RECOGNITION OF OSTEOPATHS
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—The review of my book Manipulation as a Curative -Factor : Osteopathy and Medicine, in your issue of February 21st, gave rise to the Editor's note in the same issue and the subsequent correspondence, in which I have until now taken no part. However, the letter of the General Secretary of the Canadian Medical Association in your issue of April 18th requires an answer. .
The word " recognition " is undoubtedly used within the limits defined in the Oxford Dictionary. Hence, in itself, it carries with it no comparison with the medical profession. Any comparkon must be arrived at by a study of the scope of any Bill seeking to give recognition to osteopaths.
The. General Secretary is doubtless right when he states that ".in, no part of Canada are osteopaths or chiropractors granted the legal standing accorded to the medical pro- fession'," but, to say the least, he would have been performing a, gracious act had he told the readers 9f he Spectator, that osteopaths are recognized by statute in the Provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and Saskatchewan.
It must also have been within his knowledge that the Editor's note actually understated the case for the osteopaths —legal recognition has been granted to them not in only "forty-seven of the forty-nine States of the American Union," but in every one of them. The number includes the District of Columbia.
Why did the General Secretary think fit to write on the one point, and omit to mention the other two ? The latter are at least equally important to those readers who are interested in an all-round statement of the case, whether the writer be for or against the recognition of osteopaths.—! am, Sir, &c.,