our existence that

" The old order changeth, yielding place to new ;
And God fulfils himself in many ways,
Lest one good custom should corrupt the world."

I dwell upon this point because the reason that we
do not have in New York to-day a State Board of
Medical Examiners, such as we find in Illinois and
European countries, and such as is requisite to any ef-

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 135

f ective scheme for securing a fair average of education
among medical licentiates, is due to the fact that it
has proved impossible up to this time to bring into ac-
cord as to the organization of such a board regular
physicians, homeopaths, and eclectics. About three-
quarters of the entire number of medical practitioners
in the State are regular physicians ; that is, practition-
ers calling themselves by the name of no " school " or
" sect." They number something like six thousand.
The homeopaths and eclectics number about twenty-
one hundred. Bills to create one or more central
boards of medical examiners have been introduced
into the legislature during the last four years at the
instance of each of these parties. These bills have
agreed substantially in all points save two : first, the
examination in therapeutics ; and, second, the organ-
ization of the board. The physicians have insisted
that their numerical ratio of three-fourths entitles them
to a representation in the board of at least two-thirds.
The two " schools " insist that, if this ratio should be
given, their candidates would be plucked and their
"schools" effaced, and that, when this was accom-
plished, the physicians would at once order new vials
of enormous size, larger boluses and nastier drugs than
ever before, that even the daughter of the horse-leech
would be silent from satiety, and the cup and lancet
would once more drench the land with gore.

In other words, we have this condition of things :
Three parties exist whose interests are at stake in the
proposed legislation. All declare that they favor re-
stricting the practice to men who have studied chemis-
try, botany, physics, anatomy, physiology, diagnosis,

136 CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE.

microscopy, etc. The homeopaths and eclectics hold
no sectarian views as to the atomic theory or the law
of gravitation, and agree with those whom they dub
allopaths as to which has the greater number of ribs
a man or a woman. But, when we come to materia
medica and therapeutics, we find a "state of things."
Col. Jones, having a severe pain in the vicinity of his
sword-belt, sends for his army surgeon, a regular
physician ; the baby has a sensation in its correspond-
ing region, and Mrs. Jones calls in her homeopathic
adviser, — for Jones indulges her in matters affecting
her own baby ; the nurse, experiencing a similar agita-
tion, tries an eclectic ; and the old "mammy" in the
kitchen, feeling a like distress, sticks a pin in the care-
fully concealed rag baby she keeps for such occasions.
All experience relief ; and each, like the pedler who
was kicked off four landings of a factory in quick suc-
cession, is lost in admiration of the beauty of the system.
Let us admit the truth that, while surgery has be-
come almost an exact science as compared to its sister,
— physic, — the latter is yet in the condition that un-
questioning faith in the efficacy of medication and a
willingness to break a lance for a system of therapeu-
tics is to be found rather at the bottom than at the top
of the profession. Therefore, whatever our beliefs or
prejudices, we may as well make up our minds that
no law will be tolerated that shall endeavor openly or
covertly to favor or obstruct any system of medical
practice as a system, regardless of the attainments of
its professors. Whatever the facts may be, the law
considers that the true physician is no blind partisan of
any theory. He knows how feeble his best efforts are

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 137

to combat disease, how few the medicaments that can be
used with certain results. In proportion as he is learned
and wise, he pins his faith neither to a doctrine of
similia nor of contraria, realizing that differences of
opinion arise not from knowledge, but from ignorance.

The stumbling-blocks in the way of every effort to
achieve wise medical legislation are : first, the ig-
norance and greed of the believers in and practicers
of ^^m-supernatural methods of treating disease ;
second, jealousies among the more intelligent adher-
ents to "isms" ; third, jealousies between the mother
church of medicine and those of her children that
wish to make of their specialties separate professions ;
fourth, the obstruction from vested interests that
consider themselves threatened, — the incorporated
schools that have some capital invested, and regard
their power to confer a diploma operating as a license
to practice medicine as their chief stock in trade.

The condition of our statute books to-day is this :
they contain (1) special acts incorporating medical,
pharmaceutical, and dental schools, with here and there
a general act for that purpose ; (2) acts incorporating
medical societies of physicians and of sectarian prac-
titioners of motley nomenclature ; (3) general acts regu-
lating the practice of physic and surgery ; (4) general
acts regulating the practice of dentistry ; (5) similar
acts regulating the practice of pharmacy ; (6) sanitary
regulations and laws creating health boards.

This jumble is itself an evil and an efficient cause
of the propagation of false ideas. A logical law,
which will of itself be an educator, will recognize that
the principle on which all these statutes are to be de-

138 CHEISTIAK SCIENCE.

fended is that already indicated, — the right of the
State to protect the health as well as the life and the
property of the citizen. One health statute will then
be enacted, and a responsible board created that will
have in charge the arrangements of quarantine and
sanitation and also the licensing of medical practition-
ers of every sort; and here I contend that the
dentist and the pharmacist, thoroughly accomplished
in their calling, are both medical men, and that, the
sooner they are so recognized, the sooner existing
jealousies as to them will die out, and the scientific
character of the profession and its specialties will be
raised. The student of medicine and pharmacy must
go hand in hand for a while at the outset of their
career. The former goes forward to the battle with
disease. The latter remains behind to provide suit-
able ammunition. They are both fighting in the same
cause, and will fight much better if each recognizes his
fellowship with the other. It is equally true that the
dentist is a specialist in medicine. To deny to these
men professional standing is to repeat the history of
the past and to create discord and jealousy among
those who are working in a common cause.

Legislation can aid in the education of all these fel-
low-workers chiefly by vesting the licensing power in
a central Board of Medical Examiners, and, to some
extent, under the diploma standard : (1) by fixing
a minimum age under which they will not be allowed
to practice their calling ; (2) by requiring of each of
them a fixed term of study of certainly not less than
two graded years, leaving to the board, where created,
the care of details ; (3) by requiring proof by examina-

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 139

tion or certificate that each candidate for license had
studied before beginning his professional course at
least those branches of a general education in which
law students are examined in this State before they
commence their legal studies ; (4) by declaring that no
medical school — including in the terms schools of
dentistry, pharmacy, and midwifery — shall be in-
corporated by special act, and providing a general law
for the incorporation of such schools only upon proof
made of the possession by the incorporators of suf-
ficient capital — say not less than a hundred thousand
dollars — and teaching plant to justify the belief that
the school will be capable of exercising faithfully its
franchises, Such an act should contain stringent pro-
visions for its own enforcement and for the forfeiture
of abused charters. How useless the mere enactment
may be is shown by the fact that section six of chapter
114 of the New York Sessions Laws of 1853 contains a
general provision of this nature. Nevertheless, since
its passage, some six or more medical colleges have
been incorporated by special act of the legislature;
and had it not been for the vetoes of Governors Cleve-
land and Hill, when their attention was called to this
general statute by the medical societies, at least one col-
lege would have regained by special act its charter of
which the courts had deprived it. No greater service
can be rendered to the cause of medical education by
the State than the exercise of care in creating medical
schools, and holding them to strict responsibility
when created. The latter will never be done, I fear,
except when the laws are invoked by medical societies.
(5) A minimum course of medical study should be pre-

140 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

scribed, in which a grade of at least seventy per cent,
should be attained on examination. The regulation of
all details of examination should be most wisely left
to the board of examiners. But the topics in which
examinations should be had might well be specified in
the statute; and I incline strongly to think that it
would be most wise to omit any examination in those
obscure topics of therapeutics and materia medica,
upon which all medical heresies have been begotten
by unscientific minds. One who should creditably
pass his examinations in botany, chemistry, physics,
anatomy, surgery, physiology, hygiene, diagnosis, ob-
stetrics, and microscopies, especially if his clinical ex-
amination should show him to be educated in a true
sense to observe and draw sound deductions from ob-
servation, rather than crammed like a parrot, might
well be trusted to form his own conclusions and pursue
his own studies as judgment should dictate in the terra
incognita of therapeutics.

It has been already said, but it cannot be repeated
too often, that the law has nothing to do with medical
theories. The utmost it can do successfully is to pre-
scribe that none shall practice medicine except persons
educated in those branches of science that all admit
are essential to an understanding of morbid condi-
tions of our species, and possessed besides of a fair
general education. It cannot prohibit the practice of
sectarian medicine and such delusions as mind-cure
and Christian Science, for this would be an assumption
by the law to prescribe what system of healing shall
be followed ; and it might as reasonably command —
as, indeed, I believe it does in Mormondom — that all

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 141

the sick should be treated by anointing with oil in
conjunction with prayer by the elders.

If a man who has passed his examinations in such
branches as above indicated shall conclude to adhere
uniformly in practice to the doctrine of similia or of
contraria, or even to the profundities of Mumbo
Jumbo, or mind-cure, the law cannot prevent him.
For his errors, he will be liable always in damages, no
matter what system he adopts ; and, with that, we
must be content. If the education required of him
does not keep him to the faith, we may perhaps find
in some cases that his departure from it is the opening
of a new way to fresh truth. (6) Finally, the law
should not recognize any diploma as of itself conferring
a right to practice medicine. Even if the possession of
such a document should be required as an antecedent
to examination by the health board, it should not be
allowed to take the place of such examination. It is
to the interest not only of the public, but of every
medical college of high standard, that the diplomas of
what have become known as " diploma mills " shall be
deprived of the licensing power, which is their sole value.

Any scheme of medical legislation will hereafter, of
course, embrace that great safeguard against impos-
ture and efficient tracer of frauds, the system of regis-
tration, whereunder no one is allowed to practice
medicine who has not made a public record under
oath of his name, origin, and credentials for license.

Beyond the point here indicated, it would not be
wise for legislation to go. The chief desiderata in a
good law are brevity, simplicity, and lack of detail.
If a diploma standard is to be maintained, it would

142 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

certainly be desirable that the statute should provide
that only diplomas of colleges giving graded instruc-
tion and requiring preliminary examination of their
matriculants should be received as licenses.

But it may be well to say once more that the mere
enactment of a law against a vicious practice will be
no deterrent to the transgressor, and, therefore, of no
service to the cause of education. He must realize
that the law is enforced ; and, in order that it be en-
forced, somebody must be charged with carrying out
its provisions. In the State of New York, the regular
medical societies have of late charged themselves with
the duty of executing the medical act. Such acts
have been upon the statute book for more than a hun-
dred years. But prior to 1880 they had fallen into
neglect, largely owing to the clumsiness with which
they were drafted. In that year, the State Medical
Society secured the passage of a new law, and in 1887
of a codification or revision of all the medical statutes ;
but the law in this State is yet far from perfect, and
chiefly for the reason that there is 'no central body
having control of its execution. The most that the
medical societies can do is to punish those who prac-
tice without diplomas. They are powerless to exercise
any supervision over those granting the license. In
this regard, the statute of the State of Illinois is far
more efficient than ours ; and the Health Board of
that State has entitled itself to the commendation of all
who are informed of its excellent and efficient work.

But the County Society of New York has done
enough to show that even a poor law can be of ad-
vantage to the cause of medical education. The ex-

LEGISLATION AND MEDICAL EDUCATION. 143

ample of its prosecutions has stirred up allied societies
to action, and has constantly called public attention
to the fact that the practice of quackery is not safe
within its jurisdiction. Adopting the new code of
ethics, it has shown conclusively to all who have
watched its course that its members have not had in
mind the suppression of any system of healing the
sick only because they disapproved the methods of
that system. It has recognized that the utmost limit
to which the law can properly go is to provide that
nobody shall practice medicine at all, by which term
the courts understand the use of drugs and instru-
ments, unless he has the slender educational qualifica-
tion prescribed by the statute. If possessed of that
qualification, the society concede that the practitioner
has a right to use whatever system may commend
itself to his understanding or lack of understanding.

