INCS
International Nature Cure Society
- Home
- Aims
- History
- More History
- Philosophy
- The Icon
- Bye-Laws
- Memorial Trust
- Links
- Practitioners
- Publications
- Conferences
- Contact
ISRN
The Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths
INCS
International Nature Cure Society
ISRN
The Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths
THE STORY OF THE INCORPORATED SOCIETY OF REGISTERED NATUROPATHS
EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL RECORDS
by H. Leslie Harrison
The story of the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths must inevitably reflect its outstanding personalities, and so it tends to be the chronicle of individual idealisms within the broad field of Nature Cure. One factor constantly recurs throughout the Society files (of which this is a summary): that in spite of varying personal opinions on many matters, resulting from the individualistic character of Society members, the jointly-held fundamentals have been the essential motivating force. The Society principles continue to withstand the batterings of time.
The Society has, throughout its 42 years of existence, steadfastly held to the principles of Straight Nature Cure, high standards of full-time training, and a refusal to mislead the public with initials which could suggest the possession of degrees. Its members use only those letters representing such state-recognised degrees as they may possess. Neither Society membership nor the name of the full-time training college may be represented by letters appended to one’s name.
ETHICS
Collectively the members have accepted limitations concerning methods practised; maintaining that ‘Straight Nature Cure’ has been tried and found not wanting. Many fashionable modalities masquerade under the heading of Nature Cure, but fail to meet philosophical or ethical standards, even though they have appealed to the lay public and proved commercially successful:
 |
James C. Thomson |
Early history starts with James C. Thomson (1887-1960) Co-founder in 1920 of the Nature Cure Association, and for some time its President, but who resigned from it on the issue of standards for practitioner training. His own Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics’ 4 year full-time training received the blessing of the eminent leaders of the Nature Cure Association, but a majority of the Associates considered much lower standards sufficient.
(As a personal aside, it was interesting to find the name Milton Powell cropping up regularly in correspondence with the Nature Cure Association. It was this well-known pioneer who, in 1943, was instrumental in directing the writer towards James C. Thomson, the Kingston Clinic and the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics.)
BREAKAWAY
In 1927 a group broke away from the Nature Cure Association, to form the Society of British Naturopaths, having as part of its constitution a qualifying minimum of 4 years’ full-time training. The Society was closely connected with the names of James C. Thomson, Bertram T. Fraser and Alex Barthels; the last being its Secretary and Organiser. (Jn 1934 the Nature Cure Association saw fit to increase the standards of its associated London School of Natural Therapeutics to a nominal 4 year course.)
The need for registration of practitioners was much discussed at about this time, so it was not surprising to find the files laden with letters preceding the formation of the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths. At the same time, members of the Nature Cure Association were making overtures to the Society of British Naturopaths with a view to amalgamation.
1934 also saw a meeting held in the Music Hall, Edinburgh, by the ‘United Association of Osteopaths, Chiropractors and Naturopaths of Great Britain and Ireland Ltd.’, at which registration was offered to those who took a course of 20 lectures, at an inclusive fee of 3 guineas, cash, to be held at the Edinburgh College of Naturopathy, Osteopathy and Chiropractics! (Needless to say this was in no way associated with the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics which, from its inception in 1919, never reduced its standards below that of a 4 years’ full-time training.)
In September 1934 the inaugural meeting was called of the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths (limited by guarantee), which had been formed to succeed the Society of British Naturopaths. In November 1934 all known Nature Cure Practitioners in Great Britain received a letter inviting them to apply for Registration (which was open to all qualified persons irrespective of Society Membership) and pointing out the desirability of one comprehensive Register of Practitioners of true Nature Cure. This had its repercussion, as may be seen in a sentence from a letter sent by the N.C.A. to the I.S.R.N. in 1936: ‘If the I.S.R.N. would not insist upon picking and choosing from our ranks but would be prepared to consider amalgamation complete with the N.C.A. I think it would find us willing to negotiate.’ As already stated, the acceptability of therapies and the qualifications of practitioners have always been part of the backbone of the J.S.R.N., so ‘picking and choosing’ was inevitable.
