Report of the attorney general for the year ending ..

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF
HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary
Room 904
100 Cambridge Street^
Boston. Massachusetts 02202

Public Document

No. 12

®!je (Hammflttuttaltlj $f Mn$mtliMttt&.

KEPORT

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Year ending January 19, 1910.

BOSTON:

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTING CO., STATE PEINTEES,

18 Post Office Square.

1910.

Stye Commomucaltt) of itlassacl)itsetts-

Office of the Attorney-General,

Boston, Jan. 19, 1910..

To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives.

I have the honor to transmit herewith my report for the
year ending this day.

Very respectfully,

DANA MALONE,

Attorney-General.

Sty? ffinmmntmmtltl? nf imaaaarljUBrtts

DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
State House.

Attorney-General.
DANA MALONE.

Assistants.
Frederic B. Greenhalge.
Fred T. Field.
Andrew Marshall.

Engineer of Grade Crossings.
Henry W. Hayes.

Chief Clerk.
Louis H. Freese.

Statement of Appropriation and Expenditures.

Appropriation for 1909,

Expenditures.
For law library,

For salaries of assistants,

For expert services,

For collection of Spanish war claims against national

government,

For clerks,

For office stenographers,

Telephone operator,

$45,000 00

$430 95

10,950 00

1,018 52

600 00

3,166 m

2,602 Q6

491 59

1,200 00

For expenses in the abolition of grade crossings: —
Salary of engineer, $3,600 00

Other expenses incidental thereto,

For office expenses, .
For court expenses, .

Total expenditures,
Costs collected, .

Net expenditures,

1,201 28

4,801 28
1,68S 00
3,848 49

$30,79S 15
4,394 29

$26,403 86

®ije dmnmtftttuealtf} af iHaBBarffmtfttjs.

Department of the Attorney-General,

Boston, Jan. 19, 1910,
To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives.

In compliance with Revised Laws, chapter 7, section 8,
I submit my report for the year ending this day.

The cases requiring the attention of the office during the
year, to the number of 3,321, are tabulated below: —

Corporation returns filed without suit, .... 80

Dissolutions of corporations, voluntary petitions for, . . 54

Extradition and interstate rendition, 99

Grade crossings, petitions for abolition of, . . . . 132
Informations at the relation of the Tax Commissioner, . . 322
Informations at the relation of the Commissioner of Cor-
porations, 479

Informations at the relation of the Treasurer and Receiver-
General under corporation and inheritance tax laws, . . 358

Other inheritance tax cases, 873

Indictments for murder, 25

Land Court petitions, 11

Land-damage eases arising from the taking of land by the

Armory Commissioners, 2

Land-damage cases arising from the alteration of grade

crossings, 6

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Harbor and Land Commission, 4

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Charles River Basin Commission, 68

Land-damage eases arising from the taking of land by the

Massachusetts Highway Commission, 11

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Metropolitan Park Commission, 12

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board, .... 36
Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

State Board of Insanity, 1

viii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Wrentham School, 1

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Mt. Tom State Reservation Commission, .... 2
Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the

Greylock Reservation Commission, 2

Legislative counsel and agents, 48

Miscellaneous cases arising from the work of the above-named

commissions, 29

Miscellaneous cases, 266

Public charitable trusts, 90

Public administrators petitions, 256

Savings bank accounts, withdrawal of, 1

Settlement cases for support of insane paupers, ... 53

Capital Cases.
Indictments for murder pending at the date of the last
annual report have been disposed of as follows : —

Ming Sing, Hom Woom, Leon Gong, Wong Duck;
Wong How, Joe Guey, Dong Bok Ling, Yee Wat, Yee
Jung and Waeky Charles, indicted in Suffolk County, Au-
gust, 1907, for the murder of Chin Mon Quin, Wong Shu
Chin, Chin Leet and Leet Kai !N"om, at Boston, on Aug. 2,

1907. They were arraigned Sept. 3, 1907, and pleaded not
guilty. Charles W. Bartlett, Esq., Harvey H. Pratt, Esq.,
and J. C. Woodman, Esq., appeared as counsel for the de-
fendants. In February, 1908, the defendants were tried by
the jury before Pierce and Brown, J J. The result was a
verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree against all
the defendants except Yee Wat, who died in jail before the
verdict was rendered. In the case against Wong Duck,
Wong How and Dong Bok Ling, a motion for new trial was
granted by the court. The indictment against Yee Jung
was nol-prossed, and the defendant discharged. April 30,

1908, exceptions were filed in the cases against Ming Sing,
Hom Woom, Leon Gong, Joe Guey and Warry Charles.
These exceptions were overruled by the Supreme Judicial
Court, and on July 3, 1909, the defendants were sentenced
to death. On Oct. 12, 1909, this sentence was duly executed
upon Ming Sing, Hom Woom and Leon Gong. On 'Nov. 20,

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. ix

1909, after hearing before a committee of the Council, in the
cases of Joe Guey and Warry Charles sentence was com-
muted to imprisonment for life in the State Prison. In the
cases of Wong Duck, Wong How and Dong Bok Ling the in-
dictments were placed on file and the prisoners discharged.
The case was in charge of Assistant District Attorneys F. W.
McGettrick and M. J. Dwyer.

Salvatoee Caracoccia, indicted in Essex County, May,
1908, for the murder of Guiseppe Bellavia, at .Lynn, on
Jan. 20, 1908. He was arraigned June 23, 1908, and
pleaded not guilty. Michael L. Sullivan, Esq., and J. Frank
Williams, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the
defendant. The indictment for murder in the first degree
was nol-prossed, and on Feb. 17, 1909, the defendant was
tried on an indictment for an attempt to murder, and was
found guilty and sentenced to three years in the house of
correction. The case was in charge of District Attorney W.
Scott Peters.

Jessie Hay, indicted in Essex County, September, 1908,
for the murder of her infant child, at Lawrence, on April
25, 1908. She was arraigned Sept, 30, 1908, and pleaded
not guilty. John P. S. Mahoney, Esq., was assigned by the
court as counsel for the defendant. On Jan. 27, 1909, the
defendant retracted her former plea, and pleaded guilty to
manslaughter. This plea was accepted by the Common-
wealth, and on Feb. 1, 1909, the defendant was released on
probation. The case was in charge of District Attorney W.
Scott Peters.

John J. Hereihy, indicted in Hampden County, Decem-
ber, 1908, for the murder of David Moran, at Southwick,
on Sept. 11, 1908. He was arraigned Feb. 3, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. H. B. Putnam, Esq., was assigned by
the court as counsel for the defendant. The defendant re-
tracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty to murder in
the second degree. This plea was accepted by the Common-

x ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

wealth, and the defendant was thereupon sentenced to State
Prison for life. The case was in charge of District Attorney
Stephen S. Taft.

Frank Sarno, indicted in Hampden County, December,
1908, for the murder of Cemento Giglo, at Palmer, on Dec.
14, 1908. He pleaded not guilty. A. L. Green, Esq., was
assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. The
defendant retracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty to
manslaughter. This plea was accepted by the Common-
wealth, and the defendant was sentenced to State Prison
for not more than twenty nor less than sixteen years. The
case was in charge of District Attorney Stephen S. Taft.

Salvatore Signorelli, indicted in Essex County, Sep-
tember, 1908, for the murder of Mario Magri, at Lawrence,
on Aug. 13, 1908. He was arraigned June 15, 1909, and
pleaded guilty to manslaughter. John P. S. Mahoney, Esq.,
was assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. This
plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, and the defendant
was thereupon sentenced to State Prison for a term of not
more than fifteen nor less than ten years. The case was in
charge of District Attorney W. Scott Peters.

Hattie Simmons, indicted in Bristol County, November,
1908, for the murder of William P. Simmons. She was
arraigned Nov. 24, 1908, and pleaded not guilty. Charles
Mitchell, Esq., and Emanuel Sullavon, Esq., were assigned
by the court as counsel for the defendant. This indictment
was nol-prossed, and in February, 1909, the defendant was
reindicted for the murder of Harry P. Simmons. She was
again arraigned Feb. 15, 1909, and pleaded guilty to murder
in the second degree. This plea was accepted by the Com-
monwealth, and the defendant was thereupon sentenced to the
Reformatory Prison for Women for life. The case was in
charge of District Attorney James M. Swift.

Indictments for murder found since the date of the last
annual report have been disposed of as follows : —

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xi

John W. Brown, indicted in Middlesex County, March,
1909, for the murder of Lauretta Bland, at Newton, on
Feb. 19, 1909. He was arraigned June 11, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. Edgar P. Benjamin, Esq., was assigned
by the court as counsel for the defendant. On Nov. 12, 1909,
the defendant retracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty
to murder in the second degree. This plea was accepted by
the Commonwealth, and the defendant was thereupon sen-
tenced to State Prison for life. The case was in charge of
District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Francesco Chincholo, indicted in Suffolk County, Feb-
ruary, 1909, for the murder of Callogero De Luca, at Boston,
on Jan. IT, 1909. He was arraigned April 8, 1909, and
pleaded guilty to manslaughter. J. F. Sweeney, Esq., and
Guy Ham, Esq., appeared as counsel for the defendant.
This plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, and the de-
fendant was thereupon sentenced to State Prison for a term
of not more than twelve nor less than ten years. The case
was in charge of District Attorney Arthur D. Hill.

Patrick Gannon, indicted in Worcester County, May,
1909, for the murder of Mary Gannon, at Clinton, on April
13, 1909. He was arraigned May 20, 1909, and pleaded not
guilty. Thomas L. Walsh, Esq., was assigned by the court
as counsel for the defendant. In September, 1909, the de-
fendant was tried by a jury before Sanderson, J. So much
of the indictment as charged murder in the first degree was
nol-prossed, leaving it to stand for murder in the second
degree. The result was a verdict of guilty. The defendant
was thereupon sentenced to State Prison for life. The case
was in charge of District Attorney George S. Taft.

James B. Harmon, indicted in Middlesex County, March,
1909, for the murder of Maude H. Hartley, at Somerville,
on Dec. 18, 1908. He was arraigned March 24, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. Thomas F. Vahey, Esq., and James H.
Vahey, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the
defendant. In November, 1909, the defendant was tried

xii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

by a jury before White and Fox, JJ. On Dee. 11, 1909,
during the progress of the trial, the defendant retracted his
former plea, and pleaded guilty to murder in the second
degree. This plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, the
case was withdrawn from the jury, and the defendant was
sentenced to State Prison for life. The case was in charge
of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Salvatoee Laspeogata, indicted in Suffolk County,
March, 1909, for the murder of Giovanni Matarazzo, at
Boston, on Feb. 18, 1909. He was arraigned May 6, 1909,
and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. John E. Crowley, Esq.,
was assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. This
plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, and the defendant
was thereupon sentenced to State Prison for a term of not
more than twenty nor less than sixteen years. The case was
in charge of District Attorney Arthur D. Hill.

Joiix Murphy, indicted in Middlesex County, June, 1909,
for the murder of Thompson Crowe, John Carper, Michael
Yenson, Joseph L. Leveroni and Edwin Neurse, at Somer-
ville, on June 5, 1909. He was arraigned June 11, 1909,
and pleaded not guilty. No counsel was assigned to act for
the defendant. It appeared, upon examination by alienists,
that the defendant was insane at the time of the commission
of the crimes, and he was therefore committed to the State
Asylum for Insane Criminals at Bridgewater. The case was
in charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Lawrence F. Neesox, indicted in Plymouth County,
October, 1909, for the murder of Desere Vanderpole, at
Abington, on July 18, 1909. On Oct. 22, 1909, the defend-
ant was adjudged insane, and was committed to the Taunton
State Hospital. The case was in charge of District Attorney
Thomas E. Grover.

Hiram M. Perry, indicted in Suffolk County, March,
1909, for the murder of Catherine A. McDougall, at Boston,
on Feb. 24, 1909. He was arraigned April 30, 1909, and

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xiii

pleaded guilty to manslaughter. J. H. Vahey, Esq., was
assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. This
plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, and the defendant
was thereupon sentenced to State Prison for a term of not
more than ten nor less than five years. The case was in
charge of District Attorney Arthur D. Hill.

Ambrose Vax Buskiek, indicted in Essex County, May,
1909, for the murder of Catherine Gray, at Lawrence, on
Jan. 23, 1909. John P. S. Mahoney, Esq., was assigned
by the court as counsel for the defendant. On May 29, 1909,
the defendant was adjudged insane, and was committed to
the Danvers Insane Hospital. The case was in charge of
District Attorney W. Scott Peters.

The following indictments for murder are now pend-

Petee Deloeey and James Maxtie, indicted in Mid-
dlesex County, March, 1909, for the murder of Annie Mul-
lins, at Arlington, on March 27, 1908. They were arraigned
June 16, 1909, and pleaded not guilty. Erank McDermott,
Esq., Henry H. Winslow, Esq., and John A. E. Moroney,
Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the defend-
ants. In ^November, 1909, the defendants were tried by a
jury before Eox and White, J J. The result was a verdict
of guilty of manslaughter against Peter Delorey, and a
verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree against
James Mantir. Motion of defendants for a new trial was
denied, and defendants' exceptions are now pending. The
case is in charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Hexei Eeeeox, indicted in Middlesex County, September,
1909, for the murder of Florida LaKiviere, at Lowell, on
Aug. 27, 1909. He was arraigned Oct. 4, 1909, and pleaded
not guilty. William H. Bent, Esq., and Albert O. "Hamel,
Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the defend-
ant. No action has been taken in this case. The case is in
charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

xiv ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

William C. Howaed, indicted in Bristol County, Novem-
ber, 1908, for the murder of Ida Howard. He was arraigned
Nov. 24, 1908, and pleaded not guilty. James M. Morton,
Jr., Esq., and Edward T. Bannon, Esq., were assigned by
the court as counsel for the defendant. In February, 1909,
the defendant was tried by a jury before Crosby and Sander-
son, JJ. The result was a verdict of murder in the second
degree, and the defendant was thereupon sentenced to State
Prison for life. Exceptions were taken to the verdict of the
jury, which exceptions are now pending. The case is in
charge of District Attorney James M. Swift.

Chester S. Jordax, indicted in Middlesex County,
March, 1909, for the murder of Honora C. Jordan, at Somer-
ville, Sept. 1, 1908. He was arraigned April 15, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. Charles W. Bartlett, Esq., Harvey H.
Pratt, Esq., and Jeremiah S. Sullivan, Esq., were assigned
by the court as counsel for the defendant. In April, 1909,
the defendant was tried by a jury before Stevens and Bell,
J J. The result was a verdict of guilty of murder in the
first degree. The defendant's motion for a new trial was
denied, and exceptions are now pending. The case is in
charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Mary Keeleiier, indicted in Middlesex County, March,
1909, for the murder of Annie T. Kelleher, at Somerville,
on March 1, 1906. She was arraigned March 23, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. Hugh Bancroft, Esq., and Harry N.
Stearns, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the
defendant. No action has been taken in this case. The case
is in charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Giacinto Pelosi, indicted in Suffolk County, June, 1909,
for the murder of Mariana Pelosi, at Boston, on May 19,
1909. He was arraigned July 16, 1909, and pleaded not
guilty. A. H. Weed, Esq., was assigned by the court as
counsel for the defendant. No action has been taken in this
case. The case is in charge of District Attorney Joseph C.
Pelletier.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xv

Raymond Plouffe, indicted in Worcester County, Octo-
ber, 1909, for the murder of Henry N. Stone, at Harvard,
on Sept. 13, 1909. He was arraigned Nov. 5, 1909, and
pleaded not guilty. David F. O'Connell, Esq., and John M.
Maloney, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for
the defendant. No action has been taken in this case. The
case is in charge of District Attorney George S. Taft.

Elizabeth Richmond, indicted in Middlesex County,
September, 1909, for the murder of Stewart MacTavish, at
Cambridge, on July 23, 1909. She was arraigned Sept. 20,
1909, and pleaded not guilty. Ralph W. Gloag, Esq., was
assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. No ac-
tion has been taken in this case. The case is in charge of
District Attorney John J. Higgins.

Napoleon J. Rivet, indicted in Middlesex County, June,
1908, for the murder of Joseph Gailloux, at Lowell, on Feb.
29, 1908. He was arraigned June 17, 1908, and pleaded
not guilty. William H. Bent, Esq., and Joseph H. Guillett,
Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant.
In January, 1909, the defendant was tried by a jury before
Harris and Hitchcock, JJ. The result was a verdict of
guilty of murder in the first degree. Defendant's motion
for a new trial was denied, and exceptions are now pending.
The case is in charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins.

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company

Cases.
At the date of my annual report for 1908 there were pend-
ing four cases, which arose out of the controversy between the
Commonwealth and the New York, New Haven & Hartford
Railroad Company of which the history is given at length
in that report. Two of these cases were bills in equity
against the Worcester & Webster and Webster & Dudley
street railway companies, which, as I then stated, are, in
effect, disposed of by the decision of the Supreme Judicial
Court for the Commonwealth in Attorney-General ex rel. v.
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, 198

xvi ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Mass. 413. There was also pending an appeal from the
decree in the last-mentioned case, upon which a decision
affirming the decree was handed down on March 1, 1909.
(201 Mass. 371.) The other pending case was an informa-
tion in equity under the provisions of St. 1906, c. 372, in
which it was alleged that the New York, New Haven &
Hartford Railroad Company had directly or indirectly ac-
quired the ownership or control of shares of stock in the
Boston & Maine Railroad.

Since my last report His Excellency the Governor, by a
special message, dated April 20, 1909, recommended that
the Legislature consider the advisability of creating a cor-
poration authorized under proper limitations to purchase and
hold the stock, bonds and other evidences of indebtedness of
the Boston & Maine Railroad, and pointed out certain ad-
vantages which might accrue therefrom. Subsequently, on
June 18, 1909, the Legislature enacted chapter 519 of the
Acts of the year 1909, entitled, " An Act to incorporate the
Boston Railroad Holding Company." This corporation was,
in substance, a business corporation chartered " for the sole
purpose of acquiring and holding the whole or any part of
the capital stock, bonds and other evidences of indebtedness
of the Boston & Maine Railroad, and of voting upon all
certificates of stocks so acquired and held, and of receiving
and collecting dividends and interest upon said stock, bonds
and other evidences of indebtedness," and the stock so ac-
quired could not be sold without express authority from the
Legislature. The act further authorized any railroad cor-
poration chartered under the laws of the Commonwealth and
existing at the date of the passage of the act to guarantee the
principal of and the dividends and interest upon the capital
stock, bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness of
the Boston Railroad Holding Company, and after such guar-
anty to acquire and hold the securities of that company ; and
I am advised that, by authority of these provisions of law,
the Boston Railroad Holding Company has acquired some-
what more than one hundred thousand shares of stock of
the Boston & Maine Railroad, being the stock alleged in
the pending information against the New York, New Haven

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xvii

& Hartford Railroad Company, hereinbefore mentioned, to
be owned or controlled by it in violation of the laws of the
Commonwealth, and that the stock and bonds issued to pay
therefor have been guaranteed by the New York, New Haven
& Hartford Railroad Company. Since the situation which
existed at the date of the filing of such information has been
so materially changed with reference to the ownership or
control of the stock of the Boston & Maine Railroad, and
since the ownership and control now existing in the Boston
Railroad Holding Company have been expressly sanctioned
by the Legislature, there is no further merit in the pending
information already referred to ; and that proceeding, as
well as the bills in equity directed against the Worcester &
Webster and the Webster & Dudley street railway companies,
respectively, may properly be dismissed.

Chapter 86 of the Resolves of 1908.
By resolve of the Legislature approved May 1, 1908, it
was provided that : —

The attorney-general is hereby authorized and directed to inquire
and determine to what extent, if any, the sovereignty of the com-
monwealth has been violated by the Berkshire Power Company, a
Connecticut corporation, which, by the erection and maintenance
of a dam across the Housatonic river in the state of Connecticut,
some distance southerly of the line between said state and the town
of Sheffield in this commonwealth, is alleged to have overflowed
lands and highway in said town, causing great hindrance to public
travel and menacing the public health. And the attorney-general
is authorized to institute such proceedings in the premises in courts
outside of this commonwealth as he may deem expedient, in the
name and at the expense of the commonwealth.

This resolve is to be construed as calling the attention of
the Attorney-General to the situation which exists with ref-
erence to the construction by the Berkshire Power Company,
a Connecticut corporation, of a dam across the Housatonic
River in the State of Connecticut, and the consequent flow-
ing of adjacent lands in the town of Sheffield, in the Com-
monwealth of Massachusetts, which is stated to have caused
great hindrance to public travel and has menaced the public

xviii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

health. From so much of the resolve as authorizes the
Attorney-General to institute proceedings in courts outside
the Commonwealth, it may further be inferred that it was
the desire of the Legislature that, should conditions warrant
it, an appropriate proceeding should be brought in the courts
of the United States or in the courts of Connecticut for the
purpose of abating the alleged nuisance.

In accordance with the desire of the Legislature as ex-
pressed in this resolve, I have made a careful investigation
of the question presented therein, and have twice visited the
locality where the effect of the dam referred to is manifested,
once in the company of a competent engineer.

The facts in the case are, briefly stated, that the Berkshire
Power Company, a corporation organized under the laws of
Connecticut for the purpose, among others, of owning, con-
structing and operating power plants of various kinds for
generating electricity, has constructed a dam across the Hou-
satonic River at North Canaan, Conn., the height of such
dam being about 6 feet, exclusive of flash boards. It is
said that, taking into, consideration all the circumstances, the
difference between the water above and below the dam is
approximately 8 feet. It further appears that the country
above the dam is, comparatively speaking, flat, and that the
raising of the water, even to the extent specified, results in
the flowing of a considerable area of riparian land, including
to some extent two or three of the highways of the town of
Sheffield.

No detailed estimate of the damage to the highways has
been presented to me. The flowed area is not permanently
below the level of high-water mark, except as to a very small
area, and the only effect of such flowing, of which I am
advised, is to place water upon such highways and land at
certain times and seasons, especially during what are called
the spring freshets, and to render a certain area of the land
in the village of Sheffield swampy. The dam of the Berk-
shire Power Company was erected under express authority of
the State of Connecticut in Special Acts of Connecticut,
1905, chapter 374, an act which provides for the payment of

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xix

damages to any person whose property is injured by the
erection or maintenance of such dam.

Attempts have been made to settle the damages so occa-
sioned to Massachusetts land owners, but in some cases these
have failed, and there has been considerable litigation in
the federal courts. It was there attempted to obtain an
injunction against the company, but it was finally held that
the complainant was estopped from claiming this form of
relief, for the reason that he had participated in negotiations
for a settlement. See Griffith v. Berkshire Power Co., and
Hughes v. Berkshire Bower Co., 158 Fed. 219. The court
did, however, intimate that in the same proceeding the com-
plainants might have their damages assessed. See also
Andrus v. Berkshire Bower Co., 145 Fed. 47, 147 Fed. 76,
and 203 U. S. 596. It is clear, moreover, that owners of
property in Massachusetts who are damaged have a remedy
under the Connecticut statute, should they go into Connecti-
cut to enforce it. Brickett v. Haverhill Aqueduct Co., 142
Mass. 394.

In any event, however, the Attorney-General has no author-
ity to prosecute claims for the benefit of private individuals,
except in the single instance of the unascertained individuals
who may benefit by a public charitable trust; and there his
power and duty in the premises rest upon the benefit which
accrues to the public generally by the proper administration
of a charitable trust, rather than upon any benefit which may
accrue to the individuals whom, because they are unascertain-
able, he represents. Even if the State should make the
claims of those individuals who have been damaged in their
property rights its own, and should attempt to pursue such
claims in the courts of the United States, where alone they
may be so pursued, it would be unavailing. See New Hamp-
shire v. Louisiana, 10S U. S. 76. If, therefore, any action
upon the part of the Attorney-General is required in the
premises, it must be upon the ground that the public health,
convenience and safety are affected to such a degree as to
constitute a public nuisance, or that the rights of the Com-
monwealth of Massachusetts, as a sovereign State, have been
invaded, to such an extent as to justify an appeal to the

xx ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Supreme Court of the United States for redress. It may be
assumed that if the Commonwealth were dealing with a pri-
vate individual or corporation within the limits of its juris-
diction, the flowing of the highways would constitute a pub-
lic nuisance to the extent that such individual or corporation
might be indicted and prosecuted therefor, if there were no
reasonably proper ground for such flowage. It does not
follow, however, that because an obstruction of the highway
might be made the subject of a criminal indictment, it is
therefore, and for that reason alone, a proper ground for
action by the Attorney-General.

But it may be assumed that if an individual or corporation

within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth had committed

the acts complained of, such acts, if unauthorized, would

justify interference by appropriate proceedings upon the

part of the Attorney-General in the interests of the general

public who use the highways. The precise question to be

determined is, therefore, whether or not such acts constitute

a sufficient ground for a proceeding by the Commonwealth,

by its chief law officer, in the Supreme Court of the United

States, to vindicate its sovereignty or to protect the lives or

property of its inhabitants from the acts of a citizen of

another State, — for such an action can be brought in no

inferior court. Article III., section 2 of the Constitution

of the United States provides that the judicial power of the

United States shall extend to " controversies between two or

more states," and controversies " between a state and citizens

of another state ; " and by the same article and section it is

also provided that in cases " in which a state shall be a party,

the supreme court shall have original jurisdiction." See

New Hampshire v. Louisiana, 108 U. S. 76, 86. Any action

upon the facts here presented would undoubtedly be an action

by a State against the inhabitants of another State, within

the meaning of the Constitution, and would therefore have to

be brought in the Supreme Court of the United States. That

such an action will lie, has long been established. Thus it

was said in the late case of Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co.,

206 U. S. 230, 237: —

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxi

The caution with which demands of this sort, on the part of a
State, for relief from injuries analogous to torts, must be examined,
is dwelt upon in Missouri v. Illinois, 200 U. S. 496, 520, 521. But
it is plain that some such demands must be recognized, if the grounds
alleged are proved. When the States by their union made the forci-
ble abatement of outside nuisances impossible to each, they did not
thereby agree to submit to whatever might be done. They did not
renounce the possibility of making reasonable demands on the
ground of their still remaining gmm'-sovereign interests; and the
alternative to force is a suit in this court. Missouri v. Illinois,
180 U. S. 208, 241.

But the case presented must be one of serious and general
interest to the complainant. So, in Missouri v. Illinois, 200
U. S. 496, 521, the court said: —

Before this court ought to intervene, the case should be of serious
magnitude, clearly and fully proved, and the principle to be applied
should be one which the court is prepared deliberately to maintain
against all considerations on the other side. See Kansas v. Col-
orado, 185 U. S. 125.

Is the case presented by the situation in the town of
Sheffield such a case that the highest court in the land would
hold that it was of such serious magnitude as would, between
sovereign and independent States, justify a resort to war ?
See Missouri v. Illinois, 200 U. S. 518, 520. I say without
hesitation that it is not ; that injuries of the character here
complained of have existed and have been tolerated if not
recognized by the courts of the several States for a long
time. Indeed, our own court has declared the principle which
governs acts of the character here set forth. In Manville Co.
v. Worcester, 138 Mass. 89, the court expressly recognized the
possibility of creating an easement upon land in one State by
acts accomplished in another. That case was an action of
tort by the owner of a mill site in the State of Ehode Island
for the diversion of waters in Massachusetts. The court held
that there was no distinction between nowage and diversion,
and in disposing of a contention that a servitude could not be
created in one State in favor of lands in another State,
said: —

xxii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

We are unable to agree to this proposition upon either principle
or authority. Every decision and dictum that we have found, bear-
ing on the precise point, is the other way. Slack v. Walcott,
3 Mason, 508, 516; Thayer v. Brooks, 17 Ohio, 4S9; Stillman v.
White Bock Manfg. Co., 3 Woodb. & M. 538; Bundle v. Delaware
& Baritan Canal, 1 Wall. Jr. 275, S. C. 14 How. SO; Foot v. Ed-
wards, 3 Blatchf. 310.

We think that the cases which recognize civil, and even criminal,
liability for flowing land in one State by means of a dam in another,
are hardly less pertinent. Howard v. Ingersoll, 17 Ala. 780;
Wooster v. Great Falls Manfg. Co., 39 Maine, 246; Eachus v. Illi-
nois & Michigan Canal, 17 111. 534; Armendiaz v. Stillman, 54 Texas,
623; State v. Lord, 16 N. H. 357. The defendant admits these cases
to be law, and tries to distinguish them. But we cannot assent to
the distinction between discharging and withdrawing water.

The court further observes : —

Of course the laws of Rhode Island cannot subject Massachusetts
land to a servitude, and, apart from any constitutional considera-
tions, if there are any, which we do not mean to intimate, Massa-
chusetts might prohibit the creation of such servitudes. So it might
authorize any acts to be done within its limits, however injurious
to lands or persons outside them. But it does not do either. It has
no more objection to a citizen of Rhode Island owning an easement,
as incident to his ownership of land in that State, than it has to
his owning it in gross, or to his purchasing lands here in fee. Ques-
tions might be conceived as to the transfer of such easements, but
they do not arise here. Slack v. Walcott, ubi supra. So far as their
creation is concerned, the law of Massachusetts governs, whether
the mode of creation be by deed or prescription, or whether the
right be one which is regarded as naturally arising out of the relation
between the two estates; being created, the law of Rhode Island,
by permission of that of Massachusetts, lays hold of them and
attaches them in such way as it sees fit to land there, Massachusetts
being secured against anything contrary to its views of policy by
the common traditions of the two States, and by the power over its
own territory which it holds in reserve.

In speaking of this case the court said, in Mulhall v.
Fallon, 176 Mass. 266, 267: —

We come then to the more difficult question, whether the plaintiff
can claim the benefit of the act. However this may be decided, it
is not to be decided upon any theoretic impossibility of Massachu-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxiii

setts law conferring a right outside her boundary lines. In Mann-
ville Co. v. Worcester, 138 Mass. 89, where a Rhode Island corpora-
tion sought to recover for a diversion of waters from its mill in
Rhode Island by an act done higher up the stream in Massachusetts,
it was held, following earlier decisions, that there was no such im-
possibility, although the point was strongly urged. It is true that
legislative power is territorial, and that no duties can be imposed
by statute upon persons who are within the limits of another State.
But rights can be offered to such persons, and if, as is usually the
case, the power that governs them makes no objection, there is
nothing to hinder their accepting what is offered.

Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States has
recognized the same limitation, for in the case of Missouri
v. Illinois, 200 U. S. 496, the court said (p. 521) : —

But it does not follow that every matter which would warrant a
resort to equity by one citizen against another in the same juris-
diction equally would warrant an interference by this court with
the action of a State. It hardly can be that we should be justified
in declaring statutes ordaining such action void in every instance
where the Circuit Court might intervene in a private suit, upon no
other ground than analogy to some selected system of municipal
law, and the fact that we have jurisdiction over controversies be-
tween States.

The nearest analogy would be found in those eases in which an
easement has been declared in favor of land in one State over land
in another. But there the right is recognized on the assumption of
a concurrence between the two States, the one, so to speak, offering
the right, the other permitting it to be accepted. Mannville Co. v.
Worcester, 138 Massachusetts, 89. But when the State itself is con-
cerned, and by its legislation expressly repudiates the right set up,
an entirely different question is presented.

It seems to me that we have here exactly the case of a
servitude created in one State upon lands situated in another,
against which no provision has been enacted in the State
where the land is situated, and where full and adequate means
of assessing damages have been afforded to individuals or
corporations in their property; and that, so far as concerns
the flowing of the land and the injury to private owners,
there is no ground for action upon the part of the attorney-
general.

xxiv ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Upon the score of public health there is no evidence to
show that any such situation exists as requires the interven-
tion of the Supreme Court of the United States. The general
public appears to be affected only to a limited extent, even
by the flowing of riparian land and a section of some hundred
yards in length of a highway and lesser damage to one or two
other highways in the town of Sheffield. When one con-
trasts the statement of the situation at Sheffield, of the portion
of the public affected, and of the very slight grounds for action
upon the part of the Commonwealth as a sovereign State,
with the situation of which the State of Georgia complained,
in Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., supra, where the allega-
tion of the bill, that a wholesale destruction of forest, orchard
and crops was going on, and other injuries were being done
and threatened in five counties, was amply sustained by the
proof offered to the court, who found that noxious gas was
carried by the wind great distances and over great tracts of
Georgia land, — it seems hardly necessary to seek further
authority for the proposition that it would be impossible to
prove a case based upon the condition in Sheffield, which
would bring an action by the Commonwealth against the
Berkshire Power Company, a corporation and citizen of
Connecticut, within the principle laid down by the Supreme
Court of the United States as governing action by a State
against a citizen of another State.