The prejudices and jealousies that prevented the
passage of the Examiners Bills have been already al-
luded to. But, although those bills failed to become
law, nevertheless, when the present statute incorpo-
rating their points of agreement was obtained by an
alliance of all parties, a distinct advance was made, in
that the homeopaths and eclectics were convinced
that, whether the other societies agreed or not with
them in matters of practice, they were willing to join
hands with them in securing, if not the best legisla-
tion, at least the best possible under the circumstances ;
and that they were quite capable of bringing forward
in good faith a bill actually what it appeared to be,
and not secretly designed for the destruction of
schismatics. And it is very safe to say that it is only

144 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

a question now of agitation of public and professional
opinion that is necessary in the State of New York to
bring about such legislation as will obliterate all sects
in medicine, not indeed by harassing the individual
practitioner or legislating against any system of prac-
tice, but by educating the public mind to the fact that
no one should be intrusted with the practice of any
system who has not a fair attainment in those branches
of study which all admit must be necessary to any one
expecting to devote himself to the treatment of dis-
ease ; and that every one is entitled to the name of
physician who is learned in his science, skilled in his
art, and capable in his profession of trying all things,
holding fast what is true, facing bravely the errors of
others, and admitting candidly his own, and, above
all, recognizing the possibility of honest differences of
opinion, which can be settled only by honest investi-
gation and kindly exposition.1

If the law will forbid the practice of medicine to
all but those who give proof of a fair general educa-
tion and reasonable attainments in the branches of
sciences and medical study as to which there are no
" schools," it will do all that can be asked. Its licen-
tiates will be too intelligent to indulge, as a class, in
vagaries, sectarian medicine will disappear or dwindle
to insignificance, and the physician will be free to fol-
low where the torch of Truth lights the way.

1 Shortly after this paper was read, a system of State Examination was
established and still remains in New York. In 1893 tne practice of med-
icine, dentistry, pharmacy, etc., were regulated by one Public Health
Law. The suggestions of this paper have been adopted. The medical
schools require a graded course of three or four years, and preliminary
education. The standard of medical education and the value of the
diploma have been greatly advanced.

VI.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY.1

The expression by Mr. Fox in an after-dinner
speech, when on his special mission to St. Petersburg,

of a patriotic belief that the " American language "
was destined to become the universal speech, excited
comment and curiosity. Matter-of-fact Britons re-
sented this appropriation of their mother-tongue as an
application of cuckoo methods to linguistics. Polyglot
Prussians yearned to acquire a new dialect.

Apothecary is one of those words in the use of which
American differs from English and resembles Scotch ;
for with us. as in Scotland, prior to the passage of the
pharmaceutical acts, if not now — it denotes one whose
business, of a trading nature, consists strictly in sell-
ing, compounding, and dispensing drugs, chemicals,
and kindred wares. The introduction into the stock-
in-trade of soda-water, cigars, and confectionery, sho""-
a tendency of the business to revert, even in
cities, to its type : for grocers and poticaries were for-
merly a single brotherhood, and were first incorporat
into one worshipful society. Every grocer had an
;'- : -;, by virtue of which he was a poticary.

In the fourth year of his pedantic and witch-hating
reign. James I. granted a charter to " The Wardours
and Fellowship of the Mystery of Grocers of the City

iNcw YaA Medical Record, Sept n, l88d

145

146 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

of London," making of them a body corporate. But,
as often happens where a child of his works secures a
recognized social status for his family, the lesser, or
junior, portion of this Mystery soon felt itself finer
and more mysterious than the entire fellowship.
Moreover, the blending of trades had its own incon-
veniences, easily conceivable to one who has been in
rural districts where it still obtains. Our own Galen,
who is heroic, once prescribed a very drastic remedy,
and a combined haberdasher-grocer-apothecary of
Westchester essayed to supply it. But the unusual
dose, which " no one out here has ever took," drove
him to a dispensatory, where for fifteen minutes he
groped befogged, searching if a city man had anything
in common with the ostrich. Only fear of not selling
the drug decided him to risk decreasing the population.1

Perhaps episodes of this kind as well as a realization
of the need of special care and training for the safe
dispensing of medicines induced the " well-beloved
Theodore de Mayerne and Henry Atkins," his " dis-
creet and faithful physicians," to make those represen-
tations to James that induced him, in the thirteenth
year of his reign, to separate the apothecaries from
the grocers after nine years of union, and grant the
former a separate charter under the corporate name of
" The Master, Wardens, and Society of the Art and
Mystery of Apothecaries of the City of London."

But although it was through the intercession of
physicians that the apothecary, thus freed from the

1 Thus Romeo argued with his apothecary, hesitating to sell poison con-
trary to law : " The world affords no law to make thee rich ; then be not
poor, but break it and take this." — Act v., Scene I.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 147

environment of grocerdom, was able to set up his own
mystery, we may be very sure that the said Theodore
and Henry never intended his evolution to go on until
he should become, as he now is in England, a general
practitioner of medicine. On the contrary, the new
charter provided that the rights of the College of
Physicians should not be abridged, that the college
should exercise a certain supervision over the company,
and that the apothecaries should consult the physicians
on the use and properties of medicine.1 The exclusive
privilege granted to the apothecaries by their charter
was this : " No person, free of the Grocers', or any
other mystery in London, except those of the Apoth-
ecaries' Company, shall keep any apothecary's shop,
or make, compound, administer, sell, send out, adver-
tise, or offer for sale any medicines, distilled waters,
compounded chemical oils, decoctions, syrups, con-
serves, eclegmas, electuaries, medical condiments, pills,
powders, lozenges, oils, unguents, or plasters ; or oth-
erwise in any way practice the faculty of an apoth-
ecary," etc., under a penalty of £5. The only limita-
tions upon this power were the said provision pre-
serving the rights of the College of Physicians, whose
licentiates might, under the statute, dispense medicine
in their own practice, and the further provision that
" approved chirurgeons " might enjoy their art " as
much as belongeth and appertaineth to the composi-
tion and application of outer salves or medicines only,

i a Proviso semper quod pro tot et tal' ordinationibus quae medicamenta
aut compositiones et usum earundem concernent' advocabunt de tempore
in tempus Praesidentem et quatuor censores, seu Gubernat', Colleg' & Com-
munital' Medicorum London, aut alios Medicos Praesidentem praedict,
nominand' pro avisamento in hac parte," Charter, May 30, Jac. I,

148 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

so that they do not vend or expose to sale to others
such salves or remedies, according to the common man-
ner of the apothecaries of London." But these pro-
visions were not restrictions, in any proper sense, upon
the monopoly of the trade. Physicians and surgeons
could only dispense medicine in their own practice ;
they could not deal in it ; and it would seem that this
statement of the " Encyclopaedia Britannica," under
the title " Apothecary " .: " The members of this society
do not possess and never have possessed any exclusive
power to deal in or sell drugs," is incorrect as a legal
proposition.

The broad charter obtained for the physicians from
Henry VIII. by Cardinal Wolsey, giving their college
the licensing power theretofore vested in the clergy
alone, which charter Mary confirmed, made the College
of Physicians supreme in the whole field of medicine.
It could license persons to examine and advise the sick,
write prescriptions, dispense drugs,1 and perform sur-
gical operations ; 2 whereas surgeons and apothecaries
were narrowly limited in their respective functions.
Whenever an apothecary or surgeon attempted to pre-
scribe for the sick he stood in the peril of the law, and
the college was not slow to punish him. Thus in 1602
one Jenkins, a member of the College of Surgeons,
did "give judgment on urines and undertake cures."

1 See the case of the Attorney-General ex rel Apoth. Co. v. The Royal
College of Physicians (L. J., N. S., Ch. 30, 757), infra.

2 32 Hen. VIII., C. 40, 3, enlarging the original charter of the college,
recites that the science of physic " doth comprehend, include, and contain
the knowledge of surgery as a special member and part of the same,"
with which statement Dr. Davies, in his pamphlet on medical legislation,
compares this saying of Celsus : " Illud ante omnia scire convenit, quod
(mines medicin<z partes inexce sunt} ut ex toto separari non possint"

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 149

The Censors of the College of Physicians did then
cause his arrest, and his counsel obtained, thereupon,
a writ of Habeas Corpus ; but on the return of the
writ it appeared, in answer to the questions of Sir
John Popham, Lord Chief Justice, that Jenkins could
not justify his practice by the college seal, but could
only plead : " I practiced as a surgeon, and in that art
the use of inward remedies is often necessary."
Whereupon Sir John sent him back to durance, saying
substantially, as Goodall sums him up in his history of
the college : " (1) There is no sufficient license without
the college seal. (2) No surgeon, as a surgeon, may
practice physic ; no, not for any disease, though it be
the great pox." And Sir John then further laid down
six other propositions most disagreeable to Jenkins and
like sinners, but of exceeding comfort to the college.

Before the incorporation of the College of Physi-
cians the clergy were the source of license to practice
physic. Successive bulls of the popes had failed to
toss the priesthood out of this pleasant field of science.
The college, as a corporate entity, seemed not only to
have inherited the pride that marked the ecclesiastical
body and caused the angels to fall, but also to have
manifested it by self -mutilation, after the fashion of
religious enthusiasts from the time of Atys to our own
day. It was astraddle the bladder of professional
pride that the apothecary floated on a silvery sea of
shillings, sixpences, and half-crowns, to the humble
but lucrative position of counter-prescriber and gen-
eral practitioner, while the physicians, by their own
acts, were impotent to stop him.

The surgeons had been originally barbers and smiths,

150 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

i. e.9 artficers ; the apothecaries had been grocers, and
still were tradesmen;1 so that the physicians, not-
withstanding their charter contemplated that they
should dispense medicines and treat wounds and
sores, enacted by-laws forbidding admission to their
body to any who compounded or supplied medicine
for gain, " surgeons, drug-compounders, or any other
artificers of that sort, lest, perchance, if such men be
admitted into the college we may seem not to have
sufficiently consulted our own dignity or the honor of
our country's universities, which, however, we ought,
and we always desire, to attend with the deepest
veneration." They decreed expulsion to any member
of their college so far forgetting himself as to join
the College of Surgeons or Company of Apothecaries,2
and refused to license members of either body who
did not first renounce membership therein.3 The re-
fusal of physicians to dispense even their own medi-
cines; thus necessitating a fee for advice only, and
the expense and inconvenience to patients, especially
in the country, of calling on the physician and apothe-
cary, and possibly the surgeon, for a single case, were
sufficient reasons why, in the course of time, the
vender of drugs came to be consulted as to their use.
Here was the apothecary's opportunity, especially if
he had, as was commonly the case, a surgeon's license
also. He was not bound to charge a specified fee,

1 They are so rated to-day in the Bankrupt Act.

2 See By-Laws of College of Physicians, as recast in 1687.
3"Antequam quispiam in permissorum numerum admittatur, si forte

chirurgorum aut pharmacopolarum sodalitio olim donatus fuerit, sodalitii
istius privilegiis omnibus renunciet," etc. By-laws College of Physicians
182$. See Attorney-General v. Royal College of Physicians, infra.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 151

and the average man, though unwilling to pay for
medical advice, is ready enough to purchase a nos-
trum. We love to be humbugged in gross ways. A
remedy is tangible value for money ; if the swallow-
ing of it is followed by considerable discomfort, the
buyer is all the surer that it is efficacious. Advice,
especially if consonant with common sense, seems less
valuable. If a wise physician should prescribe exer-
cise and abstinence from rum to a victim of one of
the commonest forms of " malaria," his fee would be
paid grudgingly by one willing to spend cheerfully a
tenth of his income in Golden Preparations and Cer-
tain Ague Cures, while keeping up, at considerable
expense, the cause of his symptoms. So it came about
that the apothecaries, unmindful of any gratitude
they might owe to the memory of those faithful and
discreet physicians who assisted their society into the
world, and regardless of the limitations of their
charter, fell to prescribing over their counters, and
from that proceeded to visiting the sick. Let us hope
that one cause of their success in gaining patients, as
set out by one Doctor Murett, in 1669, in his lamenta-
tion over their encroachments on the privileges of
physicians, was less important than he seems to have
thought it, for he says that physicians unawares had
been instructing apothecaries in their science by
"sending them to visit their patients to give them the
best account they could of the state of their health
and effect of their medicines, and of late years taking
them with them on their visits," so that during the
plague of 1661, " most of the physicians being out of
town" the apothecaries were enabled to "take upon

152 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

them the whole practice of medicine." l This would
imply that the physicians of the period were not only
negligent of their duty in fair times, but that they
fled their posts in time of danger, a charge savoring
more of dyspepsia than of truth.

