Parke v. Bradley, 3 Div. 457

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtSOMERVILLE, J.
Citation86 So. 28,204 Ala. 455
PartiesPARKE et al. v. BRADLEY, State Treasurer, et al.
Decision Date30 June 1920
Docket Number3 Div. 457

86 So. 28

204 Ala. 455

PARKE et al.
v.
BRADLEY, State Treasurer, et al.

3 Div. 457

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 30, 1920


Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Leon McCord, Judge.

Bill by Thomas D. Parke and others against R.L. Bradley, as State Treasurer, Samuel W. Welch, State Health Officer, and the Medical Association of the State of Alabama. Judgment for defendants, and complainants appeal. Affirmed. [86 So. 29]

I.M. Engel, of Birmingham, for appellants.

J.Q. Smith, Atty. Gen., Harwell G. Davis, Asst. Atty. Gen., and J.J. Mayfield, of Montgomery, for appellees.

SOMERVILLE, J.

It is too well settled for further controversy that the Legislature of Alabama may delegate to officers, or boards, or commissioners, of its own creation and appointment, various governmental powers for the more efficient administration of the laws, subject always to the clearly implied limitation of the Constitution that the lawmaking power, invested exclusively in the Legislature, cannot be delegated to any other department of the government, or to any other agency, either public or private. R.R. Commission v. Ala. North. Ry. Co., 182 Ala. 357, 62 So. 749; Fox v. McDonald, 101 Ala. 51, 13 So. 416, 21 L.R.A. 529, 46 Am.St.Rep. 98; 12 Corp.Jur. 839, § 323.

The prevention of disease and the conservation of health, by all of the means known to modern science, is universally recognized as one of the most important and imperious duties of government, and in the construction of statutes enacted for such a purpose, under the police powers of the state, courts are agreed that great latitude should be allowed to the Legislature in determining the character of such laws, and how, when, and by whom, in their practical administration, they should be applied. State v. McCarty, 5 Ala.App. 212, 59 So. 543, approved in Ferguson v. Starkey, 192 Ala. 471, 68 So. 348; 12 R.C.L. 1271, § 10, and cases cited.

The contention of complainants, as stated in brief of counsel, is, not that the Legislature of Alabama is without authority to create a state board of health and empower it to administer the public health laws, but that such a board must be a state board, which is an arm of the state government, and whose members must be state officials, chosen as such and amenable to public control and supervision; and that it is beyond the power of the Legislature to confer upon a private corporation composed of private individuals any part of the sovereign power of the state in that behalf. This contention explains the theory of the bill of complaint, viz. that the state board of health, as constituted by the statutes of Alabama since 1875, is an illegal body, because it is in fact a private corporation, and because the Legislature cannot make such a private corporation a repository of governmental powers, even for purely administrative purposes.

"The Medical Association of the State of Alabama" was first incorporated by the act of February 13, 1850 (Acts 1849-50, p. 315), without any public functions or duties, and the nature of its corporate aims and activities, prior to 1873, has not been made to appear. In 1873, at an annual meeting held at Tuscaloosa, the association adopted a constitution which declared its aims and functions, and prescribed its mode of organization, the character of its membership, and the names and duties of its officers. Article 3 of this constitution is as follows:

"The objects of this association shall be to organize the medical profession of this state in the most efficient manner possible, To encourage a high standard of medical education, and regulate the qualifications of practitioners of medicine in the state. To promote professional brotherhood, and encourage a high standard of professional ethics. To combine the influence of all the medical men in the state, so as to secure by legislative enactments their own legitimate rights and privileges, and the protection of the people against all medical ignorance and dishonesty. To encourage the study of the medical botany, medical topography, and medical climatology of the state. To secure careful and reliable accounts of all the endemic and epidemic diseases of the state. In a word, to watch over and protect encourage and aggrandize all the interests of the medical profession of the state."

The membership of the association is, under other articles, made up of four classes: (1) Members of county medical associations, holding a charter from the state association, who cannot vote or hold office; (2) two delegates from each county association, who can vote, but cannot hold office; (3) 100 counselors selected from the permanent members of the state organization (as then existing), vacancies in their number to be filled by the vote of delegates and counselors; and (4) correspondents, who are distinguished nonresident physicians, or ex-counselors of 10 years' service as such. The bill charges that membership in the county medical associations is subject to secret ballot, under which three "black balls" will suffice to reject an applicant.

It appears that, in addition to the customary officers of government, the state medical association elects a board of 10 censors, who serve for five years, and who are substantially an executive committee, a court of impeachment, an auditing board, and a board of examiners for admission to practice medicine.