The Claim of Axxa E. Coxaxt.
On March 15 an order of the House of Representatives,
adopted in concurrence by the Senate, w^as transmitted to
me, requesting me to investigate the matter of the petition
of Anna E. Conant, pending before the General Court, for
reimbursement for damages sustained by her in 1901 by
reason of the change of grade of Mount Vernon Street in the
city of Boston, and to state in this report whether or not
her claim or any part of it should be paid by the Common-
wealth. The facts upon which this claim is based are as
follows: In 1903 Anna F. Conant petitioned the Legislature
for the payment of the sum of $4,000 to indemnify her for

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxv

the damages sustained by her in 1901 as lessee and occupant
of the premises No. 31 Mount Vernon Street in the city
of Boston, through the change of grade of Mount Vernon
Street, under authority of St. 1900, c. 382, as amended by
St. 1901, c. 525. She employed counsel for the purpose of
having her petition for damages duly filed in court, in accord-
ance with the provisions of statute above referred to, but no
petition was brought within the time therein prescribed. The
petition filed with the Legislature in 1903 was referred
to the next General Court, with the result that in the fol-
lowing year the petitioner was given leave to withdraw. A
new petition, based upon the same subject matter, but seek-
ing the payment of the lesser sum of $2,500, was presented
to the Legislature in 1909, and such petition, with the accom-
panying resolve, was submitted to me, in accordance with the
order above referred to.

I have carefully investigated the matter, and I find that
for approximately twenty years the petitioner has occupied
the premises at 31 Mount Vernon Street, and during all of
that period has conducted the business of renting rooms and
furnishing board therein. For some time before and during
the work of construction necessary in changing the grade of
Mount Vernon Street the petitioner occupied such premises
under a written lease at a rental price of $2,000 a year. By
reason of such work access to her house was seriously inter-
fered with for a period of four months, and the condition
of the street during the whole process of the work was such
as to make her house unattractive and uncomfortable to
occupants of long standing, as well as to prospective patrons,
and resulted in the temporary loss of some business and the
diversion of other business for a year. The furnishing of
board, which formed a very substantial part of the entire
business, was seriously affected during the process of the
work. The petitioner's lessor made no reduction of rent for
this period of disturbance, and, so far as I can ascertain, the
petitioner has not received any compensation from such
lessor for the damages sustained by her. The lessor received
damages amounting to the sum of $7,000 on account of the
limitation of the height of his building, and was paid ap-

xxvi ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

proximately $450 for the cost of adapting his building to
the changed conditions, but received nothing on account of
damage to his lessee. The petitioner, by reason of the
statute of limitations, is not legally entitled to any payment,
but is, in my opinion, equitably entitled to be paid the sum
of $1,500 by the Commonwealth, on account of damages
sustained by her as herein described.

Oedeks eoe the Reduction of the Peice of Gas.

In my last report I stated that the case of Haverhill Gas
Light Company v. Barker and others, a bill in equity to
restrain the Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners
and the Attorney-General from enforcing an order of the
commissioners fixing the price at which gas should be sold
by the Haverhill Gas Light Company at 80 cents per 1,000
cubic feet, had been referred by the Circuit Court, in which
it was pending, to a special master, to find the facts and
report thereon to the court. During the year numerous hear-
ings have been had before the master, but the case has not
as yet been fully heard by him. Recently the city council
of Haverhill has voted to acquire a municipal gas plant. Un-
der the provisions of the statute governing the acquisition by
municipalities of plants for the manufacture or distribution
of gas, another favorable vote on the part of the council and
approval by the voters of the city will be necessary. If such
action is taken, it is probable that the plant belonging to the
petitioner in this case will be acquired by the city.

In view of the agreement of the Salem Gas Li^ht Com-
pany to comply with the order of the Board of Gas and
Electric Light Commissioners fixing the price at which gas
should be sold by that company at $1.10 per 1,000 cubic
feet, made in consequence of the petition filed by me on be-
half of the Board in the Supreme Judicial Court to enforce
such order, such petition and the bill in equity filed in the
Circuit Court of the United States by the company to restrain
the Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners and the
Attorney-General from enforcing the order have been dis-
missed.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxvii

Grade Crossings.
During the past year the Commonwealth has been repre-
sented at more than eighty hearings before special commis-
sions and auditors or in the courts. Of these, Mr. H. W.
Hayes, engineer of grade crossings, has attended seventy-six,
and has made forty-four visits of inspection of construction
work in progress at Fitchburg, Worcester, Russell, Mai-
den, Belmont, Hyde Park, Somerville, Deerfleld, Northfield,
Lynn, Neponset, Newton, Lanesborough and Stockbridge.
Fifty statements of expenditures submitted to auditors by
railroad corporations, cities and towns, amounting to $2,324-
575, have been examined and verified, and the Commonwealth
has objected to items to the amount of $56,713.06, as a result
of which the sum of $21,208.09 has been disallowed, and the
questions involving most of the balance still remain to be
decided. At the request of the special commissions appointed
to abolish grade crossings at Southborough and at Weston, the
engineer of grade crossings has prepared plans and drafted
reports for the elimination of the several crossings affected.

Civil Service Law.
As the law now stands (R. L., c. 19, § 34), a ruling of the
Civil Service Commissioners that a person is appointed to
or employed in the public service in violation of the civil
service rules can be made completely effective only by a
proceeding brought by the Attorney-General, at the relation
of the Civil Service Commissioners, in the Superior Court.
In my judgment, there would be a gain in ease and efficiency
of administration, without injustice to appointees or em-
ployees in the public service classified under civil service
rules, if the law were so changed as to make a ruling of the
Civil Service Commissioners conclusive unless reviewed by
the court in a proceeding brought by the employee or ap-
pointee; and I suggest for your consideration whether legis-
lation should not be enacted to accomplish this result.

xxviii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

The Inheritance Tax.
The inheritance tax statutes (R. L., c. 15, § 4, and St.
1909, c. 490, Part IV, § 4) charge property subject to a
legacy or succession tax with a lien to secure the payment
of such tax, but no suitable method is provided by which
such lien may be enforced. I therefore recommend legisla-
tion which will provide an adequate method of enforcing such
lien.

Forms of Mittimus.
There are in use in the various courts of the Common-
wealth different forms of blank for a mittimus. It wonld
seem desirable, for the convenience of the officials of the
Commonwealth in the performance of their duties, that the
blanks be made uniform, or at least that the statute under
which the person is sentenced be referred to in the mittimus ;
and I call this matter to your attention, for such action as
you may deem proper.

Levy ox Corporate Shares.
As pointed out by the Supreme Judicial Court in a recent'
case, since the enactment of St. 1884, c. 229, now re-enacted
in St. 1903, c. 437, § 28, the system for the attachment of
shares of stock and for taking them on execution, set forth in
R. L., c. 167, §§ 6Q, 68, and c. 177, § 50, respectively,
cannot be literally carried out and applied. The changes
made by St. 1884, c. 229, as to the title of the holder of
the certificate after a sale, made necessary a corresponding
change in the effect of an execution sale. I therefore recom-
mend that the necessary change in R. L., c. 177, be made,
and that there be some provision for the retirement of the
original shares of stock.

Departmext of the Attorxey-Gexerar.
During the past year cases to the number of 3,321 have
occupied the attention of this department. The total amount
of collections made on behalf of the Commonwealth is ap-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxix

proximately $226,419, of which $4,484 were penalties col-
lected from corporations for failure to comply with the
provisions of law regulating the filing of statements in the
various departments. Under St. 1909, c. 266, providing for
the collection of taxes upon legacies and successions by an
action of contract or by informations in equity brought in
the Supreme Judicial Court, the sum of $10,174.67 has been
recovered.

On the first day of March, 1909, Mr. James F. Curtis,
after more than three years of faithful and efficient service
as an Assistant Attorney-General, resigned, to take a position
as Assistant District Attorney for Suffolk County. While
Assistant Attorney-General he performed the duties assigned
to him with conspicuous ability, and the meritorious per-
formance of his work deserves high commendation.

Annexed to this report are the principal opinions submitted
during the current year.

Respectfully submitted,

DANA MALOATE,

Attorney-General.

OPINIONS

OPINIONS.

Corporation — Purpose of Organization — Buying and Selling

Real Estate.

The Commissioner of Corporations has no authority to approve the in-
corporation of certain persons for the purchase of waste, unde-
veloped or partially developed lands with a view to their development
and sale, such purpose being forbidden by St. 1903, c. 437, § 7, as
amended by St. 1906, c. 286, § 1, that " three or more persons may
associate themselves . . . with the intention of forming a corpo-
ration under the general laws for any lawful purpose . . . except
to buy and sell real estate."

Jan. 21, 1909.
Hon. William D. T. Trefry, Commissioner of Corporations.

Dear Sir: — In a letter of Jan. 21, 1909, you have requested
my opinion as to whether or not you have authority to approve
the incorporation of certain persons for purposes as follows : —

To buy and make waste, undeveloped and partially developed land
into useful property; to survey and divide the same into building
lots and roads, to build factories thereon and sell, or develop a
manufacturing business in the same, or improve it in any other way ;
to accept pay therefor in stocks, or mortgages. To sell houselots for
cash, or on land contracts, or bonds. To establish parks and pleasure
grounds on the same, and to make, vend, buy and sell any and all
kinds of manufactured articles and to do any and all other things
necessary or convenient to carry out the general purposes specified,
so far as the same shall not conflict with the laws of the Common-
wealth.

The provision of the statute upon the subject is clear and
definite. St. 1903, c. 437, § 7, as amended by St. 1906, c. 286,
provides as follows : —

Three or more persons may associate themselves by a written agree-
ment of association with the intention of forming a corporation under
the general laws for any lawful purpose which is not excluded by
the provision of section one except to buy and sell real estate.

2 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Among the purposes of the proposed corporation is the purpose
to buy and sell real estate, which is obviously not a purpose for
which incorporation is permitted by the statute.

In my opinion, therefore, you are quite correct in your ruling
to the effect that you had no authority to approve of the incor-
poration proposed for the purposes described.
Very truly yours,

Daxa Maloxe, Attorney-General.

Boards of Health — Causes of Sickness — Contagious Diseases —
Right to enter Schools — Inspectors of Health.

A local board of health may, under its general authority conferred by
E. L., c. 75, if in fact a contagions disease as a cause of sickness is
found in a school, or if such board has reasonable and proper
grounds for believing that a contagious disease may be found
therein, enter such school and make all necessary examinations in the
premises, and, if pupils suffering from contagious diseases danger-
ous to the public health are found, may remove such pupils to a
hospital or quarantine station, but, in the absence of any reason-
able grounds for believing that contagious disease existed in a
school, such board or its agents would have no authority to enter
therein for the purpose of making an examination of the physical
condition of the pupils in attendance.

State inspectors of health, acting under their general powers as defined
in St. 1907, c. 537, § 3, providing that such inspectors " shall gather
all information possible concerning the prevalence of tuberculosis
and other diseases dangerous to the public health within his dis-
trict," would not be authorized to enter a school or hospital for the
purpose of making a physical examination of individual pupils or
patients.

Jan. 22, 1909.
William C. Hanson", M.D., Acting Secretary, State Board of Health.

Dear Sir : — You require my opinion upon the question
" whether a local board of health, or its agent, acting under
its general powers in investigating causes of sickness within its
town and removing or preventing the same, has authority to enter
public schools for the purpose of detecting causes of sickness, and,
in case of discovery of infection in a pupil, to exclude such pupil
from the school, and to make such further quarantine regula-
tions as it may in case of disease in a house for the protection
of the public."

I assume that your inquiry is directed to the exercise by local
boards of health of the general powers conferred upon such

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 3

boards, with respect to causes of sickness, by E. L., c. 75, § 65,
which is as follows : —

The board of health shall examine into all nuisances, sources of
filth and causes of sickness within its town, or on board of vessels
within the harbor of such town, which majr in its opinion be injurious
to the public health, shall destroy, remove or prevent the same as
the case may require and shall make regulations for the public health
and safety relative thereto and relative to articles which are capable
of containing or conveying infection or contagion or of creating sick-
ness which are brought into or conveyed from its town, or into or
from any vessel. Whoever violates any such regulation shall forfeit
not more than one hundred dollars.

and that your inquiry is further limited to the authority of a
local board of health, where contagious diseases have been found
actually to exist, to enter a school and discover whether or not
such disease is actually present among the pupils attending such
school. If it be further assumed that entries into such school
for purposes involving an examination of the physical condition
of the scholars therein are based upon reasonable grounds for
believing that cases of sickness, which are in fact and effect
causes of sickness, exist in such school, I am of opinion that
local boards of health have the necessary power in the premises.
Where sources of sickness actually exist, the powers of local boards
of health are broad and comprehensive. See Belmont v. New
England Brick Co., 190 Mass. 442; Stone v. Heath, 179 Mass.
385. And such powers are not weakened where the causes of
sickness are cases of contagious disease so numerous as to form
an epidemic. See Oliver v. Gale, 182 Mass. 39, 40. Chapter
75 of the Eevised Laws itself contains provisions for dealing with
diseases dangerous to the public health, and gives to a local board
of health the power to remove or to quarantine a person suf-
fering from a disease of that character. See sections 42, 43, 44
and 45.

It follows, therefore, that if in fact contagious disease as a
cause of sickness is found in a school, or if a local board of health
has reasonable and proper grounds for believing that such con-
tagious disease may be found therein, such board has authority
to enter such school and to make all necessary examinations in
the premises, and if pupils suffering from contagious diseases
dangerous to the public health are found therein, to remove them
to a hospital or quarantine station, in accordance with the pro*

4 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

visions of section 42 above referred to. Upon the other hand,
however, I am of opinion that a local board of health has no
greater powers with respect to investigating generally the state
of health of the pupils in a school than such board would have
with respect to any other individual; and that, in the absence
of any reasonable ground to believe that contagious disease as a
cause of sickness exists in any school, such board of health, or its
agents, would have no authority to enter upon the premises for
the purpose of making an examination of the physical condition
of the pupils in attendance at such school.

Your communication further inquires whether State inspectors
of health, acting under their general powers as defined in St.
1907, c. 537, § 3, which provides that each State inspector of
health " shall gather all information possible concerning the
prevalence of tuberculosis and other diseases dangerous to the
public health within his district," have authority to enter school-
houses and hospitals for the purpose of obtaining such informa-
tion. The State inspectors of health are appointed under the
provisions of St. 1907, c. 537, which provides in section 3 that: —

Every state inspector of health shall inform himself respecting
the sanitary condition of his district and concerning all influences
dangerous to the public health or threatening to affect the same; he
shall gather all information possible concerning the prevalence of
tuberculosis and other diseases dangerous to the public health within
his district, shall disseminate knowledge as to the best methods of
preventing the spread of such diseases, and shall take such steps as,
after consultation with the state board of health and the local state
authorities, shall be deemed advisable for their eradication; he shall
inform himself concerning the health of all minors employed in
factories within his district, and, whenever he may deem it advisable
or necessary, he shall call the ill health or physical unfitness of any
minor to the attention of his or her parents or employers and of the
state board of health.

You do not, in this question, state the character of the in-
formation of which the health inspector is assumed to be in
search. If such inspector desires to enter a school or hospital
for the purpose of making a physical examination of individual
pupils or patients, I am of opinion that the statute above quoted
would not authorize him so to do. He has, however, the same
right to enter a hospital or school that is po-sessed by any other
individual in search of information, independent of statute. If
the statute above quoted confers upon such inspector any right

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 5

of entry into hospitals or schools, such right or authority must
be found in the first clause of section 3, and must be for the
purpose of enabling the inspector to inform himself concerning
the sanitary conditions of his district, which conceivably might
include the sanitary condition or method of construction of either
a hospital or a school, and such other information of like nature
as might be deemed necessary or important. Upon the other
hand, if the information which he seeks is to be gained by an
examination of persons or of records of cases in the custody of a
hospital or school, or other similar information, I am of opinion
that the statute does not contemplate the acquisition thereof as
a matter of right, and does not confer authority upon the in-
spector to enter either a hospital or a school for any such pur-
pose.

Very truly yours,

Dana Maloxe, Attorney-General.

Boston & Maine Railroad — Extension of Line — Consolidation
with other Corporations — Liability to Forfeiture of Charter.

The ownership and control of the Portsmouth Street Railway and the
purchase of the Eastern Eailroad Company, both corporations of the
State of New Hampshire, by the Boston & Maine Railroad, were duly
authorized by the Legislature of this Commonwealth, and such ac-
quisition and control do not render the charter of the Boston & Maine
Railroad liable to forfeiture under the provision of St. 1906, c. 463,
part II., § 47, that " if a railroad corporation owning a railroad
in this commonwealth and consolidated with a corporation owning
a railroad in another state . . . without authority of the general
court, . . . extends its line of railroad, or consolidates with any
other corporation, . . . the charter and franchise of such corporation
shall be subject to forfeiture."

The acquisition and control of the Concord Street Railway and the ex-
tension of its line from Concord to Manchester, by the Concord &
Montreal Railroad Company, was an acquisition and extension of
a New Hampshire corporation of its own line, under proper authority
from the State of New Hampshire, and such acquisition and exten-
sion do not render liable to forfeiture under the provision of law
above cited the charter of the Boston & Maine Railroad, which
operates the Concord & Montreal Railroad under a lease authorized
by the Legislature of this Commonwealth.

Feb. 16, 1909.

Hon. Allen T. Treadway, President of the Senate.

Sir : — On January 26 an order of the tenor following was
adopted by the Honorable Senate : —

6 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Ordered, That the Attorney-General be requested to inform the
Senate whether in his opinion the Boston & Maine Railroad Com-
pany, or any other railroad corporation owning a railroad in the
Commonwealth and consolidated with a railroad in another State,
has subjected itself to the forfeiture of its charter and franchise by
reason of the provision of the general railroad and railway law con-
tained in chapter four hundred and ninety-three of the statutes of
nineteen hundred and six which forbids such a corporation to extend
its line of railroad without the authority of the General Court, or
by reason of any other provision of section forty-seven of part two
of said chapter.

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the foregoing
order, and to reply thereto as follows : —

I assume that the Honorable Senate, by reference to " chapter
four hundred and ninety-three of the statutes of nineteen hun-
dred and six," intended to designate chapter 463 of the Acts of
said year, which is entitled " An Act relative to railroad corpora-
tions and street railway companies," and to require my opinion
upon the effect of section 47 of part II. of said chapter wTith ref-
erence to the present status of the Boston & Maine Railroad and
of any other railroad corporation owning a railroad within the
Commonwealth and consolidated with a railroad in another
State.

The section referred to, St. 1906, c. 463, part II., § 47, pro-
vides that : —

If a railroad corporation owning a railroad in this commonwealth
and consolidated with a corporation owning a railroad in another
state increases its capital stock, or the capital stock of such con-
solidated corporation, except as authorized by this act, without au-
thority of the general court, or without such authority extends its
line of railroad, or consolidates with any other corporation, or makes
a stock dividend, the charter and franchise of such corporation shall
be subject to forfeiture.

No evidence was transmitted to me by the Honorable Senate,
or is officially before me, with respect to any specific act or acts
of the Boston & Maine Railroad, or of any other consolidated
corporation operating a railroad within the Commonwealth, ex-
cept the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company,
upon the legal status of which, with respect to certain provisions
of the section above quoted, I have already expressed an opinion,
which is before the Honorable Senate in my annual report; and

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 7

I am aware of no provision of law which would require or even
authorize the Attorney-General officially to ascertain or determine
the facts material and necessary to a consideration of the present
inquiry, in order to perform intelligently the duty imposed upon
him by the provisions of E. L., c. 7, § 7, to " give his opinion
upon questions of law submitted to him by the governor and
council or by either branch of the general court."

I am informed, however, that, although the question in the
form submitted involves an investigation of fact with respect to
the history of the several consolidated railroad corporations which
operate railroads within the Commonwealth, which it is beyond
the power of the Attorney-General to make, the Honorable Sen-
ate had particularly in view certain definite and specific acts of
the Boston & Maine Railroad, upon the legality of which, with
respect to the provisions of the statute above quoted, my opinion
is desired, viz., the acquisition or control of the Concord Street
Eailway and the extension of its road to Manchester, the own-
ership and control of the Portsmouth Street Railway and the
purchase of the Eastern Railroad Company.

With respect to these transactions the material facts are mat-
ters of record, and are before me. The Concord Street Railway
is directly owned and operated by the Concord & Montreal Rail-
road Company, a corporation of the State of New Hampshire,
which has extended the line of such street railway to the city
of Manchester. Both the original purchase and the subsequent
extension were effected under and by virtue of the provisions of
the general laws of the State of New Hampshire, which permit
a railroad corporation to construct and operate its lines by elec-
tricity in or upon the public highways. The sections above re-
ferred to are as follows (St. 1895, c. 27, §§ 22 and 23) : —

Section 22. Every railroad corporation established under the laws
of this state, and operating railroads therein with steam for a motive
power, are hereby authorized to operate their railroads, or any part
thereof, by electricity; and for the purpose of making the necessary
changes from steam to electricity as motive power, every such rail-
road corporation may, with the consent of the railroad commission-
ers, and subject to the provisions of sections seventeen and eighteen
of this act, issue such an additional amount of capital stock as may
be necessary to defray the expenses of making such change in mo-
tive power and equipment.

Section" 23. If any existing steam railroad shall bnild extensions,
branches, or additions to its lines, to be operated by electricity as the

8 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

motive power, such steam railroad shall have the same right to build
and operate such extensions, branches, and additions in the public
highways, and be subject to all the duties, liabilities, and restrictions
as to that part of said extensions, branches, and additions operated
by electricity in public highways, as by the provisions of this act
are conferred and imposed upon street railways in their use of public
highways.

See St. (K H.) 1903, c. 102.

The connection of the Boston & Maine Railroad with these
transactions arises from the fact that it operates the Concord &
Montreal Railroad Company under a lease dated June 29, 1895,
and duly authorized by the Legislatures of Massachusetts and
of New Hampshire, in New Hampshire by chapter 5 of the Acts
of the year 1889, and in Massachusetts by St. 1893, c. 263. See
St. (N. H.) 1893, c. 100; St. (N. H.) 1889, c. 146.

It appears, therefore, that the acquisition of a street railway
line in Concord and the extension of such line from Concord to
Manchester by the Concord & Montreal Railroad Company was
an acquisition and extension by a New Hampshire corporation
of its own line, duly authorized thereto by the laws of that State.

The Portsmouth Street Railway Company was constructed and
is operated as a part of the Dover & Portsmouth Railroad Com-
pany, under authority of chapter 27 of the Acts of the year 1895,
of New Hampshire, the general law of the State of New Hamp-
shire, which, as before stated, permits the operation by steam
roads of extensions, branches or additions to its lines operated
by electricity in the public highways (see sections 22 and 23
of chapter 102 of the statutes of New Hampshire for the year
1903) ; and such street railway formed a part of the line of the
Dover & Portsmouth Eailroad Company on Jan. 1, 1900, when
such company was acquired by purchase by the Boston & Maine
Eailroad. This acquisition was effected under the express au-
thority of the State of New Hampshire, given in St. 1889, c. 5,
§ 10, which authorized the purchase of the road, franchises and
property of the Eastern Eailroad Company, the Eastern Eailroad
in New Hampshire, the Portsmouth, Great Falls & Conway Eail-
road, the Portsmouth & Dover Eailroad, and certain other rail-
roads therein named. The Massachusetts authority for the
purchase of the Portsmouth & Dover Eailroad appears to have
been conferred by St. 1891, c. 308, which in section 1 provided
that : —

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 9

The Boston and Maine Railroad is hereby authorized to acquire by
purchase, the road, franchises and property of any railroad corpora-
tion whose road is now operated by it under lease, contract or
through ownership of stock, and whether said road belongs to a cor-
poration organized under the laws of this Commonwealth or organ-
ized under the laws of the state of Maine, the state of New Hamp-
shire, or the state of Vermont.

Prior to the passage of this statute the relation of the Boston
& Maine Railroad to the Portsmouth & Dover Railroad Com-
pany had been that of lessor to lessee. It therefore appears that
the street railway in question forms a part of a railroad corpora-
tion whose property, rights and franchises are owned by the
Boston & Maine Railroad; that prior to such ownership such ex-
tensions as may have been made of the lines of the Portsmouth
Street Railway were extensions of the line of the Portsmouth &
Dover Railroad Company ; and that subsequent to such ownership
there have been, as I am informed, no extensions thereof.

The acquisition of the Eastern Railroad Company, as has been
stated, was authorized in New Hampshire by St. 1889, c. 5, which
in section 10 authorized the Boston & Maine Railroad to acquire
by purchase the road, franchises and property of the Eastern Rail-
road Company, and thereafter to acquire by purchase the roads,
franchises and property of the Eastern Railroad of New Hamp-
shire, the Portsmouth, Great Falls & Conway Railroad, and
certain other railroads therein specified. In section 12 the Bos-
ton & Maine Railroad was further authorized " to acquire by
purchase the road, franchises and property of any railroad cor-
poration incorporated under the laws of either the state of Mas-
sachusetts, Vermont or Maine whose road is now leased to or
operated by said Boston & Maine Railroad . . . ", — a general
provision identical with that contained in the Massachusetts
statute of 1891, chapter 308, which has already been quoted. In
Massachusetts a like permission was granted to the Boston &
Maine Railroad by St. 1888, c. 250, which in section 1 provided
for the acquisition of the Eastern Railroad Company, with au-
thority subsequently to acquire by purchase the road, franchises
and property of the Eastern Railroad Company of New Hamp-
shire and of the Portsmouth, Great Falls & Conway Railroad
(see St. 1890, c. 195). In accordance with the authority con-
ferred by these statutes of Massachusetts and New Hampshire,
respectively, the Boston & Maine Railroad acquired by purchase
the road, franchises and property of the Eastern Railroad Com-

10 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

pany on Ma}' 9, 1890, the Eastern Railroad in New Hampshire
on June 15, 1899, and the Portsmouth, Great Falls & Conway
Railroad on May 9, 1890.

From these facts it is clear that the Boston & Maine Eailroad
has not in the specific instances discussed consolidated with any
other railroad within the State of New Hampshire, and has not
within that State extended its own line contrary to the prohibi-
tion of St. 1906, c. 463, part II., § 47. It must follow, there-
fore, that if by reason of any of these transactions the charter
of the Boston & Maine Railroad has become liable to forfeiture
under the provision of law already referred to, it has become
liable thereto by reason of the extension of the line of the Con-
cord & Montreal Railroad Compan}*, a New Hampshire corpora-
tion leased by the Boston & Maine Railroad, from Concord to
Manchester in the State of New Hampshire, — an extension
which was duly authorized by the laws of New Hampshire. Upon
this point I am constrained to say to the Honorable Senate that
in my opinion the provisions of section 47 cannot be extended to
include, even by implication, an extension of the lines of a New
Hampshire corporation so authorized and effected. Even if the
extension under consideration were of the lines of the Boston &
Maine Railroad itself, the scope and purpose of the provision in
section 47, with respect to extensions of the lines of railroads be-
yond the limits of the Commonwealth, would not be wholly free
from doubt. In the case of Attorney-General ex rel v. New
York, New Haven & Hartford R.B. Co., 198 Mass. 413, the
court, in discussing a consolidated corporation similar to the Bos-
ton & Maine Railroad, and the mutual concessions by the several
States by which it was created, said (page 422) : —

How far, by reason of the peculiar nature of the corporation, or
by force of express provisions in the statutes, has Massachusetts
given up its right of control of this corporation, or relieved it of the
application of our general laws, and how far has it retained such
control? As creating a corporation to build and operate a railroad
in two different States, and by the language quoted from St. 1844,
c. 28, § 2, the Legislature recognized the fact that the corporation
might have certain franchises, rights, powers, privileges and prop-
erty granted or acquired under the laws of only one of the two
States. As to such rights and powers as pertain only to local mat-
ters, like the location of the railroad, the possession and manage-
ment of real estate, the crossing of highways and other railroads, the
State in which they were to be exercised would have exclusive juris-
diction. This fact is enough to show the reason for using the Ian-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 11

guage relied on by the defendant. In regard to all such matters, the
action of only one State would be appropriate and sufficient. How
far this implied authority to grant powers and franchises without
the co-operation of the sister State should be held to extend, it is
unnecessary in this case to decide. Whether it should go so far as
to include the acquisition of other railroads within the State where
the power is granted, or the location and construction of new lines
and extensions there, and an increase of the capital stock for such
purposes, is a question upon which it is not necessary to express an
opinion.

See 1 Op. Atty.-Gen., 118, 137.

It further appears that all issues of stock and bonds of the
Boston & Maine Railroad have been made in conformity to
the laws of the Commonwealth," and have been approved by the
Board of Eailroad Commissioners.

This being so, I have to advise the Honorable Senate that such
facts as I now have before me do not disclose any acts of the
Boston & Maine Railroad, or, with the exception hereinbefore
stated, of any other consolidated corporation which operates a
railroad within the Commonwealth, which would render liable to
forfeiture the charters of such corporations under the provisions
of section 47 of part II. of chapter 463 of the Acts of 1906.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Registration of Hunters — Citizen — Residence on Land used
exclusively for Agricultural Purposes.

Under the provisions of St. 1908, c. 484, § 3, which exempts, from the re-
quirement prescribed by the statute of a certificate of registration,
citizens who are bona fide residents on land owned or leased by them,
and on which they are actually domiciled, such land being used ex-
clusively for agricultural purposes, a person who is resident in a city
or town and not upon a farm, but who is the owner of a wood lot
used for growing wood, is not exempt from registration. A farmer,
however, who is actually resident upon land used exclusively for
agricultural purposes, may hunt without registration in a wood lot
which is a part of his farm.

Feb. 26, 1909.

Hon. George W. Field, Chairman, Commissioners on Fisheries and

Game.
Dear Sir : — In a letter of present date you have requested
my opinion upon the construction to be given to section 3 of
chapter 484 of the Acts of 1908, requiring citizens of the United

12 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

States resident in Massachusetts, who desire to hunt in Massa-
chusetts, to be registered and to pay a registration fee. The
section referred to is as follows : —

Every citizen of the United States who is a bona fide resident of
this state shall pay for such certificate a fee of one dollar: provided,
however, that this act shall not apply to any such citizen who is a
bona fide resident on land owned or leased by him and on which
he is actually domiciled, which land is used exclusively for agricul-
tural purposes, and not for club or shooting purposes.

Your inquiries, as I understand them, are : first, whether a
person who lives in a city or town and not upon a farm, but
is the owner of a wood lot used -for growing wood, may hunt in
that wood lot without registration; and, second, whether a per-
son who does live upon a farm and carries on agriculture as a
vocation, and is the owner of a wood lot used for growing wood,
may hunt in that wood lot without registration.

In my opinion, the first question is to be answered in the nega-
tive. The clear intent of the proviso quoted is to exempt the
farmer from restrictions upon his freedom to hunt within the
limits of his own farm. The resident of a town or city who is
not a farmer, but owns a wood lot, is not actually domiciled and
resident on land used exclusively for agricultural purposes. He
is therefore within neither the intent nor the terms of the stat-
ute, and is clearly not exempt from registration.

In reply to the second question, my opinion is that a farmer
who is actually domiciled and resident upon land used exclu-
sively for agricultural purposes may hunt without registration
in a wood lot which is part of his farm. All the land embraced
in the farm which he operates as a farm, whether it is tillage,
pasture or woodland, is to be considered as land used for agri-
cultural purposes. Such wood lot, while it need not be actually
contiguous to the rest of the farm, must, in my opinion, be so
nearly adjacent as to be considered as in fact a part of the farm
upon which the farmer lives, and to be so used.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 13

Pauper Law — Insane Person — Removal from the Common-
wealth — Settlement.

The provision of E. L., c. 80, § 6, that " a person who is absent from the
commonwealth for ten consecutive years shall lose his settlement," is
applicable to an insane person who was removed to an asylum in
another State and there maintained for more than ten consecutive
years.

March 5, 1909.

Owen Copp, M.D., Executive Officer, State Board of Insanity.

Dear Sir : — In a letter of recent date you have requested my
opinion upon the question arising upon the following facts: a
woman fifty years of age had an undoubted settlement in Massa-
chusetts, when, in 1896, she was taken to Mount Hope Asylum
in Baltimore, Md., where she has remained continuously since
that time supported as a private patient. Her relatives now de-
sire to have her returned to Massachusetts and committed to an
insane hospital of this Commonwealth.

The question upon which you have asked my opinion is,
whether the woman's settlement in Massachusetts has been lost
under the provision of the last clause of E. L., c. 80, § 6, that —

A person who is absent from the commonwealth for ten consecu-
tive years shall lose his settlement.