"Whatever the causes were, the encroachments were
made and punished during the period between the
chartering of the company and the year 1703, when
the House of Lords finally settled it in the case of
William Rose v. College of Physicians, that an
apothecary might prescribe his own remedies as well
as sell them. This case is worth considering, for it
was the last important step in the progress of the
apothecary toward his present status as a general
practitioner of medicine. The facts were these : Wil-
liam Rose being an apothecary, and John Seale,
butcher, a sick man, the said Seale did send for the
said Rose, who thereupon coming, did shake his head
and look as wise as the whole Faculty, at which being
much comforted, the thrifty butcher did ask the
apothecary to send him something for his cure ;
whereupon the said Rose, not taking advice of any
physician, did send some boluses to said Seale ; charg-
ing therefor, but not for advice. The case does not
state the effect of the boluses, nor is it important ; for
whether the patient was killed or cured was not
material to the proposition of law, that it was alike
contrary to the form of the statute for an apothecary
to cure or kill. There does not seem to have been
any doubt in the minds of the judges when the Col-

1 Cited from Dr. More's Outline of Pharmacy in Ireland, in West. Rev,
April, 1858.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 153

lege of Physicians brought Rose up with a round turn
for this his performance. The case was argued several
times — for Rose, as the result shows, was pertinacious
— but the court, having true legal respect for statutes,
said, unanimously, yet with a bit of sting in the tail
of their judgment : " The making up and compound-
ing medicines is the business of an apothecary, but the
judging what is proper for the cure, and advising what
to take for the purpose is the business of a physician ;
therefore, let the distemper be what it will, the pre-
scribing and advising what is fit for it is the business
of a physician, though without a fee ; but that rarely
happens," and it was unanimously agreed that the
practice of physic in the meaning of the statute con-
sisted :

" (1) In judging of the disease and its nature from
the constitution of the patient, and many other cir-
cumstances.

" (2) In judging of the fittest and properest remedy
for the disease.

" (3) In directing or ordering the application of the
remedy to the disease ; and that the proper business
of an apothecary is to make and compound or prepare
the prescriptions of the doctor pursuant to his direc-
tions ; and it was agreed that the defendant's taking
upon himself to send physic to a patient, as proper for
his distemper, without taking ought for his pains, is
plainly a taking upon himself to judge of the disease
and fitness of remedy, as also of the executive or di-
rectory part." l

*3 Salk, 17; 6 Mod., 44. Contrast this with the definition of the
modern New York case, Smith v. Lane, that makes the administration of
drugs and medicines, or the use of instruments the sole test of medical
practice.

154 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

The appeal being taken to the House of Lords, it
was argued for Rose : l

" That the consequences of affirming the judgment
would be to ruin all apothecaries, for in that event
they could not follow their calling without the license
of a physician ;

" That constant usage and practice shows that sell-
ing a few lozenges or a small electuary to any person
asking a remedy for a cold, or in other ordinary or
common cases where the medicines had a known and
certain effect, where no fee was taken, could not be
deemed practice of physic ; 2

" That such affirmance would give physicians a mo-
nopoly of practice to the great harm of the public ;
for it would lay a heavy tax on the nobility and gen-
try, who, in the slightest cases and even for their com-
mon servants, could not have medicine without con-
sulting and feeing a member of the college ; it would
deprive the poor of any advice ; it would be prejudi-
cial to those suffering accident and taken sick in the
night who send for an apothecary, who would risk the
penalty if he applied the least remedy."

For the college it was argued that :

" By several orders of the college its members were
enjoined to treat the poor gratis, and to visit them at
their houses ;

" That when it was observed that these orders were
defeated partially by the high price charged by the
apothecaries for medicine, the college erected dispen-
saries in towns, where free patients could get medi-
cine at one-third less than apothecary -prices ;

"That in emergencies, not only apothecaries, but
any one else, might relieve his neighbor, but this was
no reason why apothecaries should practice at their
leisure ;

J5 Bro. Pari. Rep., 553 (Tomlinson's ed.).

2 Compare Apothecaries' Co. v. Nottingham, infra.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 155

" That in light indispositions the patient generally
prescribed for himself, and the apothecary might law-
fully put up the medicine ;

" That the most dangerous diseases begin with light
symptoms, and the apothecary is not bred to detect
them ; moreover, he is likely to sell his drugs plenti-
fully, and if he makes a mistake in diagnosis, to cause
great harm in what might have been remedied by
proper treatment." *

In spite of these arguments the Lords reversed the
unanimous judgment of the Queen's Bench. How the
vote stood does not appear, nor are the reasons from
which the conclusion was drawn given. Whether the
Lord Chancellor, sitting alone in solemn majesty, de-
cided the question, or whether the lay Lords were
affrighted at the prospect of having to employ a phy-
sician, as well as buy physic, for their common serv-
ants, we cannot know. What is certain is that the
judges were reversed ; and it was from that time on
settled in England that an apothecary may prescribe
as well as sell his own drugs. Two questions re-
mained open : Whether an apothecary could recover,
in an action at law, fees for medical advice,2 or write
a prescription for medicine not dispensed by him.3

In 1815 the Apothecaries' Act (55 Geo. III., C. 194)
and in 1825 an act (6 Geo. IY., C. 133) amendatory of

1 The opticians of to-day argue in like manner against the oculists.

2 A recovery may be had now for both medicine and advice ; but if the
jury think the charge for the former sufficiently great to include a fee for
the latter, they may so find. Toune v. Lady Gresley, 3 C. and P., 581 ;
Handey v. Henson, 4 C. and P., no; Morgan v. Hallen, 8 Ad. and

E., 119.

3 This is still meat for lawyers. But it is certain that although under
the Apothecaries' Act, an apothecary must compound a qualified physi-
cian's prescription, he is not bound to compound one written by a fellow-
apothecary.

156 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

it, were passed, revising and confirming the ancient
charter of the company. At this time the state of
general medical education in Great Britain was de-
plorable. The case of Eose had established the right
of an apothecary, with no other instruction than what
he might have picked up in his apprenticeship behind
the counter, to practice medicine. The powers of the
College of Physicians appear to have been exercised
rather too often against competent men, including
graduates of the Scotch and Irish universities, and
even of Oxford and Cambridge, as in Bonham's case,
and too infrequently against veritable quacks and im-
postors. It was no simple matter to get the license
of the college, and yet unlawful for the best-trained
man to practice in London without it. The physi-
cians seem to have forgotten that a charter, such as
theirs, has no other raison (Petre than the benefit to
accrue to the public from the creation of a class of
skilled medical men and the weeding out of the igno-
rant and inept. There was a little too much of the
spirit of trades-unionism in their enforcement of the
law, and a too feeble pursuance of the object of their
charter as recited in its preamble.1 The practice of
medicine had fallen to a very considerable extent into
the hands of quacks and incompetent apothecaries,
while competent men were hampered by artificial re-

1 " Cum regii officii nostri munus arbitremur ditionis nostrae hominum
felicitati omni ratione consulere; id autem vel imprimis fore, si improb-
orum conatibus tempestive occuramus, apprime necessarium duximus
improborum quoque hominum qui medicinam magro avaritiae suae causa,
quam ullius bonae conscientiae fiducia, profitebuntur, unde rudi et cretulae
plebi plurima oriantur, audaciam compescere," etc., of the charter of the
Apothecary Company; the act of 3 Hen. VIII. , C. xi; cf. the revisers'
notes to Ch. xviii. of the N. Y. Rev. Stats,

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 157

strictions. The company, thus freshly reorganized,
set themselves about remedying this evil. The right
of apothecaries to prescribe being established, the
company licensing them now recognized that the right
to advise implied the duty of care and wisdom in ad-
vice to which medical training and instruction were
prerequisites. They accordingly required candidates
for their license to stand successfully examinations in
chemistry, materia medica and therapeutics, botany,
anatomy, and physiology, and the practice of medi-
cine. The effect was that great benefit accrued from
the act ; and this was frankly admitted by the physi-
cians who at first disapproved of it.1 Another effect
of the act was to increase greatly the number of
licentiates of Apothecaries' Hall as compared with
the college. In the decade from 1848 to 1858, the
year of the passage of the Medical Act, the licentiates
of the College of Surgeons numbered 4,915, many of
whom were, of course, apothecaries ; Apothecaries'
Hall licensed 2,823, and the College of Physicians only
242. These statistics appear to have opened some-
what the eyes of the physicians, and shown them that
the framers of their broad charter were wiser, per-
haps, in their generation, than were they who drafted
the by-laws. But it is a hard thing to admit errors ;
so that the college did not entirely relax its old rules
to meet the new crisis; but in 1860, two years after

1 Thus Sir Henry Halford testified before a Parliamentary committee :
" I must do the apothecaries the justice to say that they have executed
that act extremely well, and that the character of that branch of the pro-
fession has been amazingly raised since they have had that authority. I
only do them justice when I state that, though I was very much against
it in the first instance." Cited in West. Rev. April, 1858.

158 CHEISTIAN SCIEKCE.

the passage of the Medical Act, while still preserving
in the by-laws the provisions prohibiting membership
or fellowship in the college to any one engaged in
trade, or the practice of physic or surgery in partner-
ship, or engaging to share profits on medicines with a
chemist or other person, they nevertheless resolved to
license a class of persons privileged to compound and
dispense medicine in their own practice. Thereupon
the apothecaries, who had come to believe themselves
alone entitled to this privilege, filed an information
and bill by the Attorney-General L against the college,
praying that defendants should be restrained from
thus amending their by-laws and granting such li-
censes. Mr. Koundell Palmer and others represented
the college, and the case coming on in April, 1861,
Wood, V. C, in an exhaustive opinion, sustained the
right of the college under their charter to grant li-
censes in the entire field of physic.

We have thus seen the English apothecary not only
evolve from a grocer into a general practitioner, but
even acquire the assurance to attempt the curtailment
of the chartered rights of the physicians. But it is not
to be supposed that the apothecary, in our sense of
the word, that is to say, the chemist and druggist, or,
to use the English statutory term, the pharmaceutical
chemist,2 is entitled to prescribe his drugs in England.
The contrary has been held in two very recent prose-
cutions brought by the Apothecaries' Company con-
tending that what was very good reasoning in 1703 to
establish the right of Apothecary Eose to prescribe,

1 Attorney-General v. Royal College of Physicians. L. J., N. S., Ch.

3°> 757-

2 It is well settled in New York that an apothecary or druggist cannot

prescribe without a physician's license.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 159

was very poor logic in our day when applied to
Chemists Nottingham and Harrison. These two cases
show very clearly the law applicable to counter-pre-
scribing, as it has always been laid down by the law
courts, on both sides of the Atlantic. They merit,
therefore, full exposition.

