PRACTICE OF VETERINARY SURGERY 51 
mentioned, the essential proof had been recorded, 
but that there appeared certain defects in which 
the evidence was not sufficiently clear upon the 
face of the documents. In the Dusaw case there 
were vital defects in many particulars. 
Records must not be falsified. A county court 
in New York has no jurisdiction and no authority 
to make an order directing the county clerk to 
enter the name of a physician in the ‘‘Register of 
Physicians and Surgeons,’’ say on July 24, 1908, 
as of Dec. 1, 1899, after he had, on the latter date, 
omitted to register his diploma in the office of 
such clerk, as the law required. Any such regis- 
tration is a nullity, and on proper application it 
will be vacated and cancelled. The fact that 
one practiced medicine for more than ten years 
without authority required by statutes, gives no 
right to practice.1® 
In the absence of special enactments, it is pre- 
sumed that any person holding himself out as a 
practitioner of veterinary medicine and surgery 
is legally qualified. When there is a statute, the 
terms of the statute must be met, unless the legis- 
lature shall have exceeded its authority. Gener- 
ally the matter of applying the law and issuing 
the license is left to a board. In its rules govern- 
ing the issuance of the license the board must not 
go beyond the terms of the statute. (§5.) Where 
a medical board attempted to add requirements 
beyond those in the statute, it was held that they 
16 In re, Somme, 136 N. Y. Commonwealth v. Rice id.; Har- 
Sup. 57. gan v. Purdy, 93 Ky. 424, 20 8. 
16 Driscoll v. Commonwealth, W. 432. 
93 Ky. 393, 20 8S. W. 431; 