The clause of the statute quoted, which has been held to be
prospective in operation, was enacted in 1898, and has, there-
fore, been in effect during more than ten years of the patient's
absence.

In my opinion, the statute operates upon the settlements of
the sane and insane with the same effect, and whether a settle-
ment has been lost under its provisions depends not upon the
mental condition of the person in question, but solely upon her
actual residence during the ten years under consideration.

The patient referred to has, therefore, in my opinion, lost the
settlement which she had in Massachusetts in 1896.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

14 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Receptacle for Proprietary or Patent Medicine or Food Prepara-
tion— Label — Statement of Contents — Alcohol.

Where a proprietary or patent medicine or food preparation containing
alcohol is put up in a glass bottle enclosed in a pasteboard wrapper,
the provisions of St. 1906, c. 386, § 1, as amended by St. 1907, c.
259, § 1, requiring that " upon every package, bottle or other recep-
tacle holding any proprietary or patent medicine or any proprietary
or patent food preparation which contains alcohol . . . shall be
marked or inscribed a statement on the label of the quantity or
proportion of each of said substances contained therein," are com-
plied with if a proper statement is inscribed upon the pasteboard
wrapper, so long as such bottle is contained therein. If, however,
the glass bottle is removed from such wrapper and separately sold
or offered for sale, the statutes above cited would require a state-
ment of the quantity or proportion of alcohol contained in such bottle
to be inscribed upon the bottle itself.

March 26, 1909.

Mark W. Richardsox, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health.

Dear Sir : — You have submitted to me an inquiry as to
whether, in the case of a proprietary or patent food preparation
containing alcohol, which is put up in a glass bottle enclosed in
a pasteboard wrapper, the requirements of St. 1906, c. 386, § 1,
as amended by St. 1907, c. 259, § 1, are complied with, if a
statement of the quantity or proportion of alcohol contained
therein is properly inscribed upon the pasteboard wrapper; that
is, whether such statement must also be inscribed upon the glass
bottle.

St. 1906, c. 386, § 1, as amended by St. 1907, c. 259, § 1, pro-
vides in part that : —

Upon every package, bottle or other receptacle holding any pro-
prietary or patent medicine, or any proprietary or patent food
preparation, which contains alcohol, morphine, codeine, opium,
heroin, chloroform, cannibis indica, chloral hydrate, or aeetanilid, or
any derivative or preparation of any such substances, shall be
marked or inscribed a statement on the label of the quantity or pro-
portion of each of said substances contained therein. . . . The
provisions of section nineteen of chapter seventy-five of the Revised
LawTs, so far as they are consistent herewith, shall apply to the
manner and form in which such statements shall be marked or
inscribed.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 15

Section 6 of this statute imposes a pena'ty upon " whoever
manufactures, sells or offers for sale any . . . food preparation
in violation of the provisions of this act . . . "

E. L., c. 75, § 19, provides in part that " the required label
shall be firmly attached to or printed on the exterior of the said
article, on the top or side thereof and in plain sight."

In my opinion, the requirements of these statutes are complied
with so long as the glass bottle is within the pasteboard wrap-
per, if a proper statement is inscribed upon the pasteboard
wrapper. The required label is then " on the exterior of the
package or envelope." If, however, the glass bottle is removed
from the pasteboard wrapper and in this condition sold or of-
fered for sale, these statutes are not complied with unless the
statement be properly marked or inscribed upon the glass bottle
itself.

Very truly yours,

Da^a Malone, Attorney-General.

Animals — Slaughter or Killing — Healthy Condition — Meat
from Carcasses of Cattle infected with Tuberculosis — Sale.

St. 1908, c. 329, providing in section 1 that " the sale, offer or exposure
for sale, or delivery for use as food, of the carcass ... of any
animal which has come to its death in any manner or by any means
otherwise than by slaughter or killing while in a healthy condition
. . . shall be punished by a fine of not more than two hundred dol-
lars or by imprisonment for not more than six months," does not
permit meat derived from the carcasses of cattle infected to any
degree with tuberculosis or any other disease to be sold as food
within this Commonwealth.

March 25, 1909.

Hon. Joseph Walker, Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Sir : — I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of an
order adopted by the Honorable House of Eepresentatives on
March 16, last, requiring the opinion of the Attorney-General
" as to whether the laws and statutes of this Commonwealth per-
mit cattle which are infected to any degree with tuberculosis to
be killed and sold as food in this Commonwealth."

I am aware of no provision of law which forbids the killing
of cattle which are infected with tuberculosis; on the contrary,
the killing of cattle so infected is in certain cases expressly re-

16 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

quired (see R. L., c. 90, §§ 4, 6), and I therefore assume that
the Honorable House of Representatives in substance requires
my opinion upon the question whether or not the laws of the
Commonwealth permit the sale of food products in any form
derived from the carcasses of cattle which are found to have been
to any degree infected with tuberculosis. Upon that assump-
tion I reply as follows : —

The general supervision and inspection of slaughtered animals
and of all meat and other food products derived therefrom is
vested in boards of health of cities and towns. R. L., c. 56, § 70,
provides in part that : —

Boards of health of cities and towns may inspect the carcasses
of all slaughtered animals and all meat, fish, vegetables, produce,
fruit or provisions of any kind found in their cities or towns, and
for such purpose may enter any building, enclosure or other place
in which such carcasses or articles are stored, kept or exposed for
sale. If, on such inspection, it is found that such carcasses or arti-
cles are tainted, diseased, corrupted, decayed, unwholesome or, from
any cause, unfit for food, the board of health shall seize the same
and cause it or them to be destroyed forthwith or disposed of other-
wise than for food.

See R. L., c. 56, § 73.

By section 99 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws it is provided
that the proprietor of every slaughter house, canning, salting,
smoking or rendering establishment, and of every establishment
used for the manufacture of sausages or chopped meat of any
kind, who is engaged in the slaughter of neat cattle, sheep or
swine, the meat or product of which is to be sold or used for
food, shall be annually licensed by the mayor and aldermen of
the city, the selectmen of the town, or, in towns having a popu-
lation of more than five thousand, by the board of health, if there
be any.

Section 101 provides that : —

A licensee under the provisions of the preceding section shall not
slaughter any such animals, or cause them to be slaughtered at such
slaughter house or establishment, on any days other than those
specified in the application for such license, except in the presence
of a member of the board of health or of an inspector appointed
therefor by said board; but he may at any time change the days
for slaughtering such animals, by giving at least seven days' written

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 17

notice thereof to the board or officer authorized to issue licenses,
who shall immediately give written notice of such change to such
inspector of such city or town.

Section 102 provides that : —

Such inspector as has been appointed by the board of health
shall be present at all licensed slaughter houses or establishments
upon the days designated for slaughter by the licensee, as provided
in the preceding section, and there carefully examine the carcasses
of all animals at the time of slaughter. Such inspection shall be
made in such manner and under such rules and regulations as the
board of cattle commissioners may determine and direct. If, in the
opinion of an inspector, any carcass, or any meat or product thereof
is diseased, corrupted, unwholesome or unfit for food, he shall seize
it and cause it to be destroyed, as provided in section seventy of
chapter fifty-six.

Section 103 provides that in a slaughtering establishment
wherein inspection and branding is not carried on under the
rules and regulations for the inspection of live stock and other
products, established by the United States department of agri-
culture, the carcasses of animals slaughtered shall at the time of
slaughter, if not condemned, be stamped or branded by the in-
spector thereof in like manner as those inspected by the United
States Bureau of Animal Industry for interstate trade.

By section 104 a penalty is provided for the sale of unstamped
carcasses, which shall be deemed unfit for food. See St. 1903,
c. 220; St. 1908, c. 329.

E. L., c. 90 (originally St. 1894, c. 491), dealt with the con-
tagious diseases of domestic animals, and in general authorized
the Board of Cattle Commissioners, established by its provisions,
from time to time to make orders and regulations relative to the
prevention, suppression and extirpation of contagious diseases of
domestic animals, and relative to the inspection, examination,
quarantine, care and treatment or destruction of such animals
which are affected with, or have been exposed to, such diseases.
Section 7 is as follows : —

The board may make regulations for the inspection of meat, which
shall conform to the regulations of the United States bureau of
animal industry for the inspection of meat for export and for in-
terstate commerce.

18 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

By St. 1902, c. 116, the Board of Cattle Commissioners was
abolished, and a Bureau of the State Board of Agriculture, to be
known as the Cattle Bureau, was created. In section 3 it was
provided that the Governor should annually appoint a Chief of
the Cattle Bureau, who should have the powers and perform the
duties heretofore imposed and conferred upon the Board of Cattle
Commissioners, with the additional proviso that no orders or
regulations made by him under authority of sections 4 and 7 of
chapter 90 of the Revised Laws should take effect until approved
by the Governor and Council.

R. L., c. 90, § 12, provided for the appointment in cities, ex-
cept Boston, and in all towns, of one or more inspectors of ani-
mals. By section 13 authority was conferred upon the Cattle
Commissioners, whose powers are now vested in the Chief of the
Cattle Bureau, to appoint such inspector or inspectors in any city
or town which failed to comply with the provisions of section 12,
above cited. Sections 14 and 15 deal with the duties of such
inspectors. Section 16 is as follows: —

An inspector shall comply with and enforce all orders and regu-
lations which may be directed to him by the board of cattle com-
missioners or by any of its members. If he refuses or neglects so
to do, he shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred
dollars.

The effect of the statutes above cited is to provide that the
inspection of slaughter houses, and of the carcasses of cattle
slaughtered therein and the products derived therefrom, so far
as such inspection relates to food products, is within the ju-
risdiction of the local boards of health. See R. L., c. 75, §§
100-108; c. 56, §§ 70-76. It is also apparent from such stat-
utes that the Cattle Bureau of the State Board of Agriculture is
vested with authority to examine and inspect living animals and
the carcasses of animals which may be killed as a result of such
inspection, in order to ascertain whether or not such animals
were affected with any contagious or infectious disease. See
R. L., c. 90, §§ 12-34. It is to be observed, however, that the
inspection conducted by the Cattle Bureau does not include an
investigation of the food products derived from cattle, such in-
spection being within the jurisdiction of local boards of health,
but is limited to an inspection of living catt'e and a post-mortem
examination of cattle which have been killed for the reason

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 19

that they appeared to be affected with some contagious disease
enumerated in E. L., c. 90, § 28.

The inspection of meat within this Commonwealth is guided
by certain rules and regulations prepared by the Chief of the
Cattle Bureau and submitted for approval to the Governor and
Council, under authority of R. L., c. 90, § 7, as amended by St.
1902, c. 116, § 3, which rules and regulations, in accordance with
the direction contained in that section, are in conformity with
the regulations established by the ^nited States Bureau of Ani-
mal Industry for the inspection of meat for export and for inter-
state commerce. The rules and regulations of the Federal Bu-
reau, promulgated by authority of an act of Congress, approved
June 30, 1906 (34 St. 674), provide in section 13 as follows: —

Paragraph 1. The following principles are declared for guid-
ance in passing on carcasses affected with tuberculosis : —

Principle A. — The fundamental thought is that meat should not
be used for food if it contains tubercle bacilli, if there is a rea-
sonable possibility that it may contain tubercle bacilli, or if it is
impregnated with toxic substances of tuberculosis or associated
septic infections.

Principle B. — On the other hand, if the lesions are localized and
not numerous, if there is no evidence of distribution of tubercle
bacilli through the blood, or by other means, to the muscles or to
parts that may be eaten with the muscles, and if the animal is well
nourished and hi good condition, there is no proof, or even reason
to suspect, that the flesh is unwholesome. . . .

Principle D. — By localized tuberculosis is understood tubercu-
losis limited to a single or several parts or organs of the body with-
out evidence of recent invasion of numerous bacilli into the systemic
circulation.

Paragraph 2. The following rules shall govern the disposal of
tuberculosis meat: —

Rule A. — The entire carcass shall be condemned —

(a) When it was observed before the animal was killed that it
was suffering with fever.

(b) When there is a tuberculous or other cachexia, as shown by
anemia and emaciation.

(c) When the lesions of tuberculosis are generalized, as shown
by their presence not only at the usual seats of primary infection,
but also in parts of the carcass or the organs that may be reached
by the bacilli of tuberculosis only when they are carried in the sys-
temic circulation. Tuberculosis lesions in any two of the following"-
mentioned organs are to be accepted as evidence of generalization
when they occur in addition to local tuberculous lesions in the di-

20 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

gestive or respiratory tracts, including the lymphatic glands con-
nected therewith : spleen, kidney, uterus, udder, ovary, testicle,
adrenal gland, brain, or spinal cord or their membranes. Numerous
uniformly distributed tubercles throughout both lungs also afford
evidence of generalization.

(d) When the lesions of tuberculosis are found in the muscles or
intermuscular tissue or bones or joints, or in the body lymphatic
glands as a result of draining the muscles, bones or joints.

(e) When the lesions are extensive in one or both body cavities.
(/) When the lesions are multiple, acute, and actively progressive.

(Evidence of active progress consists in signs of acute inflammation
about the lesions, or liquefaction necrosis, or the presence of young
tubercles. )

Rule B. — An organ or a part of a carcass shall be condemned —

(a) When it contains lesions of tuberculosis.

(b) When the lesion is immediately adjacent to the flesh, as in
the case of tuberculosis of the parietal pleura or peritoneum, not
only the membrane or part affected but also the adjacent thoracic
or abdominal wall is to be condemned.

(c) When it has been contaminated by tuberculous material,
through contact with the floor, a soiled knife, or otherwise.

(d) All heads showing lesions of tuberculosis shall be condemned.

(e) An organ shall be condemned when the corresponding lym-
phatic gland is tuberculous.

Rule C. — The carcass, if the tuberculous lesions are limited to
a single or several parts or organs of the body (except as noted in
Rule A), without evidence of recent invasion of tubercle bacilli into
the systemic circulation, shall be passed after the parts containing
the localized lesions are removed and condemned in accordance with
Rule B.

Rule D. — Carcasses which reveal lesions more numerous than
those described for carcasses to be passed (Rule C), but not so severe
as the lesions described for carcasses to be condemned (Rule A),
may be rendered into lard or tallow if the distribution of the lesions
is such that all parts containing tuberculous lesions can be removed.
Such carcasses shall be cooked by steam at a temperature not lower
than 220 degrees Fahrenheit for not less than four hours.

Acting under authority of R. L., c. 90, § 7, the Chief of the
Cattle Bureau established certain regulations, approved by the
Governor and Council in accordance with the terms of St. 1902,
c. 116, § 3, and thereby having the force of law, which are in
substantial accord with the rules and regulations of the Federal
Bureau of Animal Industry.

It is clear, therefore, that the statutes and the rules and regu-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 21

lations of the Cattle Bureau, which conform to the regulations
of the United States Bureau of Animal Industry, did permit
cattle which were infected only to the extent of showing lesions
which were localized and not numerous, where there was no evi-
dence of the distribution of tubercle bacilli through the blood,
or by other means, to the muscles or to parts that might be eaten
with the muscles, to be killed if well nourished and in good con-
dition, and the meat derived from the carcasses of such cattle
to be sold as food, under proper inspection, within the Common-
wealth, since under such conditions there is no proof, or even
reason to suspect, that such meat is unwholesome; but such
statutes and regulations did not permit the sale of any meat
which was infected with tuberculosis.

Upon April 30, 1908, chapter 329 of the Acts of 1908 became
a law. This act provided in section 1 as follows : —

The sale, offer or exposure for sale, or delivery for use as food,
of the carcass, or any part or product thereof, of any animal which
has come to its death in any manner or by any means otherwise
than by slaughter or killing while in a healthy condition, or which
at the time of its death is unfit by reason of disease, exhaustion,
abuse, neglect or otherwise for use as food, or of any calf weighing
less than forty pounds when dressed, with head, feet, hide and en-
trails removed, is hereby declared to be unlawful and prohibited.
Whoever sells or offers or exposes for sale or delivers or causes or
authorizes to be sold, offered or exposed for sale or delivered for
use as food any such carcass or any part or product thereof, shall
be punished by fine of not more than two hundred dollars or by im-
prisonment for not more than six months.

Section 2 placed upon the State Board of Health and its in-
spectors, the State inspectors of health and all boards of health
of cities and towns, and their inspectors, officers, agents and as-
sistants, the duty of, and conferred upon them the necessary
powers for, enforcing this statute.

Section 5 placed all slaughter houses under the supervision of
the State Board of Health, and subject to inspection by the
State inspectors of health.

Section 7 provided that " nothing in this act shall affect or
impair the rights, powers or authority of any board or officer
not herein mentioned." This section obviously refers to the en-
forcement of the earlier provisions of the act, and does not affect
or limit the application of such provisions.

22 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Section 1 of chapter 329 of the Acts of 1908 appears in a
draft of legislation accompanying a petition by the Massachu-
setts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which
sets forth that such society represents " that there is need of fur-
ther legislation for the prevention of cruelty' to animals, espe-
cially to protect them against cruelty in transportation, and to
protect the public against the sale or use for food, or other im-
proper use, of the carcasses of animals which have died in con-
sequence of cruelty, maltreatment or neglect or otherwise than
by regular slaughter; and to provide further means and agencies
for enforcing the laws in relation thereto by extending the powers
of the State Board of Health or its officers or agents or of local
health officers or otherwise." The act itself, however, is much
broader and more drastic than the petition, and, by providing
that the sale, offer or exposure for sale or delivery for use as
food of the carcasses, or of any part or product thereof, of any
animal which has come to its death in any manner or by any
means otherwise than by slaughter or killing while in a healthy
condition, in my opinion does in terms forbid the sale — al-
though not the killing — of any animal infected to any degree
with tuberculosis, notwithstanding that such infection is local,
and that the meat derived from the carcass thereof is not in any
way affected by such disease.

Replying specifically to the order of the Honorable House of
Representatives, therefore, I am constrained to say that in my
opinion the laws and statutes of this Commonwealth do not per-
mit meat derived from the carcasses of cattle infected to any
degree with tuberculosis, or with any other disease, to be sold as
food within this Commonwealth.

I desire to point out, however, the obvious inconsistency which

exists between St. 1908, c. 329, § 1, and other provisions- of the

laws of the Commonwealth and the provisions of the laws and

rules and regulations of the Federal government in the premises.

Very truly yours,

Dana M alone, Attorney-General.

The Soldiers' Home in Chelsea — Charitable Corporation — Pur-
poses of Incorporation — Soldiers and Sailors.

The charitable corporation called the " Trustees of the Soldiers' Home
in Massachusetts," created by the provisions of St. 1877, c. 218, for
the purpose of establishing and maintaining in the citv of Chelsea a

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 23

home " for deserving soldiers and sailors and such members of their
families as said trustees may deem to be proper," may receive in
such home or institution any deserving soldier or sailor, who has
served in the organized military or naval forces either of the com-
monwealth or of the United States; and the transfer contemplated
by St. 1908, c. 199, § 3, providing that " all real and personal estate
held by said trustees shall revert to the commonwealth when the pur-
pose for which the trustees were incorporated shall have been accom-
plished," may not be made upon failure to find inmates for the
institution who have served in the late war of the rebellion.

April 14, 1909.

Hon. Albion F. Bemis, Chairman, Committee on Finance of the
Executive Council.

Dear Sir : — I have your letter of April 8, in which you in-
quire, on behalf of the committee on finance of the Executive
Council, " in regard to the future transfer of the Chelsea Hos-
pital by its board of trustees to the Commonwealth."

By the name " Chelsea Hospital " you doubtless intend to des-
ignate the home for worthy soldiers and sailors maintained in
the city of Chelsea by the " Trustees of the Soldiers' Home in
Massachusetts/7 a charitable corporation created by the pro-
visions of St. 1877, c. 218, for the purpose of establishing and
maintaining a home " for deserving soldiers and sailors and
such members of their families as said trustees may deem to
be proper." The Commonwealth has repeatedly appropriated
money in aid of the institution so established. See Bes. 1905,
c. 50; 1906, c. 53; 1907, c. 972, etc. In addition to the an-
nual appropriation so made by the Commonwealth, there have
been from time to time other appropriations for the construction
of additional buildings for the use of the institution. See Bes.
1905, c. 77; St. 1906, c. 48; Bes. 1907, c. 105, etc. In 1908 the
charter of the corporation (St. 1877, c. 218) was amended by
St. 1908, c. 199, which provided, among other things, for the
representation among the trustees of the institution, three of
whom are appointed by the Governor by and with the advice and
consent of the Council, of the voluntary associations known as
the " Massachusetts Division, Sons of Veterans, United States of
America " and the " Department of Massachusetts, United Span-
ish War Veterans." In section 3 of this act there is a provision
that "all real and personal estate held by said trustees shall
revert to the commonwealth when the purpose for which the
trustees were incorporated shall have been accomplished," — a

24 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

provision probably attached to the act for the reason that most
of the property held or controlled by the corporation was donated
or paid for from appropriations made by the Commonwealth.

Upon these facts I assume that in substance yon desire to be
advised whether or not " the purpose for which the trustees were
incorporated" is to be deemed to have been accomplished when
there may be no longer deserving soldiers or sailors who have
served in and are veterans of the war of the rebellion. It is to
be observed that the purposes of the institution, as expressed in
St. 1877, c. 218, § 1, are not in any way limited to deserving
soldiers or sailors who have served in any particular war, or,
indeed, to soldiers who have served in any war ; and in my opin-
ion such purposes are sufficiently broad to include and apply to
any deserving soldier or sailor who has served in the organized
military or naval forces either of the Commonwealth or of the
United States, and cannot fail so long as the United States or
the Commonwealth may maintain a regular military or naval
force of enlisted soldiers or sailors. It is therefore my opinion
that the transfer contemplated by St. 1908, c. 199, § 3, may not
be made upon failure to find inmates for the institution known
as the " Soldiers' Home in Massachusetts " who have served in
the late war of the rebellion, and that other deserving soldiers
and sailors who are not veterans of that war may be eligible to
become inmates thereof. In reaching this conclusion I do not
deem it necessary to consider whether or not the provisions of
the section above referred to are effective at any time to secure
in the manner contemplated the transfer of the real and personal
estate held by the trustees of such institution.
Very truly yours,

Dana Maloxe, Attorney-General.

Insurance — Accident and Health Disability — Form of Pol-
icy — Insurance Com m issioner — Approval — Exercise of
Legislative Power oy Ministerial Officer — Constitutional
Law.

A proposed act, vesting in the Insurance Commissioner authority to ap-
prove the form of every policy of accident or health disability insur-
ance issued in this Commonwealth, and constituting such approval
a condition precedent to the issuance and delivery of such policy,
without prescribing any standard form therefor or directing what,
in substance, such policy shall contain, would be unconstitutional
under the Constitution of Massachusetts, Article XXX. of the Bill
of Eights, as a delegation of legislative power to a ministerial officer.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 25

April 21, 1909.

Oscar C. Hammarstrom, Esq., Clerk of the Committee on Insurance.

Dear Sir : — By your letter of April 5 yon seek my opinion
npon the constitutionality of a proposed act relative to accident,
health and disability insurance, which contains the following pro-
visions : —

Section 1. On and after January first, nineteen hundred and
ten, no policy of accident or health disability insurance shall be
issued or delivered in this commonwealth that does not provide for
a period of grace in the payment of premiums of at least thirty days
during which period the policy shall remain in force nor until a copy
of the form thereof has been filed at least thirty days with the in-
surance commissioner, and has been approved by him.

Section 2. If the insurance commissioner refuses to approve the
form of policy aforesaid, he shall notify the proper officer of said
company, with a statement of the reasons of said commissioner for
the refusal of his approval; and said company may, within a rea-
sonable time after the receipt of such notification, petition the su-
preme court to review the said action of the insurance commissioner.

Insurance against bodily injury or death by accident and upon
the health of individuals is authorized by St. 1907, c. 576, § 32,
as amended by St. 1908, c. 248, which provides that: —

Ten or more persons residents of this commonwealth may form an
insurance company for any one of the following purposes : —

Fifth, To insure any person against bodily injury or death by
accident, or any person, firm or corporation against loss or damage
on account of the bodily injury or death by accident of any person,
or against damage caused by automobiles to property of another,
for which loss or damage said person, firm or corporation is respon-
sible, and to make insurance upon the health of individuals.

It is well established that the Legislature may prescribe a
standard form of policy for any one or more of the kinds of in-
surance authorized under the section above quoted, or may enact
substantive provisions for all policies (Neiv York Life Insurance
Co. v. ILardison, 199 Mass. 190; Heivins v. London Assurance
Corpn., 184 Mass. 177; Quinn v. Fire Association, 180 Mass. 560;
Boy den v. Massachusetts Masonic Life Assn., 167 Mass. 242; St.
1907, c. 576, §§ 60, 91 and 93), and may empower the Insurance
Commissioner to pass upon and approve or disapprove both the
form and substance of insurance policies submitted to him, in re-

26 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

gard to such standard form or to any other requirement of law,
vesting in the court the authority to review such finding upon
petition of any company aggrieved thereby. Aetna Life Insur-
ance Co. v. Hardison, 199 Mass. 181 ; Provident Savings, etc.,
Society v. Cutting, 181 Mass. 261; St. 1907, c. 576, § 75.

It is to be observed, however, that the authority of the In-
surance Commissioner to approve or disapprove the form or sub-
stance of a policy of insurance, in the cases above cited, rests
upon some statutory declaration of the essentials which such
policy shall contain, and that the function of the commissioner
is to determine, as a ministerial officer and in the management
of the details in the administration of the law, whether or not
such policy conforms to the requirements of law, his determina-
tion being subject to judicial review. New York Life Insurance
Co. v. Hardison, supra, p. 197.

With respect to the kinds of insurance here under considera-
tion, to wit, accident, health and disability insurance, the Legis-
lature has not established any standard form of policy, nor
directed what in substance the contract shall contain; and in
approving or disapproving any policy submitted to him under
the provisions of section 1 of the proposed statute, the Insurance
Commissioner must act upon his own unguided judgment, dis-
cretion and experience. In other words, the act in effect au-
thorizes the Insurance Commissioner to establish such standard
form or forms as he may deem applicable or proper in the
premises, without in any particular indicating what shall be in-
cluded therein. An authority so sweeping cannot be deemed to
be the mere working out of details under a legislative act, or de-
termination of facts upon which the application of a law has
been made to depend, or discretion in its execution (see Com-
monwealth v. Sisson, 189 Mass. 247), but is rather an authority
to make or change the law itself. In other jurisdictions, where
no standard form or other requirement has been established for
contracts of insurance, a power vesting in the Insurance Com-
missioner, or some other officer with like duties, to formulate and
prescribe the nature of such contracts, has been held to be un-
constitutional as a delegation of the legislative authority to a
ministerial officer. King v. Concordia Fire Insurance Co., 140
Mich. 258, 268; O'Neil v. Insurance Co., 166 Pa. St. 77; An-
derson v. Assurance Co., 59 Minn. 182 ; Phoenix Insurance Co.
v. Perl-ins. 19 So. Dak. 59; Dowling v. Insurance Co., 92 Wis.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 27

73; and I see no reason to doubt the application in this Com-
monwealth of the principles so established.

I am therefore of opinion that section 1 of the proposed act
is unconstitutional, for the reason that it purports to delegate
to and vest in a ministerial officer authority which may be con-
stitutionally exercised only by the Legislature itself. Constitu-
tion of Massachusetts, Bill of Rights, Article XXX.

I may add that in my opinion section 2 of the proposed act
is objectionable upon like grounds, since it purports to impose
upon the Supreme Judicial Court duties which are ministerial
and not judicial in their nature. Case of Supervisors of Elec-
tions, 114 Mass. 247.

Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Insurance — Corporation — Transaction of Insurance Busi-
ness — Place of Contract — Jurisdiction.

A Massachusetts corporation maintaining a department store, which, in
combination with certain other corporations, persons and co-partner-
ships within and beyond the Commonwealth, has given to a resident
in the State of New York a power of attorney to make contracts of
insurance in its behalf with each of such other corporations, persons
and co-partnerships in which all of the other corporations, persons
and co-partnerships bear a proportionate and distinct liability,
is transacting the business of insurance within the provisions of St.
1907, c. 576, % 3, which provides that " a contract of insurance is an
agreement by which one party for a consideration promises to pay
money or its equivalent or to do an act valuable to the assured upon
the destruction, loss or injury of something in which the other party
has an interest . . ." If, however, such contracts are made in the
State of New York, and no act in connection therewith is done
within this Commonwealth, such corporation is not engaged in the
business of insurance within the Commonwealth.

April 23, 1909.
Hon. Frank H. Hardison, Insurance Commissioner.

Dear Sir : — You ask my opinion upon the question whether
or not a Massachusetts corporation maintaining a department
store for the sale of dry goods and other merchandise, upon the
facts stated by you, should be held to be engaged in the business
of insurance, and with respect thereto subject to the regulations
and restrictions imposed by the laws of the Commonwealth upon
the conduct of the business of insurance.

28 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Upon the facts submitted it may be assumed that the corpora-
tion in question, and other persons, copartnerships and corpora-
tions within and beyond the Commonwealth, have given to a
person resident in the State of New York their several powers
of attorney which authorize such person to make contracts of in-
surance with each of such persons, copartnerships and corpora-
tions, in which all of the other persons, copartnerships and cor-
porations shall bear a proportionate and distinct liability. By
the powers of attorney so given an association has been created
for the purpose above stated, which is managed and directed by a
committee of five, representing those who have executed such
powers of attorney, which committee has the power to disqualify
and close the account of any member of such association; to
maintain a general supervision over the acts of the attorney in
fact; and to take charge of money received by him, subject to
the deduction of his compensation, and to invest the same.

Upon these facts two questions are presented ; first, whether
or not the transactions above described constitute the business of
insurance as defined by the provisions of the laws of the Com-
monwealth; and, second, if such transactions do constitute the
business of insurance, whether or not such business may be regu-
lated in accordance with the insurance laws.

No difficulty is presented by the first question. St. 1907, c.
576, § 1, provides that : —

In this act, unless the context otherwise requires : —

" Company " or " insurance company " includes all corporations,

associations, partnerships or individuals engaged as principals in the

business of insurance.

Section 3 provides : —

A contract of insurance is an agreement by which one party for
a consideration promises to pay money or its equivalent or to do
an act valuable to the assured upon the destruction, loss or injury
of something- in which the other party has an interest, and it shall
be unlawful for a company to make a contract of insurance upon or
relative to any property or interests or lives in this commonwealth,
or with any resident thereof, or for any person as insurance agent
or insurance broker to make, negotiate, solicit or in any manner aid
in the transaction of such insurance, except as authorized by the
provisions of this act or the laws relating to " fraternal beneficiary
<-<>rr orations " and "assessment insurance." All contracts of insur-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 29

ance on property, lives or interests in this commonwealth shall be
deemed to be made therein.

The transaction of the corporation in question, in my opinion,
clearly constitutes the business of insurance. The corporation by
its authorized agent receives a contract of insurance under which,
in case of loss, each member of the association is severally and
distinctly bound to pay a proportionate part. Such corporation,
also through its agent, makes with each and every other member
a similar contract, upon which it in turn is severally liable for
its proportionate share of the total amount of insurance provided
for in such contract. It follows that the corporation, through
its agent, has made as many separate contracts of insurance as
there are persons, copartnerships or corporations which have filed
powers of attorney with the common agent; or, in other words,
it has participated in separate contracts of insurance equal in
number to the total number of such powers of attorney. It is to
be observed that this is not the case of a corporation which in-
sures in a mutual insurance compan}', thereby binding itself by
a single contract to pay assessments wherever loss is incurred by
any member of the company; the distinction being that in such
case there is but a single contract, providing for the payment of
such assessments as may be necessary, while here the corporation
has written as many separate contracts of insurance as there are
members of the association, and it will continue to write addi-
tional and separate policies as often as new members are admitted
thereto.

I am confirmed in the view already expressed by section 91 of
chapter 576 of the Acts of 1907, which provides for the regula-
tion of associations of individuals who conduct the business of
insurance in the manner known as Lloyds, " whereby each asso-
ciate underwriter becomes liable for a proportionate part of the
whole amount insured by a policy."