In the Apothecaries' Company v. Nottingham,1
tried in January 27, 1876, before Baron Bramwell, it
appeared that the defendant, although only a chemist
himself, was in partnership with a medical practitioner
duly qualified, to whom he always referred such pa-
tients as in his opinion were seriously ill. It did not
appear that he ever left his shop to prescribe, but it
was admitted that he was in the habit of giving ad-
vice over the counter in what he considered trivial
cases. In charging the jury the learned Baron said :
" You have to find a true verdict on the evidence, vihether
you like the act or not? Perhaps you may think that
a person has a right to practice as he likes, whether
qualified or not ; or, on the other hand, you may think
that, whereas the poorer classes have no opportunity
of judging of or of ascertaining the qualifications of
the persons to whom they resort for medical advice,
the legislature should require such persons to possess
proper skill and knowledge, and to obtain a certificate
thereof. No doubt some people like to go to unquali-
fied practitioners so as to get advice cheap ; but there
is the law, and we have to observe it. If you think
this man has ' acted or practiced as an apothecary,5

134L. T. R., N. s.,76.

2 Our italics. There are similar New York cases affecting persons
practicing medicine under the guise of selling drugs.

160 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

then you must find your verdict for the plaintiff. In-
deed, I feel some little difficulty in putting the case to
you, for on the defendant's own admission he says he
prescribed, and that if a person brought a child to him
suffering from, say diarrhoea, and asked what was
good for it, he gave the medicine ; if, however, the
case was serious, he sent the doctor. Surely that is
acting and practicing as an apothecary within the
meaning of the act ? " 1 Still more recently, in July,
1879, this whole subject was carefully and learnedly
considered by Judge Matteran, Q. C, in the case of
the Apothecaries' Company v. Harrison.2 The facts
proved were that Julia Caddick went to the shop of
defendant, a chemist, said she was suffering from
weakness, and asked for something to relieve her.
Defendant asked the cause of her weakness ; she an-
swered that it was left on her after confinement. He
felt her pulse, looked at her tongue, and asked her to
describe how she felt. She did so. He made up a
medicine and charged only one shilling. Defendant's
council urged in his behalf every argument brought
forward for Eose, whose case, as we have seen, settled
the right of the apothecaries to prescribe. He also
tried to distinguish the chemist from the apothecary,
by the criterion that the former could only practice in
the shop, while the latter might visit ; but the court
said that the apothecary's right to visit was not clear
as a legal proposition. Judgment was given for the
company plaintiff, and the judge, citing the opinions

1 See Mr. Justice Creswell's distinction between chemists, surgeons, and
apothecaries, in Apoth. Co. v. Lotinga, 2 M. and R., 500.
267L.T., 232,

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECARY. 161

of Bramwell and Creswell, supra, concluded his own
opinion with these words, the applicability of which
in this State and County is obvious to one familiar
with their law and charities :

" I cannot, however, close this judgment without ex-
pressing my conviction that the act was intended
(which intention has, I think, been successfully carried
out) to have a beneficial action on the poorer classes.
The more scientific masters of medicine being other-
wise engaged, have no time to compound and dispense
their own prescriptions ; these, therefore, to save more
valuable labor, are relegated to the chemists and drug-
gists, who, if not a less highly educated class, are at
least a class who have not passed the necessary exami-
nation to entitle them to practice as apothecaries.
Now if the chemists were permitted to advise on the
ailments of the poor, as well as to make up their drugs
into medicines, the sick poor would lack the benefit of
that highest class of skill which the rich by their
purses can command. But this want has been pro-
vided for the necessitous at our public hospitals and
dispensaries, where the ablest physicians, surgeons,
and apothecaries in the land generously give their time
and best skill to all comers, on whom not only sick-
ness but poverty is pressing. The counsel for the de-
fendant argued that the poor would suffer by limiting
the action of the druggist according to the express
language of the act ; but to this argument the best an-
swer is given by the act itself, which protects, benefits,
and furthers the highest interests of the sick poor, by
pointing and directing them to our public medical in-
stitutions for advice with reference to their ailments,
and to the chemists for their medicines, when such
are required, and are not provided for by those noble
and charitable institutions."

Here, then, we leave for the moment our apothe-

162 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

cary. Having triumphantly established, within less
than a hundred years from his abandonment of the
grocer, his own right to practice medicine, and having
as triumphantly blocked, for nearly two hundred
years, encroachments, exactly similar to his own, by
the chemist, we have seen him, within the last twenty-
five years, lay violent hands upon the venerable col-
lege whose members gave him his first start in life as
a tradesman of a distinct sort ; and we have seen him
beaten in this assault, planned in the interest of his
corporation as a trades-union, and not as the dutiful
public servant that every corporation should be.

The apothecary's history is profitable for instruc-
tion. Not its least obvious lesson is that so long as
the laws affecting the practice of medicine and the
incorporation of medical societies are exercised, in pur-
suance of their ostensible object — i.e., the furthering
of the public welfare by requiring of practitioners con-
formity to a reasonable standard of professional at-
tainment, those laws can be enforced ; but that, when-
ever such legislation is attempted to be exercised in a
selfish spirit of trades-unionism, for the benefit of
corporations and their members, and in disregard of
the public needs and convenience, the same laws will
be nullified by close technical constructions, and if not
repealed will fall into "innocuous desuetude." The
medical profession in this country has been free,
fortunately, from those arbitrary limitations which en-
abled the untrained apothecary partially to supplant
the physician in England, by making it unprofessional
for the latter to engage in the practice of medicine to the
full extent authorized by the charter of the college grant-

THE EVOLUTION OF THE APOTHECAKY. 163

ing his license. And there seems to be no adequate
reason why the apothecary with us should be suffered
to prescribe chalk-mixtures for "light cases of diar-
rhoea," bromides for " nervousness," and so forth. A
judge in New York City said some time ago that the
court would take judicial notice of the fact that a lawyer
could be found in half an hour for any client. And
what with hospitals, infirmaries, dispensaries, night
medical service, and about twice as many well-
equipped physicians as lawyers in our cities, there is
certainly no crying need for laymen to render medical
assistance except in cases of emergency.1

1 Such has been the spread of the hospital and dispensary system in New
York City of late years that many physicians have banded together to
correct what they allege is its abuse in furnishing free medical treatment
not to the poor only, but to those in moderate circumstances and even to
the rich. Some of these allegations if well founded are certainly startling.

Appendix A.

THE CLAIMS OF CHKISTIAN SCIENCE,1

AS MADE BY ONE OF ITS EXP0UNDEKS AND AC-
CEPTED BY A JUDGE.

To the Editor of the Sun :

Sir : — Last Sunday afternoon Mr. Carol Norton lec-
tured upon Christian Science at the Metropolitan Opera
House. The building was thronged and the audience
fairly representative of the average intelligence and
education of this city. Although many present were
doubtless led thither by curiosity, a very large num-
ber, perhaps the majority, were honest believers in
the pretensions of Mrs. Eddy.

Mr. Justice Norton2 of Allegheny introduced the
lecturer as one of the foremost teachers of the new re-
ligion, as he undoubtedly is, and warmly upheld the
citizen's constitutional right to entertain any religious
belief, a right that it would be foolish for any one to
assail.

Unfortunately, no one alluded to that valid objec-
tion to Christian Science which would have com-
mended itself to so intelligent an audience, and may
be thus briefly stated : Mrs. Eddy and her adherents

1 From the New York Sun, June 9, 1899.

2 Judge Norton is not, as would seem from this title, a justice of the
Supreme Court, although thus entitled by other speakers at the meeting.
He is a county judge.

165

166 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

pretend that without the use of those remedies or ap-
pliances shown by universal experience to be certainly,
probably or possibly adequate to relieve or cure sick-
ness and wounds, they can by vague mental processes
alone effect cures where medical aid is unavailing.
They even pretend that the mere reading of her book
cures all human infirmities, even cancer. If honest in
their belief, these people are willing to put, and do
put, all medical and surgical aid aside, substituting
therefor mental processes. If they have not this
willingness, they are dishonest according to their own
pretensions. If, on the other hand, they thrust aside
scientific aid, demonstrably adequate to save life, and
substitute therefor a treatment under which death
results, they are certainly guilty of homicide in some
degree, and this practice is dangerous to the public
health. From this dilemma there is no escape. It is
worth while, therefore, to ask every thoughtful and
candid person who has listened to or read the words
of Mr. Norton, Mrs. Eddy's foremost apostle, to
ponder carefully the manner in which that gentleman,
upon whom no imputation is cast, answers inquiries
that he himself solicits. Let him and his teacher be
judged, in all fairness, by their own words.

Mr. Norton offered medical proof that Christian
Science has cured locomotor ataxia, cancer and many
other diseases. This offer is not new. Mr, Norton
copyrighted a lecture in 1898, which he has been
delivering since with more or less variation. It was
printed in full by the Troy Becord of February 28,
1899. On March 30, I wrote to him, apropos of that
publication, as follows ;

THE CLAIMS OF CHRISTIAN SCIEKCE. 167

A copy of your lecture . . . has been sent to
me. You therein say that " regular medical confir-
mation of cases two, three, four, five and eight will be
furnished any honest skeptic." I am certainly a
skeptic, and, if I may say so, an honest one, and I
should be very much obliged to you if you will give
the names and addresses of reputable and competent
medical practitioners who will certify to the second
case, the cure of an incurable cancer ; the third case,
the cure of a child suffering from epileptic fits from
birth, and having forty spasms a day at the commence-
ment of treatment ; the fourth case, a cure of " con-
sumption of the lungs in the second stage of that dis-
ease ; " the fifth case, a cure of a patient ill with
typhoid fever in Paris and treated by a practitioner
in New York; the eighth case, the cure of a lady
forty years old unsuccessfully treated for thirty-five
years for " organic valvular diseases of the heart" by
physicians who pronounced the disease incurable. I
should like to know what persons made the diagnoses
in these cases, the course of treatment followed, the
method taken to exclude in the cure other factors
than treatment by Christian Science, and the present
condition of the person cured.

Mr. Norton replied courteously on April 3, promis-
ing the information. On April 18, politely explain-
ing his delay upon the ground of many engagements,
he wrote : " I will have the positive proof of my ut-
terances in the lecture that you read in the Troy
Record properly prepared for a lawyer's gaze within
a few days." On April 29, reminding Mr. Norton
that a month had elapsed since my request, I wrote :

"With the desire to be entirely fair in discussing
the theories of Mrs. Eddy and yourself I beg now to
ask that you kindly give me an early reply to the fol-
lowing questions for immediate use :

168 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

"First — If Christian Science, as you say in your
Saratoga lecture of August 26, 1898, ' removes the
possibility of human and personal contention,' why
has Mrs. Eddy had so much contention concerning the
late P. P. Quimby and the copyright of her book that
she has threatened legal proceedings, and, I under-
stand, actually resorted to the courts ?

" Second — If ' matter ' is only erroneous thought in
'mortal mind,' and, therefore, non-existent in mind
illuminated by the right thought of Christian Science,
and if the material aids to the injured of drugs, band-
ages, splints, etc., are unnecessary and even harmful
for the proper treatment of physical injuries, will you
kindly tell me what course you or Mrs. Eddy would
adopt in any of the following cases :

" (a) Walking along the street, a brick falls from
above and cuts your head, causing blood to flow ?

" (b) A child at table swallows a fishbone and is in
peril of strangulation ?

" (c) Your child is riding in a street car and a per-
son with confluent smallpox sits down beside it?

"(d) A child in the street is run down by a cable
car and bleeds from a severed artery ?

" (e) A baby falls from a window and fractures its
skull ? "

On May 4, Mr. Norton civilly replied, kindly prom-
ising to call upon me on May 8, with the promised
medical confirmation, and, as to the foregoing ques-
tions, said: "The questions in your letter of April 29,
I will be obliged to shelve for the present,1 desiring to
do one thing at a time. I think you will agree with
me that neither of us could expect to master the ideas
of Mr. Spencer or Mr. Darwin in a hurried or impetu-
ous way, no matter how honest our purpose."

