injured at such times and places as the court may order by not exceeding two reputable physicians or surgeons to be named by the defendant in said motion. SEC. 2. The plaintiff shall have the right to object upon reasonable grounds to any physician or surgeon named, and the court shall determine the reasonableness of such objection.

SEC. 3. Whenever the court shall sustain the plaintiff's objection the defendant shall have the right to substitute another physician or surgeon in place of the physician or surgeon objected to.

SEC. 4. Failure to comply with such order of the court shall be ground for non-suit.

[House Bill No. 647.]

An Act concerning Medical or Surgical Expert Witnesses in Criminal Cases, as follows:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

No person shall be qualified to give his opinion as a medical or surgical expert witness in any criminal action until he shall have entered, or offered to enter, into a full and complete conference with the medical or surgical expert or experts to be called on the opposing side, as to the facts upon which he shall be asked to base an opinion.

Before introduction into the Assembly these bills were approved by the Bar Association at a regular meeting and a committee was appointed to aid in securing their passage. At the hearing before the Judiciary Committee the bills were ably explained and their passage recommended by Mr. Hadlai A. Hull, President of the State Bar Association of Connecticut, and others, but without avail, as they were reported upon unfavorably by the Committee and have been rejected by the House and Senate.

It seems impossible at the present time to secure the passage of any measures of this nature. It remains for this Society to take some action which shall in some way regulate the matter. After careful consideration your Chairman recommends the adoption of the following resolutions:

RESOLVED, That it is advisable that wherever possible the members of this Society adopt the so-called Leeds method of preliminary consultation by medical witnesses on both sides of the case as to its status.

[COMMENT BY DR. MCKNIGHT: A number of years ago, the physicians of Leeds, England, made an agreement among themselves that they would not testify on any medical question without having had an opportunity for a consultation with the medical experts on the other side, just as they would consult over a private patient in order to see whether they could reach a correct conclusion. This plan worked very well there, and is being tried in other places. It saves much time and expense. I think that if we could all adopt that scheme, it would save us a great deal of trouble.]

RESOLVED, That it is the sense of this Society that it is inadvisable and objectionable for any of its members to occupy the position of Medical Advisory Counsel in open court and at the same time to act as expert witness in a medico-legal case.

[COMMENT BY DR. MCKNIGHT: That is, a man who is an expert witness should not assist the legal counsel in conducting the case.]

RESOLVED, That we regard the acceptance by a physician of a fee that is contingent upon the result of a medico-legal case as not in accordance with medical ethics and derogatory to the good repute of the profession.

House Bill No. 237, establishing a State Farm for Inebriates, was introduced largely through the efforts of Dr. F. H. Barnes of Stamford working in connection with the Association of Probate Judges, and the State Temperance Society. A substitute bill, carrying a smaller appropriation, has been reported favorably by the Committee on Humane Institutions and on Appropriations and will probably be passed.

Several bills regulating the sale of narcotic drugs were introduced. A substitute for these bills, H. B. 980, was reported favorably, has been re-committed and so far as I know has not been reported back to the House.

Two bills relating to privileged communications were reported upon unfavorably and were rejected.

House Bill No. 305, an Act amending an Act concerning operations for the prevention of procreation, was reported upon favorably by the Committee, has been re-committed and has not been reported back to the House.

A bill for the extermination of mosquitoes is still under consideration.

House Bill No. 446, requiring a special form of death certificate where death occurs after six months after the administration of any serum or antitoxin or after surgical operations, was reported upon unfavorably by the Committee and has been rejected.

Senate Bill No. 290, requiring that all hospitals receiving State aid shall use the same for the benefit of the deserving poor as the Board of Charities, etc., shall direct, was reported upon unfavorably, has been rejected in the Senate and is still before the House.

House Bill No. 296, exempting cancer from the provisions of the Medical Practice Act in the interest of a certain Mr. Main, has been rejected in both houses, as is also the case with House Bill No. 712, granting a special license to Barney Gilchrist of New Haven to treat cancer.

At the request of one of the Health Officers of the State an amendment to that part of the Medical Practice Act controlling the practice of midwifery was introduced, has been reported upon favorably but has been re-committed.