Upon the second inquiry a more difficult question is presented.
Although it is not specifically so stated, I assume that the con-
tracts made under authority of the power of attorney given by
the corporation in question are made in New York, that pay-
ments upon them by way of premiums or other charges and pay-
ments of losses are there made, and that no business is in fact
conducted within this Commonwealth. This being so. it would
seem that if the association, with the exception of the Massa-
chusetts corporation, were composed of persons, copartnerships

30 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

or corporations which were not domiciled or located within the
Commonwealth, the insurance by such corporation of its property
in Massachusetts with such association could not be regulated by
the laws of this Commonwealth. In Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165
U. S. 578, 590, the court, in holding that the State of Louisiana
could not constitutionally prohibit the making of contracts by its
citizens with corporations not permitted to do business in the
State of Louisiana, where such contracts were made beyond the
limits of that State, said : —

In the privilege of pursuing an ordinary calling or trade and of
acquiring, holding and selling property must be embraced the right
to make all proper contracts in relation thereto, and although it may
be conceded that this right to contract in relation to persons or prop-
erty or to do business within the jurisdiction of the State may be
regulated and sometimes prohibited when the contracts or business
conflict with the policy of the State as contained in its statutes, yet
the power does not and cannot extend to prohibiting a citizen from
making contracts of the nature involved in this case outside of the
limits and jurisdiction of the State, and which are also to be per-
formed outside of such jurisdiction; nor can the State legally pro-
hibit its citizens from doing such an act as writing this letter of
notification, even though the property which is the subject of the
insurance may at the time when such insurance attaches be within
the limits of the State.

It must, I think, be equally true that a person resident in
Massachusetts and engaged in other business therein may beyond
the limits of the Commonwealth execute a contract to insure a
person domiciled in another State, and that persons may go from
Massachusetts into other jurisdictions with the purpose either
of insuring or of being insured, and may execute with citizens
of other States such contracts as they desire to make. It can
hardly be that, if persons so minded meet in another jurisdiction
and assume toward each other the relations of insurer and insured
under a contract made and to be performed in such jurisdiction,
doing no act in connection therewith in this Commonwealth,
they may, upon their return thereto, be held to be conducting in
Massachusetts the business of insurance. If all the acts with
relation to the creation of such a contract are in fact accom-
plished in another jurisdiction, the mere residence of the parties
in Massachusetts would not confer upon this Commonwealth any
jurisdiction to regulate either the form of the contract or the

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 31

performance of its obligations. And if a single contract is be-
yond the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth when made under
such circumstances, a series of contracts so made is equally be-
yond such jurisdiction, and the making of such contracts would
not constitute the business of insurance within the Common-
wealth solely by reason of the fact that the contracting parties
were resident therein.

Upon the assumption already made, therefore, that all the
contracts of insurance referred to are in fact made in the State
of New York, and that no act in connection therewith is done
within this Commonwealth, I am of opinion that the corporation
in question is not engaged in the business of insurance within
the Commonwealth, and that such business conducted in the
State of New York cannot be regulated or controlled by the laws
of this Commonwealth.

Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Governor and Council — Authority to Investigate Expendi-
tures — Committee on Ways and Means.

The Governor and Council may make investigations for the purpose of
ascertaining whether or not money appropriated by the Legislature
for the several departments and institutions which, or the expendi-
tures of which, are by law subject to their supervision, is being ex-
pended in a proper manner; but they may not constitutionally
prevent the expenditure of money so appropriated for the purposes
for which it was appropriated.

The committee on ways and means of the Legislature may at any time
ask the advice of the Governor and Council in regard to a proposed
appropriation, but is not required so to do.

April 26, 1909.

His Excellency, Eben S. Draper, Governor.

Sir : — Eeplying to Your Excellency's letter, in which you say,
" It has been intimated that under the Constitution of the Com-
monwealth the Governor and Council has authority to investi-
gate the expenditures in any department and to familiarize itself
as much as it sees fit with any of the expenditures of the Com-
monwealth," and ask whether or not this is so, and also whether
the ways and means committee of the Legislature may ask the
advice of the Council in regard to any proposed appropriations
for expenditures.

32 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

As to the duties of the Council, the Constitution of Massachu-
setts, part second, chapter II, section III, article I, provides : —

There shall be a council for advising the governor in the executive
part of the government . . .; and the governor, with the said coun-
cillors, or five of them at least, shall and may, from time to time,
hold and keep a council, for the ordering and directing the affairs
of the commonwealth, according to the laws of the land.

Article V of said section provides : —

The resolutions and advice of the council shall be recorded in a
register, and signed by the members present; and this record may
be called for at any time by either house of the legislature; . . .

Under chapter II, section I, article XI, of the Constitution it
is provided : —

No moneys shall be issued out of the treasury of this common-
wealth, and disposed of (except such sums as may be appropriated
for the redemption of bills of credit or treasurer's notes, or for the
payment of interest arising thereon) but by warrant under the hand
of the governor for the time being, with the advice and consent of the
council, for the necessary defence and support of the commonwealth ;
and for "the protection and preservation of the inhabitants thereof,
agreeably to the acts and resolves of the general court.

E. L., c. 6, § 28, provides as follows : —

Except as hereinafter provided, no money shall be paid from the
treasury without a warrant from the governor drawn in accordance
with an appropriation in some act or resolve of the same or of the
preceding year after the demand or account to be paid has been cer-
tified by the auditor; but the principal and interest on all public
debts shall be paid when due without any warrant, and the governor
may, without an appropriation, draw his warrant for the payment
of his own salary and the salaries of the justices of the supreme
judicial court, for the payments required to be made from the in-
come of the school fund, and for repayments required by section
sixty-eight of chapter fourteen. No certificate shall be required from
the auditor for payment of the pay rolls of the members of the coun-
cil and general court.

The articles of the Constitution and the statutes above quoted
are the only general laws defining the duties of the Governor
and Council in reference to expenditures. The Legislature fre-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 33

quently by an act or resolve provides that payments shall be made
only upon approval of the Governor and Council, and in such
cases statutes should be carefully examined in order to ascertain
what are the prerequisites to the exercise of the authority of the
Governor, with the advice and consent of the Council, to draw
a warrant on the treasury. Whenever it appears that by such
act or resolve the Legislature has either referred a claim or de-
mand to any other officer or board or the Auditor of Accounts
to be examined and audited, or has indicated an intention that
money appropriated shall be paid upon the warrant of the Gov-
ernor, with the advice and consent of the Council, then the gen-
eral law above quoted will be so far modified. See Opinion of
the Justices, 13 Allen, 594.

As Your Excellency knows, appropriations are made by the
Legislature after hearings before the ways and means committee
or otherwise as in the judgment of the Legislature seems best.
The Governor and Council have no right to withhold an appro-
priation by refusing to draw a warrant therefor merely because
such appropriation is thought by them to be unwise. The time
for the Governor to object to an appropriation is when the act
or resolve comes before him for signature after it has been en-
acted by the Legislature. That power is always open to him,
and should be exercised when in his judgment an expenditure
is thought by him to be unwise or unwarranted.

I quote, as to the duty of the Auditor of Accounts in refer-
ence to expenditures, section 1 5 of chapter 6 of the Eevised Laws,
which is as follows : —

He shall examine all accounts and demands against the com-
monwealth, excepting those for the salaries of the governor and of
the justices of the supreme judicial court, those due on account of
the principal or interest of a public debt, or of the pay rolls of the
executive council, the senate or the house of representatives. He
may require affidavits that articles have been furnished, services ren-
dered and expenses incurred, as claimed. Such affidavit for any
state institution may be made by the disbursing officer thereof. The
auditor shall in all cases make a certificate specifying the amount
due and allowed on each demand, the name of the person to whom
such amount is payable, the law authorizing the same and the head
of expenditure to which it is chargeable. If the general court, by
express statute, authorizes a board or public officer to approve de-
mands against the commonwealth, and an appropriation therefor
has been made, the auditor shall, when such demands have been

34 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

properly approved, promptly audit and certify such an amount, not
exceeding the appropriation for that purpose, as he may deem cor-
rect ; and if it appears to him that there are improper charges in
said accounts, he shall report the same to the governor and council,
with a separate certificate therefor. He shall retain in his office
copies of all such certificates and transmit the originals to the gov-
ernor, who, with the advice and consent of the council, may issue his
warrant to the treasurer and receiver general for the amount therein
specified as due.

Also section 19 of said chapter, which is as follows : —

All original bills and vouchers on which money has been or may
be paid from the treasury upon the certificate of the auditor or the
warrant of the governor shall be kept in the auditor's department;
and all boards, commissions or public officers authorized to make con-
tracts under which money may be payable from the treasury shall
file with the auditor certified copies thereof.

The Governor and Council may at any time examine such
bills and vouchers in the Auditor's department, and thus fa-
miliarize themselves with the expenditures of the Commonwealth
as much as they wish. They may take such measures as they
see fit to ascertain that the money appropriated for the various
institutions in the Commonwealth is being expended in the man-
ner intended by the Legislature, and may make such personal
investigation at the institutions themselves as may be necessary
to make sure that this is being done; but they have no right to
say that the money appropriated by the Legislature shall not be
expended in the way authorized by it. There are various de-
partments under the immediate supervision of the Governor, and
in such departments it is his duty to see that the money appro-
priated is properly expended therein. There are other depart-
ments in which it is the duty of the head of such departments to
see that the money appropriated is properly expended, and for
which the Governor is not responsible, and in which lie has no
authority except so far as may be necessary to see that the war-
rants are drawn in accordance with the appropriations author-
ized by the Legislature. Should the Governor and Council be
of opinion that the finances of any institution are not being prop-
erly and economically expended, the remedy would be by re-
moval of the trustees or other officers over whom they have
authority, in accordance with the statutes in such case made and

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 35

provided. To this extent, under the Constitution and law of
the Commonwealth the Governor and Council have authority to
investigate the expenditures of any department, and to familiar-
ize themselves as much as they see fit with any of the expenditures
of the Commonwealth.

Beplying further, the ways and means committee of the Legis-
lature, or any legislator, has a perfect right to request the ad-
vice of the Governor and Council in regard to any proposed
applanation for expenditures, or the advice of any other per-
son; but that committee is not obliged to do so, and it may act
upon the advice or not, as it sees fit.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Inspection of Buildings — Inspector of Factories and Public
Buildings — Plans — Establishment — Accommodations for
Ten or More Employees above Second Story.

The word " establishment," as used in R. L., c. 104, § 22, which in part
provides that " no building more than two stories in height which is
designed to be used above the second story, in whole or in part,
as a factory, workshop or mercantile or other establishment and has
accommodations for ten or more employees above said story, . . .
shall be erected until a copy of the plans thereof has been deposited
with the inspector of factories and public buildings for the district
in which it is to be erected . . .", refers to a single business organi-
zation, and does not include a number of offices above the second
story which are independently occupied, and in none of which are
ten or more persons employed.

May 17, 1909.

Gen. J. H. Whitney, Chief, Massachusetts District Police.

Dear Sir : — Your communication of April 2 requires my
opinion upon the following question : —

Is the person who erects or constructs a building*, or an architect
or other person who draws plans or specifications or superintends
the erection or construction of a building having ten or more rooms
above the second floor and which are designed to be used for busi-
ness offices, and in no one of said offices are ten or more persons to
be employed, required to deposit the plans and specifications of said
building with the inspector of factories and public buildings of the
district in which the building is to be erected?

36 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Your inquiry appears to relate to K. L., c. 104, § 22, which
provides that : —

No building which is designed to be used, in whole or in part, as
a public building, public or private institution, school house, church,
theatre, public hall, place of assemblage or place of public resort,
and no building more than two stories in height which is designed
to be used above the second story, in whole or in part, as a factory,
work-shop or mercantile or other establishment and has accommo-
dations for ten or more employees above said story, and no building
more than two stories in height designed to be used above the second
story, in whole or in part, as a hotel, family hotel, apartment house,
boarding house, lodging house or tenement house, and has ten or
more rooms above said story, shall be erected until a copy of the
plans thereof has been deposited with the inspector of factories and
public buildings for the district in which it is to be erected by the
person causing its erection, or by the architect thereof. . . .

The interpretation to be given to the above section with re-
spect to the present inquiry must depend upon the meaning of
the word " establishment," since it is clear that the building to
which you refer is not designed for use either as a factory or as
a workshop. The word " establishment " in this connection is
defined as : —

An organized household or business concern and everything con-
nected with it, as servants, employees, etc.; an institution, whether
public or private: as, a large establishment in the country; a large
iron or clothing establishment; a hydropathic or water-cure estab-
lishment.

The word " establishment " therefore imports a single busi-
ness organization of some extent, and several offices in which are
conducted distinct occupations may not be joined together to
create an establishment within the meaning of the statute. The
section above quoted includes only such an establishment or busi-
ness, carried on in anv building, as may have accommodations
for ten or more employees above the second story. This lan-
guage, in my opinion, must be taken to refer to a single estab-
lishment, and not to a number of offices which are independently
occupied and in none of which are ten persons employed, al-
though in the aggregate there may be ten or more employees.

Confining myself to the precise form of the question submit-
ted, therefore, and without attempting to otherwise limit or

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 37

define the meaning of the words " mercantile or other estab-
lishment/' I am of opinion that the question submitted should
be answered in the negative.

Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attornen-Qeneval.

Boston Railroad Holding Company — Acquisition of Stock,
Bonds, and Other Evidences of Indebtedness of the Boston
& Maine Railroad — Restraint of Trade — Anti-Trust Act.

The proposed bill (now St. 1909, c. 519) incorporating the Boston Kail-
road Holding Company, which authorized such company to acquire
the stock, bonds and other evidences of indebtedness of the Boston
& Maine Bailroad, and permitted any railroad corporation . existing
under the laws of the Commonwealth at the date of the passage of
such bill to guarantee the principal of and the dividends and inter-
est upon the capital stock, bonds, notes and other evidences of in-
debtedness of the Boston Eailroad Holding Company, and to acquire
and hold such stock, bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness,
is not in conflict with the provisions of the so-called Anti-Trust Act,
the Federal Statute of July 2, 1890 (26 Stat. 209), which provides
in section 1 that " every contract, combination in the form of trust
or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce among
the several states, on with foreign nations, is hereby declared
illegal."

May 27, 1909.
Roger Wolcott, Esq., Clerk of the Committee on Railroads.

Dear Sir : — The committee on railroads has submitted to
me for my opinion the following question : —

The committee on railroads is considering the so-called holding
company bill submitted to it by you. The question has been raised
as to whether, if the New Haven Railroad were to control, directly
or indirectly, this company, it would be a violation of the so-called
Sherman Anti-Trust Act or of any other federal statute, or whether
the holding company could then be made a party to the federal
suit now pending against the New Haven Railroad.

I assume that the inquiry of the committee is directed to any
action upon the part of the New York, New Haven & Hartford
Railroad Company which may be authorized by the provisions
of section 4 of the proposed bill, which, so far as material, are
as follows : —

38 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Any railroad corporation incorporated at the date of the passage
of this act under the laws of this commonwealth may guarantee the
principal of and the dividends and interest upon the capital stock,
bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness of said Boston
railroad holding company, and may acquire and hold said stock,
bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness: provided, how-
ever, that the shares of stock of said Boston railroad holding com-
pany shall not be sold or transferable until said stock has been
guaranteed as hereinbefore provided. Any railroad corporation
acquiring said stock as hereinbefore provided shall not thereafter
sell the same without the express authority of the legislature.

The so-called Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the statute of July 2,
1890 (26 Stat. 209), which is, so far as I am aware, the only
federal statute material in the premises, is entitled " An Act
to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and
monopolies," and provides in section 1 that : —

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise,
or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several
states, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.
Every person who shall make any such contract or engage in any
such combination or conspiracy, shall be deemed guilty of a mis-
demeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not
exceeding five thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding-
one year, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

It provides in section 2 that : —

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or
combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monop-
olize any part of the trade or commerce among the several states,
or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.

These provisions of law have been the subject of numerous de-
cisions by the Supreme Court of the United States: United
States v. E. C. Knight Co., 156 IT. S. 1; United States v. Trans-
Missouri Freight Association, 166 U. S. 290; United States v
Joint Traffic Association, 171 U. S. 505; Hopkins v. United
States, 171 U. S. 578; Anderson v. United States, 171 U. S. 604
Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United States, 175 U. S. 211
Montague & Co. v. Loivnj, 193 U. S. 38 ; Northern Securities Co
v. United States, 193 U. S. 197; Swift & Co. v. United States
196 IT. S. 375: Loeive v. Lawlor, 208 IT. S. 271- : Shawnee Com-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 39

press Co. v. Anderson, 209 U. S. 423; and see United States v.
American Tobacco Co., 164 Fed. 700; Bigelow v. Calumet &
Hecla Mining Co., 167 Fed. 721.

Of the cases above cited, the Northern Securities Co. v. United
States (193 U. S. 197), known as the "Northern Securities
Case/' was the most important, as it was the most sweeping in
effect. In that case the basis of the complaint brought by the
federal government was the acquisition by the Northern Securi-
ties Company, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, of the
control of the Great Northern Eailway Company, operating lines
of railway which extended from Duluth and St. Paul in the State
of Minnesota, to Portland in the State of Oregon, and to Everett
and Seattle in the State of Washington, and the Northern Pacific
Eailway Company, operating lines of railway from Ashland in
the State of Wisconsin, and from Duluth and St. Paul in the
State of Minnesota, to Portland in the State of Oregon, and to
Spokane, Seattle and Tacoma in the State of Washington, which
were parallel and competing lines, and were engaged in active
competition for interstate freight and passenger traffic. This
was effected by means of an exchange of the stock issued by the
Northern Securities Company for that of the two railroads above
mentioned, and the possession of such stock vested in the North-
ern Securities Company the control of both railroads, with the
direct and necessary effect, as the court said, " to restrain and
monopolize interstate commerce by suppressing or (to use the
words of this court in United States v. Joint Traffic Association)
' smothering ' competition between the lines of two railway car-
riers" (p. 354). A majority of the court held this transaction
to be a violation of the Anti-Trust Act, so called, and the North-
ern Securities Company was required to reconvey to the former
holders all of the stock of the Great Northern Eailway Company
and the Northern Pacific Eailway Company which had come into
its possession. After reviewing and summarizing the previous
decisions upon the Anti-Trust Act, the majority opinion laid
down certain principles as established by such decisions and
within which the case before the court was held to fall. These
principles, as declared by the court, speaking through Mr. Justice
Harlan, were as follows : —

That although the act of Congress known as the Anti-Trust Act
has no reference to the mere manufacture or production of articles
or commodities within the limits of the several States, it does em-
brace and declare to be illegal every contract, combination or con-

40 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

spiracy, in whatever form, of whatever nature, and whoever may
be parties to it, which directly or necessarily operates in restraint
of trade or commerce among the several States or with foreign
nations;

That the act is not limited to restraints of interstate and inter-
national trade or commerce that are unreasonable in their nature,
but embraces all direct restraints imposed by any combination, con-
spiracy or monopoly upon such trade or commerce;

That railroad earners engaged in interstate or international trade
or commerce are embraced by the act;

That combinations even among private manufacturers or dealers
whereby interstate or international commerce is restrained are
equally embraced by the act;

That Congress has the power to establish rules by which inter-
state and international commerce shall be governed, and, by the
Anti-Trust Act, has prescribed the rule of free competition among
those engaged in such commerce;

That every combination or conspiracy which would extinguish com-
petition between otherwise competing railroads engaged in interstate
trade or commerce, and which would in that way restrain such trade
or commerce, is made illegal by the act;

That the natural effect of competition is to increase commerce,
and an agreement whose direct effect is to prevent this play of com-
petition restrains instead of promotes trade and commerce;

That to vitiate a combination, such as the act of Congress con-
demns, it need not be shown that the combination, in fact, results or
will result in a total suppression of trade or in a complete monopoly,
but it is only essential to show that by its necessary operation it
tends to restrain interstate or international trade or commerce or
tends to create a monopoly in such trade or commerce and to deprive
the public of the advantages that flow from free competition ;

That the constitutional guarantee of liberty of contract does not
prevent Congress from prescribing the rule of free competition for
those engaged in interstate and international commerce ; and

That under its power to regulate commerce among the several
States and with foreign nations, Congress had authority to enact
the statute in question.

The court also, in effect, decided that the Anti-Trust Act might
be enforced against a State corporation acting within its charter
powers, provided that such action created a combination or con-
spiracy which was in restraint of interstate trade; and disposed
of the contention upon the part of the defendants that if the
statute were held to embrace the particular case then under con-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 41

sideration it would be repugnant to the Constitution of the
United States.

Such, then, in brief, are the affirmative propositions established
by the Northern Securities case, and the statute must now be
taken to extend to every combination or conspiracy in restraint of
interstate commerce, whether reasonable or unreasonable. See
Shawnee Compress Co. v. Anderson, supra; United States v.
American Tobacco Co., supra.

If the principle so declared is to be accepted without reserva-
tion or qualification, it must be conceded that it would reach and
forbid every kind of combination of individuals or corporations
in any way engaged in interstate commerce, and would in and
of itself be decisive of the present inquiry; but in the Northern
Securities decision the court did not have before it a case which
involved the consolidation by express authority of a State of two
domestic railroad corporations engaged in interstate traffic, or the
control of one by the other, expressly sanctioned by the same
authority ; on the contrary, the combination before the court was
expressly forbidden by the State in which one of the constituent
railroads was incorporated and both were extensively operated
(see Gen. Laws of Minn., 1899, c. 359; Laws of Minn., 1881,
p. 109 ; 1874, p. 154), and was effected by means of a corporation
of a State at a distance from the territory in which such rail-
roads were located.

I conceive, therefore, that the first and more important ques-
tion which is presented by the communication of the committee
is in substance whether or not the provisions of the Anti-Trust
Act include and prohibit a consolidation of two railroad corpora-
tions, such consolidation being duly authorized by the State by
which they were created, or a control of one such railroad by the
other, duly sanctioned by the Legislature of such State; and to
this inquiry I reply as follows : —

The right of a State to authorize or require or forbid the con-
solidation of corporations which are subject to its jurisdiction is
clearly recognized by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the
United States. In Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Ken-
tucky, 161 U. S. 677, where the court was dealing with the con-
solidation of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, the
Chesapeake, Ohio & Southwestern Railroad Company and certain
subordinate corporations, a consolidation alleged to be in viola-
tion of the provisions of section 201 of the Constitution of Ken-
tucky of 1891, which forbade the consolidation of the capital

42 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

stock, franchise or property, or the pooling of the earnings, of
certain corporations, including railroad corporations, it is no-
where intimated that the power of a State to authorize or forbid
the consolidation of railroad corporations within its limits is to
be confined to lines of railroad engaged exclusively in intrastate
commerce. Upon the other hand, the court, at page 702, uses
language which expressly concedes and confirms the right of a
State to create and to regulate the instruments of interstate com-
merce within its jurisdiction, even to the extent of permitting the
purchase by one railroad corporation of the stock of another : —

It has never been supposed that the dominant power of Congress
over interstate commerce took from the States the power of legis-
lation with respect to the instruments of such commerce, so far as
the legislation was within its ordinary police powers. Nearly all the
railways in the country have been constructed under State authority,
and it cannot be supposed that they intended to abandon their power
over them as soon as they were finished. The power to construct
them involves necessarily the power to impose such regulations upon
their operation as a sound regard for the interests of the public may
seem to render desirable. In the division of authority with respect
to interstate railways Congress reserves to itself the superior right
to control their commerce and forbid interference therewith; while to
the States remains the power to create and to regulate the instru-
ments of such commerce, so far as necessary to the conservation of
the public interests.

' If it be assumed that the States have no right to forbid the con-
solidation of competing lines, because the whole subject is within
the control of Congress, it would necessarily follow that Congress
would have the power to authorize such consolidation in defiance of
State legislation, — a proposition which only needs to be stated to
demonstrate its unsoundness. As we have already said, the power
of one railway corporation to purchase the stock and franchises
of another must be conferred by express language to that effect in
the charter; and hence, if the charter of the Louisville & Nashville
Company had been silent upon that point, it will be conceded that
it would have no power to make the proposed purchase in this case.
As the power to purchase, then, is derivable from the State, the
State may accompany it with such limitations as it may choose to
impose.

See also Railroad Co. v. Maryland, 21 Wall. 456.

The case of Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Kentucky
was decided on March 30, 1896, more than five years after the
passage of the Anti-Trust Act; and while the statute was not

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 43

involved in the question at issue, and was not referred to in the
opinion, the court must be deemed to have been well aware of its
provisions, and upon that date to have declared that such pro-
visions did not limit the right of a State to regulate and con-
trol domestic railroad corporations so far as necessary to the
conservation of the public interests; and that even in the case
of competing railroads such regulation and control did not con-
stitute an interference with interstate commerce. See Pearsall
v. Great Northern Railway Co., 161 U. S. 647; Cleveland, etc.,
By. Co. v. Illinois, 177 U. S. 514; Wisconsin, Minnesota &
Pacific Railroad v. Jacobson, 179 U. S. 287, 291 : Louisville &
Nashville Railroad Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503, 519; see also
Missouri Pacific Railway v. Larrabee Mills, 211 U. S>. 612, 621.
It is evident that the several States have never regarded the
statute as prohibiting or even limiting their action with respect
to the regulation and control of domestic railroad corporations
as an exercise of the police power. In this Commonwealth the
New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company, the
Boston & Maine Eailroad and the Boston & Albany Eailroad
Company, as they now exist, are the result of numerous consoli-
dations, leases and other forms of control authorized by the
statutes of this Commonwealth and of other States in which
they have been incorporated. Subsequent to 1890, when the Anti-
Trust Statute was enacted, the Boston & Albany Eailroad Com-
pany has been leased to the New York Central & Hudson Elver
Eailroad Company by authority of St. 1900, c. 468; the Fitch-
burg Eailroad Company has been leased to the Boston & Maine
Eailroad by authority of St. 1900, c. 426 ; the Old Colony Eail-
road Company has been leased to the New York, New Haven &
Hartford Eailroad Company by authority of the general law
(1894) ; and numerous other statutes have been enacted author-
izing consolidations or leases of railroads within the Common-
wealth. See St. 1894, c. 53; St. 1898, cc. 194, 399; St. 1900r
c. 424 (and see St. 1906, c. 463, part I, § 67; St. 1907, c. 585).
In no one of these instances has the authority of the Common-
wealth or the legality of the action of any railroad thereunder
been questioned by the federal authorities. I cannot believe that
it was beyond the power of the Commonwealth to enact the legis-
lation by which these consolidations were effected, or that the
federal courts would entertain bills in equity to enjoin their fur-
ther continuance, or sustain criminal suits against the officers
who operate the lines of railroad which they include; and in this,

44 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

respect I am unable to distinguish between a consolidation and
any other form of combination or control. So long as a combina-
tion is created by State authority, it seems to me immaterial by
what means it is effected, whether by a holding company, a
lease or a consolidation.

Notwithstanding any doubt which may be created by the lan-
guage of the decision in the Northern Securities case, I am there-
fore constrained to conclude that there is still vested in the sev-
eral States, under the police power, authority to regulate and
control domestic railroad corporations, notwithstanding that such
corporations are instrumentalities of and are engaged in inter-
state commerce and in competing therefor, including the power
to authorize their consolidation or the control of one by another
through a lease or the ownership of stock; and I am further of
opinion that it is within the authority of the Commonwealth to
pass the proposed act now before the committee, and that action
thereunder by the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
Company or by any other railroad corporation chartered by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts would not constitute a violation
of the Anti-Trust Act. If the law were otherwise it would, in
my judgment, create inextricable confusion in every State in the
Union, and, in the words of Mr. Justice Holmes, a former chief
justice of the highest court of the Commonwealth, in his dissent-
ing opinion in the Northern Securities case, would " disintegrate
society so far as it could into individual atoms."

Whether or not the holding company contemplated by the pro-
posed statute might properly be made a party to the suit brought
under the Anti-Trust act in the federal court, and now pending,
against the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Com-
pany, is a question which must depend upon the ultimate decision
in that suit, and I cannot with propriety attempt to foretell what
that decision may be. I may, however, suggest that the allega-
tion which concerns the ownership or control of the stock of the
Boston & Maine Railroad by the New York, New Haven &
Hartford Railroad Company is but one among several grounds
for federal action, and is not essential to the maintenance of the
suit; and that such allegation is based upon a state of facts
which, as I am advised, does not now exist, and which may be
distinguished from the state of facts which would exist if action
were taken by the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
Company under the proposed statute now before the committee.
Very truly yours,

Dana M alone, Attorney-General .

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 45

Register of Deeds — Duty to record Instrument in Foreign

Language.

A register of deeds is not by law required to receive and record an
instrument in a foreign language, whether or not such instrument
is accompanied by a translation.

June 24, 1909.
Henry E. Woods, Esq., Commissioner of Public Records.

Dear Sir : — In reply to your inquiry as to " whether or not
a register of deeds within this Commonwealth is obliged under its
laws to receive and record any instrument in a foreign language,
even if the said instrument be accompanied by a translation/7 I
advise you that in my opinion a register of deeds is not obliged to
receive and record any instrument in a foreign language, even
though such instrument be accompanied by a translation.

The purpose of recording an instrument in the registry of
deeds is to give notice of the contents thereof. It follows that
the record must be such that a person examining it with a reason-
able degree of care and intelligence may obtain actual notice of
the facts recorded. Persons making such examinations cannot,
in my opinion, reasonably be required to be familiar with lan-
guages other than English, which is the language used in the
conduct of the affairs of the Commonwealth and in ordinary
business transactions. Since the record must be in English, and
since it must be an accurate copy of the instrument recorded, the
instrument must be in English. The record of a translation of
an instrument would not be in compliance with the statutes
requiring the recording of such instrument. Even if both an
original instrument in a foreign language and a translation «of it
were recorded, a person examining the record would have no
assurance that the translation was accurate.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

State Highway — Opening — City or Town — Water Works —

Service Pipes.

The water commissioners of a town are not authorized, without the
permission of the Massachusetts Highway Commission, as required
by E. L., c. 47, § 11, to open a State highway for the purpose of
laying service pipes therein, under an act providing that, in the

46 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

construction and maintenance of suitable water works for the use
of such town, they may " lay and maintain aqueducts, conduits, pipes
and other works under and over . . . public and other ways " in
such town.

July 12, 1909.

A. B. Fletcher, Esq., Secretary Massachusetts Highway Com-
mission.

Dear Sir : — In your letter of July 2 you state that the water
commissioners of the town of Plainville recently opened a State
highway in that town for the purpose of laying service pipes, and
that the opening so effected was without permission from the
Massachusetts Highway Commission.

Such action is expressly forbidden by the provisions of R. L.,
c. 47, § 11, that: —

No opening shall be made in any such highway nor shall any
structure be placed thereon . . . except in accordance with a permit
from the commission, which shall exercise complete and permanent
control over such highways.

It appears, however, that the water commissioners of the town
of Plainville make the claim that they are not required to secure
a permit from the Massachusetts Highway Commission in ac-
cordance with the provision above quoted, for the reason that
chapter 404 of the Acts of 1908, entitled " An Act to authorize
the town of Plainville to supply itself and its inhabitants with
water," provides in section 2 that the town, for the purpose of
constructing and maintaining complete and effective water works,
" may construct wells and reservoirs and establish pumping
works, and may construct, lay and maintain aqueducts, conduits,
pipes and other works under and over any land, water courses,
railroads, railways and public or other ways, and along such ways
in the town of Plainville, in such manner as not unnecessarily
to obstruct the same ; and for the purpose of constructing, laying,
maintaining, operating and repairing such conduits, pipes and
other wrorks, and for all proper purposes of this act, said town may
dig up or raise and embank any such lands, highways or other
ways in such manner as to cause the least hindrance to public
travel on such ways."

I am of opinion that the water commissioners of the town of
Plainville may not rely upon the provisions of the latter statute

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 47

to justify their action in opening a State highway within that
town; and that in digging up a State highway, unless authorized
so to do, such statute cannot serve as justification in the premises.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Taxation — Excise Tax on Express Business on any Railroad,
Railway, Steamboat or Vessel in the Commonwealth — Com-
putation — Gross Earnings within the State — Value of
Capital, Bonds and Unfunded Debt — Deductions — Stocks,
Securities and Real Estate outside Commonwealth not used
in Express Business.

In St. 1907, c. 586, as amended by St. 1908, c. 194, and St. 1908, c. 615,
imposing an excise tax upon all persons, companies, partnerships
or associations doing an express business upon any railroad, rail-
way, steamboat or vessel in the Commonwealth, and providing, in
section 5, that such tax shall be " upon the fair cash value of such
proportion of his or its capital, bonds and unfunded debt ... as
the gross earnings of the said person, company, partnership or asso-
ciation within the state, bear to his or its total gross earnings,"
the words, " gross earnings . . . within the state " include earnings
within the State from interstate business, and such earnings should
be considered in determining the amount of such tax.

In determining the amount " of the capital, bonds and unfunded debt "
of a person, company, partnership or association doing an express
business on any railroad, railway, steamboat or vessel within the
Commonwealth for the purpose of computing the excise tax pro-
vided for under the statutes above cited, property consisting of
stocks, securities and real estate outside the Commonwealth and not
used in the express business should be deducted from the total value
of the capital, bonds and unfunded debt.

