testimony concerning all matters within its or his jurisdiction. The Board shall not be bound by strict rules of procedure or by the laws of evidence in the conduct of its proceedings but the determination shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain it. The Board shall have the right to institute an action in its own name to enjoin the violation of any of the provisions of this act or the regulations promulgated in accordance therewith and in such connection a temporary injunction may be granted. The said action for an injunction shall be in addition to any other action, proceeding, or remedy authorized by law."

Section 5: On page 8, line 4, after the word "same", we recommend the insertion of the following which is contained in our present law: "and also showing that the standard of requirements adopted and enforced by said Board is equal to that provided by this act." If this is omitted it would open up the District of Columbia to men of low educational standards as the requirements in some of the other States are lower than those of the District of Columbia; and it is not in keeping with the qualifications required of all applicants to take the licensing examination as provided for in our present law and as stipulated previously in this section.

As no provision is made in this section for the guaranty of the individual's character and integrity, we recommend:

(1) That the following be inserted after the words "District of Columbia" (p. 8, line 7): “And provided further, That the Board of Optometry of the District of Columbia is hereby not required to issue any such reciprocity license, if in its discretion such applicant does not meet all the requirements of other applicants for licenses to practice optometry in the District of Columbia.”

(2) That the words "reputable and personal" be inserted before or in lieu of the word "continuous" (p. 8, line 9).

Section 6: We recommend that the following be inserted before the words "Each person" (p. 8, line 19): “A duly certified copy of said record shall be recorded in the clerk's office of the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia and shall be admitted as prima facie evidence in all courts of the District of Columbia in the trial of any cause, and it shall be the duty of the clerk of the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia to keep a special book for the purpose of recording said licenses, and shall, upon application and the payment of a fee of 50 cents, deliver to any person applying therefor a certificate that the license has been recorded in compliance with the provisions of this act." This is part of the original optometry law and was written to comply with the established law of the District of Columbia.

Section 8: In order to protect the citizens of the District of Columbia from certain irregularities and evils that have been existing which our present law is not adequate to correct and which this bill only partially rectifies, we suggest:

(1) That the following be inserted between (b) and (c), page 9: “That said licensee is unfit or incompetent by reason of negligence."

(2) That the following be inserted between (d) and (e), page 10: "That said licensee is directly or indirectly employed by or associated for the practice of optometry with any person, partnership, or corporation unless it be with a person or partnership all of whose members are licensed to practice optometry under this article, or that said licensee directly or indirectly enters into any contract, agreement, or other arrangement whatsoever, express or implied, to share the proceeds or benefits of whatever nature resulting or accruing from the practice of optometry with any other person, partnership, or corporation unless it be with a person or partnership all of whose members are licensed to practice optometry under this article."

(3) That the following be used in lieu of (g), "That every registered optometrist who desires to continue the practice of optometry shall annually on or before the 10th day of January of each year, pay to the secretary-treasurer of the board a renewal registration fee to be fixed annually by the board, not to exceed $15, for which he shall receive a renewal of his certificate. In case of neglect to pay the renewal registration fees as herein provided, the board shall have authority to revoke such license and the holder thereof may be reinstated by complying with the conditions specified in this section, but no license may be revoked without giving 60 days' notice to the delinquent. The board shall only have the right to renew such license on the payment of a renewal fee for each year a renewal fee has not been paid by such applicant,

and with penalty of $5 for each such year: Provided, That retirement from practice for a period of 5 years or more shall deprive the holder of said license of the right to renew the same.

(4) That the following be inserted after (g), “(j) that said licensee directly or indirectly employs solicitors, canvassers, or agents for the purpose of obtaining patronage

66

"(k) that said licensee practices optometry or holds himself out to the public as practicing optometry under any name other than his own proper name as is set forth on his license;

"(1) that said licensee lends, leases, rents, or in any other manner places his license at the disposal or in the service of any person not licensed to practice optometry in the District of Columbia;

"(m) that said licensee has willfully or repeatedly violated any of the provisions of this act or of the rules enacted in accordance therewith regulating the practice of optometry; or

"(n) that said licensee has been guilty of unprofessional conduct."

Section 9: To further protect the citizens of the District of Columbia from certain practices which are prevalent today, we recommend:

(1) That line 20, page 10 be altered to read: "That it shall be unlawful for any person to."

(2) That (c), line 25, page 10 be amended to read: "Practice optometry in violation of this act or the rules and regulations made pursuant to the provisions of this act regulating the practice of optometry."

(3) That the following be inserted between (f) and (g), page 11: "Sell, dispense, furnish, or supply any spectacles, eyeglasses, or ophthalmic lenses for the aid or correction of vision except on prescription from a duly licensed physician or duly licensed optometrist, and except replacement of broken lenses originally so prescribed."

(4) That the following be inserted between (g) and (h), page 11: "Have possession of any trial lenses, trial frames, graduated test cards, self-testing devices, eyeglass vending machines, appliances or instruments used in the practice of optometry for the purpose of examining the eyes or rendering assistance to anyone who desires to have an examination of the eyes, unless he be a duly licensed physician, a duly licensed optometrist, or a manufacturer, wholesaler, optician, jobber, or supply house dealing in said articles."

