The Supreme Court of Rhode Island has decided a most important question affecting Christian Science practice in two cases which recently went before that court on appeal: the cases of the State v. Mylod and Anthony. For some reason, the Court selected the Mylod case as the one in which to render a full decision, rendering in the Anthony case a per curiam decision, in which they simply re-affirmed the reasoning and conclusions of the Mylod case. The facts, so far as the evidence was concerned, were practically identical in each case, and the witnesses were the same. We therefore publish in full the decision in the Mylod case. It is interesting to know that the opinion was a unanimous one, having been concurred in by the full bench, composed of the following named judges, all of whom are everywhere recognized as able and impartial jurists: the Honorable Charles Matteson, Chief Justice; and the Honorables John H. Stiness, Pardon E. Tillinghast, George A. Wilbur, Horatio Rodgers, William W. Douglas, and Benjamin M. Bosworth,—the last named having prepared the opinion. The decision is as follows:—
STATE v. WALTER E. MYLOD, C.Q. No. 384.
Bosworth, J. The defendant was adjudged probably guilty in the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District upon complaint of Gardner T. Swarts, secretary of the State Board of Health. Said complaint, which was made under cap. 165, Gen. Laws R. I., alleges that the defendant, at Providence, on the twenty-sixth day of November, 1897, "did then and there practise medicine and surgery for reward and compensation, without lawful license, certificate, and authority, and not being then and there duly registered according to law."