Aug. 11, 1909.
Albert E. Taylor, Esq., Clerk of the Board of Appeal.

Dear Sir : — The Board of Appeal, constituted under E. L.,
c. 14, § 65, has requested my opinion upon certain questions rela-
tive to the computation of the tax upon the Adams Express Com-
pany and the American Express Company imposed by St. 1907,
c. 586, as amended by St. 1908, c. 194, and St. 1908, c. 615.

This statute in section 5 requires the Tax Commissioner to
levy an excise tax upon every person, company, partnership or
association doing an express business on any railroad, railway,
steamboat or vessel in the Commonwealth, —

48 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

upon the fair cash value of such proportion of his or its capital,
bonds and unfunded debt . . ., after deducting- therefrom the value
of the real estate, machinery, merchandise and other property be-
longing to the person, company, partnership or association, within
the commonwealth and subject to taxation in the various cities and
towns thereof, together with the value of securities owned by him
or it and not liable to local taxation, as the gross earnings of the
said person, company, partnership or association within the state,
bear to his or its total gross earnings.

The first question submitted is as to the meaning of the words
" gross earnings . . . within the state," as used in the above sec-
tion.

The tax imposed by the statute is similar in its nature to the
tax imposed in this Commonwealth upon telegraph companies,
and held to be constitutional in Western Union Telegraph Co. v.
Massachusetts, 125 U. S. 530 (see also Massachusetts v. Western
Union Telegraph Co., 141 U. S. 40), and to the taxes on express
companies imposed in some other jurisdictions and sustained in
the Adams Express Cases, 165 U. S. 194; 165 U. S. 255; 166
IT. S. 171 ; 166 IT. S. 185. See also Fargo v. Hart, 193 U. S.
490. It is an excise under the Massachusetts Constitution meas-
ured by the value of property within the Commonwealth not
otherwise taxed. It is an attempt to reach the additional value
"gained by the property being part of a going concern." The
local tax and the excise " together fairly may be called a com-
mutation tax." See Holmes, J., in Galveston, Harrisburg, etc.,
Railroad v. Texas, 210 U. S. 217, 226.

In the value of the property which is the measure of the tax,
the Legislature, in my opinion, intended to include the increased
value due to the use of such property in interstate commerce.
The tax " is intended to reach the intangible value due to . . .
the organic relation of the property in the State to the whole
system." See Holmes, J., in Fargo v. Hart. 193 U. S. 490, 499.

This can constitutionally be done. Adams Express Cases,
supra; Fargo v. Hart, supra; Galveston, Harrishurg, etc., Rail-
road v. Texas, supra.

The value of property within the State, including the increased
value due to its use in interstate commerce, may be determined by
reference to gross earnings within the State, including earnings
from interstate business. In my opinion, the words, " gross
earnings . . . within the state," as used in the present statute,

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 49

include earnings within the State from interstate business, and
such earnings should be considered in determining the amount
of the excise.

The statute, unlike many statutes imposing similar taxes, does
not provide a method of determining the part of the earnings
from interstate business to be treated as earnings within the
State. Cf. Maine v. Grand Trunk Railway Co., 142 U. S. 217;
Wisconsin & Michigan Railroad Co. v. Powers, 191 U. S. 379;
Galveston, Harrisburg, etc., Railroad v. Texas, supra. Such
earnings are, therefore, to be determined as a matter of fact with-
out the aid of prima facie rules. I shall not attempt to advise
as to the method which should be followed in making this de-
termination. Unless it has been made to appear to the Board
of Appeal, as it has not to me, that the amount of the gross earn-
ings within the State, used by the Tax Commissioner in the com-
putation of the tax, includes a larger part of the earnings from
interstate business than, all things considered, can fairly be ap-
portioned to this State, the Board should not revise the deter-
mination of the Tax Commissioner upon this point.

The second inquiry is as to whether, in determining the fair
cash value of the proportion of the capital, bonds and unfunded
debt of the companies upon which the tax is levied, property
consisting of stocks, securities and real estate outside the Com-
monwealth not used in the express business should be deducted
from the total value of capital, bonds and unfunded debt.

In my opinion this deduction should be made. Fargo v. Hart,
supra, is decisive upon the point that such property cannot be
used as the measure of a tax such as is here in question. See
also Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Co. v. Pennsyl-
vania, 198 U. S. 341. The reason is clear. The tax is, in effect,
a tax on the property by which it is measured. A State cannot
tax property outside its jurisdiction. The more difficult question
is whether such property should be deducted in computing the
tax, or whether the statute should be regarded as unconstitutional
as an attempt to tax property not within the jurisdiction of the
Commonwealth. In my jr ""gment, the former is the better view.
Though the requirement oi such a deduction may not be read
into the statute except for good reason {American Glue Co. v.
Commonwealth, 195 Mass. 528, 530), there is, in the fact that
otherwise federal constitutional requirements would be infringed
a sufficient reason for implying authority to make such deduction.

50 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Such a construction is in accord with the established principle
stated in Pittsburg, etc., Railway Co. v. Backus, 154 U. S. 421,
428 : —

It is not to be assumed that a State contemplates the taxation
of any property outside its territorial limits, or that its statutes
are intended to operate otherwise than upon persons and property
within the State. It is not necessary that every section of a tax
act should in terms declare the scope of its territorial operation.
Before any statute will be held to intend to reach outside property,
the language expressing such intention must be clear.

The conclusion which I have reached as to the second inquiry
is in accord with an opinion given by my predecessor to the Tax
Commissioner under date of Dec. 1, 1905.
Very truly yours,

Dana M alone, Attorney-General.

Taxation — Exemption — Woodland used for Educational Pur-
poses — Forestry.

A tract of woodland, acquired and used by Harvard University for the
purpose of instruction in forestry, is owned and occupied for edu-
cational purposes, and is therefore exempt from taxation, under the
provisions of E. L., c. 12, § 5, cl. 3, which exempt from taxation
real estate owned and occupied by literary, charitable and scientific
institutions for the purpose for which such institutions are incor-
porated.

Aug. 13, 1909.

Hon. William D. T. Trefry, Tax Commissioner.

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to whether a
tract of about seventeen hundred acres of woodland, situated in
the town of Petersham, acquired by Harvard University for the
teaching of forestry, is subject to taxation.

The woodland in question is taxable unless it is exempt be-
cause owned and occupied by Harvard University, or its officers,
for the purposes for which the university was incorporated. E. L.,
c. 12, § 5, cl. 3. I am of opinion that it is exempt on this ground.
No question is made but that the teaching of forestry is within
the broad educational purposes for which Harvard University was
incorporated. That woodland is as necessary for the teaching
of forest^ as is a farm for the teaching of agriculture, is ap-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 51

parent. As a farm is exempt from taxation if used in the teach-
ing of agriculture (Mt. Hermon Boys' School v. QUI, 145 Mass.
139), so, in my judgment, woodland used in the teaching of for-
estry is likewise exempt from taxation. To claim this exemp-
tion, of course, the officers of the university must, in their use
of the woodland, be acting in good faith and reasonably. Emer-
son v. Trustees of the Milton Academy, 185 Mass. 414, 415. So
far as disclosed by the facts submitted to me and agreed to by
the assessors of the town and by the representative of the univer-
sity, there is nothing to indicate that the use of the woodland in
question is not in good faith and reasonable. It does not appear
that the area is unreasonably large. It appears that the sales of
lumber from the woodland are considerable in amount, but this
fact does not deprive the university of its exemption, if such
sales are merely incidental to the main use of the woodland as
a place and means of instruction. From the statement sub-
mitted, it is to be inferred that such sales are merely incidental
to such main use.

A part of the tract (whether of the seventeen hundred acres
situated in the town of Petersham or of three hundred in the
adjoining town of Phillipston is not stated) is poor farming land,
on which are a dwelling house which is occupied and used by
students, two barns and a few other buildings. This dwelling
house is used as a dormitory and dining room and for lecture
rooms ; the resident superintendent lives in one wing of it. It is,
by reason of this use, exempt from taxation. See Harvard Col-
lege v. Cambridge, 175 Mass. 145. The barns and other build-
ings are exempt from taxation, since they are used for purposes
incidental to instruction in forestry. See Mt. Hermon Boys'
School v. Gill, supra; Emerson v. Trustees of Milton Academy,
supra. The farming land not occupied by buildings is not used
for purposes inconsistent with the general use of the woodland.
It would be difficult to acquire a large area of woodland without
some open. Under authority of Wesleyan Academy v. Wilbra-
ham, 99 Mass. 599, 604, it is exempt from taxation.
Very truly yours,

Dana. Malone, Attorney-General .

52 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Taxation — Business Corporation — Deductions — Stocks and
Bonds subject to Taxation if owned by a Natural Person
Resident in this Commonwealth.

In the assessment of the franchise tax upon a business corporation under
St. 1903, c. 437, or St. 1909, c. 490, part III, the value of stocks
and bonds which would be subject to taxation if owned by a nat-
ural person in this Commonwealth should not be deducted from the
value of the corporate franchise.

" Oct. 22, 1909.

Hon. William D. T. Trefry, Tax Commissioner.

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to the method
of determining the amount upon which the franchise tax upon
domestic business corporations is to be assessed.

By St. 1903, c. 437, § 72, codified as St. 1909, c. 490, part III,
§ 41, cl. 3, it is provided that there shall be deducted from the
value of the shares constituting the capital stock of a domes-
tic business corporation the value " of its property situated in
another state or country and subject to taxation therein," and
" of securities which if owned by a natural person resident in this
commonwealth would not be liable to taxation." In St. 1903,
but not in the codification, it is further provided that " from such
value there shall not be deducted securities which, if owned by a
natural person resident in this commonwealth, would be liable
to taxation."

Your inquiry is whether there should be deducted from the
value of the shares constituting the capital stock of such a cor-
poration the value of " certain stocks and bonds, all of which
would be subject to taxation if owned by a natural person resi-
dent in this Commonwealth, which stocks and bonds upon the
first day of May are situated in New York and Illinois."

In determining the amount upon which the franchise tax upon
a business corporation is to be assessed, no deductions are to be
made other than those expressly authorized by statute. Com-
monwealth v. New England Slate & Tile Co., 13 Allen, 391 ; Cf.
Commonwealth v. Hamilton Mfg. Co., 12 Allen, 298; Manufac-
turers' Insurance Co. v. Loud, 99 Mass. 146 ; Home Insurance Co.
v. New York, 134 U. S. 594.

In view of the express provision of St. 1903, it is clear that
under that law the value of the stocks and bonds in question
should not be deducted from the value of the shares constituting
the capital stock of the corporation. The provisions of the codifi-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 53

cation, which took effect on the thirtieth day after June 12, 1909
(E. L., c. 8, § 1), are to be construed as continuations of exist-
ing statutes (section 26). Such codification is not to be pre-
sumed to have changed the law unless the intention clearly ap-
pears. Wright v. Dresser, 140 Mass. 147, 149. The commission
which reported the codification expressly disclaim any intention
to change the law (report of the Commission on Taxation, Jan-
uary, 1908, pp. 12, 79), and the same construction can reason-
ably be given to the law as codified as was given to the earlier
law. It is, therefore, unnecessary for me to express an opinion
as to which law governs, since, in my judgment, under either law
the value of the stocks and bonds referred to is not to be deducted.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Corporation — Name or Title containing the Words " Bank " or

" Banking ."

The provisions of St. 1909, c. 491, § 4, amending St. 1908, c. 590, § 16,
that no person, partnership, corporation or association, except co-
operative banks, savings banks and trust companies incorporated
under the laws of this Commonwealth, and such foreign banking
corporations as were doing business therein and were subject to the
examination or supervision of the Bank Commissioner on June 1,
1906, should thereafter "transact business under any name or title
which contains the word ' bank ' or ' banking,' as descriptive of said
business," are applicable to a corporation organized prior to the
passage of such act.

Oct. 26, 1909.

Hon. Arthur B. Chapix, Bank Commissioner.

Dear Sir: — I have your letter of the 19th inst, in which you
request my opinion as to whether or not it is in violation of chap-
ter 491 of the Acts of 1909 for any corporation chartered by this
Commonwealth prior to the passage of said act to continue to use
the words " bank " or " banking " in connection with its busi-
ness. Your reference is to section 4 of the act cited, which
amends St. 1908, c. 590, § 16, by adding at the end thereof the
words : " Nor shall any person, partnership, corporation or asso-
ciation except co-operative banks incorporated under the laws of
this commonwealth and corporations described in the first sen-
tence of this section hereafter transact business under any name
or title which contains the words 'bank' or 'banking/ as de-

54 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

scriptive of said business." The corporations described in the
first sentence of the section are " savings banks and trust com-
panies incorporated under the laws of this commonwealth,," and
" such foreign banking corporations as were doing business in
this commonwealth and were subject to examination or supervi-
sion of the commissioner on June first, nineteen hundred and
six."

This statute is in the nature of a police regulation for the pre-
vention of fraud. Its purpose is evidently to prevent persons,
partnerships, corporations and associations other than those un-
der the supervision of the Bank Commissioner from holding
themselves out as banks or banking institutions. It is intended
that any one dealing with a corporation which transacts business
under a name or title containing the words " bank " or " bank-
ing " shall have the assurance that he is safeguarded in such deal-
ing by provisions of law and by State supervision. This purpose
wholly fails if the prohibition in the statute under consideration
be construed as not applying to corporations formed prior to its
enactment.

The language of the statute, apart from other considerations,
indicates that the Legislature meant that the prohibition should
apply to corporations, whenever formed. If the Legislature had
intended it to apply only to corporations formed after its enact-
ment, it could readily have said so. If this had been the inten-
tion, the prohibition, in the case of corporations, would naturally
have been against incorporation rather than against the transac-
tion of business under such name or title. The prohibition, as
applied to corporations, is the same as applied to persons, yet no
one would suggest that the prohibition as to persons applied only
to those commencing business after the passage of the act.

The history of the statute, so far as it is of any assistance, leads
to the same conclusion. The statute was passed at the instance
of the Bank Commissioner, who recommended legislation pro-
hibiting the doin? of business under such name or title " by or-
ganizations not incorporated under banking or trust company
laws of this Commonwealth." There is here no suggestion of a
limitation to corporations afterward formed.

The hardship caused by the statute, construed in this manner,
is not unreasonably severe. A change in the name of a corpora-
tion may readily be effected. See St. 1903, c. 437, § 40. Of
course the name has a value which would be destroyed by a
change, but to require a change in name imposes no greater hard-

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 55

ship upon the corporation than upon a person, partnership or
association. At any rate, the hardship is no greater than the
Legislature may properly impose under a police regulation. No
constitutional rights are invaded.

These considerations lead me to the conclusion which I have
stated, — that the prohibition in the statute applies to the cor-
porations not expressly excepted therefrom, regardless of the time
of formation.

Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Insane Person — Guardian — Petition to sell Real Estate —

Notice.

Under the provisions of St. 1909, e. 504, § 102, that upon a petition
of a guardian for license to sell property of a spendthrift or of
an insane person a license to sell shall not be granted to such
guardian unless " seven days' notice of the petition therefor has
been given to the overseers of the poor of the city or town in which
the spendthrift resides, or to the state board of insanity in the case
of an insane person," such notice, in the case of an insane person,
is to be given only to the State Board of Insanity.

R. L., c. 145, § 41, providing that a conservator shall give bond as re-
quired of guardians of insane persons, and making all provisions
of law relative to the management, sale or mortgage of the prop-
erty of insane persons applicable to such conservator, is not re-
pealed by St. 1909, c. 504, §§ 99-102, inclusive, providing for the
appointment of guardians for insane persons and spendthrifts, and
is to be construed in connection with such statutes.

Nov. 1, 1909.

Owen Copp, M.D., Executive Officer, State Board of Insanity.

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to the con-
struction of St. 1909, c. 504, §§ 99, 100, 101 and 102, with refer-
ence to the following questions : —

First: must notice of guardian's petition for license to sell prop-
erty of an insane person be given only to the overseers of the poor
of the city or town in which said insane person resides, or to the
said overseers and to the State Board of Insanity or only to the State
Board of Insanity?

Second: what effect does chapter 504, Acts of 1909, sections 99
to 102 inclusive, have upon Revised Laws, chapter 145, section 41,
in regard to notices to be sent to the Board of Insanity?

56 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

The sections of the statute referred to are as follows : —

Section 99. If the relatives or friends of an insane person, or
the mayor and aldermen of a city or the selectmen of a town in
which he is an inhabitant or resident, or the state board of insanity,
apply to the probate court to have a guardian appointed for him,
the court shall cause not less than seven days' notice of the time
and place appointed for the hearing to be given to him and to the
state board of insanity, except that the court may, for cause shown,
direct that a. shorter notice be given to him and to the said board;
and if after a hearing the court finds that he is incapable .of taking
care of himself, it shall appoint a guardian of his person and estate.
A copy of such appointment shall be sent by mail by the register
to the said board. If in the opinion of the court additional medical
testimony as to the mental condition of the person alleged to be in-
sane is desirable, it may require such person to submit to examina-
tion, and may appoint one or more physicians, expert in insanity,
to examine such person and report their conclusions to the court.
Reasonable expense incurred in such examination, shall be paid out
of the estate of such person, or by the county, as may be determined
by the court.

Section 100. Upon the petition of the mayor of a city, the
selectmen of a town, the overseers of the poor of a city or town,
the state board of insanity, or other person in interest, the court
may, if it finds that the welfare of a minor, insane person, or spend-
thrift requires the immediate appointment of a temporary guardian
of his person and estate, appoint a temporary guardian of such
minor, insane person, or spendthrift, with or without notice, and
may in like manner remove or discharge him or terminate the trust.
A temporary guardian may proceed and continue in the execution
of his duties, notwithstanding an appeal from the decree appointing
him, until it is otherwise ordered by the supreme judicial court, or
until the appointment of a permanent guardian, or until the trust
is otherwise legally terminated.

Section 101. No final account or discharge of a guardian of
an insane person shall be allowed under the provisions of chapter
one hundred and forty-five of the Revised Laws, unless at least
seven days' notice of the petition therefor has been given to the
state board of insanity.

Section 102. A license to sell shall not be granted to the guard-
ian of a spendthrift who resides in this commonwealth, or of an
insane person, unless seven days' notice of the petition therefor has
been given to the overseers of the poor of the city or town in which
the spendthrift resides, or to the state board of insanity in the case
of an insane person. Such notice may be served upon any one of
said overseers or board.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 57

In my opinion, the statute, in section 102, provides that notice
of a guardian's petition to sell property of an insane person who
resides in this Commonwealth shall be given only to the State
Board of Insanity. The provision as to notice to the overseers of
the poor applies only to the case of a spendthrift. The language
of the act seems to me clear, and the construction indicated is in
accord with the general purpose of the act, to bring all matters
relative to the care and support of the insane into the hands of
State officials.

In reply to the second question, my opinion is that since R. L.,
c. 145, § 41, has been neither repealed nor amended, it is to be
construed as still in force and to be read with the statute above
quoted. E. L., c. 145, § 41, is as follows : —

Such conservator shall give bond as is required of guardians of
insane persons, and all provisions of law relative to the management,
sale or mortgage of the property of insane persons shall apply to
such conservator.

Since St. 1909, c. 504, contains the present provisions of law
relative to the management, sale or mortgage of the property of
insane persons, the provisions of sections 99-102 are applicable
to the cases of persons for whose property conservators have been
appointed, and notice of petitions for the disposition of property
in the hands of conservators must be given to the State Board of
Insanity.

While, however, this is in my opinion clearly the effect of the
statutes as they stand, it would seem that the situation may have
been the result of an oversight upon the part of the Legislature.
St. 1909, c. 504, expressly provides that in the case of a spend-
thrift the guardian's notice shall be given to the overseers of the
poor of the city or town where the spendthrift resides. The posi-
tion of an aged person whose property is in the hands of a con-
servator is more nearly analogous to that of a spendthrift than
that of an insane person, and as a matter of administration it
would seem that the law should be so amended as to require the
conservator to give notice of his petitions to the overseers of the
poor rather than to the State Board of Insanity.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

58 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Foreign Corporation — Usual Place of Business — Commissioner
of Corporations.

The words " usual place of business," in E. L., c. 126, § 4, which pro-
vides that every foreign corporation which has a usual place of
business within the Commonwealth, or is engaged therein, per-
manently or temporarily, in the construction, erection, alteration or
repair of a building, bridge, railroad, railway or structure of any
kind, shall, before doing business in this Commonwealth, in writing
appoint the Commissioner of Corporations and his successor in office
to be its true and lawful attorney, include a foreign corporation
which has executive offices within the Commonwealth where a con-
siderable part of the management of the business of the company
is carried on.

Nov. 5, 1909.
Hon. William D. T. Trefry, Commissioner of Corporations.

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to whether
certain foreign public service corporations for which the Stone &
Webster Management Association acts as general manager may
be said to have usual places of business in this Commonwealth,
and thus become subject to the provisions of chapter 126 of the
Revised Laws.

A foreign public service corporation is subject to the provisions
of this chapter if it " has a usual place of business in this Com-
monwealth" (section 4). The language quoted is the same as
that used in R. L., c. 14, § 50, and in St. 1903, c. 437, § 58.

Under date of Oct. 26, 1908, I advised you that " the phrase
' usual place of business ' used in the Revised Laws is broad
enough to include corporations which had within this Common-
wealth offices used solely for directors' meetings or transfer of-
fices . . ." , and that these words in section 58 of the business
corporation act " are to be construed as they were to be construed
under the earlier act." In this opinion I was interpreting the
law relative to mining companies. I am, however, of opinion
that the words " usual place of business " are to be construed in
the same way in the section now under consideration as in the
sections of the Revised Laws dealing with mining companies and
in the statute dealing with business corporations. In my opin-
ion, if the companies in question actually have executive offices
here, at which offices a considerable part of the management of
the companies' business is carried on, they have usual places of

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 59

business here within the meaning of chapter 126 of the Kevised
Laws. Cf. People v. Horn Silver Mining Co., 105 N. Y. 76.

I do not attempt to pass upon the specific cases submitted,
since each case must be determined upon its special facts.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Savings Banks — Authorized Investments — First Mortgages of
Real Estate — Notes secured by a Mortgage of Real Estate
to a Trust Company.

Notes secured by a mortgage of a tract of land with buildings thereon
to a trust company as trustee, as security for an issue of notes made
by the owners of the property, of which the notes in question are
a part, are not a legal investment for savings banks, since they
do not constitute an investment in " first mortgages of real estate,'*
within the provisions of St. 1908, c. 590, § 68, el. 1, defining au-
thorized investments for savings banks in this Commonwealth.

Nov. 11, 1909.
Hon. Arthur B. Chapin, Bank Commissioner.

Dear Sir : — You ask my opinion as to whether it is lawful
for a savings bank to invest in notes secured by a mortgage of a
tract of land with buildings thereon to a trust company, as
trustee, as security for an issue of notes made by the owners
of the property of which the notes referred to are a part.
These notes amount on the whole to less than 60 per cent, of
the value of the real estate subject to the mortgage.

St. 1908, c. 590, § 68, cl. 1, which defines authorized invest-
ments for savings banks, is as follows : —

First. In first mortgages of real estate located in this common-
wealth not to exceed sixty per cent of the value of such real estate;
but not more than seventy per cent of the whole amount of deposits
shall be so invested. If a loan is made on unimproved and unpro-
ductive real estate, the amount loaned thereon shall not exceed forty
per cent of the value of such real estate. No loan on mortgage
shall be made except upon written application showing the date,
name of applicant, amount asked for and security offered, nor ex-
cept upon the report of not less than two members of the board of
investment who shall certify on said application, according to their
best judgment, the value of the premises to be mortgaged; and such
application shall be filed and preserved with the records of the
corporation.

60 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

At the expiration of every such loan made for a period of five
or more years not less than two members of the board of investment
shall certify in writing, according to their best judgment, the value
of the premises mortgaged; and the premises shall be revalued in
the same manner at intervals of not more than five years so long
as they are mortgaged to such corporation. Such report shall be
filed and preserved with the records of the corporation. If such
loan is made on demand or for a shorter period than five years, a
revaluation in the manner above prescribed shall be made of the
premises mortgaged not later than five years after the date of such
loan and at least every fifth year thereafter. If at the time a re-
valuation is made the amount loaned is in excess of sixty per cent,
or in the case of unimproved and unproductive real estate in excess
of forty per cent, of the value of the premises mortgaged, a suffi-
cient reduction in the amount of the loan shall be required, as
promptly as may be practicable, to bring the loan within sixty per
cent, or in the case of unimproved and unproductive real estate
within forty per cent, of the value of said premises.

Savings banks cannot invest in any notes of the kind de-
scribed unless such investment is authorized by clause 1 of
the above section, which authorizes investments in " first mort-
gages of real estate located in this commonwealth, not to exceed
sixty per cent of the value of such real estate/' The question
is, therefore, whether the investment described is an investment
in " first mortgages of real estate."

A similar question was considered by Attorney-General
Knowlton. (1 Op. Atty.-Gen., 4-34.) St. 1894, c. 317, § 31,
was then in force. It did not differ materially, so far as this
question is concerned, from the present statute. In that opinion
the then Attorne}- General said : —

I am of opinion, however, that the purchase of bonds by a sav-
ings bank, which are a portion of a larger number secured by a
mortgage given by the obligor to a third person as trustee for the
benefit of bondholders, is not a " loan upon mortgage," within the
meaning of the statutes relating to savings banks. ..." Loans
upon first mortgages of real estate," as that expression is used in
the statute, are loans made to an individual or a corporation upon
the security of a mortgage given by the borrower to the savings
bank. Certain rights attach to the holder of a mortgage which do
not appertain to the holder of a bond secured by a mortgage in
the hands of a trustee. It was, in my opinion, the intention of the
statute to authorize savings banks to loan upon mortgages only when
the full and unrestricted rights of mortgagees are conferred upon

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 61

the bank, to the end that the entire control and custody should be
in the hands of the bank. (Page 435.)

In an opinion of Attorney- General Parker (2 Op. Atty.-
Gen., 593) the same provision of statute, then E. L., c. 113, §
26, cl. 1, was under consideration, and it was pointed out that
in the case of an assignment of a mortgage to a savings bank
the section contemplates one " which should have effect to vest
in the latter (that is, the savings bank) the full and unrestricted
rights of a mortgagee in the premises."

The general propositions stated in these opinions were clearly
correct, and no reason appears for now departing from them.

It is true that certain of the specific objections existing in
the case considered in the opinion of the Attorney- General first
cited (1 Op. Atty.-Gen., 434) have been done away with. The
trustee cannot require indemnity before foreclosing; he has
no prior lien on the property for his charges ; there is no express
exemption from responsibility for the negligence of agents and
the trustee has not discretion as to whether or not to foreclose.
It is to be noticed, however, that any holder of a note may
request foreclosure. The result is that some other person hold-
ing a note secured by the mortgage in question might insist
upon foreclosure, although the bank did not wish it, and the
bank could not prevent such foreclosure. The bank has not,
then, entire control and custody as it would have in the case
of a mortgage held by it directly.

It is not clear to me that it is contemplated to comply with
the provisions of the first clause of section 68, which provides
that " no loan on mortgage shall be made except upon written
application showing the date, name of applicant, amount asked
for and security offered, nor except upon the report of not less
than two members of the board of investment who shall certify
on said application, according to their best judgment, the value
of the premises to be mortgaged." If this is not done, clearly
the loan would not be one authorized by the statute. It is
further provided in the second paragraph of the first clause of
said section that at the expiration of every such loan there must
be a revaluation by the board of investment at intervals of not
more than five years so long as they are mortgaged; and also
that " If at the time a revaluation is made the amount loaned
is in excess of sixty per cent of the value of the premises mort-
gaged, a sufficient reduction in the amount of the loan shall be

62 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

required, as promptly as may be practicable, to bring the loan
within sixty per cent of the value of the premises."

The deed of trust, a copy of which is submitted to me, makes
no provision for such a contingency; and from a careful con-
sideration of the statute I am of opinion that such a loan was not
contemplated by the Legislature, but that the words " so long
as they are mortgaged to such corporation " mean a direct
mortgage to the savings bank itself and not to a trustee. I am,
therefore, of opinion that such an investment in the case de-
scribed is not an investment in " first mortgages of real estate."
As pointed out in the opinion first quoted, such forms of loans
are becoming more frequent, and it may be that the Legislature
will authorize savings banks to purchase them; but until such
time comes I am of opinion that savings banks cannot legally
invest therein.

Very truly yours,

Daxa Malone, Attorney-General.

Trust Company — Reserve — Time Deposit.

An agreement in writing, payable thirty days after demand or notice,
is a time deposit payable at a stated time, within the meaning of
St. 1908, c. 520, § 8, which provides that " every trust company . . .
shall at all times have on hand as a reserve an amount equal to at
least fifteen per cent of the aggregate amount of its deposits, ex-
clusive of savings deposits and of time deposits represented by
certificates or agreements in writing and payable only at a stated
time."

Nov. 12, 1909.

Hon. Arthur B. Chapin", Bank Commissioner.

Dear Sir : — You request my opinion as to whether an agree-
ment in writing, payable thirty days after demand or notice, is
a time deposit payable at a stated time, and therefore exempt
from the reserve requirements.

St. 1908, c. 520, § 8, provides that: —

Every trust company doing business within the commonwealth
shall at all times have on hand as a reserve an amount equal to at
least fifteen per cent of the aggregate amount of its deposits, ex-
clusive of savings deposits and of time deposits represented by
certificates or agreements in writing and payable only at a stated
time, but whenever such time deposits may be withdrawn within
thirty days they shall be subject to the reserve requirements of this

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 63

act; and every trust company doing business in the city of Boston
shall at all times have on hand as a reserve an amount equal to at
least twenty per cent of the aggregate amount of its deposits com-
puted in the same manner.

In my opinion, this law requiring a reserve does not apply to
deposits of the character described in the question. The de-
posits in question cannot be withdrawn within thirty days, but
only thirty days after demand or notice, and therefore come
within the terms of the statute which exempts deposits payable
at a stated time from the reserve requirement.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

Official Bond — Surety — Married Woman — Wife of Principal.

Under the provisions of E. L., c. 153, § 2, that " a married woman may
make contracts, oral and written, sealed and unsealed, in the same
manner as if she were sole, except that she shall not be authorized
hereby to make contracts with her husband," a married woman
may, as surety, sign the official bond of her husband.

Nov. 23, 1909.
Charles R. Prescott, Esq., Controller of County Accounts.

Dear Sir : — In answer to your communication, dated No-
vember 17, in which you inquire whether or not a wife is eligible
as surety upon the official bond of her husband, I beg to refer
you to the provisions of R. L., c. 153, § 2, which section is as
follows : —

A married woman may make contracts, oral and written, sealed
and unsealed, in the same manner as if she were sole, except that
she shall not be authorized hereby to make contracts with her
husband.

This statute " enables a married woman to ' make contracts,
oral and written, sealed and unsealed, in the same manner as
if she were sole/ and does not require that the consideration of
her contracts should enure to her own benefit. The provision
that nothing in this act shall authorize her c to convey property
to, or make contracts with, her husband/ is evidently not in-
tended to impose any new restriction on her capacity, but merely
to affirm the rule of the common law, so far as her husband

64 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 1910.

is the other party to her grant or contract ; and does not prevent
both of them from binding themselves by a joint promise to a
third person, within the authority conferred by the statute.
Parker v. Kane, 4 Allen, 346." {Major v. Holmes, 124 Mass.
108.) See also Binney v. Globe National Bank, 150 Mass. 574.
It follows, therefore, that a married woman may, as surety,
sign the official bond of her husband.
Very truly yours,

Dana Malone, Attorney-General.

INDEX TO OPINIONS.

PAGE

Animals affected with tuberculosis, sale of meat derived from carcasses of, 15
Anti-trust act, acquisition of stock of Boston & Maine Railroad by Boston

Railroad Holding Company, ....... 37

Authorized investments for savings banks, notes secured by mortgage of

real estate to a trust company, ...... 59

" Bank " or " banking " in name of corporation, ..... 53

Bonds, official, wife of principal as surety, ...... 63

Boston & Maine Railroad, acquisition of stock of, by Boston Railroad

Holding Company, anti-trust act, ...... 37

Boston & Maine Railroad, liability to forfeiture of charter, ... 5

Boston Railroad Holding Company, restraint of trade, anti-trust act, . 37
Buildings, inspection of, plans deposited with inspector of factories and

public buildings, ......... 35

Business, usual place of, of foreign corporation, ..... 58

Charitable corporation, purposes, Soldiers' Home in Chelsea, . . 22

City or town, authority to open State highway to lay water pipes, . 45

Constitutional law, exercise of legislative power by ministerial officer, . 24
Corporation, business, taxation, deduction of stocks and bonds taxable if

owned by a natural person, ....... 52

Charitable, Soldiers' Home in Chelsea, purposes, .... 22

Foreign, usual place of business, ....... 58

Insurance, transaction of business of insurance, .... 27

Name containing words "bank" or "banking," .... 53

Organized to buy and sell real estate, ...... 1

Deed, in foreign language, duty of register of deeds as to recording, . 45

Employees, ten or more, above second story, inspection of buildings, . 35

Excise tax, computation of, on express business, ..... 47

"Establishment," definition of, in reference to inspection of buildings, . 35

Exemption from taxation of property used in instruction in forestry, . 50
Expenditures, investigation of, by Governor and Council, . . .31

Express business, computation of excise tax on, ..... 47

Forestry, instruction in, exemption of property used for, ... 50

Guardian of an insane person, petition to sell real estate, notice, . . 55

Governor and Council, power to investigate expenditures, ... 31

Health, boards of, right to enter schools in cases of contagious diseases, . 2

Inspectors of, right to enter schools, ...... 2

Hunters, registration of, residence on land used for agricultural purposes, 11

Insane person, guardian, petition to sell real estate, notice, ... 55

66 INDEX.

PAGE

Insane person, settlement, removal from Commonwealth, ... 13

Insurance, accident and health disability, form of policy,

Place of contract, jurisdiction, ......

Insurance Commissioner, approval of form of policy,

Married woman as surety on official bond of husband, .

Meat, derived from carcasses of cattle affected with tuberculosis, .

Mortgage of real estate to a trust company, notes secured by, as authorized
investments for savings banks, .....

Notice, of petition to sell real estate by guardian of insane person,

Patent medicine, label, ........

Pauper law, settlement, effect of removal of insane person from Common-
wealth, .........

Policy, insurance, approval of form of, constitutional law,

Proprietary or patent medicine, label, statement of contents,

Real estate, organization of corporation to buy and sell,

Register of deeds, duty to record instrument in foreign language, .

Registration of hunters, residence on land used for agricultural purposes,

Restraint of trade, acquisition of stock of Boston & Maine Railroad by
Boston Holding Company, ......

Savings banks, authorized investments, notes secured by mortgage of real
estate to a trust company, ......

Schools, right of boards of health to enter in cases of contagious diseases,
Right of inspectors of health to enter, .....

Settlement, insane person, removal from Commonwealth,

Soldiers and sailors, charitable corporation, Soldiers' Home in Chelsea,

State highway, authority of city or town to open, for water pipes,

Surety, wife of principal on official bond, as, ....

Taxation of business corporations, deduction of stocks and bonds taxable
if owned by a natural person, .....

Excise tax on express business, computation,
Exemption of property used for educational purposes, forestry,

Trust company, notes secured by mortgage of real estate to, as authorized
investments for savings banks, .....
Reserve, time deposit, .......

Tuberculosis, sale of meat from animals affected with, .

LIST OF CASES

IN WHICH THE

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

HAS APPEARED

During the Year 1909.

GRADE CROSSINGS.

Notices have been served upon this department of the filing of
the following petitions for the appointment of special commis-
sioners for the abolition of grade crossings : —

Barnstable County.

Barnstable, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
County Road, Pond Village, crossing. Railroad Commis-
sioners appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Arthur W. DeGoosh appointed auditor. Auditor's
second report filed. Pending.

Bourne, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition of
Collins and Handy crossings. Louis A. Frothingham,
Henry L. Parker, Jr., and Lyman P. Thomas, appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Arthur W.
DeGoosh appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed.
Pending.

Berkshire County.

Adams. Hoosac Valley Street Railway Company, petitioners.
Petition for abolition of Commercial Street crossing in
Adams. George W. Wiggin, William W. McClench and
Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. Frank H. Cande appointed auditor.
Auditor's second report filed. Pending.

Great Barrington, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of a grade crossing in the village of Housatonic in
said town. John J. Flaherty, Edmund K. Turner and
Stephen S. Taft appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Frank N. Nay appointed auditor. Auditor's
second report filed. Pending.

Lanesborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of Valley Road and Glen Road crossings. Railroad Com-
missioners appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Pending.

Lee, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Lang-
don's crossing in Lee. Wade Keves, Thomas W. Kennefick

70 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

and Luther Dean appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's
second report filed. Pending.

Lenox, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of grade
crossings in Lenox. Fred Joy, Louis A. Frothingham and
Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. J. Mott Hallowell appointed auditor.
Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

North Adams. Hoosac Valley Street Railway Company, peti-
tioners. Petition for abolition of Main Street crossing,
known as Braytonville crossing, in North Adams. Edmund
K. Turner, William W. McClench and Joseph P. Magenis
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed.
Frank H. Cande appointed auditor. Auditor's first report
filed. Pending.

North Adams, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition
for abolition of State Street and Furnace Street crossings.
Edmund K. Turner, David F. Slade and William G.
McKechnie appointed commissioners. Pending.

Pittsfield, Mayor and Aldermen of, and Directors of Boston &
Albany Railroad Company, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of Hubbard and Gates avenues and Jason Street
crossings in Pittsfield. Thomas W. Kennefick, William Sul-
livan and Charles M. Ludden appointed commissioners.
Commissioners' report filed. Patrick J. Ashe appointed
auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

Pittsfield, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Merrill crossing in Pittsfield. Thomas W. Ken-
nefick, Frederick L. Green and Edmund K. Turner ap-
pointed commissioners. Pending.

Pittsfield, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Holmes Road crossing. William W. McClench,
Charles N. Clark and Edmund K. Turner appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones
appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pending.

Stockbridge, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition
of " River Road " crossing in Stockbridge. James B. Car-
roll, Edward B. Bishop and Luther Dean appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Wade Keyes
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

Stockbridge, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
South Street crossing. Eailroad commissioners appointed

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 71

commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. A. W. De-
Goosh appointed auditor. Pending.
Williamstown. Hoosac Valley Street Kailway Company, peti-
tioners. Petition for the abolition of a grade crossing in
Williamstown, near the Fitchburg Eailroad station. Ed-
mund K. Turner, William W. McClench and Charles N.
Clark appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Frank H. Cande appointed auditor. Auditor's second
report filed. Pending.

Bristol County.

Attleborough. Directors of Old Colony Eailroad, petitioners.
Petition for abolition of South Main Street crossing in At-
tleborough. George W. Wiggin, Augustus P. Martin and
Charles A. Allen appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Clarence H. Cooper appointed auditor. Audi-
tor's third report filed. Pending.

Attleborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of West Street, North Main Street and other crossings in
Attleborough. James E. Dunbar, Henry L. Parker and
William Jackson appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Chas. P. Searle appointed auditor. Auditor's
sixth report filed. Pending.

Easton. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Eail-
road Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of cross-
ing at Eastondale. James E. Cotter, Wm. Eankin and
Chas. D. Bray appointed commissioners. Fred Joy ap-
pointed auditor. Auditor's fourth report filed. Pending.

Fall Eiver, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Brownell Street crossing and other crossings in
Fall Eiver. John Q. A. Brackett, Samuel N. Aldrich and
Charles A. Allen appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's
nineteenth report filed. Pending.

Mansfield. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
grade crossing at North Main, Chauncey, Central, West,
School and Elm streets in Mansfield. Samuel L. Powers,
Stephen S. Taft and Wm. Jackson appointed commissioners.
Pending.

New Bedford, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of certain grade crossings in New Bedford. George

72 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

F. Richardson, Horatio G. Herrick and Wm. Wheeler ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred
E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's thirteenth report
filed. Pending.

Taunton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of grade crossings in Taunton. William B. French,
A. C. Southworth and Edward B. Bishop appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Disposed of.

Taunton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of grade crossings at Danforth and other streets in
Taunton. Pending.

Essex County.

Gloucester. Boston & Maine Railroad, petitioner. Petition for
abolition of crossings at Magnolia Avenue and Brays cross-
ing. Arthur Lord, Moody Kimball and P. H. Cooney ap-
pointed commissioners. Pending.

Haverhill, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Washington Street and other crossings in
Haverhill. George W. Wiggin, William B. French and Ed-
mund K. Turner appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's
ninth report filed. Pending.

Ipswich. Boston & Maine Bailroad Company, petitioners. Peti-
tion for abolition of Locust Street crossing in Ipswich.
George W. Wiggin, Edmund K. Turner and William F.
Dana appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's first
report filed. Pending.

Ipswich, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
High Street and Locust Street crossings. Geo. W. Wiggin,
Edmund K. Turner and William F. Dana appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

Lawrence. Boston & Maine Railroad, petitioner. Petition for
abolition of crossing at Chickering Street. Pending.

Lynn, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Summer Street and other crossings on Saugus
branch of Boston & Maine Railroad and Market Street and
other crossings on main line. George W. Wiggin, Edgar R.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 73

Champlin and Edmund K. Turner appointed commis
sioners. Commissioners7 report filed. Pending.

Lynn, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of grade crossings at Pleasant and Shepard streets, Gas
Wharf Eoad and Commercial Street, on the Boston, Eevere
Beach & Lynn Railroad. Pending.

Rowley. Boston & Maine Railroad Company, petitioners. Peti-
tion for abolition of Main Street crossing in Rowley. E.
K. Turner, Ralph A. Stewart and James M. Swift ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Ed-
ward A. McLaughlin appointed auditor. Auditor's second
report filed. Pending.

Salem, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of grade crossings at Bridge, Washington, Mill,
North, Flint and Grove streets in Salem. Pending.

Salem, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Lafayette Street crossing in Salem. Pending.

Franklin County.

Deerfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
" Upper Wisdom Road " crossing. Edmund K. Turner,
Calvin Coolidge and Hugh P. Drysdale appointed commis-
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Lyman W. Griswold
appointed auditor. Pending.

Greenfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition
of Allen and Russell streets crossings in Greenfield. Ed-
mund K. Turner, Walter P. Hall and Fred D. Stanley
appointed commissioners. Stephen S. Taft appointed au-
ditor. Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

Northfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
crossing on road to South Vernon. Edmund K. Turner,
Charles W. Hazelton and Charles H. Innes appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending.

Hampden County.
Chicopee, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Plainfield and Exchange Street crossings and other
crossings in Chicopee. Geo. W. Wiggin, Edmund K. Turner
and Fred D. Stanley appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. Timothy G. Spaulding appointed au-
ditor. Auditor's fourth report filed. Pending.

74 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Palmer, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Palmer and Belchertown Road crossing in Palmer. T. M.
Brown, Chas. E. Hibbard and Henry G. Taft appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Stephen S.
Taft appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed.
Pending.

Palmer, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Burley's crossing in Palmer. Pending.

Russell, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Montgomery Road crossing. Railroad Commissioners ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed.
Thomas W. Ivennefick appointed auditor. Pending.

Springfield, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Bay State Road and other crossings in Spring-
field. George W. Richardson, Marshall Wilcox and George
W. Wiggin appointed commissioners. Commissioners' re-
port filed. Charles W. Bosworth appointed auditor. Audi-
tor's first report filed. Pending.

Springfield, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of South End Bridge crossing in Springfield. Ar-
thur H. Wellman, John J. Flaherty and George F. Swain
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed.
Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's second report
filed. Pending.

Westfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition
of North Elm Street crossing in Westfield. Charles E.
Hibbard, Joseph Bennett and George W. Wiggin appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Ralph W.
Ellis appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed.
Disposed of.

Westfield. Boston & Albany Railroad Company, petitioners.
Petition for abolition of Coburn's and Morse's crossings in
Westfield. Charles M. Ludden, William Sullivan and Rich-
ard W. Irwin appointed commissioners. Commissioners'
report filed. Ralph W. Ellis appointed auditor. Auditor's
first report filed. Disposed of.

Hampshire County.
Belchertown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Holyoke Road crossing in Belchertown. George W. Wiggin,
Fred D. Stanley and Edmund K. Turner appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Stephen S. Taft
appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 75

Belchertown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the aboli-
tion of Leache's crossing in Belchertown. Augustus W.
Locke, George W. Johnson and Joseph Bennett appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. William H.
Clapp appointed auditor. Auditor's report filed. Disposed
of.

Belchertown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the aboli-
tion of crossing of road from Belchertown to Three Rivers
and road from Bondville to Ludlow. Pending.

Northampton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Grove Street and Earl Street crossings in North-
ampton. Frederick L. Greene, Stephen S. Taft and James
M. Sickman appointed commissioners. Commissioners' re-
port filed. William P. Hayes appointed auditor. Auditor's
first report filed. Pending.

Ware, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Maple
Street and Gilbertville Eoad crossings in Ware. Alpheus
Sanford, Everett C. Bumpus and William W. McClench ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. John
W. Mason appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed.
Pending.

Middlesex County.

Acton, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Great
Eoacl crossing in Acton. Benj. W. Wells, George Burrage
and William B. Sullivan appointed commissioners. Com-
missioners' report filed. Fred Joy appointed auditor.
Pending.

Acton, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of May-
nard, Stow and Maple streets crossings in Acton. Edmund
K. Turner, Edward F. Blodgett and Wade Keyes appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred Joy
appointed auditor. Auditor's third report filed. Pending.

Ayer, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Main
Street crossing in Ayer. Samuel K. Hamilton, Theodore C.
Hurd and Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners.
Commissioners' report filed. Robert P. Clapp appointed
auditor. Auditor's third report filed. Pending.

Ayer, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of West
Main and Park streets crossing in Ayer. Frank P. Gould-
ing, Charles A. Allen and Anson D. Fessenden appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Theodore C.
Hurd appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed.
Disposed of.

76 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. .[Jan.

Belmont, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Brighton Street, Concord Avenue and Trapelo Road cross-
ings in Belmont. Pending. Theodore C. Hurd, Fred Joy
and George F. Swain appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. Guy Murchie appointed auditor.
Auditor's third report filed. Pending.

Cambridge. Directors of Boston & Maine Eailroad Company,
petitioners. Petition for abolition of Prison Point Street
crossing in Cambridge. Henry S. Milton, Edward B.
Bishop and Henry G. Taft appointed commissioners. Com-
missioners' report filed. Theodore C. Hurd appointed audi-
tor. Auditor's sixth report filed. Pending.

Chelmsford, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Princeton Street crossing in Chelmsford. Edmund K. Tur-
ner, Frederick "W. Dallinger and Charles F. Worcester ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. W.
C. Dillingham appointed auditor. Auditor's second report
filed. Pending.

Everett. Directors of Boston & Maine Eailroad Company, peti-
tioners. Petition for abolition of crossings at Broadway and
Main Street in Everett. George W. Wiggin, Edmund K.
Turner and Robert S. Gray appointed commissioners. Com-
missioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor.
Auditor's sixth report filed. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo-
lition of Marble Street crossing. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the aboli-
tion of Concord Street crossing. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo-
lition of Waverly Street crossing. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo-
lition of Bishop Street crossing. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo-
lition of Hollis and Waushakum streets crossings. Pending.

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo-
lition of Claflin Street crossing. Pending.

Lexington, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Grant Street crossing in Lexington. Alpheus Sanford,
Edmund K. Turner and S. Everett Tinkham appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Franklin
Freeman appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed.
Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 77

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Middlesex and Thorndike streets crossings. Pend-
ing.

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Boston Eoad and Plain Street crossings. Arthur
Lord, David F. Slade and Henry A. Wyman appointed
commissioners. Pending.

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of School and Walker streets crossings. Arthur Lord,
David F. Slade and Henry A. Wyman appointed commis-
sioners. Pending.

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Lincoln Street crossing. Arthur Lord, David F.
Slade and Henry A. Wyman appointed commissioners.
Pending.

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Middlesex, Thorndike and Lincoln streets and Bos-
ton Eoad grade crossings. Pending.

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Pawtucket Street crossing and other crossings in
Lowell. George W. Wiggin, John W. Ellis and Samuel L.
Minot appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Patrick H. Cooney appointed auditor. Auditor's
second report filed. Disposed of.

Maiden. Directors of Boston & Maine Eailroad Company, peti-
tioners. Petition for abolition of Medford Street and other
crossings in Maiden. Geo. W. Wiggin, Eobert 0. Harris
and Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners. Com-
missioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor.
Auditor's third report filed. Pending.

Maiden, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo-
lition of Pleasant and Winter streets crossing in Maiden.
George W. Wiggin, Edmund K. Turner and Fred Joy ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Win-
field S. Slocum appointed auditor. Auditor's first report
filed. Pending.

Marlborough, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Hudson Street crossing in Marlborough. Walter
Adams, Charles A. Allen and Alpheus Sanford appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending.

Natick. Boston & Worcester Street Eailway Company, petition-
ers. Petition for alteration of Worcester Street crossing in

78 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Natick. Geo. W. Wiggin, Edmund K. Turner and Larkin
T. Trull appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Theo. C. Hurd appointed auditor. Auditor's second
report filed. Pending.

Newton, Major and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of Concord Street and Pine Grove Avenue cross-
ings in Newton. George W. Wiggin, T. C. Mendenhall and
Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners. Pending.

Newton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of crossings on main line in Newton. Theo. C. Hurd
appointed auditor. Auditor's eleventh report filed. Pend-
ing.

Newton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of Glen A venue and nine other crossings in New-
ton. Geo. W. Wiggin, T. C. Mendenhall and Edmund K.
Turner appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Patrick H. Cooney appointed auditor. Auditor's
sixteenth report filed. Pending.

North Beading, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Main Street crossing in North Reading. Alpheus
Sanford, George N. Poor and Louis M. Clark appointed
commissioners. Report of commissioners filed. Pending.

Somerville, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Park Street, Dane Street, Somerville Avenue
and Medford Street crossings in Somerville. George W.
Wiggin, George F. Swain and James D. Colt appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Patrick II.
Cooney appointed auditor. Auditor's third report filed.
Pending.

"Wakefield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Hanson Street crossing in Wakefield. Pending.

Waltham, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of South Street crossing in Waltham. Geo. F.
Swain, and Geo. A. Sanderson appointed com-
missioners. Pending.

Waltham, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Moody Street, Main Street, Elm Street, River
Street, Pine Street, Newton Street and Calvary Street cross-
ings in Waltham. Arthur Lord, Patrick H. Cooney and
George F. Swain appointed commissioners. Pending.

Weston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Church Street crossing. Railroad Commissioners ap-
pointed commissioners. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 79

Weston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Concord Road crossing. Railroad Commissioners appointed
commissioners. Pending.

Winchester, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the aboli-
tion of crossing at Winchester station square. George W.
Wiggin, George F. Swain and Arthur Lord appointed com-
missioners. Pending.

Norfolk County.

Braintree, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition
of the Pearl Street crossing at South Braintree. Patrick H.
Cooney, Frank N. Nay and George F. Swain appointed com-
missioners. Pending.

Braintree. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Railroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
grade crossing at School, Elm, River and Union streets in
Braintree. John L. Bates, Winfield S. Slocum and Arthur
H. Wellman appointed commissioners. Pending.

Brookline. Directors of Boston & Albany Railroad Company,
petitioners. Petition for the abolition of Kerrigan Place
crossing in Brookline. William Sullivan, Henry M. Hutch-
ins and Wade Iveyes appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. Henry M. Hutchins appointed auditor.
Auditor's first report filed. Pending.

Brookline and Boston. Directors of the Boston & Albany Rail-
road Company, petitioners. Petition for the abolition of
Reservoir Lane crossing in Boston and Brookline. Henry
C. Mulligan, Charles T. Davis and Albert S. Apsey ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Rob-
ert G. Dodge appointed auditor. Auditor's second report
filed. Pending.

Canton. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Rail-
road Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Ded-
ham Road crossing in Canton. Samuel L. Powers, Stephen
S. Taft and Wm. Jackson appointed commissioners. Pend-
ing.

Dedham. Directors of the Old Colony Railroad Company, peti-
tioners. Petition for the abolition of River Street and Whit-
ing Avenue crossings. Augustus P. Martin, Charles A.
Allen and Fred Joy appointed commissioners. Commis-
sioners' report filed. Clarence H. Cooper appointed auditor.
Auditor's supplemental report filed. Disposed of.

SO ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Dedham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition of
Eastern Avenue and Dwight Street crossings in Dedham.
Alpheus Sanford, Charles Mills and J. Henry Reed ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred
E. Jones appointed auditor. Pending.

Dedham, Selectmen of, and Directors of New York, New Haven
& Hartford Railroad Company, petitioners. Petitions for
abolition of East Street, Walnut Street and Vernon Street
crossings in Dedham, consolidated with petitions to abolish
Milton Street crossing in Hyde Park. Samuel N. Aldrich,
Edward B. Bishop and H. C. Southworth appointed commis-
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones ap-
pointed auditor. Auditor's thirteenth report filed. Pend-
ing.

Foxborough. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Railroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
grade crossing at Cohasset and Summer streets in Fox-
borough. Samuel L. Powers, Stephen S. Taft and Win.
Jackson appointed commissioners. Pending.

Hyde Park and Dedham, consolidated petitions. See Dedham.

Hyde Park, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Fairmount Avenue and Bridge Street crossings in Hyde
Park. Boyd B. Jones, Edmund K. Turner and Fred Joy
appointed commissioners. Thomas W. Proctor appointed
auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pending.

Needham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Charles River Street crossing in Needham. Pending.

Quincy. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Rail-
road Compaq, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Saville
and Water streets crossings in Quincy. John L. Bates,
Winfield S. Slocum and Arthur H. Wellman appointed
commissioners. Pending.

Sharon. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Eail-
road Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of grade
crossing at Depot, Garden and Mohawk streets in Sharon.
Samuel L. Powers, Stephen S. Taft and Wm. Jackson ap-
pointed commissioners. Pending.

Walpole, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Oak Street crossing and other crossings in Walpole. Dana
Malone, Edmund K. Turner and Henry A. Wyman ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. N. L.
Sheldon appointed auditor. Auditor's fourth report filed.
Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 81

Westwood. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Green Lodge Street crossing in Westwood. Samuel L.
Powers, Stephen S. Taft and Wm. Jackson appointed com-
missioners. Pending.

Plymouth County.

Abington. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Central Street crossing in Abington. Alpheus Sanford,
Erastus Worthington, Jr., and Edward B. Bishop appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones
appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pending.

Hingham. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Eockland Street crossing in Hingham. Winfield S. Slocum,
Alpheus Sanford and Henry C. Southworth appointed com-
missioners. Arthur W. DeGoosh appointed auditor. Au-
ditor's first report filed. Pending.

Scituate. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Eail-
road Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Water
Street and Union Street crossings in Scituate. Arthur H.
Wellman, Edmund K. Turner and Oscar A. Marden ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred
E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's third report filed.
Pending.

Suffolk County.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Dudley Street crossing in Dorchester. Thomas Post,
Fred Joy and Edmund K. Turner appointed commissioners.
Commissioners' report filed. James D. Colt appointed au-
ditor. Auditor's eighth report filed. Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Dorchester Avenue crossing in Boston. F. N.
Gillette, Charles S. Lilley and Charles Mills appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred Joy ap-
pointed auditor. Auditor's thirty-first report filed. Pend-
ing.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Austin Street, Cambridge Street and Perkins Street
crossings in Charlestown. Henry S. Milton, Edward B.
Bishop and Henry G. Taft appointed commissioners. Com-

82 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

missioners' report filed. Fred Joy appointed auditor. Au-
ditor's twelfth report filed. Pending.

Boston. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company,
petitioners. Petition for abolition of Neponset and Granite
avenues crossings in Dorchester. Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Freeport, Adams, Park, Mill and Walnut streets and
Dorchester Avenue crossings. James R. Dunbar, Samuel
L. Powers and Thomas W. Proctor appointed commis-
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Arthur H. Wellman
appointed auditor. Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Congress Street crossing in Boston. George W.
Wiggin, Edward B. Bishop and Charles A. Allen appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones
appointed auditor. Auditor's twenty-seventh report filed.
Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for the
abolition of the Essex Street crossing in Brighton. George
W. Wiggin, William B. French and Winfield S. Slocum
appointed commissioners. Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of Blue Hill Avenue and Oakland Street crossings in
Boston. William B. French, Arthur H. Wellman and
George A. Kimball appointed commissioners. Commission-
ers' report filed. Fred E. Jones appointed auditor. Au-
ditor's twentieth report filed. Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of all crossings in East Boston. George W. Wiggin,
William B. French and Edward B. Bishop appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Winfield S. Slo-
cum appointed auditor. Auditor's eleventh report filed.
Pending.

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli-
tion of crossings at Saratoga, Maverick and Marginal
streets in East Boston. Railroad Commissioners appointed
commissioners. Pending.

Eevere, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Win-
throp Avenue crossing in Pevere of the Boston, Revere
Beach & Lynn Pailroad. Pending.

Revere, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Win-
throp Avenue crossing in Revere. George W. Wiggin,

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 83

Everett C. Bumpus and Charles D. Bray appointed commis-
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones ap-
pointed auditor. Auditor's third report filed. Pending.

Worcester County.

Blackstone. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Mendon Street crossing in Blackstone. Eailroad commis-
sioners appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. William S. Dana appointed auditor. Auditor's first
report filed. Pending.

Clinton, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Sterling, Water, Main, High and Woodlawn streets cross-
ings. George W. Wiggin, William E. McClintock and James
A. Stiles appointed commissioners. Pending.

Fitchburg, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Eollstone Street crossing in Fitchburg. Ed-
mund K. Turner, Edwin U. Curtis and Ernest H. Vaughan
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed.
Pending.

Gardner, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Union Street crossing in Gardner. Frank P. Goulding,
Charles A. Allen and Franklin L. Waters appointed com-
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Henry L. Parker
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Disposed of.

Holden, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Dawson's crossing and Cedar Swamp crossing in Holden.
Charles A. Allen, Arthur P. Eugg and Henry G. Taft ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. H.
L. Parker appointed auditor. Pending.

Hubbardston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of Depot Eoad crossing in Hubbardston. Pending.

Leominster, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Water, Summer, Mechanic and Main streets crossings.
George W. Wiggin, George F. Swain and Charles D. Barnes
appointed commissioners. Pending.

Leominster, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Lancaster Street crossing in Leominster. Alpheus Sanford,
Charles A. Allen and Seth P. Smith appointed commis-
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred E. Jones ap-
pointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Disposed of.

Northborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition

84 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

of Westborough Hospital station crossing in Northborough.
Thomas Post, William Wheeler and Alpheus Sanford ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Guy
W. Currier appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed.
Pending.

Northbridge and Uxbridge, joint petition of Selectmen of. Pe-
tition for abolition of Whitin's station crossing. Alpheus
Sanford, Edward B. Bishop and Harry C. Southworth ap-
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred
E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's fifth report filed.
Disposed of.

Southborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of crossing on road from Southborough to Framingham.
Samuel W. McCall, Louis A. Frothingham and Eugene C.
Hultman appointed commissioners. Pending.

Southborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of crossing on road leading from Southborough to Hopkin-
ton. George C. Travis, James W. McDonald and William
Sullivan appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report
filed. Theodore C. Hurd appointed auditor. Auditor's
third report filed. Pending.

Southborough, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition
of Main Street crossing at Fayville in Southborough.
Pending.

West Boylston. Boston & Maine Railroad Company, petitioners.
Petition for abolition of Prescott Street crossing. Pending.

Westborough, Selectmen of, and Directors of Boston & Albany
Eailroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of
Main Street and Summer Street crossings in Westborough.
George W. Wiggin, George N. Smalley and Joseph Bennett
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. H.
L. Parker appointed auditor. Auditor's third report filed.
Disposed of.

Worcester, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of crossings at Exchange, Central and Thomas
streets. Arthur Lord, George F. Swain and Fred Joy ap-
pointed commissioners. Pending.

Worcester, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for
abolition of Grafton Street crossing and eight other cross-
ings, including alterations of Union Station. James R.
Dunbar, James H. Flint and George F. Swain appointed
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. James A.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 85

Stiles appointed auditor. Auditor's tenth report filed.
Pending.
Worcester. Directors of Boston & Albany Railroad Company,
petitioners. Petition for abolition of Webster Street, Lud-
low Street, Sutton Lane and Heard Street crossings in
Worcester. Harvey N. Shepard, Frederick Brooks and
Joseph S. Ludlam appointed commissioners. Commission-
ers' report filed. James A. Stiles appointed auditor. Au-
ditor's amended second report filed. Pending.

The following cases have been brought for alleged land dam-
ages incurred in the alteration of grade crossings. The Com-
monwealth, being obliged under the statutes to pay at least
twenty-five per cent, of the expenses incurred in the alteration
of all grade crossings, has in all cases been made a party thereto.

Belmont v. Boston & Maine Eailroad et al. Superior Court,
Middlesex County. Pending.

Boston & Maine Railroad v. Belmont. Superior Court, Middle-
sex County. Pending.

Fitchburg Eailroad Company v. Belmont. Superior Court, Mid-
dlesex County. Pending.

Lovejoy, Augustus, v. Commonwealth et al. Superior Court,
Middlesex County. Pending.

Maiden v. Boston & Maine Eailroad Company. Superior Court,
Middlesex County. Pending.

Worcester v. Worcester, Nashua & Eochester Eailroad Company
et al. Superior Court, Worcester County. Pending.

86 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

CASES AEISING IN THE COURTS

UNDER THE

Acts relative to Inheritance and Succession Taxes.

Petition for Instructions.
Barnstable County.
Horton, Charles P., estate of. Arthur H. Phippen et ah, ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Berkshire County.

White, Matilda W., estate of. Frank H. Butler, administrator.
Petition for instructions and discharge of lien. Final
decree.

Bristol County.

Haskell, Mary S., estate of. Frank C. Haskell, administrator.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Simmons, Allen S., estate of. Robert F. Raymond et al., ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Attorney-General
waived right to be heard.

Essex County.

Cheever, Samuel, estate of. William C. Rust, administrator.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Gorrill, Mark S., estate of. Clinton R. Thorn et al., adminis-
trators. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Nichols, Mary C, estate of. Frank 0. Woods, executor. Peti-
tion for instructions. Pending.

Franklin County.
Hosmer, Maria L., estate of. John L. Baker et al., executors.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Hampshire County.
Welton, Walter B., estate of. Henry W. Kidder, administrator.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 87

Middlesex County.
Langdell, Margaret E., estate of. Eugene Wambaugh et al.,

executors. Petition for instructions. Attorney-General

waived right to be heard.
Langdell, Margaret E., estate of. Eugene Wambaugh, et al.,

executors. Petition for instructions. Pending.
Mink, Louis, estate of. Frank Louis Mink, executor. Petition

for instructions. Decree.
Minot, George, estate of. Arthur 0. Fuller, trustee. Petition

for instructions. Attorney-General waived right to be

heard.
Mitchell, Austin E., estate of. James L. Richards et al., ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions and postponement.

Decree.

Norfolk County.
Hall, William F., estate of, Fannie M. H. Fegan, administratrix.

Petition for instructions. Attorney-General waived right

to be heard.

Suffolk County.
Browne, Charles A., estate of. Ida F. Richardson, executrix.

Petition for instructions. Dismissed.
Fessenden, Ferdinand S., estate of. Samuel Pote, trustee.

Petition for instructions. Decree.
Howe, Irving A., estate of. D. J. Lord, administrator. Petition

of Treasurer and Receiver-General for payment of tax on

certain legacies. Settled.
Marshall, James C, estate of. The New England Trust Com-
pany, petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending.
O'Keefe, Patrick, estate of. Martin Hayes et al., executors.

Petition for instructions. Decree.
Rogers, Mary P., estate of. Albert W. Thompson, petitioner.

Petition for instructions. Decree.
Hart, Thomas N., executor, v. Edwin F. Warren et al. Petition

for instructions. Disposed of.

Worcester County.

Burnap, Harriet T., estate of. Samuel W. Miller, administrator.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Thayer, Eugene V. R., estate of. Nathaniel Thayer et al., ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Decree.

88 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Inventories.

Barnstable County.

Clark, Achsah S., estate of. Lewis F. Clark, administrator.
Pending.

Webquish, Miranda V., estate of. Edward S. Ellis, adminis-
trator. Dismissed.

Berkshire County.

Coughlin, William, estate of. Annie T. Coughlin, adminis-
tratrix. Dismissed.

Harrington, William A., estate of. Oreeala Harrington, admin-
istratrix. Final decree.

Toll, Elizabeth, estate of. Minnie V. Potter, administratrix.
Final decree.

Bristol County.

Baines, James, estate of. Margaret Baines, administrator.
Final decree.

Baker, Nancy J., estate of. Leonard F. King, administrator.
Final decree.

Conway, Martin J., estate of. Martin Conway et al., adminis-
trators. Final decree.

Didier, Francois, estate of. Jean B. Jean, administrator. Final
decree.

Johnson, Ann, estate of. Betsey Miller, administratrix. Final
decree.

Lessard, Andre, estate of. Marie Lessard, executrix. Final
decree.

Martel, Arthur, estate of. Melvina Martel et al., executors.
Final decree.

Philla, Henry, estate of. Fannie Philla, administratrix.
Pending.

Pierce, Edward A., estate of. Morris P. Brownell, adminis-
trator. Dismissed.

Eeilly, Mary, estate of. Mary E. Banks, administratrix. Final
decree.

Rogers, Helen A., estate of. James W. Richardson, adminis-
trator. Pending.

Sullivan, Mary E., estate of. Daniel Sullivan, executor. Dis-
missed.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

Essex County.

Agganes, Louis N., estate of. George P. Agganes, administrator.
Pending.

Bent, Thomas H., estate of. William A. Bent, administrator.
Final decree.

Darcey, Mary, estate of. Ann Fitzsimmons, administratrix.
Final decree.

Davis, Agnes EL, estate of. Walter A. Davis, administrator.

Dunkerly, Daniel, estate of. Sarah Dunkerly, administratrix.
Final decree.

Eagan, Michael, estate of. Edward F. Eagan, administrator.
Dismissed.

Gilmartin, Daniel, Jr., estate of. Daniel Gilmartin, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Giroux, Joseph, estate of. Philomene Giroux, administrator.
Final decree.

Grandmaison, Abraham, estate of. Vena A. Grandmaison, ad-
ministratrix. Pending.

Harrington, Margaret, estate of. Jerome F. Kennelly, admin-
istrator. Pending.

Hinds, Catherine, estate of. John J. Lowney, administrator.
Final decree.

Houle, Joseph, estate of. Maria Honle, executrix. Final decree.

Jewett, David J. F., estate of. Alice C. Jewett, administratrix.
Final decree.

Kelley, Mary, estate of. Mary E. Mulcahey et al., executors.
Final decree.

Kimball, Mary E., estate of. Ella M. Kimball, administratrix.
Final decree.

King, Ellen F., estate of. James H. King, administrator. Final
decree.

Knowlton, Ann E., estate of. Frances A. Watson, executrix.
Final decree.

Kwiatkowski, Wladeslaw, estate of. John Kwiatkowski, admin-
istrator. Final decree.

Litt, Louis, estate of. Devoise Litt, administrator. Final
decree.

Mahoney, Margaret, estate of. Nellie J. Mahoney, administra-
trix. Final decree.

McDavitt, Dominic, estate of. Maria McDavitt, administratrix.
Final decree.

90 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Mignault, Armand, estate of. Rose A. M. Mignault, executrix.
Final decree.

Murphy, Thomas M., estate of. Mary F. Murphy, executrix.

Nelson L. Sigfrid, estate of. Carl Johnson, administrator.
Final decree.

O'Brien, Philip, estate of. Mary E. Sweeney, administratrix.
Pending.

Pecker, James M., estate of. James Pecker, administrator.

Reade, William C, estate of. Beverly S. Eeed, administrator.
Final decree.

Sanborn, Aaron T., estate of. Franklin Balch, administrator.

Shute, Joseph, estate of. Annie F. Shute, administratrix.
Pending.

Smith, Fannie M., estate of. Katherine F. S. Smith, admin-
istratrix. Dismissed.

Smith, Eichard, estate of. John H. Smith, executor. Final
decree.

Tallouse, Ethel M., estate of. Fred E. Tallouse, administrator.
Pending.

Testino, Mary C, estate of. Felice Senno, administratrix.
Final decree.

Thurston, George A., estate of. James T. Davidson, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Uhlig, John A., estate of. Christiana Uhlig, administratrix.
Final decree.

Wentworth, Isaac E., estate of. George E. Durgin, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Westwood, Charles E., estate of. David Westwood, adminis-
trator. Dismissed.

Wildes, Sarah J., estate of. F. Balch, administrator. Pending.

Franklin County.
Hulbert, Abbie L., estate of. J. Henry Nichols, executor. Final
decree.

Hampden County.

Ethier, Cordelia, estate of. Olivier Baudriault, executor.
Final decree.

Fitzpatrick, James J., estate of. John A. Fitzpatrick, admin-
istrator. Pending.

Kane, John J., estate of. Matilda A. Kane, administratrix.
Dismissed.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 91

King, Albert H., estate of. Freemont Temple, administrator.
Final decree.

Kubik, Sebastyan, estate of. Karolina Kubik, administratrix.
Pending.

Kurlej, Mary anna Busin, estate of. Waldyslaw Kurlej, exec-
utor. Pending.

Lamb, Almira E., estate of. Charles M. Goodnow, adminis-
trator.

Laventure, Henry T., estate of. Clara E. Laventure, adminis-
tratrix. Pending.

Leseige, Gasper E., estate of. Deseire Leseige, administrator.
Final decree.

McNamara, Michael, estate of. Dennis McNamara, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

O'Connor, Mary, estate of. Hannah O'Connor, administratrix.
Final decree.

Robinson, Delphine, estate of. Frank Z. Eobinson, executor.
Pending.

Syrek, William, estate of. Joseph Tuleja, executor. Final
decree.

Taylor, Frederick H., estate of. Sarah B. St. Ledger, admin-
istratrix. Final decree.

Middlesex County.

Anderson, Eobert N., estate of. Carl J. Anderson, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Aylward, John, estate of. John H. Aylward, administrator.

Basso, Luigi, estate of. Eosa Basso, administratrix. Dismissed.

Blake, George B., estate of. George H. Blake, administrator.
Dismissed.

Brooks, Armenia P., estate of. Charlotte Johnson, adminis-
tratrix. Dismissed.

Brown, Belmore N., estate of. Anna E. Brown, administra-
trix. Pending.

Buckley, Timothy J., estate of. Margaret Buckley, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Burrell, Mary E., estate of. Dennis J. Kelley, executor. Final
decree.

Callaghan, Mary, estate of. Mary E. Cunningham, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Cosgrove, John, estate of. Kate Cosgrove, executrix. Final
decree.

92 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Coughlin, John,, estate of. Sarah Coughlin, administratrix.

Final decree.
Cusick, George M., estate of. Elizabeth A. Cusick, administra-
trix. Final decree.
Dimond, Charles H., estate of. Elphonso I. Everton, admin-
istrator. Dismissed.
Downey, Patrick, estate of. Annie Downey, administratrix.

Final decree.
Downs, Joseph W., estate of. Mary A. Downs, administratrix.

Final decree.
Dwyer, Timothy, estate of. Ellen M. Dwyer, administratrix.

Final decree.
Eddy, Arthur S., estate of. Lawrence Bond, administrator.

Final decree.
Ellis, Martha J., estate of. Walter B. Ellis, executor. Final

decree.
Elston, Abraham A., estate of. John F. Elston, executor.

Final decree.
Everton, Ella M., estate of. Elphonso I. Everton, administra-
tor. Dismissed.
Finnegan, Patrick, estate of. Mary Finnegan, administratrix.

Pending.
Folger, Alice M., estate of. Henry C. Folger, administrator.

Final decree.
Forsaith, Elbridge, estate of. Allen S. White, administrator.

Final decree.
Gilberti, Antonio, estate of. Margaret J. Gilberti, administra-
trix.
Gormley, James J., estate of. Kose A. Gormley, executrix.

Final decree.
Gott, Jabez E., estate of. Guy L. Gott, administrator. Dis-
missed.
Granger, Mary, estate of. Bridget Mahoney, administratrix.

Dismissed.
Hartwell, Martha K, estate of. Alfred T. Hartwell, adminis-
trator. Final decree.
Higgins, Thomas, estate of. Emma E. Higgins, executrix.

Final decree.
Hildreth, Helen J., estate of. Florence H. Dresser, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.
Hoisington, Elver C., estate of. Eoseltha E. Hoisington, ad-
ministratrix. Final decree.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 93

Jackson, Dorothy B., estate of. Volney Skinner, administrator.
Pending.

Jenkinson, Susan M., estate of. Bernice M. Scott, administra-
trix. Final decree.

Kane, Mary, estate of. John J. Kane, administrator. Final
decree.

Kirkland, Mary L., estate of. Kobert N. Turner, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Langeline, Henry C, estate of. Frank N. Carpenter, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Little, Martha W., estate of. Willard A. Little, administrator.
Final decree.

Martinez, Alfred, estate of. Julia Martinez, executrix. Final
decree.

Mason, Harriet, estate of. Theodella Tyler, administratrix.
Pending.

McClaren, Mary E., estate of. Eva F. Loukes, administratrix.
Final decree.

McLeod, Donald, estate of. Annette McLeod, executrix. Dis-
missed.

Meehan, Michael J., estate of. Mary F. Meehan, executrix.
Final decree.

Miller, Laura A., estate of. Darius L. V. Moffett, administrator.

Murray, Ann, estate of. Ellen E. Murray, administratrix.
Final decree.

Nowell, Susan A., estate of. Edith M. Nowell, administratrix.
Final decree.

Ordway, Ada B., estate of. Charles F. Ordway, administrator.
Final decree.

Phelps, Mary A., estate of. Elizabeth A. Phelps, administratrix.
Final decree.

Pope, George W., estate of. Jessie F. Pope, administratrix.
Final decree.

Rayfuse, Emeline P., estate of. Justin N. Dows, administrator.
Final decree.

Reardon, Daniel E., estate of. Margaret Reardon, administra-.
trix. Final decree.

Eussin, Annie, estate of. Moris Russin, administrator. Final
decree.

Russo, Gerard, estate of. Louise R. Russo, administratrix.

Pending.
Ryder, Nellie B., estate of. Frank L. Tibbetts, administrator.
Dismissed.

94 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Saxe, Abby D., estate of. Charles L. Seavey et al., executors.
Final decree.

Sheehan, Elizabeth E., estate of. Mary E. Gaffney, administra-
trix. Dismissed.

Staples, Mary E., estate of. Mabel D. Thirierge, executrix.
Pending.

Strong, Mary J., estate of. Lawrence W. Strong, executor. Final
decree.

Tozier, Susan C, estate of. James W. Tozier, administrator.
Final decree.

Twitchell, Charles M. A., estate of. Everett H. Hadley, admin-
istrator.

Vahey, Mary, estate of. John P. Yahey, executor. Pending.

Walker, William A., estate of. Joseph F. Ham et ah, adminis-
trators. Dismissed.

Wight, Ella A., estate of. Walter H. Gregg, administrator.
Final decree.

Wyeth, Mary A., estate of. Wilfred C. Wyeth, administrator.
Pending.

Norfolk County.

Atwoocl, Charles F., estate of. Harrison H. Atwood, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Bent, Roswell, estate of. Ann Bent, executrix. Final decree.

Blanchard, Calvin, estate of. Antoinette S. Paige, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Buckley, Timothy, estate of. Annie Buckley, executrix. Dis-
missed.

Chestnut, Cora L., estate of. Samuel J. Chestnut, administra-
tor. Dismissed.

Childs, Henry 0., estate of. Charles L. Johnson, administrator.
Final decree.

DeLory, John E., estate of. Eobert Q. DeLory, administrator.
Final decree.

Frye, Howard, estate of. Edward Frye, administrator. Final
decree.

Hannan, John, estate of. Nancy Hannan, administratrix.
Dismissed.

Hayden, Amanda C, estate of. Frank L. Hay den, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Mclnnis, William, estate of. Daniel G. Mclnnis, administrator.
Final decree.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 95

Monstovich, John, estate of. Wylam Monstovich, administrator.
Dismissed.

Murray, Margaret, estate of. Catherine E. Murray, executrix.
Final decree.

Sonia, Frank A., estate of. Catherine Sonia, administratrix.
Final decree.

Staples, Catherine W., estate of. George F. Mclntire, adminis-
trator. Dismissed.

Weston, Elizabeth A., estate of. H. E. Euggles, administrator.
Dismissed.

Wines, Millard, estate of. Abbie E. Moulton, administratrix.
Final decree.

Plymouth County.

Bixby, Fred M., estate of. Lillie Bixby, executrix. Dismissed.

Broughton, Margaret, estate of. Daniel Broughton, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Burrill, Willard A., estate of. Mary F. Burrill, administratrix.
Final decree.

Davis, Faith May, estate of. Nettie L. Davis, administratrix.
Dismissed.

Eames, Margaret C, estate of. Etta F. Shaw, administratrix.
Final decree.

Fish, Angenette, estate of. Edwin E. Fish, administrator. Dis-
missed.

Fitzgerald, Mary, estate of. Patrick J. Fitzgerald, administra-
tor. Dismissed.

Hill, Susan B., estate of. Sarah T. Holmes, administratrix.
Final decree.

Holmes, Massena F., Jr., estate of. Massena F. Holmes, admin-
istrator. Dismissed.

Jones, Ellen, estate of. William H. Jones, administrator. Final
decree.

Lambert, J. Edgar, estate of. Kendall B. Lambert, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Eourke, Francis, estate of. Thomas J. Eourke, administrator.
Dismissed.

Shurtleff, Eliza A., estate of. George E. Shurtleff, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Tinkham, George B., estate of. Elisha B. Tinkham, adminis-
trator. Dismissed.

96 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Tobin, Elizabeth, estate of. Frank J. Lally, executor. Dis-
missed.

Whitcomb, Hannah L., estate of. Harold G. Leavitt, executor.
Final decree.

Suffolk County.

Allen, Harriet S., estate of. Charles T. Allen, executor. Final
decree.

Andrews, Clifford F., estate of. Addie L. Andrews, administra-
trix.

Applebee, Albert W., estate of. Hattie A. Applebee, administra-
trix. Final decree.

Arthur, Ferida, estate of. Leo Ferris, administrator. Pending.

Barnr, Ellen T., estate of. Michael Barry, administrator. Final
decree.

Bartlett, Annie M., estate of. Charles J. Bartlett, executor.
Final decree.

Benson, Elizabeth A., estate of. A. Dudley Bayley, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Brown, Benjamin H., estate of. Katherine K. Brown, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Brown, Robert H., estate of. Bridget Brown, administratrix.
Final decree.

Burns, Patrick, estate of. Elizabeth F. Thomas, administratrix.
Final decree.

Cahill, Patrick, estate of. Patrick J. Cahill, administrator.
Dismissed.

Call, Frances C, estate of. John M. Call, executor. Final
decree.

Campana, Michael E., estate of. George Campana, administra-
tor. Pending.

Cassidy, Mary Ann, estate of. Andrew J. Cassidy, executor.
Final decree.

Catanzaro, Angelo, estate of. Antonio Catanzaro, administra-
tor. Dismissed.

Cobleigh, Charles C, estate of. Ellen F. Cobleigh, executrix.
Final decree.

Collins, Mary, estate of. John F. Coppinger, executor. Final
decree.

Collins, Michael D., estate of. Michael J. Collins, executor.
Final decree.

Cook, Clara, estate of. Edward C. Creed, executor. Final
decree.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 97

Craig, Annie, estate of. William H. Craig, administrator. Final
decree.

Crowley, Daniel J., estate of. Patrick J. Crowley, administra-
tor. Pending.

Cusack, Thomas F., estate of. James J. Kelly, executor. Final
decree.

Cusick, Thomas, estate of. Michael Cusick, administrator.
Final decree.

Devine, William J., estate of. Katherine F. Whalley, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Dickey, Thomas J., estate of. Pamelia P. Dickey, executrix.
Pending.

Evans, John, estate of. Christopher E. McCaffrey, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Evans, Thomas W., estate of. E. W. Brewer, administrator.
Final decree.

Fallon, John F., estate of. Annie McNally, administratrix.
Pending.

Fargo, Martha, estate of. Anna F. Eogers, executrix. Pending.

Farrer, Daniel F., estate of. Clarence P. Weston, executor.
Final decree.

Flanagan, William, estate of. Annie F. Flanagan, executrix.
Final decree.

Forbes, James J., estate of. Agnes C. Forbes, administratrix.
Final decree.

Foster, Mary, estate of. George A. Foster, administrator. Final
decree.

Frothingham, Edwin, estate of. Mattie M. Frothingham, ad-
ministratrix. Pending.

Gardner, Annie W., estate of. Charles E. W. Kent, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Gilligan, Delia, estate of. Joseph J. O'Brien, administrator.
Final decree.

Glass, Joseph, estate of. Mamie Glass, administratrix. Final
decree.

Hake, Ann, estate of. John B. Hake, administrator. Dismissed.

Healey, Bessie, estate of. Margaret Doyle, administratrix.
Final decree.

Healey, Rose, estate of. Michael H. Healey, administrator.
Dismissed.

Heidtke, Margaret, estate of. Edward C. Heidtke, administra-
tor. Dismissed.

98 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Hennessey, John, estate of. Mary Alston, administratrix. Dis-
missed.

Home, Norman S., estate of. Irene S. Home, administratrix.
Pending.

Janse, Johanna, estate of. Edward A. Janse, administrator.
Final decree.

Jordan, Joanna M., estate of. Francis J. Jordan, administra-
tor. Pending.

Joseph, Amelia, estate of. Mary Marshall, administratrix.
Final decree.

Kelly, Arsenius J., estate of. Helen C. Kelly, administratrix.
Final decree.

Kennedy, Katherine J., estate of. Edward C. Creed, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Kenney, Ellen, estate of. Daniel Kenney, administrator. Final
decree.

King, David J., estate of. Elizabeth King, administratrix.
Pending.

Kneeland, Frank, estate of. Catherine F. Kneeland, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Lawson, Mary, estate of. Edward P. Lawson, administrator.
Final decree.

Leach, George H., estate of. Alfred G. Ochs, administrator.
Pending.

Leary, Ellen E., estate of. Michael J. Mahoney, executor. Final
decree.

Love, Mary M., estate of. Henry AT. Beal, administrator.
Pending.

Lnnny, Catherine, estate of. Thomas A. Walsh, executor. Final
decree.

Lynch, Catherine T., estate of. Edward F. Lynch, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Lynch, Timothy, estate of. Julia Lynch, administratrix. Final
decree.

Mahoney, Bridget, estate of. Timothy D. Mahoney, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Manning, Charles W., estate of. Almira E. Manning, executrix.
Final decree.

Martin, John, estate of. Rosie Martin, administratrix. Final
decree.

McAskill, John A., estate of. Christee McAskill, administra-
tor. Final decree.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 99

McAuliffe, Catherine H., estate of. John T. McAuliffe, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

McCarthy, James, estate of. Delia McCarthy, administratrix.
Final decree.

McCarthy, Jeremiah F., estate of. Margaret E. McCarthy,
executrix. Pending.

McCarthy, Maria, estate of. John McCarthy, administrator.
Pending.

McCarthy, Mary R, estate of. William J. Joyce et al., adminis-
trators. Final decree.

McDermott, Eliza B., estate of. Ida M. Gerrity, administra-
trix. Final decree.

McDonough, Bridget, estate of. Edward I. Buckley, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

McGrath, Kate, estate of. Elizabeth F. McGrath, executrix.
Pending.

McKeen, William, estate of. Katherine M. McKeen, adminis-
tratrix. Pending.

McLaughlin, Ellen, estate of. Annie M. Story, administratrix.
Final decree.

Melia, Delia, estate of. Emily Barry, administratrix. Final
decree.

Mellow, Susan Augusta, estate of. Elizabeth H. Norman, ad-
ministratrix. Final decree.

Melvin, Jane, estate of. Mary F. Claffey, executrix. Final
decree.

Morgan, Helen M., estate of. Henry H. Morgan, administrator.
Final decree.

Mullen, Francis, estate of. Annie M. Mullen, executrix. Final
decree.

Mulligan, Eobert W., estate of. Samuel E. Paige, administrator.
Final decree.

Murphy, Bridget, estate of. Mary G. Murphy, administratrix.
Final decree.

Murphy, Cornelius, estate of. Katherine Murphy, administra-
trix. Final decree.

Murphy, Hannah, estate of. James H. P. Dyer, administrator.
Final decree.

Newcomb, Mary S., estate of. Charles B. Newcomb et ah,
executors. Final decree.

O'Connell, David J., estate of. Daniel F. O'Connell, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

100 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

O'Flaherty, Ellen, estate of. Daniel D. O'Flaherty, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

O'Xeil, James H., estate of. Stanley Bishop, administrator.
Final decree.

Prendergast, James, estate of. Anne Prendergast et ah, ex-
ecutors. Final decree.

Raymond, Edward A. W., estate of. Martha Clement, adminis-
tratrix. Final decree.

Eeardon, William H., estate of. John H. Eeardon, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Sampson, Frances E., estate of. Edward J. Sampson, adminis-
trator. Pending.

Shacat, Isidore C, estate of. Hyman Shacat, administrator.
Pending.

Shea, Thomas, estate of. Patrick E. Shea, administrator. Dis-
missed.

Skinner, Augusta F., estate of. John H. Skinner, administra-
tor. Dismissed.

Slattery, John A., estate of. Mary E. J. Slattery, administra-
trix. Final decree.

Smith, Andrew, estate of. Fannie Reynolds, executrix. Final
decree.

Smith, John, estate of. Bartholomew A. Brickley, executor.
Final decree.

Spear, Koysta S., estate of. Lucy May Calden, administratrix.
Final decree.

Spooner, John S., estate of. Wallace Spooner, administrator.
Final decree.

Springer, Pauline, estate of. Jessie Springer, administratrix.
Dismissed.

Strid, August, estate of. Elma Strid, administratrix. Pending.

Strumph, Harry M., estate of. Lea Rosenbaum, administrator.
Final decree.

Sullivan, John, estate of. Mary Modden, administratrix. Final
decree.

Taylor, James L., estate of. Catherine Taylor, administratrix.
Final decree.

Thatcher, Josephine, estate of. Lucinda E. Shaw, executrix.
Final decree.

Towle, Susan M., estate of. Joseph Towle, administrator. Final
decree.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 101

Tracey, Thomas, estate of. Alice E. Tracey, administratrix.
Dismissed.

UfTord, Hezekiah G., estate of. Julia F. Ufford et ah, executors.
Final decree.

Vassalo, Carlo, estate of. John E. Vassalo, administrator.
Final decree.

Welch, John J., estate of. Michael J. Connolly, executor. Final
decree.

Welchlin, John A., estate of. Catherine Welchlin, administra-
trix. Pending.

Young, Alexander F., estate of. Thomas Young, administrator.
Final decree.

Worcester County.

Beaman, Agnes E., estate of. Ernest L. Beaman, administra-
tor. Final decree.

Dietzman, Herman, estate of. William H. Dietzman, adminis-
trator. Final decree.

Feehan, Johanna, estate of. Daniel F. Feehan, executor. Final
decree.

Fitts, Emily L., estate of. Palmer Fitts, administrator. Final
decree.

Gallagher, William B., estate of. Sadie A. Gallagher, adminis-
tratrix. Dismissed.

Grenier, Louis, estate of. Louis H. Grenier, executor. Final
decree.

Houck, Annie M., estate of. George W. Houck, administrator.
Final decree.

Howe, Minnie L., estate of. Sherman E. Howe, administrator.
Final decree.

Impresoia, Constantine, estate of. Domenick Impresoia, ad-
ministrator. Final decree.

Keevan, Thomas, estate of. Eichard Cody, executor. Final
decree.

King, James M., estate of. Frances S. King, executrix. Final
decree.

McGee, Patrick, estate of. John L. McGee, administrator.
Dismissed.

O'Malley, Honora, estate of. Margaret T. Smith, executrix.
Final decree.

Padula, Batista, estate of. Charles M. Padula, executor. Final
decree.

102

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Pominville, Dinise, estate of. Christina Bouthillette, executrix.

Final decree.
Kution, James I., estate of. James F. Ryan, executor. Final

decree.
Shales, Thomas, estate of. Alma Shales, executrix. Dismissed.
Walsh, David B., estate of. Mary S. Walsh, administratrix.

Final decree.

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 103

PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUSTS.

Bristol County.

Borden, Ariadne J., estate of. Henry H. Earl, executor. Peti-
tion for instructions. Pending.

Pease, Abner, estate of. George A. Crampton et ah, trustees.
Petition for appointment of trustee. Dismissed.

Pease, Abner, estate of. James L. Dexter et ah, trustees. Peti-
tion for appointment of trustees. Decree.

Pease, Abner, estate of. James L. Dexter et als., trustees. Peti-
tion to establish trust to be a public charity. Pending.

Essex County.

Bartlett, David G., estate of. Albert L. Bartlett, executor.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Buffum, Jonathan, estate of. Caroline P. Moulton et ah, execu-
tors. Petition for allowance of final account. Account
allowed.

Dickson, W. Scott, estate of. Aroline C. Gove et ah, petitioners.
Petition for appointment of trustees. Assented to petition.

Essex Agricultural Society v. Massachusetts General Hospital
Corporation and the Attorney- General. Petition to sell real
estate and to apply the doctrine of cy-pres. Service accepted.
Petition dismissed. Petitioner appealed. Pending.

Mack, Esther Clark, estate of. Eben B. Symonds, petitioner.
Petition for appointment of trustee. Assented to petition.

Punchard, Benjamin H., estate of. Domestic and Foreign
Mission Society, petitioner. Petition to vacate decree ap-
pointing trustee. Pending.

Popes, Eliza 0., estate of. Charles W. Eichardson et ah, execu-
tors. Petition for appointment of trustee and for instruc-
tions. Decree. Appeal.

Popes, Eliza 0., estate of. Charles W. Eichardson et ah, ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Eopes, Mary P., estate of. Charles W. Eichardson et ah, ad-
ministrators. Petition for instructions. Pending.

104 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Eopes, Mary P., estate of. Charles W. Kichardson et al., ad-
ministrators. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Popes, Mary P., estate of. Charles W. Eichardson et al., execu-
tors. Petition for appointment of trustee and for instruc-
tions. Decree. Appeal.

Wood, James M., estate of. Lawrence Home for Aged People,
petitioner. Petition for leave to sell real estate. Decree.

Franklin County.
Emerson, George H., estate of. Charles P. Adams, 2d, trustee.

Petition for leave to sell real estate held in trust. Assented

to petition.
Stratton, Abigail, estate of. Frank H. Montague et al., trustees.

Petition for allowance of tenth account. Pending.

Hampden County.

Holbrook, George B., et al. v. Edward W. Appleton et al. Peti-
tion for leave to sell real estate under deed of trust, and for
instructions. Pending.

Weld, David, estate of. Stephen S. Taft, Jr., administrator.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Whiting, H. Amelia, v. The Women's Union Temperance Or-
ganization. Petition for injunction to prevent defendant
corporation from exceeding its powers under charter. Pend-
ing.

Woman's Union Temperance Organization of Holyoke v.
Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Holyoke et ah.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Hampshire County.

Gates, John E., estate of. Francis S. Eeynolds, trustee. Peti-
tion for leave to sell real estate. Assented to petition.

Gaylord, George H., petitioner. Petition for termination of
trust fund created for Eussell Societv. Pendinsr.

■ ,-•

Middlesex County.

Ashton, John, estate of. Massachusetts General Hospital et al.,
petitioners. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Bigelow, Hannah E., estate of. James F. Bigelow et al., peti-
tioners. Petition for instructions. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 105

Bodwell, Abbie, estate of. George G. Clark, trustee. Petition
for instructions. Attorney- General waived tight to be
heard.

Goodnow, Rebecca D., estate of. Eugene D. Brooks, trustee.
Petition for instructions as to disposition of estate held in
trust. Attorney-General waived right to be heard.

Harrington, Elizabeth W., estate of. Clara W. Harrington
et al., executors. Petition for instructors. Decree.

Haven, Hannah B., estate of. William T. Haven et al., execu-
tors. Petition for leave to sell real estate. Attorney-General
waived right to be heard.

Hayes, Maria, estate of. William Nutt, executor. Petition for
allowance of first and final account. Account allowed.

Hayes, Maria, estate of. Edward Clark et al., trustees. Peti-
tion for release of present trustees and appointment of
successors. Pending.

Holden, Joseph, et al. v. Attorney- General. Petition for leave
to sell real estate. Decree.

Houston, Ellen, estate of. Anna C. Fall, trustee. Petition for
instructions. Decree.

Houston, Ellen, estate of. Anna C. Fall, trustee. Petition for
instructions. Attorney- General waived right to be heard.

Houston, Ellen, estate of. Anna C. Fall, trustee. Petition for
allowance of second account. Pending.

Phinney, Eobert J. W., estate of. Sarah M. C. Phinney, exec-
utrix. Petition for leave to sell real estate. Decree.

Smith, George 0., estate of. Albert S. Parsons et al., trustees.
Petition for leave to sell real estate held in trust. Assented
to petition.

Symmes, Edmund, estate of. Westford Academy, trustee. Pe-
tition for instructions. Petition dismissed.

Whitney, Caroline A. R., estate of. Charles A. Stone et al.,
trustees. Petition for instructions. Petition dismissed.

Whitney, Caroline A. R,, estate of. Charles A. Stone et ah,
trustees. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Wilder, Harriet A., estate of. Ministry-at-large in Lowell, pe-
titioner. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Norfolk County.
Ely, Frederick D., et al. v. Attorney-General et al. Bill in
equity for instructions under the will of Charlotte Kings-
bury. Rescript. Final decree.

106 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Harlow, Robert Henry, estate of. Francis L. Hayes et ah, ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Decree. Appeal to Su-
preme Judicial Court. Final decree.

"Whiting, Josiah, estate of. American Unitarian Association,
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Plymouth County.

Ellis, Benjamin, estate of. Eldoretta McFarlin, executrix.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

McFarlin, Peleg, estate of. Eldoretta McFarlin, executrix. Pe-
tition for instructions. Pending.

Suffolk County.

Anagnostopoulos, Michael, estate of. Wallace L. Pierce et al.,
trustees. Petition for allowance of first and final account.
Pending.

Anagnostopoulos, Michael, estate of. Wallace L. Pierce et al.,
executors and trustees. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Ashton, Elisha V., estate of. Charles P. Greenough, trustee.
Petition for leave to sell real estate. Decree.

Bradlee, Joseph P., estate of. Francis C. Welch petitioner.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Brown, Josiah W., estate of. Sewall W. Abbott et ah, trustees.
Petitions for instructions. Pending.

Cheney, Ednah D., estate of. Charles S. Gill et ah, executors.
Petition for allowance of first, second and third and final
accounts. Pending.

Church of the Unity. Charles F. Perry et ah, petitioners.
Petition for disposition of trust fund. Decree.

Cushing, Emeline, estate of. Archibald H. Grimke et al., peti-
tioners. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Cushing, Emeline, estate of. Archibald H. Grimke et ah, peti-
tioners. Petition for allowance of first to thirteenth ac-
counts, inclusive. Pending.

De Witt, William E., estate of. Wilbur C. Temple, trustee.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Diocese of Western Massachusetts v. John S. Blatchford, trustee,.
et ah Petition for leave to convey trust estate under deed
of trust of George B. Hogar. Decree.

Dix, John H., estate of. Charles P. Greenough et al., trustees.
Petition for allowance of eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh
accounts. Accounts allowed.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 107

Eckley, Frances Augusta, estate of. Francis E. Bangs, trustee.
Petition for allowance of first and second and final accounts
of S. Gannett Wells, and of first account of Francis K.
Bangs, trustee. Assented to petition.

Harris, Mary, estate of. Elizabeth L. Bond, petitioner. Peti-
tion for appointment of trustee. Assented to petition.

Harvard College, President and Fellows of, v. Attorney-General.
Petition for distribution of trust funds of estate of David
A. Wells. Pending.

Hemenway, Mary, estate of. Augustus Hemenway et al., trus-
tees. Petition for allowance of fourth account. Pending.

Jackson, Charles E., estate of. Charles A. Jackson et al.,
trustees. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Jackson, James, estate of. Frederick C. Bowditch, petitioner.
Petition for appointment of trustee. Assented to petition.

Liversidge, Thomas, estate of. Eichard P. Humphreys et al.,
trustees. Petition for leave to sell real estate. Pending.

Lyman, Florence, estate of. Thomas Dwight et dl., executors.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Lyman, Florence, estate of. Thomas Dwight et al., executors.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Lyman, Florence, estate of. Thomas Dwight' et al., executors.
Petition for allowance of first account. Attorney-General
waived right to be heard.

Mabie, William I., et al. v. Edwin S. Gardner and Attorney-
General. Petition for instructions regarding a public char-
itable trust under will of Mary Eedding. Pending.

Minot, William, v. Attorney- General. Petition to modify a de-
cree entered March 19, 1901, in the estate of Thomas
Thompson. Pending.

Paine, Eobert T., et al. v. Attorney-General et al. Petition for
instructions as to scheme for erection of monument to
Phillips Brooks. Attorney- General waived right to be heard.

Parkman, George F., estate of. Edmund D. Codman, executor.

