Tbe plaintiff instituted bis action against tbe board of county commissioners оf Madison County to enforce tbe payment to bim of tbe salary of county physician and quarantine officer, to wbicb office *285 be allеged be bad been elected by tbe county board of bealtb of Madison County as tbat board was constituted under tbe provisions of cb. 322, Public-Lоcal Laws 1931.
Tbe defendant board denied liability chiefly on tbe ground tbat tbе local act of tbe General Assembly creating a county board of bealtb for Madison County, under wbieb plaintiff claims, violated tbe prоvisions of Art. II, sec. 29, of tbe Constitution of North Carolina, and was therefore void.
Since tbe plaintiff’s action is based on this act of tbe Legislature bis right to maintain bis suit depends upon tbe validity of tbe act.
Reed v. Madison County,
Art. II, sec. 29, of tbe Constitution, prohibits tbe General Assembly from pаssing “any local, private or special act . . . relating to bealtb, sanitation and tbe abatement of nuisances.” It is expressly ordainеd tbat any local or special act passed in violation оf this section shall be void, power being given tbe General Assembly to pass general laws regulating tbe matters therein set out.
Tbe act, cb. 322, Public-Lоcal Laws 1931, under which plaintiff claims, undertakes to create for Mаdison County, alone, a county board of bealtb and to name its members. Tbe principal duty of this board is to elect a county physician and quarantine officer, for whom is prescribed tbe duty of inspecting tbe county institutions and seeing “tbat each is kept in a sanitary condition.” This board is also authorized by tbe act to select a physician to vaсcinate against disease.
It is apparent tbat tbe act is loсal and tbat it relates to bealtb and sanitation, and thus comes within tbe prohibition of tbe quoted section of tbe Constitution. This is in accord with tbe dеcision of this Court in
Armstrong v. Comrs. of Gaston County,
The local act attempting to creаte a county board of health for Madison County must be held void by reason of its conflict with the constitutional restrictions upon the power of the General Assembly imposed by Art. II, sec. 29, and the persons named as mеmbers of the county board of health by this act were thus without power to perform any duty prescribed thereby.
Freeman v. Comrs. of Madison County, supra.
Nor could validity be given to their acts as
de facto
officers, for the reason thаt it is found as a fact that the
de jure
board of health of Madison County, constitutеd in accordance with the provisions of the general statute (C. S., 7064), аnd acting as such, had in April, 1937, elected another person as cоunty physician and quarantine officer for the county, who performеd services and was recognized by the board of county commissionеrs as such.
Baker v. Hobgood,
We conclude that the plaintiff’s action founded upon the Public-Local Act of 1931 cannot be maintained, and that the judgment of the court below in his favor must be
Reversed.