The following notes will indicate to you something of the matter with which we had to deal in relation to the proposed medical bill before the New York Legislature. My own activity in this matter is an incident rather than the result of any plan. As early as last August, we heard it said that the medical fraternity were laying plans for the enacting by the Legislature at Albany this winter, of a law that would crush out the Christian Scientists and their method of practice. Advice was secured quietly from one of our Supreme Court justices, who is friendly to our Cause, for the reason that his wife has been healed after all other efforts had failed. This gentleman, who is familiar with all legislative matters in our state, kindly volunteered to advise us in case such legislation should be undertaken. In course of time, a bill was offered in the Assembly which aimed directly at our work, distinctly naming Christian Scientists in its text; simultaneously with this, another bill was offered in the Senate, not so drastic, but very subtle in construction. Our legal friend referred to above, as well as an able ex-senator, secured copies of both these bills, and informed us that they were equally dangerous. Correspondence was begun by many of the Scientists and their friends throughout the state with their representatives at Albany, and notwithstanding a great volume of influence was brought to bear, it yet seemed that both these bills were liable to come up. Upon hearing that they had been referred to the Joint Committee on Public Health of the Assembly and the Senate, hearings were asked for. Various statements as to the liability of these bills coming up for hearing were floating about, and on Saturday, March 12, one of the brethren from western New York went to Brooklyn in order first to confer personally with our friend and counsel, the Justice, and secondly to learn just how the brethren at New York were proposing to meet this matter in the Legislature. An informal meeting was held and arrangements perfected for a formal meeting composed of representatives from the several churches at New York and Brooklyn; then at a meeting held March 13, a committee was appointed, charged with the important duty of securing a proper attorney or attorneys and others who should conduct our side of the case before the Health Committee at the Capitol; arrangements being completed for gathering a goodly number of our brethren at Albany, on short notice, who might attend these hearings at the Capitol, illustrating and demonstrating the power, practicability, and effectiveness of Christian Science. On Monday morning a Scientist, accompanied by an attorney, went to Albany, and by noon, Monday, it was ascertained that the member introducing the Assembly Bill and the chairman of the Public Health Committee of the Assembly, by mutual agreement, had consented not to present that bill for passage, and they unhesitatingly stated that this view was reached by them, because of the great weight and wealth of remonstrance which had poured in upon them from all parts of the state. The fate of the Senate Bill was not, however, definite, and as a hearing upon this bill was appointed for Wednesday the 16th, word was at once sent out to the various centers of our work throughout the state. Accordingly large numbers of Scientists and their friends began to arrive in Albany, so that by ten o'clock, Wednesday morning, notice was given to Senator Dr. Brush, chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Health, that his committee room would not be at all adequate to receive those who would be there in attendance upon this hearing, and he was requested to arrange for the hearing in some suitable place, which he did by securing the Senate Chamber, and at the adjournment of that day's session of the Senate he met there with his Committee; and the Scientists, who had been notified of this fact, completely filled the Chamber and galleries—it being a fair estimate that there were in the neighborhood of one thousand people in attendance. Included in this audience were many members of both houses of the Legislature. The discussion, which was opened by ex-judge Talman, of Brooklyn, and was also participated in by Mrs. Laura Lathrop, of New York, Mark S. Hubbell, Esq., of Buffalo, Henry L. Call, Esq., of New York, Dr. Cochran, of New York, and Mr. Henry W. Box, of Buffalo, was concluded in less than an hour. In announcing that the arguments against the measure would now close, Dr. Brush stated that it was scarcely probable any one would venture to say a word in favor of it after what had been seen and heard against it; but that, as a matter of form, if there was any one present who wished to speak for the bill they could do so. Dead silence reigned in the Senate Chamber for some seconds. And then the eloquent Senator Coggeshall, who had introduced the bill, arose, and in a short but felicitous speech, happily conceded his willingness either to withdraw the bill, or to amend it in such a manner that Christian Scientists should be entirely exempted from each and all of its provisions. The formal meeting then adjourned, and for over an hour the Senate Chamber and the adjoining apartments were the scene of a most happy and interesting impromptu reception to the Senator, and interchange of congratulations by the brethren who had so quickly come together from all parts of the Empire State. During the evening, senators and members of the Assembly called at the hotels of the Scientists who remained in the city over night. Nothing but kind words and friendly feelings were expressed on all sides for our brethren in the Cause.
The writer of these notes is happy to tell to the Field the glad, good news that from the hour of the hearing, until noon, Friday, when he left for home, the subject of Christian Science was the general topic of conversation about the Capitol and throughout the city of Albany, so that, indirectly, great work has undoubtedly been done for our Cause where its opposite was intended.
The victory lately scored by our brethren in the Massachusetts Legislature was a point strongly urged by our speakers.
In connection with the above we have the privilege and pleasure of publishing a synopsis of the able and eloquent remarks of Judge Talman of Brooklyn. He said in part:—
Gentlemen of the Committee: In appearing before your Honorable Committee I wish to state at the outset that I am not a Christian Scientist; am not a member of any of its churches, and am unbiased in my judgment in its favor. I come, untrammeled by prejudice, to speak to you upon a bill dangerous in its principles and subversive of liberty. I think I am as unprejudiced and free from bias as any gentleman on this committee. I believe in right, fairness, and justice, and when asked to appear before your honorable body in the event of eminent counsel being unable to attend, I accepted, trusting that I might suggest to you such reasons as may induce your honorable committee to take such action as shall defeat a measure fraught with disastrous consequences to a large body of religionists in this state and throughout the United States. The interest taken in this bill, is evidenced by the large gathering here present. They come from all parts of the state imbued with one common interest.