Upon May 8, Mr. Norton did me the honor of call-

1 The italics are mine. — W. A. P.

THE CLAIMS OF CHKISTIAJST SCIENCE. 169

ing with the promised " medical confirmation," which
consisted in each case of a brief statement of conclu-
sions signed by a Christian Scientist. Of these sign-
ers one was said to have studied in a homeopathic,
and another in a regular medical college. No facts
were set forth upon which the conclusions were based,
no names were connected with the certificates that
would carry any weight with the general medical
profession or any body of trained investigators. Nor
would the evidence have been admissible in Judge
Norton's court. It is not meant by this to cast
the least reflection upon the honesty, sincerity and
good repute of the signers. Doubtless they are ex-
cellent persons, but their names are unknown in the
field of accurate investigation. In a very pleasant and
good-tempered conversation, Mr. Norton referred to
this actual case mentioned in my letter of April 28 :
A mother affected with Christian Science, but not
to the point of infanticide, called a physician to see
her child sick from eating stone-fruit. " Doctor," she
said, " I really do not know whether the stone is in
the child or in my mind." " Madame," he replied, " I
cannot undertake to prescribe for a stone in your
mind, but I can manage one in the boy." And this
he did very successfully with castor oil. Of this ma-
terial thought Mr. Norton, in flat contradiction of
Mrs. Eddy (" Science and Health," pp. 158, 159, edi-
tion of 1887), said : " How silly ! Of course, the stone
was in the boy. But there are fools among Christian
Scientists as well as among other classes." It was a
proposition upon which Ave unexpectedly found our-
selves in entire accord. He was understood also dis-

170 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

tinctly to say that Christian Scientists made differ-
ential diagnoses, and would presume in the case of a
severed artery to put aside a surgeon and substitute
for his their own treatment. But in order that no
misapprehensions might arise on this score a letter
was written on the following day to his secretary,
saying :

I understood Mr. Norton yesterday to say that
Christian Scientists both make and accept differential
diagnoses of disease ; that if a patient came to him
complaining of a sore, he would make diagnosis to de-
termine whether it was cancer, abscess, ulcer, carbun-
cle, boil, or what not ; and so with diseases he would
make diagnosis between pneumonia, fever, appendi-
citis, etc. I further understood him distinctly to say
that if the clerk in my outer office should accidentally
sever an artery and there were a surgeon present with
adequate surgical appliances to stanch the flow of
blood, he, Mr. Norton, would assume the responsibility
of checking that arterial gush by the mental processes
of Christian Science, and would dispense with the
surgeon's aid and appliances. To my mind these are
very startling propositions, and I wish, in justice to
Mr. Norton and the cause he represents, to be entirely
sure that I apprehend him rightly, and I shall be
obliged to him or to you for a prompt reply on these
points. And I should also be glad to have replies to
the questions that I last submitted to Mr. Norton in
writing as to what he would himself do in the case of
certain accidents occurring in his presence, such as
the fracture of the skull by a falling brick, the sever-
ing of a leg by a cable car, etc.

To this Mr. Norton himself replied thus on May 29,
the italics being his :

You most thoroughly misunderstood me in relation

THE CLAIMS OF CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. 171

to what I said about deferential l diagnosis of disease.
I make no diagnosis except along the lines of consist-
ent mental therapeutics. An expert in mental thera-
peutics will naturally know the character of this diag-
nosis. Discord is discord. Pain is pain. Disease is
disease. The principle that cures one, if rightly ap-
plied, will cure all. This is the beginning and end of
rational mental healing. In relation to mental treat-
ment for a severed artery, I said simply that I be-
lieved the proper application of mind power would do
the same work, if not better than any other method.
I beg that you quote me correctly, if you ever quote
me, and I most thoroughly disagree with the under-
standing you got about diagnosis. In reply to the
list of questions that you wrote to me in a recent let-
ter, I have but to repeat my recent utterances in a
letter to you, that I prefer to shelve them,2 because to
answer them would bring about wholly indifferent re-
sults.

Space forbids the publication of all the letters
verbatim, nor is that necessary. Mr. Norton has
been accurately quoted upon the point at issue. Every
one can decide for himself whether the questions were
fairly put and fairly answered. The learned Judge
who presided at Sunday's meeting should be eminently
competent to decide whether Mr. Norton would be
guilty of manslaughter under this hypothetical state
of facts : A child is bleeding to death from a severed
artery. A surgeon at hand with ligatures and all
proper appliances is demonstrably able to stop the flow
of blood. Mr. Norton thrusts him aside, saying:
"Here is only an error of mortal mind. My revered
mother, Mrs. Eddy, teaches, on pp. 158 and 159 of

i Sic. 2 These italics are mine.— W. A. P,

172 CHEISTIAN SCIENCE.

' Science and Health,' thus : ' Mind can regulate the
condition of the stomach, bowels, food, temperature of
your child, far better than matter can do so. Your
child can have worms if you say so, or whatever
malady is timorously holden in your mind relative to
the body.' And at page 183 she says : ' Anatomy,
physiology, treatises on health — sustained by what is
called material law — are the husbandmen of sickness
and disease.' Accordingly, dismiss the surgeon while
I apply mind power. If I do it properly I will do the
same work, if not better than the surgeon." The
child dies. Would Judge Norton's belief in liberty
of conscience, which no sensible person wishes to
curtail, lead him to instruct a jury that a person
thus suffering a little child to bleed to death and
thrusting aside the aid that would have saved life is
guiltless of manslaughter ?

If it be said that Christian Scientists wTould not
attempt to treat such a case, it is admitted that the
whole solemn preachment of Mrs. Eddy, Mr. Norton
and their fellows is nonsense, a humbug, a snare and a
delusion; that their alleged cures are due not to any
peculiar virtue of Christian Science, but to that action
upon the body of the mind in a certain class of cases
that has been known and acted upon both by phy-
sicians and intelligent laymen since before the time of
Heraclitus : that operates for the voudoo priestess as
well as for Mrs. Eddy.

If it is depressing to see an intelligent audience
listening seriously to such teaching, it is equally
regrettable that a member of the Court should pre-
side at such a meeting, when it is considered that

THE CLAIMS OF CHKISTIAN SCIENCE. 173

cases may come before him involving violations of
the law — whether by homicide or failure to report
births, deaths and contagious diseases — under cover of
theories which he publicly defends, apparently, as
reducible with safety to common practice. Surely
this learned Judge knows that in the Mormon cases
the United States Supreme Court lucidly pointed out
the wide distinction between religious liberty and
license to commit, in the name of religion, acts for-
bidden by the law of the land enacted within the
scope of the police power.

W. A. Pttkkington.

New York, May 2gt

Appendix B.

CHKISTIAN SCIENCE AND THE LAW.1

To the Editor of the Sun :

Sir : — In a recent editorial quoting a number of the
excerpts from Mrs. Eddy's book lately appearing in the
reviews systematic effort was urged " to ferret out and
punish " Christian Scientists. The editorial omitted,
however, to show the state of the law and the diffi-
culties in the way of following its advice. It would
be unfortunate if the adverse sentiment toward Eddy-
ism aroused by exposure of its methods and the nu-
merous reported cases of its manslaughters should be
perverted or lessened by ill-considered action ; it seems,
therefore, worth while to make the situation clear.

No medical law of any State enjoins or prohibits
any system of medical practice. No law forbidding
the practice of Christian Science or any other system
of treating the sick, no matter how foolish, has been
proposed. Those who assert the contrary do so igno-
rantly or with intent to mislead. What medical laws
require, and in the opinion of the Supreme Court of
the nation and of almost every State properly require,
is that no person shall practice medicine before he has
pursued a proper course of study and furnished some
evidence that he has a fair knowledge of the human

1 New York Sun, July 12, 1899.

175

176 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

economy and the sciences relating thereto. This reg-
ulation applies to Roman Catholics, Protestants and
Jews. It is objected to by Christian Scientists and
Spiritualists, who stoutly maintain that to require the
same education of them as of others engaging in the
same business is to infringe their liberty of conscience
and right to worship in their own way, although it
is undeniable that when a man has once obtained a
license to practice medicine upon proof of his scien-
tific attainments he may follow any system he chooses.
He may, if he see fit, rely solely upon mental proc-
esses. Every physician does largely take into account
and rely upon the effect of the mind upon the body,
especially in certain classes of cases. There are few
to-day who pretend that the high potencies of home-
opathy have any medicinal action, and it was a realiza-
tion that their effect was due to the patient's imagina-
tion that led Mrs. Eddy, as she says, into her own
extraordinary system. But homeopathists admit the
existence of disease. They often administer drugs as
heroically as regular practitioners — sometimes more
heroically. They use surgery skilfully. In fact, it
is often difficult to differentiate them from regular
physicians by their practice alone ; nor was there ever
a time when they did not claim to be called physi-
cians. The Eddyites, on the other hand, although
eager to dub themselves "doctors of Christian Sci-
ence," declare that they are not practitioners of medi-
cine. Mrs. Eddy, as was fully pointed out in the
North American Review for March, condemns not
only drugs, remedies and instruments, but even hy-
giene, exercise and bathing. Her method of curing

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE AND THE LAW. 177

disease is first to deny its existence and then to argue
with it as one would argue with a Congressman.
Herein lies at once the danger of her crazy method
and the immunity of its practitioners from punish-
ment under the law of this and many other States.
A druggist who prescribes a proprietary nostrum or
so simple a remedy as rhubarb or chalk mixture may
be convicted of a misdemeanor. Our Supreme Court
has so held in several cases. But it also has laid
down in Smith v. Lane (24 Hun., 632) the narrow
rule that the use of drugs, medicines or instruments is
an essential element of medical practice, holding, in
substance, that the medical law was intended only to
protect those seeking treatment secundum artem from
false pretenders to skill in the use of dangerous drugs
or instruments, but not to protect from their mistake
or folly, persons who, lured by wonderful promises of
cure, submit themselves to the treatment of those
avowedly discarding ordinary medical methods.

This case, expressly approved of in Ohio, Rhode
Island and perhaps other States, is the joy and bul-
wark of Christian Scientists. It was held to be in-
applicable under the Nebraska and Illinois statutes ;
but from the last Legislature of the latter State the
Eddyites are said to have secured a proviso in the
new medical law adopting its rule.

It will be remembered that a letter in The Sun of
June 9, the accuracy of which has not been denied
to my knowledge, showed that when Mr. Carol Norton,
Mrs. Eddy's apostle hereabouts, was asked if he would
dare to exclude medical aid and treat severed arteries,
fractures, strangulations and contagious diseases by

178 CHKISTIAN SCIENCE.

mental processes he twice wrote that he preferred
to shelve the questions. It must seem startling to a
layman that a druggist violates the medical law by
prescribing rhubarb, while a Christian Scientist who
" thinks at " the severed artery of a child is exempt
from the operations of that statute. And perhaps it
may seem easy to rectify the anomaly by legislation.
Two recent experiments in this direction may be
profitable for instruction.

