Page 163 - My FlipBook
P. 163
:
HISTORY OF DENTAL SURGERY 133
held in the presence of a coneealcrl witness, tlie proposition was made to Dr.
Crouse that he, as the chairman of tlie directors of the association, should
permit them to win two or tliree suits. In consideration of this, they would
place at his disposal for h.is own use, a sum double as large as all the dues that
had been paid by members of the association for its support, and that in
addition, they would place him in a position to receive percentages of all the
amounts to be collected in tlie way of royalties from the dental profession.
This proposition was promptly declined, and the fight in the interests of the
profession continued as loyally as before.
After the main fights were won, the directors found it necessary to
raise more money to carry on succeeding litigation, and they determined, under
the bylaws of the association, to levy an assessment upon the members. This
assessment was onlv responded to by a very small number of the members.
Human weakness seems always the same. AVlien great danger was in sight and
security against it was proffered, many availed themselves of its protecting
fold, but after the danger seemed to be averted, only comparatively few felt like
providing means to continue sustenance to the protecting power.
Early in the year 1900, the Crown company had commenced aljout fifty
suits, all of them east of Ohio. Later they secured an order from a court in
New York, which compelled one of the members of the association to present
his books and have the same examined by a master of the court. Tliis pro-
ceeding was objected to by the attorney of the association, but over-ruled by
Judge Lacombe, and the examination of the books was carried out. This
decision was used by the Crown company as an additional cudgel for intimida-
tion of the dentists, but the following week when this company made an attempt
in Boston to secure a decision in the same direction, the Federal court of appeals
there refused their order and pronounced the procedure illegal.
An editorial in the "Dental Digest" for May, 1904, gives a full explanation
of the final victory achieved by the association, from which the following is
extracted
This judge decided, and so ordered, that he had the power to compel the attendance
of several members of the association before a court official, making them to submit to
an examination, day after day, of all the work done by them in the mouths of their
patients, of their books describing the same, and giving the names and addresses of each
individual patient. This testimony was taken prior to the final trial, before a master in
chancery, with a view to ascertaining how much crown and bridge work these dentists
had done, the nature of the work, etc., and thus determining for how much they were
liable to the Crown company.
One of these cases was afterwards tried before a jury under the instruction of a
HISTORY OF DENTAL SURGERY 133
held in the presence of a coneealcrl witness, tlie proposition was made to Dr.
Crouse that he, as the chairman of tlie directors of the association, should
permit them to win two or tliree suits. In consideration of this, they would
place at his disposal for h.is own use, a sum double as large as all the dues that
had been paid by members of the association for its support, and that in
addition, they would place him in a position to receive percentages of all the
amounts to be collected in tlie way of royalties from the dental profession.
This proposition was promptly declined, and the fight in the interests of the
profession continued as loyally as before.
After the main fights were won, the directors found it necessary to
raise more money to carry on succeeding litigation, and they determined, under
the bylaws of the association, to levy an assessment upon the members. This
assessment was onlv responded to by a very small number of the members.
Human weakness seems always the same. AVlien great danger was in sight and
security against it was proffered, many availed themselves of its protecting
fold, but after the danger seemed to be averted, only comparatively few felt like
providing means to continue sustenance to the protecting power.
Early in the year 1900, the Crown company had commenced aljout fifty
suits, all of them east of Ohio. Later they secured an order from a court in
New York, which compelled one of the members of the association to present
his books and have the same examined by a master of the court. Tliis pro-
ceeding was objected to by the attorney of the association, but over-ruled by
Judge Lacombe, and the examination of the books was carried out. This
decision was used by the Crown company as an additional cudgel for intimida-
tion of the dentists, but the following week when this company made an attempt
in Boston to secure a decision in the same direction, the Federal court of appeals
there refused their order and pronounced the procedure illegal.
An editorial in the "Dental Digest" for May, 1904, gives a full explanation
of the final victory achieved by the association, from which the following is
extracted
This judge decided, and so ordered, that he had the power to compel the attendance
of several members of the association before a court official, making them to submit to
an examination, day after day, of all the work done by them in the mouths of their
patients, of their books describing the same, and giving the names and addresses of each
individual patient. This testimony was taken prior to the final trial, before a master in
chancery, with a view to ascertaining how much crown and bridge work these dentists
had done, the nature of the work, etc., and thus determining for how much they were
liable to the Crown company.
One of these cases was afterwards tried before a jury under the instruction of a
