Ex parte Frazer
Opinion
lead Opinion
Bankmckinstry, J.
It is argued by counsel for petitioner, that the Act of April 3rd, 1876, “ to regulate the practice of medicine,” as amended in 1878, (Laws 1877-8, p. 918) is void, because a violation of the provisions of the late Constitution: “ Corporations may be formed under general laws, but shall not be created by special act.”
The second section of the act confers the exclusive power to appoint Boards of Examiners upon three medical societies, and prohibits such appointment by any other corporation, society, person, or persons. The eighth section of the amendatory act makes it a misdemeanor for any person (except an appointee of one of the three societies named) to sign, seal, or issue a certificate purporting to authorize the practice of medicine.
It is claimed by petitioner, that the power to appoint is a franchise which the act attempts to confer upon the three named *96 incorporations, and which is not enjoyed by other medical societies incorporated under the general laws ; that the act is, therefore, violative of the provisions of the Constitution above recited, as the same was construed in San Francisco v. Spring Valley Water Works, 48 Cal. 493 .