PRACTICE OF VETERINARY SURGERY 67 
all diseases.’’ The court held that by so doing he 
claimed that he was ‘‘specially qualified to prac- 
tice veterinary surgery within the meaning of the 
law.’’® A chemist published a book upon animal 
diseases, and advised under certain conditions the 
calling of a veterinary surgeon. In this book he 
spoke of himself as a ‘‘pharmaceutical and veter- 
inary chemist.’’ It was held that in so doing he 
was leading people to suppose that he was legally 
qualified to practice veterinary medicine within 
the meaning of the law.** 
41, Practice asa Company. A sign was placed 
upon a building, and advertisements were pub- 
lished, bearing the words ‘‘Churchill’s Veterinary 
Sanatorium (Ltd.), Dogs and Cats boarded. James 
Churchill, M. D. (U. 8. A.) Specialist, Managing 
Director.’’ Churchill was not registered as a 
veterinary surgeon, nor certified by the H. and 
A. 8. of Scotland. Under the criminal code there 
was no provision for the punishment of an incor- 
porated limited company. Therefore, the court 
issued an injunction against the company, and 
against Churchill personally, to restrain the con- 
tinuing to make this false representation.°* In 
a somewhat similar case in New York, a licensed 
physician was employed by a drug company which 
advertised free examination and free treatment 
by competent physicians for those using its medi- 
cines. It was shown that he did make certain 
54 Royal Col. of Vet. Surg. v. 56 Atty. General v. Churchill’s 
Collinson, 77 L. J. K. B. 689 Veterinary Sanatorium, Ltd., 79 
(1908), 2 K. B. 248. L. J., Ch. 741, (1910) 2 Ch. 
55 Royal Col. of V. S. v. 401; Atty. Gen. v. Myddletons, 
Groves, 57 J, P. 505. Ltd. (1907), 1 J. R, 471, 