By the act of February 19, 1875 (Acts 1874--75, p. 130), it was provided:

"That the Medical Association of the State of Alabama organized in accordance with the provisions of the constitution which was adopted by said association at its annual meeting in [86 So. 30] the city of Tuscaloosa, in March, 1873, be and is hereby constituted the board of health of the State of Alabama."

By the same act it was also provided that--

"County medical societies in affiliation with the Medical Association of the State of Alabama, and organized in accordance with the provisions of the constitution of said association, *** be and are hereby constituted boards of health for their respective counties, and as such shall be under the general direction of the board of health of the state of Alabama. ***"

These provisions have been re-enacted in every Code of Alabama, down to and including the Code of 1907.

The act of September 29, 1919 (Gen.Acts 1919, p. 909), amends, revises, and extends, under a recodification, the health laws of the state, but does not essentially alter the structure of the system.

The present organization of the health department of the state,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
46 practice notes
  • In re Fite, 6 Div. 216.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 9, 1933
    ...expressed or implied constitutional limitations. Lehmann v. State Board of Public Accountancy, supra; Parke v. Bradley, State Treasurer, 204 Ala. 455, 86 So. 28; Railroad Commission v. Ala. North. Ry. Co., 182 Ala. 357, 62 So. 749; Ex parte Samples (Samples v. State), 210 Ala. 544, 98 So. 8......
  • Yeilding v. State ex rel. Wilkinson, 6 Div. 887
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • April 4, 1936
    ...capacity, and does not come within the prohibition or rule referred to. This question was considered in Parke v. Bradley, State Treasurer, 204 Ala. 455, 86 So. 28, and in Fox v. McDonald, 101 Ala. 51, 13 So. 416, 21 L.R.A. 529, 46 Am.St.Rep. 98, and the right of the Legislature to delegate ......
  • Lehmann v. State Board of Public Accountancy, 3 Div. 567.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 29, 1922
    ...powers for the more efficient administration of the law, subject, however, to certain limitations of the Constitution. Parke v. Bradley, 204 Ala. 455, 86 So. 28; Railroad Commission v. A. N. Railway Co., 182 Ala. 357, 62 So. 749. Courts of equity rarely interfere by injunction with proceedi......
  • State v. Clements, 3 Div. 915.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • January 28, 1930
    ...constitutional provisions, running through many years, is of weighty consideration with the courts. Parke v. Bradley, State Treasurer, 204 Ala. 455, 459, 86 So. 28; Ex parte Hardy, 68 Ala. 303; Moog v. Randolph, 77 Ala. 597; Farrior v. N.E. M. Sec. Co., 88 Ala. 275, 7 So. 200; Jones v. McDa......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
45 cases
  • Lehmann v. State Board of Public Accountancy, 3 Div. 567.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 29, 1922
    ...powers for the more efficient administration of the law, subject, however, to certain limitations of the Constitution. Parke v. Bradley, 204 Ala. 455, 86 So. 28; Railroad Commission v. A. N. Railway Co., 182 Ala. 357, 62 So. 749. Courts of equity rarely interfere by injunction with proceedi......
  • Franklin v. State ex rel. Alabama State Milk Control Board, 6 Div. 923
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 11, 1936
    ...158 Ala. 263, 48 So. 354; State ex rel. v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 209 Ala. 9, 95 So. 295; Parke v. Bradley, State Treasurer, 204 Ala. 455, 458, 86 So. 28; Albert et al. v. Milk Control Board, supra. It is also contended that the act attempts to confer upon the milk control board ......
  • State v. Clements, 3 Div. 915.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • January 28, 1930
    ...constitutional provisions, running through many years, is of weighty consideration with the courts. Parke v. Bradley, State Treasurer, 204 Ala. 455, 459, 86 So. 28; Ex parte Hardy, 68 Ala. 303; Moog v. Randolph, 77 Ala. 597; Farrior v. N.E. M. Sec. Co., 88 Ala. 275, 7 So. 200; Jones v. McDa......
  • Johnson v. Craft, 3 Div. 501
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • February 3, 1921
    ...v. N.E.M. Security Co., 88 Ala. 275, 279, 7 So. 200; Jones v. McDade, 200 Ala. 230, 75 So. 988." Parke et al. v. Bradley, State Treas., 86 So. 28, All of our Constitutions have expressly remitted to the Legislature as an original and inherent power the matter of providing for elections on c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT