A RECENT DECISION

Archibald McLellan

A Few years ago the state of Missouri, upon the solicitation of a committee of medical doctors, enacted a law which was popularly supposed to be aimed at the practice of Christian Science. This view would seem to be justified, judging from the action of the state board of health, which recently instituted the prosecution of two Christian Scientists under the terms of this law, alleging that in practising Christian Science they were practising medicine. The outcome of this prosecution is shown in the following news item, which we clip from The Christian Science Monitor of Dec. 21:—

Warrensburg, Mo.—Judge Berry Thurmond, in case of state vs. Lena D. Jaccard and Theresa M. Haywood, Christian Science practitioners, charged with practising medicine without license, Saturday held that the Missouri state medical statutes do not apply to this class of healers, and that there is no law in this state either prohibiting or regulating their practice.

The case was argued by T. A. Witten of Kansas City, Fred W. Lehman and Judge Franklin Ferriss of St. Louis, and O. L. Houts of Warrensburg for the defense, and Ewing Cockrell, J. W. Suddath, and J. A. Kemper, all of Warrensburg, for the State.

Does it not seem as if the Missouri state board of health might be in better business than the persecution of two women who are engaged in healing the sick, and who are not lawbreakers, technically or otherwise? The members of this board surely cannot be ignorant of the fact that thousands of persons have been healed of the most serious diseases through the practice of Christian Science, and it would appear to any impartial observer to be more in line with their office if they were engaged in promoting every means by which the sick can be healed, rather than by interfering with the practice of an admittedly successful system.

Archibald McLellan.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit