§ Sir E. Graham-Littleasked the Minister of Health whether in view of the claim that an Act (34 and 35 Henry VIII) dealing with herbalists gives to this section of unregistered practitioners the right to engage in medical practice without compliance with the Medical Act, 1858, thus defeating the purpose of this Act to enable the public to distinguish between qualified and unqualified practice, he will make provision to secure the repeal of this legislation of 40o years ago?
§ Sir K. WoodI am advised that the Act of 34 and 35 Henry VIII enabled the persons named therein to treat certain medical conditions without incurring penalties under an earlier Act of the same reign which had given a monopoly of practice to physicians and surgeons approved thereunder by the Bishop, and that it does not give to these persons the rights which are secured by registration under the Medical Act, 1858. The latter Act, however, as the hon. Member is aware, does not prohibit practice by unregistered persons. There appears, therefore, to be no conflict between the two Acts, and I do not feel called on to take action in the direction suggested in the question.