The first question that presents itself is, Who asks for the passage of this bill? It has been suggested, perhaps in joke, that the undertakers are behind this measure because of the close alliance between themselves and the doctors, but I am inclined to think that certain of the medical profession are the real movers of this measure. They are the ones who ask for this special protection at the hands of the Legislature. Certainly the people do not ask for it.
We will then assume that the honorable medical profession, with other allies, are knocking at the door of the Legislature for this monopoly, giving to them the sole and only right to heal, making it penal for any one else to minister to the sick and save from death the thousands in our midst who are stricken with disease.
Now this being the real object of the bill, has the medical profession earned by its wonderful success in its treatment of disease, such a record that it, and it only, deserves to be regarded as the real and only healer of pain, sickness, and death to which man is subject, so that the strong arm of the state should be thrown around it; and none other, unless stamped with the seal of its colleges, should be permitted to minister to the sick and save the dying?
The infallibility of the physician is disproved by the reports from our Boards of Health, our well-filled cemeteries, and the records of their absolute inability to heal and to ward off death in so many cases. I believe there are many physicians who will admit that medicine does not cure, but it is the mind of the patient who believes in the potency of the drug that does bring the relief.
I do not believe that all the members of the profession are so narrow-minded in its behalf as to wish for this monopoly. I believe they are many who would welcome any agency which would allay suffering and ward off the power of death. I have respect for the medical profession, but it must not claim what its records will not support. Of late, the profession has been asking very much. It has asked to close the dispensaries, so that the poor will be compelled to employ a regular physician. It has asked protection against sanitariums, and now comes and asks that the strong arm of the law should be brought to bear upon Christian Scientists.
And now comes the vital object of this bill. Shall Christian Science be squelched, and shall the thousands who today are thanking God for their deliverance from sickness and death, be marked with the mark of Cain, their faith derided, their ministrations ended, the doors of their churches closed, and the teaching of the Saviour of man be adjudged blasphemous? I answer in the name of reason, fairness, and the glorious religious liberty with which our land is blessed, NO.
What is Christian Science? The revival of the teachings of the early Christians. Such as the Saviour taught when he said: "Go into all the world, preach the gospel, and heal the sick." Never did he say, "Go, preach," without adding "heal the sick."
But I hear the enquiry: Can it heal the sick? It can and it does. In my own family I have had an illustration. My wife was taken down with typhoid fever, in a most serious form. She took no medicine, going through a most terrible ordeal; but to-day is in perfect health. A Christian Science healer was her only attendant. She was also cured of nervous prostration after over six years' trial of the most excellent specialists of such diseases. A majority of the Scientists have come into this faith through being healed and saved from death when given up by the doctors. They know it is true, and no legislative power on earth can compel them to call medicine to their aid. Look at this gathering. Do they look like cranks? Are they puny and sickly? Is there not health, cheerfulness, and kindliness there? They have become Scientists by reason of its great healing power.
Fifty thousand in this state can bear testimony to the power of Science. Will you deny this? Can you disprove this assertion? Can the doctors deny it? The Scientists court investigation, they do their work in the light, and will you say that healing thus brought about, is a misdemeanor, and those who have adopted it are deserving of punishment?
I am not drawing on my imagination for my facts. The committee can have the affidavits of thousands if they desire it. The lame have been made to walk, the blind to see, sickness has been cured, and from the very shadow of the grave they have been called back to life. And yet you are asked by the doctors to punish these faithful, God-serving people.
The nineteenth century with all its glories is upon us. Are we going back to those days when religious intolerance burned its neighbors as witches because they did not believe as they did? The world moves. The light of a larger thought, a wider charity, is gilding the mountain-tops of our land with its influence. No religious intolerance can put out that light. Shall the preacher and the healer not go hand in hand?
The Scientist does not ask for patients. Can the Legislature prohibit the choice of a healer? Can it say, You must employ this doctor or die? Can you make it compulsory whom the citizen shall employ? Now that is what this bill does....
I am not stating this proposition too strongly when I assert that this bill is a blow at religious liberty. If by an enactment you say, None but the doctor or the licensed practitioner shall heal, you stop the preaching of the Scientist doctrine. Healing is its very foundation-stone. If it is a misdemeanor to heal it is a crime to preach the word; it is a sin to proclaim the doctrines of the New Testament. The Scientist faith inculcates the highest morality, the purest love, the highest citizenship.
There is no need of this bill. The laws on our statute books give ample protection from the quacks; and the charlatan malpractice on the part of a doctor or healer is equally punishable. Within this week an eminent physician in the city of New York has been arrested and his case is before the grand jury for alleged malpractice. His license does not protect him, and our law reports contain many such cases, where doctors have made blunders. In the state of Massachusetts a similar bill to this has been before the Legislature and it has been killed. Why are the doctors pressing the bill? They are afraid of its taking away their practice. Will the Legislature help them in their work of monopoly? Gentlemen of the Committee, a body of earnest, God-serving men and women ask you to stay the hands of the doctors and their allies in their continued attacks upon Christian Science. It is doing a noble work. Thousands testify to it. Let no narrow-mindedness enter into your deliberations. Bear in mind the grand work they have done, do not pick out a solitary instance where Christian Science has seemed to fail, and condemn the whole body of Christian Scientists. Give it time to prove to all its usefulness. If it is false, it must die. Truth and falsehood can never go together. It cannot live. Do not stop its work of healing and ministering to the sick and caring for the poor, but in the light of a broader religious liberty, which is invading our pulpits and our literatures, say, Go on in your Christ-like worship and work, and from the lips of thousands shall go up the song of triumph that the Empire State is true to its history, true to religious liberty and personal freedom.
I thank you for your attention, for your courtesy and patience. I leave the bill in your hands with full confidence in your action.