(5) That the following be inserted between (h) and (i), page 12: "Advertise by printed, radio, display, or any other means the quotation of prices for, a discount on, or terms of payment for eyeglasses, spectacles, ophthalmic lenses, frames, or mountings, or the phrases "moderate prices," "low prices," "lowest prices," "clinic prices," "guaranteed glasses," "satisfaction guaranteed," or any variations thereof or words of similar import."

Section 10: According to this section, proceedings in the case of a violation would become very complicated and unduly prolonged. An individual, guilty of a violation, would be able to continue in practice for an indefinite period of time or until a final decision is reached. As this section makes the adminstration of the law cumbersome, slow, and expensive, we recommend the following: "Proceedings under this section shall be begun by filing charges with the board in writing and under oath. Said charges may be preferred by any person or association. The board shall fix a time and place for a hearing and shall cause a copy of the charges together with a notice of the time and place fixed for the hearing to be served on the respondent or his counsel at least 10 days prior thereto. When personal service cannot be effected, the board shall cause to be published once a week for 2 successive weeks a notice of the hearing in a newspaper published in the District of Columbia and shall mail a copy of the charges and of such notice to the respondent at his last-known address. When publication of the notice is necessary, the date of hearing shall not be less than 10 days after the last date of the publication of the notice. At said hearings the respondent shall have the right to appear either personally or by counsel, or both, to produce witnesses and evidence on his own behalf, to cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpenas issued by the board. The board shall thereupon determine the charges upon their merits.

"In case any license to practice optometry is revoked, suspended, or refused, the licensee or the applicant may, within 10 days after the order of revocation or the order of suspension or any such refusal to grant such a license, is entered or made, appeal in writing to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia to review said action of the board of optometry, the hearings on said appeal to be

submitted either orally or in writing at the direction of said Commissioners, and said Commissioners shall not be required to take evidence, either oral, written, or documentary. The decision of said Commissioners on any question of fact involved in such appeal shall be final and conclusive; but no such appeal or other action as may be taken by any such licensee or applicant shall stay, enjoin, or suspend any such order of revocation, suspension, or refusal pending any such appeal.

"Upon application, the board may reissue a license to practice optometry that has been revoked but such application shall not be made prior to 1 year after the revocation and shall be made in such manner and form as the Board may require."

Section 11: There is no section 11 in this bill. The omission may be due to a typographical error.

Section 13: With the recommendation and support of the District of Columbia Medical Society, we suggest that line 1, page 18 be changed to read as follows: "That all of the other provisions of this act with the exception of sections 8 and 9, which sections shall remain applicable, shall not apply to."

The members of the District of Columbia Medical Society and the District of Columbia Optometric Society concur in the opinion that, for the protection of the citizens of the District of Columbia, these prohibitions should apply to all persons rendering aid to the human eye.

Section 15: This section is contradictory to the preceding sections of this bill. It would permit a lay company or corporations to do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly. A company or corporation cannot be educated so as to meet the highly specialized educational requirements as set forth in our present law and in this bill; it can neither take a licensing examination nor be licensed to practice; it cannot render to others the services, guidance, and advice which is derived from a specialized education or knowledge; it cannot maintain the personal relationship that must exist between the individual seeking advice and the adviser; its environment is contrary to that as outlined by the courts in the ruling that a profession cannot be practiced in the market place. We are opposed to this section and urgently request that it be stricken from the bill.

162220-39--9

TO REGULATE THE PRACTICE OF OPTOMETRY IN THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1939

COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH, HOSPITALS, AND CHARITIES,

Washington, D. C.

The Subcommittee on Public Health, Hospitals, and Charities of the Committee on the District of Columbia met in the committee room, Old House Office Building, at 10:30 a. m., the Honorable Rudolph G. Tenerowicz, acting chairman of the subcommittee presiding. Mr. TENEROWICZ. The committee will please come to order.

The hearing will be resumed this morning on H. R. 278, the bill introduced by Mr. Smith, of Virginia, "To regulate the practice of optometry in the District of Columbia"; and

A bill introduced by Mr. Nichols, of Oklahoma, H. R. 5238, also "To regulate the practice of optometry in the District of Columbia." I will ask Mr. Kaufman, who previously has testified, to take the

stand.

ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF CECIL D. KAUFMAN

Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. Chairman, yesterday many things were said, and as a result of the things said you made a specific request relative to the substantiation of the information which I gave you.

I have all that information, and I have a complete substantiation of everything I stated here yesterday. There is only one request here that I am going to make, and that is in effect as to the procedure thus far, and, of course, it rests entirely in your own hands.

I recall that other witnesses here have made statements and have quoted a lot of people. Then, when they were specifically asked who made those statements, they answered you by saying that they preferred not to disclose those names, because it might prove embarrassing. Do you recall that part of the testimony?

Mr. TENEROWICZ. I recall that testimony.

Mr. KAUFMAN. I have everything you asked for, and if I may, sir, I would rather present the facts in bulk without naming the individuals involved on the same ground that it might prove embarassing to them because, after all, I have more or less carried the brunt of this thing, you see, and you know who I am, and my name is a matter of record. So, if I may, I would like to give you the information minus the names. Would that be fair?

Mr. TENEROWICZ. Is the committee to understand that you are willing to give this information for the information of the Committee? Mr. KAUFMAN. I will give you any information you ask for.