InstituteChiro Wiki

Legally Defensible:

Chiropractic in the Courtroom and After, 1907

Author: William S. Rehm, D.C.

Citation: Chiropractic History, 1986. 6: 51-55.

This article was published in 1986 in the journal Chiropractic History.1 At the time, not much was known about Morikubo and his trial. The Palmer Archives were not yet catalogued and available for researchers. Rehm, a chiropractic historian, mostly relies on the unpublished Lerner Report as his source.

Rehm’s article establishes some context for the landmark Morikubo case. The article itself has led to decades of theory about the historical origins of chiropractic’s history and perhaps more particularly, chiropractic’s philosophy. Unfortunately, much of it is incorrect.

The article does establish that the case set a precedent and established chiropractic as separate and distinct based on its science, art, and philosophy.

In order to objectively and critically analyze the article, seven criteria are used. These criteria were developed by Dr. McAulay, a prominent chiropractic academic, as a critical way to approach the chiropractic literature. The criteria are; Clarity, Accuracy, Precision, Relevance, Depth, Breadth, and Logical Consistency.2

Contents:

Clarity

Accuracy

Precision

Relevance

Depth

Breadth

Logical Consistency

Critiques and Revisions

References

DD Palmer and Morikubo

BJ and Morikubo (1906)

Clarity

Clarity requires that every statement is backed up with appropriate citations.2

Rehm’s article relies on one primary source and six secondary sources.3-9 And yet, not every statement is backed up with citations. For example, Rehm cites competition between newspapers of La Crosse, Wisconsin, in 1907, but cites no newspapers. Instead, he relies on Mawhiney’s 1984 Chiropractic in Wisconsin. Rehm correctly cites Turner’s The Rise of Chiropractic and even corrects Turner.

Rehm’s main source is Lerner’s manuscript. Eleven of Rehm’s twenty-six referenced points come from Lerner’s report. The problems with Lerner’s manuscript may be explained in part due to a lack of resources, as it was written in 1952. It does contain facts and refers to interviews that were taped but not transcribed. It also refers to some court documents, newspaper articles, and some chiropractic literature. Unfortunately, Lerner chose to fill in the gaps of his knowledge with conjecture and does not provide a list of references. Today, we have access to digital libraries of old newspapers, pdfs of old documents and books, as well as new historical finds. It is relatively easy to point out the errors of Lerner’s report, note his correct facts, and better appreciate his conjectures. For this wiki, much of the focus is on Rehm’s use of Lerner’s report.

Accuracy

The overall accuracy of the article is very poor. A good deal of Lerner’s information is unsourced and much of it was fabricated in order to write an interesting story. Thus, Rehm’s article includes a few historical facts and several errors leading to some incorrect conclusions.

Several basic facts are correct such as;

  • Morikubo was charged with practicing medicine, surgery, and osteopathy without a license.
  • Tom Morris convinced the court to drop the charges down to “practicing osteopathy without a license.”
  • Morris was able to demonstrate that osteopathy and chiropractic were separate.
  • Morikubo was acquitted.
  • Soon after the trial, B.J. Palmer started referring to himself as “developer” and had the faculty grant him the first PhC degree, or ‘doctor of chiropractic philosophy.’10
  • The Universal Chiropractor’s Association (UCA) was started the year before the Morikubo trial.11
  • There were no laws in the United States regulating chiropractic as of 1907.11
  • D.D. Palmer was sentenced to 105 days in jail in April 1906, for practicing medicine without a license. He was released after 23 days upon paying the fine.8
  • D.D. Palmer did not defend himself in court and only offered “one legendary outburst.”
    (    To read the outburst please follow this link: DD to the Judge in 1906.)
  • Langworthy started a rival school, a magazine, an association with colleagues (the first American Chiropractic Association), and published a textbook. He and the Palmers did have a rivalry.12
    (According to Faulkner’s book, D.D. even referred to Langworthy as “Langworthless” as early as 1901.)12

Here are some of the assertions made by Rehm that are now found to be factually incorrect:

Assertions:

  • Morikubo claimed that he only came to LaCrosse to pioneer chiropractic.
  • Morikubo’s July interview with the Tribune and prejudice against Japanese during that era, were the reasons he was singled out with charges.
  • Morikubo’s defense was planned quickly, by Morris in two weeks.

Facts: While Morikubo’s interview with the Tribune is accurate, he only told the complete story after the trial and many of the facts have only come to light in recent years. Morikubo and B.J. Palmer chose LaCrosse, because of the case against Whipple, a chiropractor practicing in LaCrosse, in 1905.13 In that case, D.D. Palmer was the expert witness and the chiropractor on trial lost. D.D. agreed that he was guilty and was mixing other methods with chiropractic. Charges were originally brought against Whipple by a local osteopath named Jorris. After graduating at the top of his class, Morikubo opened an office in the building that Jorris practiced in. Morikubo took out a full page ad as a four-column article on the science and philosophy of chiropractic.14 Morikubo was sent to test the law. He and B.J. planned to force the legal issue and utilize the new Universal Chiropractor’s Association. According to Morikubo, he and B.J. worked on their defense for six months prior to the trial.15

Assertion: Chiropractic’s first legal conflict was a grand jury indictment against the Palmer Infirmary in 1903, which involved B.J. Palmer and D.D. Palmer. This led to D.D. Palmer’s eventual jail sentence in 1906 for practicing medicine without a license.

Fact: This conjecture comes from Lerner’s account. Lerner offers no facts to support it. The charges against D.D. Palmer in 1906 relate to statements made in his publication The Chiropractor, which started production in December 1904.16 Earlier cases included various legal troubles for D.D. Palmer, the Brunner case, and the Whipple case.12

Assertion: Tom Morris developed his legal argument from “the scholarly writings” of “Dr. Solon Massey Langworthy.”

Fact: There is no evidence that the book Modernized Chiropractic was used in the defense. There is some indication that several chiropractic books were requested by the prosecution. One news story notes that Morikubo provided all books on chiropractic and osteopathy to the prosecution. There is no evidence of how they were used or, which ones. At the time of the trial, several books were in print including B.J. Palmer’s Vol. 2, Davis’ Neuropathy, as well as D.D. and B.J.’s Science of Chiropractic from 1906.

Morikubo and another witness both stated that they did not use the Langworthy book in court.18,15 These statements were in response to a statement from Langworthy’s association (ACA).  Specifically, the only surviving quote from the statement, suggests that the arguments in the case originated a talk Langworthy gave in 1906, and that talk was reproduced in the book.15 Any suggestion that the argument was actually used by the defense is conjecture.

Another conjecture is the possibility that the defense followed the reasoning developed by Smith during the Brunning trial. Faulkner’s book demonstrates that Smith was an expert witness in the Brunning case in Aberdeen, South Dakota, in 1906. Smith was also secretary of that first ACA. Brunning was accused of improperly using the title “Dr.” In Smith’s testimony, he emphasized chiropractic’s separate methods and the unique approach to disease and causation. He learned those ideas from D.D. Palmer.12 (It is unknown whether Tom Morris was aware of the only other chiropractic trials in the Midwest during those years.)

Morikubo responded to the allegation from the ACA. Morikubo writes of Modernized Chiropractic, “I fail to see in it any argument which might in the slightest degree add any strength to my position against the false accusation made by Osteopathy.”15 He also notes that the prosecution tried to use the book to demonstrate similarities (not differences) between chiropractic and osteopathy. He writes,

“On the contrary, the principles set forth by its authors are no more Chiropractic than Osteopathy. It was with difficulty that we succeeded in detracting our opponent’s attention from referring to “Modernized Chiropractic” to show the judge and jury that Chiropractic was a smattering knowledge of Osteopathy.”15

Even though Lerner quotes from several issues of The Chiropractor, he must have not had access to the issues that debunked his claims. (It is unknown whether he had access to the original statement about Langworthy’s essay.)

New evidence proves that Modernized Chiropractic was written by O.G. Smith, D.D. Palmer’s 10th student.12 According to Smith’s 1932 edition of the book, Langworthy was the publisher.19

Assertions: According to Rehm, “Modernized Chiropractic purported to establish for the first time these ideas: ‘A correct philosophy, a well-developed technique, a dependable systems of diagnosis, and a reliable and extensive system of correction.” Also, that the brain was the source of the “unseen power,” and that the book introduced the importance of intervertebral foramina, the chiropractic thrust, and the central role of the nervous system in chiropractic theory.1

Facts: D.D. Palmer wrote about all of these ideas between the years 1899 and 1905.22-27

Assertion: Chiropractic only relied on philosophy after the court case.

Fact: D.D. Palmer’s wrote about Subluxation and IVF in 1902,28, 29 Innate Intelligence and Educated Intelligence can be dated at least to 1903,25 and his writings on Universal Intelligence can be dated to 1905.27

Assertion: B.J. abandoned his father’s philosophy and embraced Langworthy’s theories.

Fact: Both B.J.’s theories and Smith’s theories (as described in Modernized Chiropractic) were built upon D.D. Palmer’s theories.12, 30

Assertion: Tom Morris was “the brains behind B.J.” and “developed the idea of chiropractic philosophy.”1

Fact: B.J. Palmer had already delivered two sets of unique lectures, published his own textbook in 1907 as Vol. 2,30 and contributed several essays to the 1906 text, The Science of Chiropractic,31 before working with Morris. Morris and B.J. Palmer worked together for two decades defending chiropractors. They mostly relied on the new theories B.J. developed in 1907 and 1908, which were based on D.D.’s theories.30, 32-34

Assertion: B.J. and Morris split because of a new UCA policy in the 1920s, which only defended chiropractors practicing “straight chiropractic,” who did not include extraneous methods or therapies.

Fact: The UCA policy always focused on this defense. In fact, Holmes, Morris’ law partner, even wrote of this in a textbook called Malpractice as Applied to Chiropractors, published by the Palmer School of Chiropractic as Green Book Vol. 17, in 1924.35 Morris endorsed the book. The splits in the ranks of the UCA in the 1920s were complex.11

Precision

Apart from the obvious inaccuracies reported, Rehm’s article makes several statements, which lead to conclusions that are questionable. For example, Rehm inserted his own opinion by using the term “dogma” twice. Once was in regard to B.J. Palmer’s theories. The second time suggests that the Morikubo trial was an attempt to merge “science and dogma.” In this regard, he also quotes the term, “unscientific and cultist” in referring to the philosophy of chiropractic, but there is no source for the quote. These types of unsubstantiated opinions were misrepresented as facts in future publications citing Rehm.36, 37

Relevance

In light of the many problems with accuracy, clarity, and precision, Rehm’s article should no longer be considered relevant and should not be cited to support its basic claims.

Depth

Rehm’s article is lacking in complexity and dimensionality. It relies on Lerner’s one-sided account, historical errors, and a bias against the chiropractic paradigm, which emphasizes Innate Intelligence and vertebral subluxation. We now know that the context of the Morikubo trial is far more complex than the article suggests.

Breadth

Rehm’s article also lacks breadth, which is defined as a “full spectrum of thinking on the subject.”2

Logical Consistency

Rehm’s article tells a clear enough story but it is based on so many gaps and an inherent bias against core chiropractic theories that it does not meet this criteria. For example, a reading of D.D. Palmer’s articles and chapters from 1902 to 1906 demonstrates that his theories were developed well before the Morikubo trial. The logic of Rehm’s article is deeply flawed.

Critiques and Revisions

There have been several critiques of Rehm and Lerner in the literature of the past few years.38-44 Any peer-reviewed papers published at this point referencing Rehm to support the spurious claims should call into question the adequacy of journals, reviewers, and editors that let it pass as a valid reference.

The literature citing Rehm is extensive.11, 13, 36, 37, 45-89 It is difficult to estimate the impact of the article on the chiropractic literature, chiropractic education, and even chiropractic policy decisions.

The Institute Chiropractic Wiki will continue to list seminal articles from the chiropractic canon. Statements that do not meet the criteria of a critical approach, especially the criteria of clarity due to unsupported statements, will be noted. It is hoped that this contribution to the literature will help to reshape the future discourse in chiropractic and inspire revisions of arguments that rely on inadequate citations.

References

  1. Rehm, W., Legally defensible: Chiropractic in the courtroom and after, 1907. Chiropr Hist, 1986. 6: p. 51.
  2. McAulay, B., Rigor in the philosophy of chiropractic: Beyond the dismissivism/authoritarian polemic. J Chiropr Humanit, 2005. 12: p. 16-32.
  3. Mawhiney, R.B., Chiropractic in Wisconsin 1900-1950. 1984: Wisconsin Chiropractic Association.
  4. Urdang, L., The Timetables of American History: History and Politics, the Arts, Science and Technology, and More in America and Elsewhere. 2001: Simon and Schuster. 
  5. Turner, C., The Rise Of Chiropractic. 2006/1931: Kessinger Publishing.
  6. Lerner, C., The Lerner report. 1952, Davenport, IA.: Palmer College Archives.
  7. Gilkey, G.R., The First Seventy Years: A History of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, 1909-1979. 1981: University of Wisconsin-La Crosse Foundation.
  8. Gielow, V., Old dad chiro: A biography of D.D. Palmer founder of chiropractic. 1982, La Crosse (WI): Fred Barge.
  9. Palmer, B.J., The Chiropractor. 1907. December.
  10. Palmer, B.J., The Chiropractor. 1907. August-September.
  11. Keating, J., A. Callender, and C. Cleveland, A history of chiropractic education in North America. 1998, Davenport, IA: Association for the History of Chiropractic.
  12. Faulkner, T., The Chiropractor’s Protégé: The Untold Story of Oakley G. Smith’s Journey with D.D. Palmer in Chiropractic’s Founding Years. 2017, Rock Island, Ill: Association for the History of Chiropractic.
  13. Troyanovich, T, Keating, J, Wisconsin versus chiropractic: the trials at LaCrosse and the birth of a chiropractic champion. Chiropr Hist, 2005. 25(1): p. 37-45.
  14. Morikubo, S., Chiropractic. LaCross Leader, 1907.
  15. Morikubo, S., The Motive of Conspiracy. The Chiropractor, 1907. 3(11).
  16. Waters, T., Chasing D.D.: D.D. Palmer in the news 1886-1913. 2013, Raleigh, NC: Lulu, Inc.
  17. Palmer, D.D., Dr. D.D. Palmer’s Address to the Judge. The Chiropractor, 1906. May.
  18. Linniker, C., Letter from Chas Linniker to B.J. Palmer, B.J. Palmer, Editor. 1908: The Chiropractor (4).
  19. Smith, O., Naprapathic genetics: Being a study of the origin and development of naprathy. 1932, Chicago: Self-published.
  20. Palmer, D.D. and B.J. Palmer, Chiropractic Book. The Chiropractor, 1906. 2(2): p. 8.
  21. Foley, J. and T. Faulkner, Email corresponence, S. Senzon, Editor. 2018.
  22. Palmer, D.D., The Chiropractic. 1899. March(Number 26).
  23. Palmer, D.D., The Chiropractic. Number 26, 1900.
  24. Palmer, D.D., Is chiropractic an experiment? . The Davenport Times, 1902. June 14.
  25. Palmer, D.D., Innate Intelligence. Palmer Infirmary and Chiropractic Institute, 1903.
  26. Palmer, D.D., Chiropractic defined. The Chiropractor, 1905. 1(4).
  27. Palmer, D.D., Immortality. The Chiropractor, 1906. 2(3).
  28. Palmer, D.D., Letter to B.J. Palmer. 1902. April 27.
  29. Palmer, B.J., Chirorpactic: Its value to suffering humanity. The Davenport Times, 1902. August.
  30. Palmer, B.J., The science of chiropractic: Eleven physiological: Vol. 2. 1907, Davenport, IA: Palmer School of Chiropractic.
  31. Palmer, D.D. and B.J. Palmer, The science of chiropractic 1906, Davenport, Iowa: The Palmer School of Chiropractic.
  32. Palmer, B.J., The philosophy and principles of chiropractic adjustments: A series of twenty-four lectures; Vol. 3. Volume 3. 1908, Davenport, IA: Palmer School of Chiropractic.
  33. Palmer, B.J., The science of chiropractic: Causes localized: Vol. 4. 1908, Davenport, IA: Palmer School of Chiropracitc.
  34. Palmer, B.J., Philosophy of chiropractic: Vol. 5. 1st ed. 1909, Davenport. IA: Palmer School of Chiropractic.
  35. Holmes, A., Malpractice as applied to chiropractors. 1924, Davenport: Palmer College.
  36. Keating, J. and R. Mootz, The influence of political medicine on chiropractic dogma: Implications for scientific development. J Man and Phys Ther, 1989. 12(5): p. 393-397.
  37. Keating, J., The specter of dogma. J Can Chiropr Assoc, 2001. 45(2): p. 76.
  38. Peters, R. and M. Chance, Disasters, discoveries, developments, and distinction: The year that was 1907. Chiropr J Aust, 2007. 37: p. 145-156.
  39. Wolfe, J., Who really convinced a jury that the chiropractic vertebral subluxation is distinct from the osteopathic spinal lesion. International Research and Philosophy Symposium, 2015. Sherman College.
  40. Senzon, S., Constructing a philosophy of chiropractic: When worldviews evolve and Premodern roots. J Chiropr Humanit, 2011. 18(1): p. 10-23.
  41. Senzon, S., Constructing a philosophy of chiropractic I: an Integral map of the territory. J Chiropr Human, 2010. 17(17): p. 6-21.
  42. Chance, M.A. and R.E. Peters, Appreciating a legacy without prejudice. Chiropractic Journal of Australia, 2006. 36(4): p. 121.
  43. Wolfe, J., Fleshing Out a Footnote: Dr. Shegetaro Morikubo’s Life in America Before and After the Famous 1907 La Crosse Trial. Chiropractic History, 2014. 34(2).
  44. Senzon, S., Chiropractic Revisions. https://www.institutechiro.com/chiropractic-revisions/, 2012.
  45. Keating, J., Rationalism and empiricism vs. the philosophy of science in chiropractic. Chiropr Hist, 1990. 10(2): p. 23-27.
  46. Keating, J., Several pathways in the evolution of chiropractic manipulation. J Man and Phys Ther, 2003. 26(5): p. 300-321.
  47. Keating, J., C. Cleveland, and M. Menke, Chiropractic History: A primer. 2004, Davenport: Association for the History of Chiropractic.
  48. Keating, J., The gestation and difficult birth of the American Chiropractic Association. Chiropr Hist, 2006. 26(2): p. 91-126.
  49. Keating, J. and W. Rehm, The origins and early history of the National Chiropractic Association. J Can Chir Assoc, 1993. 37(1): p. 27-51.
  50. Keating, J., C. Sterling Cooley, DC, FICC, Forgotten Leader of Chiropractic’s Middle Ages-Part I.
  51. Troyanovich, S. and J. Troyanovich, Chiropractic and Type O (Organic) Disorders: Historical Development and Current Thought. Chiropr Hist, 2012. 32(1): p. 59-72.
  52. Donahue, J., Metaphysics, rationality and science. J Man and Phys Ther, 1994. 17(1): p. 54-55.
  53. Coulter, I., Uses and Abuses of Philosophy in Chiropractic. Philosophical Constructs for the Chiropractic Profession, 1992.
  54. Leach, R., The chiropractic theories: A textbook of scientific research: Third edition. 1994, Baltimore, MA: Williams and Wilkins.
  55. Myburgh, C., Methodological and epistemological challenges for the chiropractic profession in health care-a study of the history, status quo and future of research and clinical practices. 2005, Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch.
  56. Plaugher, G., Textbook of clinical chiropractic: a specific biomechanical approach. 1993: Williams & Wilkins.
  57. Rehm, W., Remembering Tom Morris. J Chiropr Hum, 1998. 8(1): p. 67-70.
  58. Strauss, J., Refined by fire: The evolution of straight chiropractic. 1994, Levittown(PA): Foundation for the Advancement of Chiropractic Education.
  59. Moore, S., Chiropractic in America: The history of a medical alternative. 1993: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  60. Folk, H., Vertebral Vitalism: American Metaphysics and the Birth of Chiropractic, 2006, Ph.D. diss: Indiana University.
  61. Keating, J., The short life & enduring influence of the American Chiropractic Association, 1922-1930. Chiropr Hist, 1996. 16(1): p. 50-64.
  62. Phillips, R., et al., A contemporary philosophy of chiropractic for the LACC. J Chiropr Humanit, 1994. 4: p. 20-25.
  63. Folk, H., The Religion of Chiropractic: Populist Healing from the American Heartland. 2017: UNC Press Books.
