A bill emanating from the medical faculties of the Universities of Laval at Quebec and of McGill at Montreal, was introduced in the Legislature for the Province of Quebec, recently in session at Quebec City. The last feature of the bill was a direct menace to Christian Science practitioners and our Cause as well, but so insidiously was it phrased that it had received its second reading before the attention of the Christian Scientists in Montreal and the Eastern townships was directed to it through a local evening paper of Friday, the 1st of March.

Upon inquiry it was found that the third reading of the bill would be on the following Monday, so that between Saturday and Monday morning there was not much time to lose. By wiring to Quebec the lawyers engaged to look after the interests of the Scientists arranged to have the third reading postponed for one day. On Sunday night the attorneys representing First and Second Churches of Christ, Scientist, Montreal, went to Quebec City, followed on the Monday by deputations from both churches. On Tuesday the hearing took place, and the attorneys placed the case in a strong light and referred to an old French law by which the liberty of conscience of the subject in matters of his religion must not be interfered with.

The deputations from the Christian Science churches were well received and were listened to very respectfully. The Cabinet is composed principally of the French element, who inherit the characteristic of politeness in presence of and towards ladies. Suffice it to say, the obnoxious clause met its quietus, and the bill was practically killed.

The following excerpts from the report of Mr. Busteed, one of the legal representatives of the Christian Scientists, will be read with interest.—Editor.]

Considerable literature was given me for perusal, including the "Hearing on Proposed Medical Bills" before some of the Legislatures in the United States, articles from the February and March numbers of the Cosmopolitan and from The Christian Science Journal; all of which I carefully read during my leisure time at Quebec. Needless to say, I was deeply impressed, not only with the history and remarkable growth of Christian Science in nearly all civilized countries, but with the broad Christian principles and sound reasoning on which it is founded.

On arrival at Quebec, I learned that the bill, which had passed the second reading in the House of Assembly, had then been referred to a special committee of seventeen or eighteen members, of whom eight were doctors of medicine; it had been reported on favorably by this committee, and was to come up for its third reading either that or the following day. The section which most deeply affected not only Christian Scientists, but all those who practised the healing art who were not members of the college, read as follows:—

"Every person not registered in this Province, who is convicted, on the oath of one or more witnesses, of having practised medicine, surgery, or obstetrics, or any other art of healing in the Province, in contravention of the dispositions of the present section, either for hire or for money, merchandise, or effects generally, or in the hope of receiving recompense, or who is recompensed in any manner whatever, as having practised medicine, surgery, obstetrics, or any other art of healing, shall incur a penalty of fifty dollars."

On my first interview with the Premier, I was given to understand that it was too late to oppose the bill in the Assembly, and that our objections should be made in Committee of the Council. This would have been a severe rebuff at the outset, if carried into effect. However, on consideration, and with the hearty approval of some of the members of the Cabinet, a hearing of the objections to the bill was fixed for the next day at eleven o'clock. At the hour appointed we were graciously received by the Premier and several members of his Cabinet, due no doubt, to some extent, to the presence of several ladies and other members of First and Second Churches of Montreal, who had taken the trip to Quebec specially to oppose the bill. I may mention that the members of First Church were also accompanied by their counsel. I was accorded a most attentive hearing for about half an hour. Without attempting to do more than give a mere outline of my argument, I may note some of the points I endeavored to make:

1. With the aid of Judge Clifford P. Smith's article in The Christian Science Journal of October, 1905, and other items gleaned from the books given me, I shortly outlined what I conceived Christian Science to be, and quoted figures to show its enormous growth and development in recent years; its foundation, the teaching of the gospel, could only lead its followers to "do good and follow after it;" also that its claims to heal the sick were indissolubly bound up with its tenets.

2. That all knowledge did not begin and end with medical science, as evidenced by the radical changes introduced in the treatment of diseases within the memory of many present, as well as by the fact that on our statute book, side by side with the act relating to physicians and surgeons, was the act governing the erstwhile despised and much reviled homeopaths.

3. That science was opening up new modes of healing and no one could say what changes would be introduced in the healing art from day to day, and while Christian Scientists were not opposed to the requirement that those who professed to practise medicine, surgery, and obstetrics, should prove their skill, knowledge, and ability to do so in accordance with the laws and rules of medical science, they decidedly objected to the idea that all knowledge of healing began and ended there.

4. That the bill was too sweeping in its claims, in that it shut out all believers in the art of healing, unless practised by a regular licentiate of the college, and that it infringed on and prohibited all means of healing by others for any sort or manner of reward or recompense.

5. That it was a gross infringement on, and curtailment of, the rights of the subject, who would be prevented and prohibited from using any means of alleviation from suffering, even at the hands of those whom, in his heart of hearts, he believed competent and capable of affording him relief.

Citations were also made from proceedings before legislative committees in several of the States of the Union, where similar tentative legislation had been successfully opposed, to the great satisfaction of every one, even of the legislators themselves. We were assured that the claims of the Christian Scientists would receive consideration, and were informed later, either that the objectionable clause would be stricken out or an exception made in their favor. This was actually done at final reading of the bill in the Assembly, when the objectionable clause was struck out. When the bill came before the committee of the Upper House, it was met by so many objections and was so changed that its promoters would scarcely have recognized it. Among other changes the objectionable clause was stricken out in toto. I have read the bill as finally assented to, and have pleasure in assuring you that there is nothing in it which interferes in any way with the rights of the Christian Scientists, or infringes on the liberty, which we, in common with all law-abiding citizens and loyal subjects, enjoy.

This is the first attempt to violate the rights of Christian Scientists in the Province of Quebec, and we have every reason to express thankfulness to divine Mind for guidance and protecting care over our interests and those of our Cause.—Correspondence.