In 1898 a bill was introduced into the Massachusetts
Legislature defining the term " practicing medicine "
so as to include all methods of treating the sick and
wounded for hire, including, of course, Christian Sci-
entists and every sort of " healer." As was naturally
to be expected, Mr. William Lloyd Garrison and Prof.
James — the latter of whom seems bent upon forcing
Harvard, ancient mother of scholars and conservative
men, to associate, in the public mind, with Mesdames
Eddy and Piper — lifted up their voices against the
bill. These gentlemen represent the best of the host
that rally to Mrs. Eddy's support ; sincere, educated,
intelligent, dearly loving to run a tilt with the ma-
jority, with Athenian fondness for new things and not
unwilling to fill the trump of Fame. Mr. Garrison,
therefore, who a short time ago — I think it is the same
Mr. Garrison — clamored at the top of his pen for aca-
demic rules to prevent the ingenuous youth of Har-
vard from inflicting or submitting to the cautery of a
boyish and rather silly initiation of a secret society —
Mr. Garrison, who has harrowed all our feelings by
pointing out the awful brutality of football, actually
obstructed the passage of the law requiring Christian

• CHKISTIAN SCIENCE AND THE LAW. 179

Scientists in Massachusetts to have as a condition of
treating the sick the same education required of Prot-
estants, Catholics and Jews engaged in the same
business. And what was his delightful argument?
As reported by the Christian Scientists, it seems to
have consisted of two main premises : First, " John
P. Eobinson, he, said they didn't know everything
down in Judee," or, in common English, u the physi-
cians don't know it all : therefore let all the ignorant
have free field." Second, homeopathy was formerly
ridiculed. The answer seems simple enough. Mr.
Robinson, whose dictum has been much overworked,
was right. In medical science we know a good deal
more than was known in Judee. Moreover, Mr.
Garrison himself doesn't practice all theories ema-
nating from that district. He may surpass the rest of
us, but it may be doubted whether he gives to every
one that asks of him or turns away from none who
would borrow of him ; and as for resisting what he
considers evil he has a perfect mania for it, using the
sonnet with deadly effect. It is true that the meta-
physical theory of Hahnemann that a drug has me-
dicinal properties when attenuated to a degree repre-
sented by figures that overwhelm the imagination,
and that such properties are further affected by the
number and direction of the shakes given to the phial
containing the potency, was ridiculed, and very justly
so, as appears from the fact that few homeopathists
of to-day profess the theory, and fewer, if any, prac-
tice it, except, perhaps, as a form of mind cure. Prof.
James was not less convincing than Mr. Garrison.
With neat appreciation of the proprieties he pro-

180 CHEISTIAIST SCIENCE.

claimed his professorship at Harvard, thereby drag-
ging a reputable mother's name into company where
most of her offspring would blush to see her. Next
he took the bold, broad, not to say bad, ground that
the State should not regulate medicine at all, because
it is not a " finished science." This is the most de-
licious tid-bit of logic yet offered. If we are to legis-
late only about " finished sciences " our statute books
wTill soon be made up of enactments that straight lines
shall be the shortest distances between points, and
that it shall be a misdemeanor for the square de-
scribed on the hypothenuse to exceed the sum of the
squares described on the other two sides.

In the same year Senator Coggeshall introduced
into the New York Legislature, at whose instance I
do not know, a bill that would have affected Christian
Scientists. At its hearing in committee so many
Eddyites, most of them in skirts, were present that
adjournment was had to the Senate chamber. Ap-
parently no one spoke for the bill and no one of note
against it. After the usual platitudes concerning
liberty and the customary depreciation of medicine as
an unfinished science, the Senator is reported to have
smiled, bowed to the ladies, and abandoned the bant-
ling upon Mrs. Eddy's doorstep as cheerfully as he
took it from its parent, whoever that may have been.
It was another instance of an enthusiastic and organ-
ized few carrying their point, while the unorganized
multitude was indifferent and apathetic. It seems
obvious, therefore, that attempts at legislation in this
matter should not be made ill-advisedly or without
due organization.

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE AND THE LAW. 181

But does it follow that we are without remedy-
under existing law? It would seem not. If it can
be demonstrated that a Christian Scientist has caused
death by excluding proper medical or surgical treat-
ment and substituting his mental processes — in such
cases, for instance, as those submitted to Mr. Norton
and " shelved " by him — it ought not to be difficult to
obtain a conviction of manslaughter, if not of murder.
The societies for prevention of cruelty to children can
act in the premises. English courts are extraordi-
narily lenient with fanatics, but although Wagstaflfe
escaped punishment prior to the enactment of the
Prevention of Cruelty to Children statute, that law
seems to have been passed in consequence of his ac-
quittal; and recently another member of the "Pe-
culiar People," whose child died under a similar treat-
ment by anointing with oil in Apostolic fashion, was
convicted of manslaughter. If memory serves, Mr.
Gerry, some years ago, took from a missionary a
child whose fractured arm the father was treating
solely by such anointing ; and the Bishop forbade the
parent to go back to his post. There is no reason
why Christian Scientists should not be compelled to
report births, deaths and contagious diseases under
the usual penalties for disobedience. If they say that
it is wrong to compel them, who do not believe in
disease, to report its existence, once more the answer
is simple: Mrs. Eddy herself has reported in print
that her first husband, Col. Glover, died of "yellow
fever," that " insidious disease."

But after all, that which will destroy Christian
Science is the true exposition in the reviews and daily

182 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE.

press of its absurdities, its vulgarities, its false pre-
tences as well as its dangers. It does not seem possible
that a sane or reverent mind or one with any sense of
humor could accept seriously the preachment of the
exceedingly shrewd, but very ignorant and ungram-
matical old lady, once of Lynn but now of Concord.
And it is safe to say that unless Christian Scientists
can win some temporary advantage by cheap martyr-
dom the time will come very soon when sane and
reputable persons, many of whom now accept the
doctrine ignorantly, will blush with shame to think
they ever could have been disciples of Mary Moss
Baker Glover Patterson Eddy, whose name seems to
be legion. "W. A. Purrington.

July jo.

Index.

Absent Treatment, 22, 3011,
101.

Advertising, methods, (see Mrs.
Eddy).

^Esop's fable, ass and lion's
skin, 97.

Agamo-genesis, possible in " Sci-
ence," 47.

Agathon's dinner, 23.

Agnosticism, confounded with
gnosticism, 42.

Anatomy, study of condemned,
25, 47; a cause of disease,
172.

Anecdotes, of Bishop and Luna-
tic, 63; of Faith Cure, 38.

Animal 'Magnetism , condemned,
23» 47 > 58, (see Cerberus).

Anti-diploma Law of Massa-
chusetts, 51.

Apothecary, meaning of, 145;
and grocer, 146; originally
dispenser not prescriber,
147, 148, 151; wins right to
prescribe, 132, 151 to 155;
in America, 158 n\ 163; in
England, 160; English
apothecaries act, 155; ex-
aminations, 157; try to en-
join college of physicians
from licensing general
practitioners, 158; differs
from chemist, 158; contrast
between his legal liability

l and that of a "Scientist,"

178.
Argument against Christian
Science, remedy for dis-
eases, 21, 22; summed up,

Aristophanes ridicules harmony

cure, 23.
Artery, Christian Science tested

by, 65, 67, (see Norton).
Astrologer, consulted when in

prison, 88.

Babies, daily ablution of, 24,

(see Children).
Baker, maiden name of Mrs.

Eddy, 40.
Barbers, ancient surgeons, 149.
Bates, General Erastus N., 52,

58.

Bathing, condemned, 24.
Baunscheidtismus, death from,

75-
Bayard, last strict Hahneman-

nist in N. Y., 94.

Bentham on legislation, 128.

Bequests of Christian Science,
costly and martial, 59.

Berkeley, Bishop, tar-water the-
ory, 13; almost discovered
Christian Science, 18.

Bible, (see Scriptures).

Bishop, anecdote of lunatic
and, 63.

183

184

INDEX.

Boards of Exa?niners, (see Med-
ical Examiners).

Boastfulness, badge of charla-
tan, II, (see Mrs. Eddy).

Body, evolved from mortal
mind, 21; not to be cared
for, 24; seedling that starts
thought, 21.

Botanical School, Thomson's,

Browning, Robert, poetry com-
pared with Mrs. Eddy's,
59 > 60.

Buchanan s, College, compared
with Mrs. Eddy's, 54.

Bunions may be insanity, 21.

C. S. D., symbolic letters, 55;
first displayed by Mrs.
Eddy, 45.

Cabbage, eaten heartily by a
baby under Mrs. Eddy's
care, 27.

Cadi, judgment of a, 25, no,
in.

Cagliostro, 67, 91; offer to swal-
low poison, 45 n.

Cancer, cured by Mrs. Eddy in
one visit, 27; by merely
reading her book, 17, 166;
Mr. Norton's statement as
to, 167.

" Catnip and Christ,1' Mrs.
Eddy's profane compari-
son, 58.

Cerberus, devours Delilah's vic-
tims, 58.

Certificates, Mrs. Eddy's, 27;
evidence of their fabrica-
tion, 6on, (see Mrs. Eddy's
advertising methods,
Death).

Charlatanism, 1 1 ; homicide
and, 127.

Charter, (see College, Mrs.
Eddy).

Chemist, English equivalent of
American apothecary, 158.

Childbirth, normal operation of
function, not disease, 66, ,
120 ; danger of Christian
Science in, 67.

Children, cured of bowel com-
plaint, 27; "dumpishness,"
61; hayfever and rupture,
3011; diseases of, due to ma-
ternal ideas, 25, 169, 171;
danger to, of Eddyism, 25,
26, 37, 169, 171; medical
neglect of, 26, 87, 88, (see
Peculiar People); exposure
of to contagion, 26, 65, 103,
120; not amenable to force
of suggestion, 103; inflam-
mation of eyes, to be report-
ed, 108; severed artery, 64:
104; 113; 168; protection
from cruelty, 181, (see Nor-
ton).

Christ, corner-stone of Mrs. Ed-
dy's church, 41; and catnip,
58 ; less than Christianity , 18.

Christianity, larger than its
founder, 18.

Christian Science, alleged cures
due to suggestion, etc., 66,
101 ; no peculiar efficacy in,
64; basis of Mrs. Eddy's
church, 41; causes of suc-
cess, 18, 19, 66 ; condemns
all other systems, 24; dan-
ger of, 23, 29, 37, 177; de-
stroys Mrs. Eddy's edu-
cation, 42; differs from
homeopathy and eclecti-
cism, 117; discovery of, 17,
48, 49; "hopelessly origi-
nal," 47; inefficacious and
sham in surgical cases, 28,
64, 101, 171; only means
of cure, 23, 24; originated

INDEX

185

in homeopathic idea, 16,
loo; practice of should not
be absolutely forbidden, 34,
115,180; pretences summed
up, 166; publicity will de-
stroy, 36, 98, 182; suc-
cess dependent on fees, 56;
therapeutic methods, 21,82,
84, 101; unimportant as a
religious or metaphysical
theory, 22, 63, 100, 102,
(see Manslaughter, Medical
Boards, Mrs. Eddy).

Christian Scientists, disingenu-
ous, of 104 ; liability of for
malpractice, 32, 33, 109,
114, 181 , (see manslaugh-
ter); reports of contagious
disease and death by, 86,
108, 120, 181; held to be
or not to be practitioners of
medicine according to law
of the particular jurisdic-
tion, 31, 79 seq., (see cita-
tions of Smith v. Lane);
Mrs. Eddy's advice to, 56;
their comfortable fortunes,
57; their fees, 56, 83, 84;
reasons of their objection to
classification with physi-
cians, 16.

Churchy Mrs. Eddy's, 41; civil
liability of Christian Scien-
tists, (see Christian Scien-
tists).

Clairvoyance, is medical practice
if coupled with material
remedies, 81, 85; con-
demned by Mrs. Eddy, 23,

47.

Cleanliness, discouraged, 20, 24.

Clergy, formerly practiced physic
and licensed physicians, 149.

Clothing, unnecessary to Chris-
tian Scientists, 25.

"Coffee" Thomsonian remedy,
71,72.

Coggeshall, legislative bill of
senator, 180.

College, (Mrs. Eddy's), 50 to
57; course of instnictioi ,
staff and fees, 51, 52;
closed on account of pros-
perity, 55; or anti-diploma
law, 51; enormous success,

54.

College, Royal of Physicians,
chartered, 148; by-laws,
157; right to license, 158.