The period 1934-36 saw mention of the Davidson College of Natural Therapeutics, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. It is not known for how long this College existed.
The formation of the I.S.R.N. faced the Society and its Secretary with much active work. Correspondence was heavy on the subject of the use of massage and electrical equipment by Nature Cure Practitioners within the City of London, No ultra-violet therapy could be administered without L.C.C. Registration and on prescription by a Medical Doctor.
1936 was also a time of much activity, as the various naturopathic societies shared concern over a Bill before Parliament (sponsored by the B.M.A. and put to the House of Commons by C. A. V. Duckworth, Conservative Member for Shrewsbury), imposing restrictions on unlicenced Healers. Union between the Societies of Naturopathy was again stressed as being essential. The Officers of the I.S.R.N. were not impressed; mainly on the issue of qualifications and method and standard of practice; also pointing to the fact that if this Bill became law it could not affect us, as we were not ‘healers’, holding firmly to the contention that each patient performs his own healing.
1937 marked the beginning of a new I.S.R.N. activity - the production, by the Publications Committee, of a series of educational Monographs on various health subjects. Notable among these were What to Eat for Health, Digestive Troubles, Appendicitis and Hydro-therapy.
1938-39 saw major changes in the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics with its removal from the centre of Edinburgh to the City’s southern outskirts at the newly established Kingston Clinic. This offered excellent facilities. In addition to spacious rooms, laboratories, gymnasium and recreational opportunities for the students, an invaluable aspect was that the students ‘lived in’ and so had constant opportunity to observe the progress of resident patients as well as participating in the Free Clinic for out-patients.
BEVERIDGE
World War Two depressed the progress of the Society somewhat, but regular Annual Conferences were held. In 1943 considerable activity developed from publication of the Beveridge Report, which envisaged a complete Health Service. Many practitioner societies over the country became active, some specifically pushing their hope of being included in the functions of such a Service. Various Nature Cure and osteopathic societies joined to send delegates to a meeting with the Government Committee which, naturally, was concerned with the qualifications of unorthodox practitioners. It is recorded that the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths was the only body of Practitioners which could present a long record of high standard in qualification. Other societies were told to go back and, for the sake of their future, look closely at this aspect of their case.
Mr George House, Member of Parliament for St. Pancras North, presented to the Commons a clear statement of typical results of Nature Cure treatment, quoting factual records of patients treated by members of the I.S.R.N. His efforts were successful in causing to be deleted a clause which would have imposed severe penalties on anyone who refused orthodox treatment.
CERTIFICATES
Further Parliamentary activity at this time, in which our Society took a leading part, resulted in the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance agreeing to accept Certificates of Incapacity - for payment of sickness benefit - signed by Registered Nature Cure practitioners. This arrangement is still in force.
1946 saw the re-opening, following the War, of the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics, and both School and students continued to be closely associated with the activities of the I.S.R.N.
The British Health Freedom Society appeared on the scene. ‘The right of the individual to the therapy of his choice’ became a slogan. The I.S.R.N. at first supported this body, but it became apparent that the B.H.F.S. was concerning itself more with the political powers of practitioner associations - and regarding mere numbers as a prime consideration - and less with individual patients’ rights. The I.S.R.N. lost interest in the B.H.F.S. somewhat sadly, for it had appeared as though all unorthodox patients might benefit from the original aims.
At this same time, the I.S.R.N. sent letters of sympathy to Dr. Gian Cursio, in America, where under New York State law he had been imprisoned for practising his Nature Cure therapies.
THIS NATURE CURE
In an attempt to clarify the I.S.R.N. position, the Naturopathic Council in 1946 published the pamphlet This Nature Cure. It had an impact on Nature Cure followers throughout the country, upsetting many by its clear, though possibly oversimplified, statement of the I.S.R.N. stand. The essential point (which - somewhat extended— - still features in our Bye-Laws) is: ‘No member of the Register shall prescribe “remedies”, e.g., Biochemicals, Tissue Salts, Hormones, Vitamin Concentrates, Pharmaceutical, Homeopathic or Herbal Preparations’. This caused much distressed correspondence, as it was taken as a criticism of other ‘Nature Cure’ societies to whose members these modalities mattered much.
In 1948 the I.S.R.N. wrote to George Bernard Shaw offering to confer on him the Honorary Degree of Master of Natural Therapeutics and his reply - carefully preserved - was as follows:
Ayot Saint Lawrence
Welwyn
Herts.
22/5/1948
In reply to your letter dated the 16th February, I am much gratified by the offer of your Society to confer on me the degree of Master of Natural Therapeutics; but I must not accept it, as it would imply that I am such a Master (which I am not) and am in general practice as such. I should be inundated with letters asking for advice or treatment.
I am sufficiently honored and satisfied with the proposal, which I highly appreciate.
(Signed) G. Bernard Shaw
E.S.N.T.
In 1951, the I.S.R.N. sent a fresh protest to America, and a cable of sympathy to the American Nature Cure Movement, following the repeated imprisonment of Drs. Gian Cursio and Gerald Benesh, for continuing to practise according to Nature Cure philosophy. It was also during this year that seven new Graduates of the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics were welcomed by the President, Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc. These - the first Graduates since the War - had completed 5 years full-time training, under James C. Thomson as Principal and C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc., as Director of Studies.
 |
C. Leslie Thomson |
During 1953 the British Naturopathic and Osteopathic Association sent an official invitation, either to bring the I.S.R.N. into their fold, or to form a Joint Register of all practitioners. Our reply was that Members of the B.N.O.A. who could qualify would be very welcome to join our Register, which was not intentionally ‘narrow’ and which had been formed in 1934. Also that the chief object of this or any other Register, should be the maintenance of standards.
The Annual Conference of 1955 opened negotiations with the Ministry of National Insurance, to standardise certificates used for sickness benefits for patients. A form acceptable to both parties was drawn up, printed and supplied to all Members. This proved a valuable help to our patients.
A sad item in the Minutes for 1957 recorded the death of J. Francis Carswell. He had served the Society for many years as an outstandingly active and conscientious Secretary, as well as in other capacities.
The following year, 1958, brought a letter from the B.N.O.A., asserting that we no longer had the sole right to use the term ‘Registered Naturopath’ citing the case of Dodds versus the General Council and Register of Osteopaths. This, however, did not seem to perturb the Society.
J.C.T.
The next major event, put on record at the 1961 A.G.M., was the death in 1960 of its best-known founder, James C. Thomson. He had also been the founder of the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics, and co-founder of the Nature Cure Association of Great Britain and Ireland in 1920. Recorded in the Minutes is the highest tribute that could be paid. “Without his strength, ability, power and inspiration the Society might never have existed, nor would we as practitioners have been here”.
Having in mind the vast amount of effort, devotion and courage that James C. Thomson had put into the promotion of Straight Nature Cure throughout his life, the 1961 General Meeting approved the formation of a Charitable Trust to his memory. Its purpose was to ensure that his Nature Cure drive would go on, assisted by many who would always be grateful for the influence James C. Thomson had on their lives.
Immediately after the death of James C. Thomson came a further request from the B.N.O.A. for a meeting between representatives of the two societies with a view to forming a common Register of Naturopaths. The I.S.R.N. found the same difficulty as in the past, noting:
‘Our unwillingness to be identified with those Nature Cure Practitioners who, by the use of remedies, disclose a philosophy which is alien to us’. The clause suggested by the B.N.O.A. ‘That such a Register be left open for a set time, say, 2-3 years, after its inception, and then closed except to graduates of recognised Schools’ was contrary to the position regarding qualifications held by the I.S.R.N. since its inception.
It is interesting to note that during this year a national periodical refused to accept Society announcements because the words “Nature Cure” were involved. Lengthy correspondence ensued, and compromise was reached by substituting “Natural Therapy” for “Nature Cure”.
1962 saw increased correspondence and meetings between I.S.R.N. representatives and those of the B.N.O.A., in which our differences only became more apparent. This terminated in the thought that: ‘the only field left for co-operation was on the social level’. The idea was put forward that the two Societies should work towards a joint day’s activity as part of their Autumn Conferences. One got the feeling that the other National Nature Cure bodies felt that the I.S.R.N. had been dictatorially controlled by James C. Thomson, and now was the time to get in; but events show clearly that the bond of fundamental Nature Cure principles between the I.S.R.N. Practitioners was stronger than the influence of any single individual.
After discussion, the 1963 Annual General Meeting passed an addition to the Bye-Laws relating to remedies, and by unanimous decision the phrase ‘nor shall they practise hypnotism’ was added.
DIFFERENCES
In the Autumn of that year the B.N.O.A. and the I.S.R.N. held a joint gathering at Frazer House, London. The Conference day was spent with lectures and discussions emphasising our similarities. Stanley Lief’s lecture ‘Nature Cure is Sufficient’ might well have been given by James C. Thomson. Reflection suggests that the time could have been better spent exploring our differences!
In general discussion it became apparent that the B.N.O.A. was looking for I.S.R.N. amalgamation in order to add to their numerical strength and to help them improve the general standard of Nature Cure within their Society. Our counter-proposal was that if they first improved their own Society membership qualifications we would consider amalgamation.
Still later that year another attempt was made at some form of federation of professional so-called Nature Cure bodies. A report from our representative stated ‘No such federation could include the I.S.R.N. since the federation would include a majority who do not practise Nature Cure at all’.
Over the years the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths and the British Register of Naturopaths seem to have developed separate identities. Much thought was given to how to encourage members of the Register who were not also members of the Society to attend Conferences. It was in 1966 that practical moves were made to re-form this duality back into a single body.
That year also saw the completion of the tedious journey of the James C. Thomson Memorial Trust through legal channels to recognition as a Charity, with the following Trustees: C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc., Mrs B. C. Parke, B.Sc., James Leask, C.A., James Johnston and H. Leslie Harrison (Hon. Sec., 1 Albemarle Road, The Mount, York).
In 1966 Mrs Jessie R. Thomson’s many years of service to the Society and her contributions to Nature Cure were acknowledged by the award of Honorary Life Membership of the I.S.R.N.
1967 saw the first financial report of the James C. Thomson Memorial Trust placed before the A.G.M. of the I.S.R.N. It was disclosed that £55 of the total of £722 represented donations in lieu of fees to practitioners who gave lectures to various societies.
In 1968 the unification of the I.S.R.N. and the British Register of Naturopaths was completed by the adoption of revised Bye-Laws, bringing the Society and the Register under one set of rules.
At the time of writing, Committees of the B.N.O.A. and of the I.S.R.N. are preparing yet another joint meeting to discuss possible co-operation.
PRINCIPLES
The main principles of the I.S.R.N., which have stood more than forty years’ stern test, are:
1. At least 4 years’ full-time training in Natural Therapeutics at a recognised School or College and to standards approved by the Society.
2. Injunction to its Members to append no initials to their names other than of State-recognised degrees they may possess.
3. That its Members are pledged to practise Straight Nature Cure. In the words of the current Bye-Laws
No Member of the Register shall prescribe ‘remedies’, e.g., biochemicals, tissue salts, hormones, vitamin concentrates, pharmaceutical, homeopathic or herbal preparations; neither shall he practise hypnotism or any other therapy contrary to the philosophy and principles of the Society.
This outline History reflects a record of which the Members of the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths can be proud. They belong to the professional Nature Cure Society of longest standing in Great Britain, which has consistently maintained the highest standards of training, ethics and practice.