Medical Jurisprudence, Volume 1 (of 3)Paris, John Ayrton
Science
Medical Jurisprudence, Volume 1 (of 3)
Paris, John Ayrton
Medical laws and legislation -- Great Britain
“The Court (i. e. of King’s Bench) has jurisdiction over Corporate
Bodies to see that they act agreeably to the end of their institution.”
“Where a party who has a right has no other specific legal remedy, the
Court will assist him by issuing this prerogative writ (i. e.
_mandamus_) in order to his obtaining such right.”
“But it is not a writ that is to issue of course, or to be granted
merely for asking.”
“The College are obliged in conformity to the trust and confidence
placed in them by the Crown and the public, to admit all that are fit;
and to reject all that are unfit.”
“The judgment and discretion in determining on skill, learning, and
sufficiency to practise physic, is trusted to the College, and the Court
will not interrupt them in the due and proper exercise of it. But their
conduct in the exercise of this trust thus committed to them ought to be
fair, candid and unprejudiced; not arbitrary, capricious or biassed;
much less warped by resentment or personal dislike.”
“It is possible that other causes of rejection than insufficiency of
skill may occur, as _badness of morals_, for instance; of these the
Court will judge.”
“If they should refuse to examine the candidate at all, the Court will
oblige them to do it.”
“The power (of admission) remains with the body; and the examination by
the President and four Censors is only preparatory, and for the ease of
the body at large.”
“Every Fellow may examine and argue with the candidate in the _comitia
minora_ though he has no vote _there_.”
“The delegation to the _comitia minora_ to examine is good.”
“Mr. Justice _Aston_ followed Mr. Justice _Yates_ in saying that Doctor
_Letch_ should rather have applied for a mandamus requiring the College
to grant him a license to practise within London and seven miles of it,
than for a mandamus to admit him as a member.”
“The _comitia majora_ acted with great moderation in admitting him to
another examination.
“Mr. Justice _Hewit_ declined giving any opinion (on a point started in
argument) whether London Licenciates are _members_ of the College or
not; though he hinted, that the more he thought of it, the more he
doubted it.”
“We should go a great way if we should say ‘that a Licenciate to
practise within _London_ and seven miles round is a _member_ of the
College’.”
The Rule was accordingly discharged by the unanimous opinion of the
Court.
But the matter did not rest here; the notion that the Licenciates were
entitled to be considered as Members of the College, under the term
Commonalty or otherwise, gained ground; and accordingly two terms after
the original argument and judgment, Sir _Fletcher Norton_ (afterwards
Lord _Eardly_) moved for a Rule upon Dr. _Askew_ and others (the four
then Censors), for them to shew cause why an information in nature of a
_quo warranto_ should not be granted against them, to shew by what
authority they acted as Censors of the College of Physicians.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account