Conjugal Rights, Mrs. Eddy's
ideas of, 46, 47.

Constitutionality of health and
medical laws, 14, 124.

Contagious Diseases, duty to re-
port, 31, 33, 86, 108, 120,
181; exposure of children
to, 26, 65, 103, 120.

Crous, Jno. M., his hydro-
phobia cure, 70.

Cures, due to faith of mortal
mind, 20; scandal, 78°;
Mrs. Eddy's book, 47; of
hayfever, heart disease and
insanity, 3on; " dumpish-
ness," 61; dropsy and in-
fantile bowel complaint, 27;
crushed foot, etc., 28, (see
Cancer and Mrs. Eddy's ad-
vertising methods).

Damages, (see civil liability).

Danger of Eddyism, (see Chris-
tian Science).

Darwin, comparison of Mrs.
Eddy with, 168.

Death, certificates of, 86, 108,
(see Manslaughter).

Deformity, a belief, 22.

186

INDEX.

Delilah, leads victims to Cer-
berus, 58.

Denf s case, 14.

Dentistry, a branch of medicine,
138, 139.

Diagnosis, physicians err in, 12;
immorality of medical, 24;
Mrs. Eddy's certain, i6n;
by Christian Scientists, i6n,
101; Mr. Norton's explana-
tion of, 65, 170, (see Dis-
cernment); need of, 22.

Diet, care in, condemned i6n,
20; unscientific, 24.

Diphtheria, exposure of children
to by Faith curer, 26.

Diplomas, poor standards of
medical qualification, 128,
141; Mrs. Eddy's scruples
as to hers, 51; medical, 139
seq.

"Discernment," equivalent of,
diagnosis, i6n.

Discord, the nothingness of
error, 23; is discord, 171,
(see Norton).

Discovery, Mrs. Eddy's was
"hopelessly original," 47.

Disease, (see Norton).

Diseases, conscious beliefs of
unconscious mind, dream
shadows and growths of
illusion, 20, 22; feigned and
self-limited, 66; non-exist-
ent, 21; to be argued with,
21, 22; cured by Mrs.
Eddy's book, 21; mortal
mind, 100; unintelligent, 21.

Disingenuousness, of Christian
Scientists, 104.

Diss de Bar, the adventuress, 35.

Draughts, "harmless to scien-
tists," 25.

Drea?ns, Mrs. Eddy's history a
record of, 43, 44, 45.

Dresser, H. W., Arena article on
Mrs. Eddy, 38.

Dropsy, cured by Mrs. Eddy,

28.
Drowsiness, caused by Mrs.

Eddy's book, 3011, 61.
Drugs, use of shows lack of

faith in God, 24, 58.
Druggist, (see Apothecary).
Dying, restored to life, 28.

Eating, unnecessary, 29.

Eclectics, (see Schools of Medi-
cine).

Eddy, Asa B., marriage to Mrs.
Patterson, 44; first pupil of
Mrs. Eddy to display sign
of Christian Scientist, 45;
death of from poison men-
tally administered, 4511.

Eddy, Ebenezer J. Foster, 52.

Eddy, Mrs. Mary Baker Glover
Patterson, autobiography,
37; advertising methods,
27, 28, 36, 6on, 61, 62;
admitted to church, 41;
advises disciples to charge
fees, etc., 56; admits that her
disciples are not fit to treat
surgical cases, 28, 64, 172;
boastfulness, 17, 18, 19,48,
49» 5°» 57' certainty of
diagnosis, i6n, 99; child-
hood early studies, 40, 41,
42, 99; compared with
Cagliostro, 67; with Lydia
Pinkham, 60; danger of her
teachings, 37; disparage-
ment and denunciation of
P. P. Quimby and all sys-
tems of treating the sick,
23, 24, 38, 47; disdain of
Lindley Murray, 43; dis-
courages all study except
of her book and the Bible,

INDEX.

187

25, 54; Defines infringe-
ment of her copyright as
"theft," 48; experiments
on herself with poisons,
45n; forgets all she ever
learned from books, 42;
first person to interpret the
scriptures, 48, 49; gains in
substance, 50; forgets her
grammar, 42, 43, 60; high
potency homeopath, 16, 20,
100; " hopelessly original,"
47; hears mystic voices, 40;
humorous sense, 38; "in-
telligent ease" in facing
about, 39, 40; ignorance, 42,
99; incoherence, 19; mar-
riage, her views of, 46; un-
necessary to procreation,
46, 47; to Col. Glover, 42;
to Mr. Eddy, 44; to Dr.
Patterson, 43; her mar-
riages were dreams and
shadows that declined, 44;
mathematical logic of her
teaching, 40; her methods,
21, 29, 82, 84, 101;
"mother," her title of, 40;
more than mortal, 40, 49;
her poetry, 18, 36, 43, 59;
her weird rhetoric, 58, 59;
her spiritual grace of divine
origin, 39; scriptures read
through belief in eyesight,
57 ; summary of her system,
100, 104; shadow not grow-
ing less, 50; separation of
years from her child, 43;
unselfishness in accepting
large fees divinely sug-
gested, 52, 53; teaches that
prayer to personal God is
injurious, 27; vagueness of
thought and vulgarity of
expression, 18, 19, 58; vin-
dictiveness toward P. P.
Quimby, 24, 38, (see

Agnosticism, Certificates,
Christian Science, College,
Pantheism).

Education, Mrs. Eddy's, lost
upon discovery of Chris-
tian Science, 42; unneces-
sary, harmful and distaste-
ful to "Scientists," 54,
116; purpose of medical
laws to ensure, 115, 175;
(see medical laws and legis-
lation) in England prior to
apothecaries act, 156, (see
Medical Education; Health,
and Anatomy, Study).

Electricity, administration of as a
remedial agent is practice
of medicine, 81.

Eryximachns, cure of hic-
coughs, medical theory of
harmony, 23.

Examinations, (see Medical
Boards, etc.).

Exercise, disapproved, 20, 24,
47; does not increase mus-
cular power, 24.

Experience, medical treatment
should accord with, 13, 73.

Eyes, reading not done by, 57.

Faith, affects bodily con-
dition, 12, 20.

Faith Cure, ridiculed and con-
demned by Mrs. Eddy, 38,

47.

Fear, affects body, 12.

Fees, of Christian Scientists,
56, 81, 83, 113; aid cure of
the sick, 55; for Mrs.
Eddy's tuition divinely in-
spired, 52, 53; and un-
selfishly accepted, 43; as
element of medical prac-
tice, no.

Felony, intent as element of, J^ :

188

INDEX.

77, (see Manslaughter and
Suicide).
Fever, Mrs. Eddy's, 41; Col.
Glover* s death from in-
sidious disease yellow fever,

43-
Fishbone, in child's throat as

test of " Science," 65, (see

Norton).
Flannel, less protection than

mind, 25.
Food, not necessary to support

life, 29; depriving a child

of, criminal, 29.
Fractures, cured by Mrs. Eddy,

but to be avoided by her

disciples, 28.
Forgetfulness, Mrs. Eddy's, after

discovering her * ' Science, ' '

42.
Frederic, Harold, case of, 33,

69.

Galileo, 12, 13.

Garrison, Wm. Lloyd, 178.

Gehazi, Christian Scientist,
compared to, 84.

Glover, Col. Geo. W., first hus-
band of Mrs. Eddy, 42, 43.

Godliness, mystery of unlocked,
by Mrs. Eddy, 48; no mor-
tal could have unlocked it,

49-

Gnosticism, confused with ag-
nosticism, 42.

Grammar, Mrs. Eddy's weak-
ness in English, 42, 43, 60.

Grocers, of same guild with
apothecaries, 146.

Hahnemannism, decadence of,
94, 176; differentiated from
Christian Science, 176; high
potency theory starting-

point of Mrs. Eddy, 16, 100;
properly ridiculed, 179.

Hale, Lord, (see Manslaughter).

Halford, Sir Henry, on apoth-
ecaries act, 132.

Harmony, Aristophanes and
Eryximachus discuss, the
somethingness of Truth,
substitute for physiology,

Healing sick, Christian Science
has no distinct efficacy in,
64.

Health, treatises on cause sick-
ness, 25, 47, 172; is Mind,
100.

Health Laws, purpose of, 14,
(see Constitutionality, Leg-
islation, Medical Laws).

History, useless except to illus-
trate truth, 46.

Holmes, Dr. Oliver Wendell, on
Berkeley, 13; Judge Oliver
Wendell, (see Manslaugh-
ter).

Homeopathy, (see Hahneman-
nism,Medical Schools);Mrs.
Eddy's starting-point, 16,
20, 100; denounced by Mrs.
Eddy, 23; agrees with other
medical systems in accept-
ing the teachings of general
science and reality of sick-
ness, 176.

Homeopathists, aid passage of
N. Y. Medical Law, 95, 143;
not to be classed with
Christian Scientists, 117;
dissensions among, 94, (see
Schools of Medicine).

Homicide, (see Manslaughter);
compared with quack prac-
tices, 125.

Hope, affects body, 12.

" Hopeless originality," of Mrs.
Eddy's discovery, 47.

Humor, Mrs. Eddy's, 38.

I^DEX,

189

Humbug, of Christian Science,
65, 101, 172.

Hunger, a mental impression,
29.

Huntoon, Mehitable, hears mys-
tic voices call Mary Baker,
40.

Hydrophobia, Crous's cure for,
70.

Hygiene, denounced by Mrs.
Eddy, 16", 20, 24, 47.

Ignorance, Mrs. Eddy's, exam-
ples of, 18, 42, 43, 48, 59,
60, 99.

Illinois, Medical Laws of, 82n,

134. H2.
Immortality, already here, 29.
Incoherence, of Mrs. Eddy's

writings, I9n.
Infants, folly of bathing, 24.
Insanity, no defence of Christian

Science, 32.
Iowa, (see Manslaughter).
Irish, happiness of emigrants in

filth, 24.

James, Professor, 178, 179.
Jenkins, case of, 148.
Jenner, 12, 13.
Jesus, (see Christ).

Keithley's case, 74.

Kerosene, malpractice by use
of, 76.

Kershaw's case, 69, (see Man-
slaughter).

Law, affects practices, not the-
ories and religious beliefs,

30, 34, 86, 96, (see Legisla-
tion and Medical Laws).

Laws, regulating medical prac-
tice, reports of contagious
diseases, etc., in New York,
106.

Legislation, Bentham on, 128;
favorable to Christian Sci-
ence, 33, 178 to 181; neces-
sarily imperfect, 128; need
of to control "Scientists"
doubtful, 33, 90, 114, 180;
not confined to exact sci-
ences, 180; obstacles to
medical, 137; purpose,
scope and limits of, (see
Law and Medical Laws).

Liberty, Religious, (see Reli-
gion).

Liability, of Christian Scien-
tists, (see, Penalties, Man-
slaughter, Christian Scien-
tists).

License, to practice medicine,
(see Medical Laws).

Lobelia inflata, Thomsonian
remedy, 72.

Long, St. John, quack convicted
of manslaughter, 31; ladies
of rank testify to his cures,
88.

Lovett, Ezra, death from Thom-
sonian treatment, 71, 72.

Lunatic, anecdote of Bishop
and, 63.

Malpractice, in medicine lia-
bility for, 30, 109, in, 181,
(see Manslaughter).

Manslaughter, American rule,
73; by Baunscheidtismus,
75; constructive, by un-
licensed medical practi-
tioner, 31, 72, 74, 77; cases
of Keithley and Rice, 74;

190

INDEX.

of Lovett and Thomson,
71, 72; Bemis and Pierce,
76; by recklessness, 32, 72,
y/t 114, 125; by substitut-
ing negations of Christian
Science for right practice,
32, 78, 114, 120, 166, 171,
181; duty to deceased ele-
ment of, 31, 33, 109, 112;
English rule, 33.

Hale, opinion of Lord, 72, yy\
Holmes, opinion of Judge,
73 to 78; intent to cure
consistent with criminality,
73, yj\ by negligence, 32;
offence against state gov-
erned by different rule from
that of civil liability, 112;
victim's willingness to die,
no defence, 126, (see Sui-
cide).

Marshrosemary, "coffee " of the
Thomsonians, 72.

Marriage, Mrs. Eddy's to Col.
Glover a dream, 43, 44; to
Dr. Patterson a shadow
that declined, 44; to Mr.
Eddy a blessed spiritual
union, 44; unnecessary for
procreation, 47; celibacy
preferable, 46; convenient,
pleasant or a love affair,
46, (see Mrs. Eddy and
Conjugal Rights).

Martyrdom, cheap, a boon to the
Scientists, 34, 182.

Massachusetts Metaphysical
college, (see College).

Material History, only a dream,

.44-

Matter, non-existent, another
name for mortal mind,
21.

Matteran, Q. C, on apothe-
caries act, 161.

Matthias, imposture and indict-
ment of, 34, 35.

Medical Boards of Examiners,
in New York, 14, 15, 135,
I44n ; do not demand uni-
formity in practice, 14, 15;
suggested for Christian
Science, 16, 116, 117; why
not for Catholics and Prot-
estants, etc., 121.

Medical Education, (see Edu-
cation, Study, Diplomas).

Medical Laws, approval of by
courts, 14, 124; argument
against, 13; do not pre-
scribe one system of prac-
tice, 14, 15, 136, 140; en-
forcment of, 86, 114, 129,
130, 142, 162; petition for
repeal of, N. Y., 89; pur-
pose and scope of, 89, 114,
123 seq., 134, 137,144, 175;
widened by defining medi-
cal practice will include
Christian Scientists, 121;
obstacles to enacting, 137.

Medical Practice, (see Practice
of Medicine).

Medical Schools, (see Schools
of Medicine). *

Medical Societies, function of,

133.
Medical Study, impairs natural

gifts of healers, 89; prereq-
uisite to license, 15, 85;
Mrs. Eddy's denunciation
of, 25, 54; legal regulation
of, 140, (see Education,
Study).

Medical Systems, (see Schools
of Medicine).

Medical Text-Books, cause dis-
ease, 25.

Medicine, administered by sci-
entists, 16 n; practice of,
(see Practice); not an exact
science, 12, 119; right of
physicians to dispense, dis-
puted, 147, 148; use of

INDEX.

191

condemned by Mrs. Eddy,
(see Drugs).

11 Mediumship," denounced by
Mrs. Eddy, 23.

Mental stimulus, affects body,
12.

Mesmerism, denounced by Mrs.
Eddy, 23.

Midwifery, a branch of medi-
cine, 139.

Mind, (see Mortal Mind); regu-
lates your childs stomach,

25.

Mind cure, denounced by Mrs.
Eddy, 23, 47.

Misdemeanor, unlicensed prac-
tice of medicine may be in
U. S., 36; is in New York,
106; is not in England, 31;
practice of Christian Sci-
ence is not in N. Y., but is
in Nebraska, 106.

Missouri, (see Practice of Medi-
cine).

Mormon cases, 64, 86, 87.

Mortal Mind, does not exist,
29; another name for mat-
ter, 21 ; is disease, 100.

" Mother," title of Mrs. Eddy,
40.

Mothers, cause diseases of chil-
dren by their thoughts, 25,
169, 171.

Mother's Darling, and Evening
Prayer, poems of Mrs.
Eddy, 43, 60.

Movement cure, denounced,

23. 47.
Murder, malpractice may be,

31, 78, 120.
Murray, Lindley, grammar of,

42, 43, (see Grammar).

Nebraska, medical practice in
by " Scientists,* * 82.

Negligence, (see Manslaughter).

New York, Boards of medical
examiners, 14, 15, 135,
I44n; legislature of, buys
hydrophobia cure, 70;
practice of medicine in, 31,
72, 82, (see Citations of
Smith v. Lane).

Nexus, importance of the, 46.

Norton, Mr. Carrol, eulogy of
Mrs. Eddy, 39; defines
disease as disease, pain as
pain, etc., 171; idea of
diagnosis, 65, 171; lack of
faith in his own teachings,
64; lecture in Metropoli-
tan Opera House, 64, 165;
offers medical proof of cer-
tain cures, 167; scouts idea
that a child's malady is in
the maternal mind, 169;
"shelves" test questions,
104, 113, 168, 169, 171;
suggests comparison of
Eddyism with philosophy
of Darwin and Spencer,
168.

Ohio, practice of medicine in,
82.

Ormonde, Marchioness of testi-
fies for St. John Long, 89.

Osteopathy, 81.

Pain, a belief without adequate
cause, 21; is pain, 171.

Paine, Dr. H. M., reference to
Mrs. Eddy's homeopathy,
20^.

Pantheism, Mrs. Eddy's under-
standing of, 42.

Patterson, Dr., Mrs. Eddy's
second husband, 43, 44.

192

IKDEX.

"Peculiar People/* deaths of
children under their neg-
lect, 87, 88.

Penalties, amenability of "Scien-
tists " malpracticing, etc.,
to, 31, 33, 109, 114, 181,
(see Misdemeanor, and
Practice of Medicine).

Petition, for repeal of N. Y.
Medical Law, 89.

Pharmacy, a branch of medi-
cine, 138, 139.

Physical sense, is error and
shadow, 50.

Physic, less exact than surgery,
136.

Physician, dispensing of drugs
by, 147 to 150; duty to ex-
amine theories candidly
without prejudice, 96, 137;
may follow any system, 15;
liability for malpractice, 31,
33, 109, in, (see Man-
slaughter); not infallible,
12, 13, 119; should not be
consulted by Christian
Scientists, 23.

Physiology, anti-Christian, 23;
a cause of disease, 172;
should be replaced by har-
mony, 23.

Pinkham, Lydia, Mrs. Eddy
compared to, 60.

Placenta pravia, 67.

Poetry, Mrs. Eddy's i8n, 36,43,

59-
Poison, mental administration of

to Mr. Eddy, Mrs. Eddy's
immunity to, Cagliostro's
offer to swallow, 45.

Police power, medical practice
regulated under, 14.

Policy of enacting laws against
Christian Science, 90.

Popham, Sir John, on medical
practice of apothecary, 149.

Practice of Medicine, by

apothecaries, 132, 148,
151, 155; defined in Eng-
land, 160; in general, 106,
108; Illinois, 82n; Indiana,
80; Maine, Michigan and
Missouri, 8 1 ; Nebraska,
8.2; New York, 79; Ohio,
82, 107; Rhode Island, 84,
107; Wisconsin, 81; Mrs.
Eddy's opinion of, 23.

Prayer, to a personal God is in-
jurious in science, 27.

Predestination, rejected by Mrs.
Eddy in childhood, 41.

Prevention of Medical aid, (see
Manslaughter).

Prophylaxis, of Christian Sci-
ence, 25.

Public Health Laws, (see Med-
ical Laws) in New York,
106, 108.

Publicity, will destroy Christian
Science, 36, 98, 121, 182.

Puffendorf, cites Cadis' judg-
ment, 25, no.

Quacks, their argument against
Medical Laws, 13; com-
pared with homicides, 125;
pretences to peculiar gifts,

85.

Quackery, (see Charlatan); not
forbidden by law, in; in-
crease of, in England, after
Rose's case, 132.

Quarles, on the good fortune of
physicians, 102.

Quimby, P. P., disparaged by
his former patient, Mrs.
Eddy, 24, 38.

Ram-cats, Thomsonian rem-
edy, 71.

HSTDEX,

193

Reading, by belief in eyesight,

57-

Recklessness, in treating the
sick, (see Manslaughter,
Malpractice, Civil Liability);
of " Scientists," 30°.

Registration, of physicians, 141.

Religion, not to be used to cloak
crime, lust and greed, opin-
ion of U. S. Supreme Court,
30, 86, 87; of Nebraska
Court, 84; Mrs. Eddy's,
unimportant apart from its
dangerous practices, 22, 63,
ioo7 102; not a test of med-
ical skill, 13, 121; not as-
sailed by preventing the ig-
norant from treating the
sick, 63.

Retrospection and Introspection,
Mrs. Eddy ' s autobiography ,

37-

Rhetoric, Mrs. Eddy's wonder-
ful, 58.

Rhymes, Mrs. Eddy's, (see
Poetry).

Rubbing, denounced, 24.

Scandal Cure, j8n.

Science and Health with Key to
the Scriptures, deeply dip-
ping into last edition quali-
fies to cure disease, 52;
only text-book except Bible,
54; drowsiness and vomit-
ing caused by reading,
3on, 61.

Science of Man, Mrs. Eddy's
first book, cures from read-
ing it, copyright infringed,

47.
V Schools " of Medicine, disap-
pearance of differences with
growth of exact knowledge,
144; equality before the

law, 134; differ from Chris-
tian Science in accepting
results of learning and ex-
perience, 117, 136.

Scriptures, inadequate prior to
Mrs. Eddy's discovery, 48.

Scruples, Mrs. Eddy's as to
diplomas, 51.

Senior, twice convicted of man-
slaughter of his children by
refusing medical aid, 88n.

Senses, their evidence not to be
heeded, 57; error and
shadow, 50.

Sham, of Christian Science con-
fessed by Mrs. Eddy, 28,
65, 101, 172.

Sickness is inharmony, 23, (see
Disease).

Simon, the sorcerer, Christian
Scientists compared to, 82.

Slander, to say a licensed prac-
titioner has killed a patient
by malpractice, 74.

Smallpox, as a test of Christian
Science, 65, 168, (see
Norton).

Socrates, 12, 13; ridicules pre-
sumption of ignorance, 118.

Soul, is substance, 50.

Spencer, Herbert, comparison
of Mrs. Eddy with, 168.
itualism, denounced, 23.

State Boards, of Medical Ex-
aminers, (see Medical
Boards); suggested for
"Scientists," 16, 116, 117.

Strangulation, of child a test of
"Science," 65, 168, (see
Norton).

Study, of medicine causes dis-
ease, 25; of general science
condemned, 54; of Bible
with science and health all
sufficient, 54.

Substance, is soul, 50.

Suggestion, effects "cures" of

194

INDEX.

Christian Science, 101, 104;

children not subject to, 103;

eliminated by Mrs. Eddy,

104.
Suicide, a felony to attempt, or

aid, or abet, 33, 112.
Surgeons, once barbers, 149.
Surgery, more exact than

physic, 136; to be avoided

by Christian Scientists, 28.
Systems, of medicine, (see

Schools).

TAR-water, Bishop Berkeley's,

13.

Tenement house, children ex-
posed to contagion in, 26.

Test questions, in Christian
Science, (see Norton).

Theft, infringement of Mrs.
Eddy's copyright declared
to be, 48.

Therapeutics, no system favored
by law, 14, 15, 136; should
be based on experience,
112; Mrs. Eddy's system

Of, 21, 22, IO

Thinkers, their time has come,

IS-

Thirst, a mental impression, 29.

Thomson, Samuel, founder of
" Botanic School," 71.

Trades-union spirit, not scien-
tific, 133, 156.

Vagueness, of Eddyism, 19".
Vis medic atrix natures, force

of, 12, 66.
Vomiting, due to reading

Science and Health, 30,

61.

WelHny -gristle, Thomsonian

remedy, 71.
Woodbury, Mrs. J. C, article

in Arena, 38.
Worms, caused in children by

maternal thought, 25.

Yellow fever, an "insidious dis-
ease," 41.

M % 1900

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

0 022 169 590.2

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Christian science;"

See other formats