153 So. 470 | Ala. | 1934
Section 5191 of the Code of 1923 says: "Any person who treats, or offers to treat diseases of human beings in this state by any system of treatment, whatsoever, without *232 having obtained a certificate of qualification from the state board of medical examiners, shall be guilty" etc. The treatment, as set out in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, was "massages" by the defendant of two persons, one of whom had a pain in her shoulder and the other a pain in the neck, and, this being so, the state failed to show that the defendant treated them for a disease.
We find no discussion of the word "disease" as used in a criminal statute, but many of the leading courts, in defining the word "disease," hold that it means more than a mere temporary pain or disorder. Words and Phrases, vol. 2, Second Series, 69; 18 C. J. p. 1139. In a well-considered opinion by the Oregon court, Merriam v. Hamilton,
The main case relied upon by the petitioner, State ex rel. Biggs v. Higbee,
The statute says, and means, "who treats, or offers to treat diseases * * * by any system of treatment." Therefore, if the state proves that the defendant treated a person for a disease, a case would be made whether the person actually so treated had a disease or not. Frazier v. State,
From the undisputed facts, as set out in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, we agree that the defendant was due the general charge.
Writ denied.
All Justices concur.