House Bill No. 298, amending the Osteopathic Bill, was merely a change in the wording of the law which would enable osteopaths in this state to secure reciprocal relations with osteopaths in other states but which gave them no additional powers and was not objectionable. It was, however, reported upon unfavorably by the Committee, rejected in the House, re-committed in the Senate, has been favorably reported by the Committee and will probably be passed before adjournment.

House Bill No. 285, the Optometry Bill, was the least objectionable of any which has ever been introduced, simply calling for examination and registration. As it was necessary that some action should be taken to prevent fakers selling cheap glasses from imposing upon the public, your Committee withdrew all objections to the bill upon the agreement on the part of the Optometrists that they would insert a clause preventing anyone who receives a license under the provisions of the Act from using

the title "Doctor" either as a prefix or otherwise. This has been reported upon favorably and will probably be passed.

House Bill No. 297, the Anti-Vaccination Bill, was given two hearings before the Committee, was unanimously reported upon unfavorably and has been rejected in both houses.

House Bill No. 98, concerning the practice of Naturopathy, gave us a very lively hearing. The term Naturopathy in this bill included the practice of psychotherapy, mechanotherapy, chiropractic, biochemistry, hydrotherapy, the Kneipp system, manual manipulation, Swedish movements, spondylotherapy, suggestive therapeutics, electrotherapy, food science, concussion of the spine and all other systems of treatment by natural methods. The bill was reported upon unfavorably by the Committee, only one member favoring it. The motion to reject the bill was lost in the House and it was tabled for calendar and printing. It was twice under consideration and tabled and at one time it looked as though it might pass the House, as many members felt that as these men were already engaged in their practices it would be much better to have them regulated in some way. Some of these, however, were willing to advocate an amendment similar to the clause inserted in the Optometry bill which would make it unlawful for any person licensed under the provisions of this Act to use the title "Doctor" either as a prefix or otherwise. When it was evident to the advocates of the bill that it could be passed only with the addition of this amendment they ceased working for the bill and it was indefinitely postponed in the House and rejected in the Senate.

[COMMENT BY DR. MCKNIGHT: I put into the hands of several men, some of whom were really favoring the bill, copies of this amendment; and when the advocates of the bill found that it was very probable that if the bill did go through, it would contain that amendment attached to it, they preferred to have the thing go by, rather than lose the right they now have to use the title "Doctor." Therefore, the third time the amendment had been put into the hands of several Representatives, they ceased to work for it. It was indefinitely postponed in the House, and rejected in the Senate.]

House Bill No. 445, the Chiropody Bill, with amendments prohibiting the use of the title "Doctor" and exempting practitioners holding certificates to practice any branch of the Healing Art issued under the authority of this State, is not objectionable and will probably be passed.

[COMMENT BY DR. MCKNIGHT: This bill, in its original form, was very objectionable. I thought that it was the kind that has been introduced all over the United States by the three bodies, the proprietary medicine men, the men who are hit by the Pure Food and Drug Bill, and the Christian Science Church. Their bills have been introduced all throughout the Union to undermine the profession. I supposed that this was one of them, because no physician could have treated any disease of the extremities or burned off a wart without having been licensed as a chiropodist and having paid his five dollars, without a five hundred dollars fine. I do not think that this was intended, but it would have held. With the changes made, however, the bill is unobjectionable.]

Taken as a whole the results have been much more satisfactory than we could have expected under existing conditions, and I wish to take this opportunity of thanking the members of the Committee and the individual members of this Society who responded so ably to calls for special work in this direction.

Respectfully submitted,

E. J. MCKNIGHT.

(9) Report of Delegate to Conference of the American Medical Association on Medical Education and Medical Legislation:

REPORT OF DELEGATE TO THE AMERICAN MEDICAL

ASSOCIATION.

The ninth annual Conference of the American Medical Association on Medical Education and Medical Legislation was held in Chicago on February 24 and 25 of this year. It is impossible in this report to give any detailed account of the papers and discussions. As usual, your Delegate obtained much valuable