  64. Keating, J., Science and politics and the subluxation. Amer J Chiropr Med, 1988. 1(3): p. 107-10.
  65. Keating, J. and R. Mootz, Five contributions to a philosophy of the science of chiropractic. JMPT, 1987. 10(1): p. 25-29.
  66. Keating, J., The evolution of Palmer’s metaphors and hypotheses. Philosophical Constructs for the Chiropractic Profession, 1992. 2(1): p. 9-19.
  67. Green, B., M. Mostashari, and T. Trafecanty, Tom Morris: Chiropractic Advocate and Friend of Drugless Healers. Chiropr Hist, 1994. 14(1): p. 36.
  68. Green, B., Gloom or boom for chiropractic in its second century? A comparison of the demise of alternative healing professions. Chiropractic history: the archives and journal of the Association for the History of Chiropractic, 1994. 14(2): p. 22-29.
  69. Keating, J., “Heat by nerves and not by blood”. Chiropr Hist, 1995. 15(2): p. 70-77.
  70. Green, B., A place for chiropractic historians: The workshop to develop a chiropractic research agenda. chiropr Hist, 1996. 16(2).
  71. Editor, Instructions for Authors. Chiropr Hist, 1997-2008.
  72. Keating, J., Roots of the NCMIC: Loran M. Rogers and the National Chiropractic Association, 1930-1946. Chiropractic history: the archives and journal of the Association for the History of Chiropractic, 2000. 20(1): p. 39-55.
  73. Wardwell, W., Chiropractic: History and evolution of a new profession. 1992, St. Louis(MO): Mosby.
  74. Troyanovich, S. and R. Gibbons, Finding Langworthy: The last years of a chiropractic pioneer. Chiropr Hist, 2003. 23(1): p. 7-16.
  75. Keating, J., A brief history of historical scholarship in chiropractic. The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association, 2001. 45(2): p. 113.
  76. Mootz, R.D., Back to basics… professional identity: The role of chiropractic theory. Topics in Clinical Chiropractic, 2001. 8(1): p. 1-9.
  77. Funk, M.F., et al., The prevalence of the term subluxation in chiropractic degree program curricula throughout the world. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 2018. 26(1): p. 24.
  78. Keating, J., Early Palmer theories of dis-ease. Whittier CA: Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, 1996.
  79. Keating, J., Notes on B.J. Palmer & the Palmer School. National Institute of Chiropractic Research, 2005.
  80. Keating, J., Chronology of Shegetaro Morikubo, DC. National Institute of Chiropractic Research, 2007.
  81. Villanueva-Russell, Y., Caught in the crosshairs: Identity and cultural authority within chiropractic. Social Science & Medicine, 2011. 72(11): p. 1826-1837.
  82. Wardwell, W., Chiropractic “philosophy”. J Chiropr Humanit, 1994. 3: p. 3-8.
  83. Keating, J., Philosophy in chiropractic, in Principles and practice of chiropractic, S. Haldeman, Editor. 2005, McGraw Hill Companies, Inc: New York. p. 77-97.
  84. Johnson, C., Reflecting on 115 years: the chiropractic profession’s philosophical path. 2010, Elsevier.
  85. Young, K.J., Gimme that old time religion: the influence of the healthcare belief system of chiropractic’s early leaders on the development of x-ray imaging in the profession. Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2014. 22(1): p. 36.
  86. Villanueva-Russell, Y., An ideal-typical development of chiropractic, 1895-1961: Pursuing professional ends through entrepreneurial means. Social Theory & Health, 2008. 6: p. 250-272.
  87. Keating, J., Ain’t got enough philosophy. Dynamic chiropractic, 2003. 16.
  88. Keating, J., Chiropractic at the Turn of the Century. Dynamic Chiropractic, 2001. 19.
  89. Senzon, S., The secret history of chiropractic: D.D. Palmer’s spiritual writings. 2005, Asheville, NC: Self published.
© 2020 The Institute Chiropractic - Senzon Learning, Inc.