Petition for instructions. Pending.
Pierce, Elizabeth I., estate of. Thomas A. Bubier, trustee.
Petition for allowance of first, second and third accounts.
Attorney- General waived right to be heard.

Poor, Edwin Herbert, estate of. New England Trust Company,
executor. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Pope, Ebenezer, estate of. Boston Monthly Meeting of Friends,
petitioner. Petition to distribute estate under cy-pres doc-
trine. Decree.

108 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Potter, Sarah E., estate of. New Bedford Free Public Library,
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Eufus S. Frost General Hospital, petitioner. Petition for leave
to borrow money. Attorney-General waived right to be
heard.

Way, Fannie D., estate of. William T. Way, petitioner. Peti-
tion for appointment of trustee. Assented to appointment.

Wellington, Caroline T. M., estate of. Charlestown Charity
Fund, petitioner. Petition for appointment of trustee.
Attorney-General waived right to be heard.

Worcester County.

Blanchard, Margaret Bromfield, estate of. Bromfield School,
trustee. Petition for leave to transfer property held in
trust. Decree.

Brown, Mary A. L., estate of. Annie E. Blanchard, executrix.
Petition for instructions. Decree.

Cavanaugh, Morris, estate of. Jerry E. Kane, administrator.
Petition for leave to compromise claim. Decree.

Foster, Eichard W., estate of. Catherine E. Foster et ah, ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Pending.

Frost, Sumner M., estate of. Edward B. Tilton et ah, executors.
Petition for instructions. Pending.

Murdock Fund, trustees of. Petition for appointment of Orange
Whitney incorporator to fill vacancy. Assented to petition.

Nelson, Charles Horatio, estate of. Anna B. Nelson et ah, ex-
ecutors. Petition for instructions. Decree.

Southgate, Isaac, estate of. Frank D. Tucker, petitioner. Peti-
tion for appointment of new trustee. Pending.

Stevens, Cephas B., estate of. Charles F. Eichardson et ah,
trustees. Petition for leave to mortgage real estate left
in trust. Decree.

Winch, Ellen M. B., estate of. Charles W. Perkins et ah,
executors. Petition for allowance of first and second and
final accounts. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 109

SUITS CONDUCTED BY THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

In Behalf of State Boards and Commissions.

The following cases have been reported to this department by
State boards and commissions, to be conducted by the Attorney-
General, or under his direction.

1. Metropolitan Park Commission.
Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages
alleged to have been sustained by the taking of land by the said
commission.

Middlesex County.
Allen, Herbert F., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Blais, Eugenia V., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Blais, Michel, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Debbins, Eobert W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Kerr, William B., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Northrup, Stephen C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Phelan, Patrick, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Tolsom, Thomas, v. Commonwealth. Settled.

Suffolk County.
Hurley, John J., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Proctor, George F., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Welch, Mary E., et als. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

2. Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board.
Petitions to the Supreme Judicial and Superior Courts for
assessment of damages alleged to have been sustained by the
taking of land, and rights and easements in land, by said board.

Norfolk County.

Boston & Albany Eailroad Company v. Commonwealth. Pend-
ing.

Boston & Albany Eailroad Company et al. v. Commonwealth.
Pending.

Goddard, George A., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

110 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Worcester County.
Allen, Byron D., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Allen, Byron D., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Ball, Oliver M., administrator, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Bartlett, Asenath M., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Bigelow, James A., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Bradley, Patrick, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Brigham, William H., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Burgess, Thomas EL, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Cutting, Louis, administrator, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Fitzgerald, John, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Puller, Willis A., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Fyfe, Mary J., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Fyfe, Mary J., executrix, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Hastings, George E., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Hastings, Mary J., executrix, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Hastings, Mary J., executrix, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Hastings, William H., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Joyce, Bridget M., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Kendall, Everett, et al. v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Kendall, Sanford C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Keyes, Henry F., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Kirby, Nellie M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Knight, AsaE., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Lamb, Aroline M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Longley, Olive E., executrix, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Plummer, George M., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Shattuck, George W., v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Taylor, Jennie W., administratrix, v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Welch, James E., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Wood, James H., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Wood, J. Frank, et als. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Wood, J. Frank, et als. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Wood, Lucy A., v. Commonwealth. Settled.

3. Massachusetts Highway Commission.

Petitions to the Superior Court for a jury to assess damages
alleged to have been sustained by the taking of land, or injury to
land, by said commission. Under agreement with this Common-
wealth most of these cases are defended by the various towns in
which the land is situated.

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. Ill

Bristol County.
Lincoln, Benjamin A., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Seabury, Phoebe W., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Talbot, Joseph, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Franklin County.

■Connecticut Valley Street Eailway Company v. Commonwealth.
Pending.

Hampshire County.
Flagg, Lucretia Taft, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Taft, Kate P., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Middlesex County.
Nourse, Joseph P., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Norfolk County.
McLaughlin, Nancy M., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Worcester County.
Hill, Everett, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Sullivan, Kate, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Warren, Alice E. M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

4. Board of Harbor and Land Commissioners.
Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages
caused by the taking of land by said commissioners.

Suffolk County.
Butler, Philip H., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
East Boston Company v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Lamb, George, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Lamb, George, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

5. Charles River Basin Commissioners.

Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages
caused by the taking of land by said commissioners.

Middlesex County.
Proctor, George 0., v. Commonwealth. Settled.

112 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Suffolk County.
Abbott, Ellen M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Abbott, Katherine M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Allen, Henry F., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Allen, Henry F., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Apthorp, Octave L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Barstow, Catherine A., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Bartlett, Schuyler S., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Beal, Elizabeth S., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Beal, Thomas P., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending
Bowditch, Alfred, et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Brown, Rebecca W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Case, Laura L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Coolidge, Julia, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Cotting, Charles E., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Edmands, Katherine B., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Fields, Annie, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Freeman, Caroline S., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Goddard, George A., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Hall, Harry S., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Heaton, Robert C, et al. v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Higginson, Henry L., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Homans, Helen A., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Home for Aged Women v. Commonwealth. Settled.
Hooper, James E., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Hooper, Eobert C, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Hopkins, Georgiana, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Hunneman, Carleton, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Hutchins, Edward W., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Tnches, Louise P., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Jackson, Frances E., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Jewell, Edward, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Loring, Mary H., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Mann, Jonathan H., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. .
McClure, Maria M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Means, Helen G., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Meyer, Heloise, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Moseley, Helen C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Niles, Sarah F., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Paine, Eobert Treat, trustee, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Parker, George W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Parkinson, John, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

1910.J PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 113

Parkman, Henry, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Pierce, Katherine C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Pierce, Wallace L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Prince, Fannie L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Prince, Lillian C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Putnam, Harriet L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Eichardson, Margaret W., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Sears, Mary C, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Sears, Eichard D., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Sears, Euth W., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Shattuck, Frederick C, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Shattuck, George B., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Shaw, Francis, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Skinner, Francis, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Sleeper, Maria W., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Stackpole, Martha P., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Stanton, Esther H., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Sullivan, Eichard, v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Tarbell, Arthur P., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Taylor, Georgianna 0., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Taylor, Mary M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Ware, Mary L., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Whitney, Christiana S., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending.

Wigglesworth, George, et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth.

Settled.
Williams, John D., trustee, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Williams, Ralph B., v. Commonwealth. Settled.

6. Armoey Commissioners.

Suffolk County.
Brooks, Ellen A., et al. v. Commonwealth et al. Pending.
Lyons, Ellen E., v. Commonwealth et al. Pending.

7. Mt. Tom State Reservation.

Hampshire County.
Colton, George S., v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Colton, George S., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

8. Greylock Eeservation Commission.

Berkshire County.
Phillips, Dewey, v. Commonwealth. Pending.
Smith, Clarence M., v. Commonwealth. Pending.

114 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

9. State Board of Ixsaxity.
Suffolk County.
Boston v. Commonwealth. Settled.

10. TTrexthaac School for the Feeble-mixded.
Norfolk County.
Soderberg, xAnnie h.} v. Commonwealth. Pending.

11. MlSCELLAXEOUS CASES FROM ABOVE COMMISSIOXS.

Bristol County.
Chace, Charles A.; trustee, v. Commonwealth et als. Action of
tort for damages caused by defects in State highway.
Dismissed.

Essex County.
Cilley, Orran G., v. Cattle Bureau. Petition to recover the value
of cattle condemned by Cattle Bureau. Pending.

Middlesex County.

Hogan, James, v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover for ma-
terials furnished to contractor in construction of boulevard
in Quincy. Pending.

International Automobile and Vehicle Tire Company v. Com-
monwealth. Petition for damages caused by construction
of bridge across Charles River under St. 1903, c. 391.
Pending.

Suffolk County.

Atkins, Florence R., Commonwealth v. Bill in equity in regard
to violation of building restrictions imposed by Metropol-
itan Park Commission. Decree.

Austin Engineering and Construction Company v. Common-
wealth. Bill to recover on contract with Park Commission.
Pending.

Baldwin, Walter H., et al., Commonwealth v. Bill in equity in
regard to building in violation of restrictions imposed by
Metropolitan Park Commission. Appeal to Supreme Judi-
cial Court. Decree.

Davis, James A., et al. v. Commonwealth et al. Petition to re-
cover for labor and materials used in construction of sewer.
Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 115

Doherty, James, v. Edward W. Everson et al. and Metropolitan
Water and Sewerage Board. Action of tort. Damages
caused by blasting. Pending.

Doherty, James, v. Commonwealth. Petition for assessment of
damages caused by blasting for metropolitan sewer. Pend-
ing.

Dunican, Anna L., v. Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board.
Action of tort. Damages caused by impure water furnished
by defendant. Settled.

Eastman, Charles Albert, v. Board of Eegistration in Medicine.
Bill in equity to enjoin Board from revoking certificate.
Pending.

Ellinwood, Ealph P., Commonwealth v. Petition to restrain
respondent from infringing park regulations on Eevere
boulevard. Pending.

Gibbons, William EL, v. Commonwealth. Damage caused by
blasting in construction of metropolitan sewer. Pending.

Hersey, Albert A., v. Commonwealth et als. Bill in equity to
recover for labor and materials furnished in construction of
metropolitan sewer in Melrose. Settled.

Martin Brothers, Commonwealth v. Bill to recover for services
of inspector furnished by Metropolitan Water and Sewerage
Board in cutting ice on Waushacum Pond. Disposed of.

McGinniss, Margaret T., Commonwealth v. Bill in equity to re-
strain defendant from encroaching on land of the Common-
wealth. Pending.

Minon, Joseph, Henry H. Sprague et als. v. Information to re-
strain the defendant from boating on Lake Cochituate.
Settled.

Natick, Commonwealth v. To recover for use of water of Lake
Cochituate. Pending.

National Contracting Company et al., Commonwealth v. Action
of contract to recover on bond. Pending.

Nilancl, Michael, v. Commonwealth. Petition for assessment of
damages caused by blasting for metropolitan sewer. Pend-
ing.

Nil and, Michael, v. Edward W. Everson et al. and Metropolitan
Water and Sewerage Board. Action of tort. Damages
caused by blasting. Pending.

Normile, Francis, v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al. Pe-
tition for a jury to assess damages caused by construction of
sewer in Eoxbury. Pending.

116 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Normile, Francis, v. Edward W. Everson & Co. and Henry H.
Sprague et ah iiction of tort.

Old Colony Construction Company, Commonwealth v. Action
of contract to recover on bond. Pending.

Pacific Surety Company v. Commonwealth et ah (McBride
& Co.). Petition to recover from McBride & Co. certain
sums expended by petitioner. Pending.

Kaddin, Hiram A., et ah, Commonwealth v. Bill in equity in
regard to violation of building restrictions imposed by Met-
ropolitan Park Commission. Decree.

Thomas, Lyman P., v. George M. Quirk et ah Action to re-
cover for labor and materials furnished in construction of
State highway. Pending.

Worcester County.
Gatchell, David H., v. Commonwealth. Claim for damage to
horse on State highway. Settled.

12. State Board of Charity.
Actions of contract pending in the Superior Court to recover
charges for the support of insane paupers in State insane hos-
pitals, under the provisions of E. L., c. 87.

Suffolk County.
Bradford, Treasurer, v. Waltham. Settled.
Bradford, Treasurer, v. Waltham. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Joseph J. Heney, administrator. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Ella L. Howe, administratrix. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. McGonagle. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Melrose. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Charles A. Mullin. Pending.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Augustus Perrin. Pending.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Maria Sliney. Pending.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Waltham. Settled.
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Worcester. Settled.
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Joseph C. Colligan. Pending.
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Granville S. Dow. Pending.
Stevens, Treasurer, v. George M. Stearns, administrator. Pend-
ing.

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 117

MISCELLANEOUS CASES.

Allen, Henry F., v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission et al. Bill
to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles Eiver. ' Pending.

Alley & Emery, Inc. Claim for merchandise furnished by
Massachusetts Commission for the Blind. Disposed of.

American Soda Fountain Company, Attorney-General ex rel. v.
Dumping material into tide water. Pending.

American Writing Paper Company et al., Attorney-General v.
Petition for an injunction to restrain respondents from
dumping material into tide water. Discontinued as to
American Writing Paper Company. Pending.

Anderson, Mary J., administratrix of the estate of Elizabeth P.
Anderson, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Andrew, Manuel, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Information in
the nature of quo warranto to try the title of the respondent
to the office of sealer of weights and measures in Cambridge.
Pending.

Barker, Forrest E., et al. v. Haverhill Gas Light Company. Pe-
tition for injunction to restrain company from business
until compliance with order of Gas Commission. Pending.

Barker, Forrest E., et al. v. Salem Gas Light Company. Bill in
equity to require company to comply with order of Board
of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners. Disposed of.

Beal, Elizabeth S., v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission. Bill to
enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian rightc
on Charles Eiver. Pending.

Beal, Thomas P., et al. v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission. Bill
to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles Eiver. Pending.

Billings, William H., administrator of the estate of Mary Haynes,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Blake, Martha L., v. Commonwealth. Petition to Superior
Court for damages caused by lowering the grade of Bow-
doin Street. Settled.

118 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Bombard, Louis L., executor of the will of James Wall, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. Final
decree.

Boston v. Commonwealth. Sewer assessment on Rutherford
Avenue, Charlestown. Pending.

Boston & Albany Railroad Company, petitioners. Petition to
take land in Natick for additional tracks. Disposed of.

Boston & Northern Street Railway Company. Claim for amount
expended in relaying water pipes in Washington Street,
Lynn, destroyed by electric currents. Pending.

Boston Elevated Railway Company v. Commonwealth. Petition
to recover tax paid to Commonwealth under protest. De-
cree.

Boston Society of New Jerusalem v. Commonwealth. Settled.

Bowditch, Alfred, et al. v. Charles River Basin Commission et
al. Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with
riparian rights on Charles River. Pending.

Brennan, James M., v. Charles E. Woodbury, Superintendent.
Action of tort for personal injuries. Pending.

Bright, William E., et al. v. Railroad Commissioners ei al.
Petition for certiorari. Pending.

Brogan, Hugh H., administrator c. t. a. of the estate of Bridget
C. Brogan, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Final decree.

Brooks, Frank H., executor of the will of Charles G. Brooks,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Brown, Clarence W., executor of the will of William N. Burn-
ham, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in-
heritance tax. Pending.

Brown, Henry, executor of the will of Rhoda B. Potter, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Final decree.

Biytie, Andrew W., et als. v. Commonwealth et al. Petition to
recover money in hands of Commonwealth. Pending.

Bryson, James, executor of the will of Bernard Bryson, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Pending.

Burr, Arthur E., trustee, v. Commonwealth. Action to recover
money held by Commonwealth, and belonging to H. P.
Cummings Company. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 119

Butland, Francis A., Attorney-General, ex rel. v. Information
in the nature of quo warranto to try the title of the re-
spondent to the office of call fireman in Lawrence. Pending.

Cahill Construction Company v. Commonwealth. Bill in equity.
Pending.

Campbell, H. Douglas, v. Commonwealth. Bill to recover for
services in connection with work on Spanish war claims.
Settled.

Chapin, Arthur B., Bank Commissioner, v. Boston Banking
Company. Petition for injunction and appointment of a
receiver. Referred to James D. Colt, master, who reported
in favor of defendant.

Chapin, Arthur B., Bank Commissioner, v. Joseph DeMarco.
Petition for injunction and appointment of receiver. In-
junction issued, and George R. Stobbs appointed receiver.

Chapin, Arthur B., Bank Commissioner, v. DeMarco Ticket
Company. Petition for injunction and appointment of
receiver. Injunction issued, and George R. Stobbs ap-
pointed receiver.

Cheney, Ansel J., v. James O'Doherty. Bill in equity to enjoin
respondent for violation of building laws in construction
of schoolhouse in Haverhill. Pending.

Cheney, Ansel J., v. James O'Doherty. Bill in equity to enjoin
respondent for violation of building laws in construction
of schoolhouse in Haverhill. Pending.

Clark, Herbert E., et al., administrators of the estate of Lurissa
A. Clark, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Final decree.

Coen, Bridget E., executrix of the will of Rose Coen, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Dismissed.

Coleman, George H., executor of the will of Eliza McCarthy,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Dismissed.

Collins, Joseph W., et al. v. James B. Hamblin. Petition to re-
quire the respondent to construct a fishway in dam on
Acushnet River. Disposed of.

Columbian National Life Insurance Company v. Commonwealth.
Petitions for abatement of franchise tax paid in 1903, 1904,
1905, 1906 and 1907. Pending.

Commonwealth v. Boston. Action to recover money expended
in changing grade of Bowdoin Street. Pending.

120 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Commonwealth v. Boston. Action to recover money expended
in changing grade of Bowdoin Street. Pending.

Commonwealth v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
Company. Action of tort for damage to property of Massa-
chusetts Reformatory, caused by fire. Pending.

Commonwealth v. Worcester. To recover for land taken from
the Commonwealth. Pending.

Conant, Nellie M.., v. Mary F. Conant et ah Action of tort.
Pending.

Conant, Nellie M., v. Hosea M. Quimby. Action of tort. Pend-
ing.

Connecticut Valley Street Railway Company, McClintock, Wil-
liam E., et al. v. Petition for writ to compel obedience
with order of Massachusetts Highway Commission. Dis-
posed of.

Connors, James M., v. Commonwealth. Damages caused by
defect in State highway. Pending.

Corney, James H., executor of the will of Matilda Corney,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Cotter, Margaret, executrix of the will of Elizabeth Connell,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Cotting, Charles E., et ah, trustees of Boston Real Estate Trust,
v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover money paid as bet-
terments on land sold by Commonwealth. Pending.

Cotting, Charles E., et ah v. Commonwealth. Petition to re-
cover sewer assessment. Pending.

Crocker, George G., et ah v. Charles River Basin Commission.
Bill to restrain Commonwealth from closing the dam across
Charles River. Rescript.

Crockett, Sara L., estate of. H. L. Harding et ah, executors.
Petition of Treasurer and Receiver- General to collect tax on
said estate. Pending.

Crossdale, Edward, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Information
in the nature of quo warranto to try the title of respondent
to the office of police officer in Lawrence. Petition dis-
missed, on motion of Attorney-General.

Cummings, Roscoe F., executor of the will of Ellen L. Cum-
mings, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax.

Cummins, John F., administrator of the estate of John B.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 121

Halloran, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Pending.
Cushing, Lawrence B., et al. v. Commonwealth. Petition to Su-
perior Court for damages caused by widening Bowdoin

Street. Settled.
Dailey, Michael B,, executor of the will of Maurice Daily,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Donovan, Daniel J., executor of the will of George W. Conboy,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Dowley, George B., administrator of the estate of Lewis H.

Plaisted, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Final decree.
Dunn, William T., v. Samuel J. Lowe. Appeal from finding of

Superior Court under B. L., c. 91, § 91. Eescript.
East Boston Company, petitioner, v. Commonwealth. Appeal

from decree of Court of Land Eegistration. Eescript.
Edgerly, Frank H., et al. v. Cattle Bureau. Bill to recover for

horse killed by order of Cattle Commissioner under E. L.,

c. 90. Pending.
Ellicott, Josephine, executrix of the will of Nancy H. Ellicott,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Everett, Willard S., executor of the will of Elizabeth Davis,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Field, Ealph, administrator of the estate of George A. Mason,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Fields, Annie, v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission. Bill to

enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian rights

on Charles Eiver. Pending.
Fifield, George W., administrator c. t. a. of the estate of Eveline

E. Baldwin, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Final decree.
Fifield, George W., executor of the will of Euth S. Shaw, Attor-
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.

Pending.
Follansbee, Hazen L., executor of the will of David W. Swett,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Dismissed.

122 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Foster, George W., administrator of the estate of Elvira A.
Foster, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in-
heritance tax. Final decree.

Fottler, Lucy Ann, et al. v. Commonwealth. Petition to Supe-
rior Conrt for damages caused by lowering grade of Bow-
doin Street. Settled.

Fowler, Charles F., executor of the will of Eliza E. Crocker,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

Frankfort Marine and Plate Glass Company v. Commonwealth.
Petition to recover deposit with Treasurer. Pending.

Galvin, Stephen P., administrator of the estate of Calvin R.
Baker, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in-
heritance tax. Pending.

Gardner, Henry R., executor of the will of Emily M. Rayner,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

George H. Sampson Company v. Commonwealth et ah. Bill of
complaint. Pending.

Georgia Home Insurance Company v. Commonwealth. Action
to compel Treasurer and Receiver-General to return bond
deposited with him by said company. Pending.

Grant, Robert, Judge of Probate, v. ^Yilliam W. Risk et al.
Contract on bond as public administrator. Pending.

Hall, John 0., executor of the will of Mary 0. S. Kent, Attor-
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Final decree.

Hammond, Gardner Green, petitioner. Petition to register title
to land in Chilmark. Pending.

Hanson & Parker, Limited, v. Commonwealth. Petition to re-
cover from Commonwealth amount of tax alleged to be un-
lawfully assessed. Decree.

Hanson, Lydia W., v. Commonwealth. Petition for damages
caused by lowering grade of Bowdoin Street. Settled.

Harmon, G. Howard, executor of the will of Walter S. Harmon,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Harrington, Charles C, executor of the will of Elizabeth A.
Harrington, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Harve}', James R., Commonwealth v. Action to recover for

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 123

horses returned by the State Colony for the Insane. Claim

proved in bankruptcy.
Haverhill Gas Light Company v. Gas and Electric Light Com-
missioners et al. Bill in equity in the Circuit Court of the

United States to restrain the Board from carrying out an

order to decrease the price of gas in Haverhill. Pending.
Hersey, Albert A., v. Commonwealth et al. Bill to restrain

Commonwealth from paying out money in its hands for

construction of north metropolitan sewer system. Eescript.
Higginson, Henry L., et al. v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission

et al. Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with

riparian rights on Charles Eiver. Pending.
Hillside Corporation. Petition to register title to land.

Decree.
Home for Aged Women v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission et al.

Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian

rights on Charles Eiver. Pending.
Hopkins, Jonathan. Petition for leave to withdraw deposit in

Seamen's Savings Bank, Provincetown, deposited by Joseph

M. Day, judge of probate. Disposed of.
Hume, Edgar B., et al., petitioners. Petition to register title

to land in Pittsfield. Decree.
Hunneman, Carleton, v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission. Bill

to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian

rights on Charles Eiver. Pending.
International Automobile and Vehicle Tire Company v. Com-
monwealth. Petition for damages to petitioner's property

caused by change of east branch of Charles Elver by Park

Commission. Pending.
Irving, Eleanor K, executrix of the will of Elizabeth Conway,

Attorne}r-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Jackson, Frances E., v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission et al.

Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian

rights on Charles Eiver. Pending.
Jackson, Henry C, executor of the will of Emeline L. Harris,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Jay, Pierre, Bank Commissioner, v. Greenfield Savings Bank.

Petition for injunction. Injunction issued.
Jenney, E. C, executor of the will of Maria P. Stark, Attorney-

124 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.

Pending.
Johnson, Edwin A., executor of the will of Bessie M. Fuller,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Johnson, Julia A., executrix of the will of Daniel G. Davis,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Kent, George H., executor of the will of Eliza Ann May,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Keyes, Wade, executor of the will of Annie E. Eobinson,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Ivilroy, John, administrator of the estate of Bridget Woodsum,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Knox, James E., executor of the will of Sarah J. Sheldon,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Dismissed.
LaMoss, Erwin, v. Commonwealth. Petition to Superior Court

for a jury to assess damages sustained to property on Bow-

doin Street caused by lowering of the grade of Bowdoin

Street. Settled.
Lawrence, Amory A., et al. v. Harbor and Land Commissioners.

Bill in equity to require enforcement of stipulations in

deed of Commonwealth's land. Eescript.
Lawrence, Common Council of, Attorney- General ex rel. v.

Petition for use of Attorney-General's name for writ of

mandamus. Pending.
Lenon, Sarah L., executrix of the will of James Libby, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.

Dismissed.
Libby, George W., administrator of the estate of Oliver Libby,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Linehan, Frank E., et al., Commonwealth v. Claim for steam

supplied from Deer Island Pumping Station. Settled.
Little, George T., et al., executors of the will of Eachel E.

Thayer, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Pending.

1910..] PUBLIC DOCUMENT— No. 12. 125

Little, Henry B., petitioner. Petition to register title to land

in Peabody. Pending.
Loomis, James H., executor of the will of George W. Gibson,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Lowe, Philip, executor of the will of William P. Eainey,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Lyons, Walter S., v. Commonwealth. Bill of complaint to re-
cover for work done on Foxborough State Hospital from

funds held by the Commonwealth. Pending.
Mahar, Joseph P., executor of the will of Thomas J. Eehill,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Mahoney, Francis P., executor of the will of John Driscoll,

Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Manchester, Abraham, executor of the will of Abraham E.

Manchester, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Pending.
Mann, Mary Ellen, executrix of the will of Phebe Totman.

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Pending.
Maritime Insurance Company v. Commonwealth et al. Bill to

recover bonds deposited with the Treasurer and Eeceiver-

General. Pending.
Matthews, Albert W., executor of the will of Martha Bruce,

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance

tax. Final decree.
Maxwell, Orrin P., administrator of the estate of Thomas T.

Maxwell, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover

inheritance tax. Final decree.
MacDonald, George E., Attorney- General ex rel. v. Information

in the nature of quo warranto to try the title of the respond-
ent to the office of secretary of the board of overseers of

the poor of Gloucester. Pending.
Macfarlane, Ada. Petition to register title to land in Wlnthrop.

Pending.
McCarthy, Justin H., v. Commonwealth. Petition under E, L.,

c. 201, to recover salary. Pending.
McCarthy, Justin H., v. Jophanus H. Whitney et al. Petition

126 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

for mandamus to compel reinstatement as boiler inspector.
Dismissed.

McClure, Maria M., v. Charles River Basin Commission et al.
Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles River. Pending.

McGuirk, Ann, executrix of the will of Terrence Farle}r, Attor-
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Pending.

Mclntire, Charles EL, trustee under the will of Maria T. Clark,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

McLaughlin & Eeilly Company, Commonwealth v. Information
in the nature of quo warranto to try the right of respondent
to use charter fraudulently procured. Petition dismissed.

McSweeney, Charles H., petitioner. Petition to register title
to land in Quincy. Decree.

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Commonwealth. Peti-
tion to recover taxes alleged to have been illegally assessed.
Rescript.

Moore, William EL, et al., executors of the will of Edward W.
Murray, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Morgan, Thomas, et al., executors of the will of Martha Frank-
land, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in-
heritance tax. Pending.

Morse, Electra A., et al. v. David Ferguson et al. Action of
tort. Pending.

Morton, Edward P., executor of the will of Anne Cuddy,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Munroe & Arnold-Merritt Express Company v. Selectmen of
Peabody. Petition for mandamus to compel issuance of
license. Use of name of Attorney- General denied.

Murphy, Mary E., executor of the will of Delia Martin, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Pending.

Murphy, William H., executor of the will of Bridget Connor,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Dismissed.

National Contracting Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to
recover under R. L., c. 201. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 127

New England Maple Syrup Company v. Henry P. Walcott et ate.
Bill in equity for an injunction. Pending.

New England Trust Compan}7, trustee under the will of James
C. Marshall, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company, Attor-
ney-General ex rel. Commissioner of Corporations v.
Eescript.

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, Attor-
ney-General ex rel. v. Information to enjoin the company
from holding stock of the Boston & Maine Railroad.
Pending.

Nickerson, George B. Petition for writ of habeas corpus. Dis-
missed.

North, Lucy A., executrix of the will of Horatio S. Ware,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

O'Brien, Johanna T., et al., executors of the will of Mary J.
Fitzgerald, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Final decree.

O'Brien, Mary F., Attorney-General ex rel. v. Information in
the nature of quo ivarranto to try the title of the respondent
to the office of assistant superintendent of State aid depart-
ment of Lowell. Pending.

O'Connell, Joseph P., v. Commonwealth et al. Bill to recover
money in hands of Commonwealth belonging to Austin
Engineering and Construction Company. Pending.

O'Lear}^, Thomas, v. Commonwealth et al. Bill in equity.
Disposed of.

Osman, Charles F., administrator c. t. a. of the estate of
Johanna F. Rising, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to
recover inheritance tax. Pending.

Paine, Robert Treat, trustee, v. Charles River Basin Commission
et al. Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with
riparian rights on Charles River. Pending.

Parker, Edward S., executor of the will of George W. Barry,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Parker, Galen A., executor of the will of Martha R. Temple,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

128 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

Patridge, Eugene E., executor of the will of Charles L. Pitts,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

Peach, Ambrose B., v. Commonwealth et al. Bill in equity.
Disposed of.

Peterson, Joseph N., et ah, Armory Commissioners, v. John
Meaney et al. Dismissed.

Phillips, Edwin E., petitioner. Petition to register title to land
in Sandwich. Petition withdrawn.

Pi Eta Associates v. Horace F. Ball. Appeal from order of in-
spector of buildings. Disposed of.

Porter, Eose M., v. Frank H. Hardison. Action of tort. Pend-
ing.

Powers, Wilbur H. Petition to register title to land in Winthrop.
Pending.

Pratt, Annie L., executrix of the will of Sarah M. Wyman,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

Pratt, C. J., administrator of the estate of Daniel W. Pratt,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Provident Institution for Savings, Attorney-General v. Peti-
tion to withdraw deposits under St. 1907, c. 340. Eescript.
Writ of error. Pending in the Supreme Court of the United
States.

Eaboin, Israel, executor, v. Louis Eaboin, Jr., et al. Appeal
from decree of Probate Court, allowing will of Louis
Eaboin, Sr. Eescript.

Eayner, Augustus J. C, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Informa-
tion in the nature of quo warranto to try the title of the
respondent to the office of rodman for the Massachusetts
Highway Commission. Pending.

Eiverbank Improvement Company, petitioner. Petition to
register title to land on Charles Eiver. Decree.

Eody. Mary T., executrix of the will of Catherine Murphy,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Eogers, Morrison, et al., executor of the will of John P. McElroy,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

Evan, Annie, administratrix of the estate of Mary Kilroy,

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 129

Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.
Evan, John S., executor of the will of Margaret Gorman,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.
St. Peter's Italian Fishermen's Union of Mutual Succor, Inc.
Failure to file annual statement with Insurance Commis-
sioner. Disposed of.
Salem Gas Light Company v. Gas and Electric Light Commis-
sioners et al. Bill in equity in the Circuit Court of the
United States to restrain the board from carrying out an
order to decrease the price of gas in Salem. Settled.
Salmon, Patrick M., et al., executors of the will of Ellen Noonan,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.
Sargent, Clara J., v. State Board of Lunacy and Charity. Supe-
rior Court, Essex County. Appeal on a complaint charging
neglect of children under St. 1882, c. 181. Pending.
Segee, Samuel A., Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition for use
of Attorney-General's name in an information in the nature
of quo warranto to try respondent's title to the office of
assessors of Revere. Use of name denied.
Skinner, Francis, v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission et al. Bill
to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles River. Pending.
Smith, Susan, executrix of the will of Eliza Ann Smith,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.
Society of Mutual Succor St. Mary of Lattani of Roccmonfina,
Inc., Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition for injunction
and appointment of receiver. Edward McAnally appointed
receiver.
Somerville v. Commonwealth. Claim for aid furnished paupers

having no settlement. Dismissed.
Stearns, James P., administrator of the estate of Robert Bram-
hall, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in-
heritance tax. Pending.
Stevens, Elmer A., Treasurer and Receiver-General, v. Alfred
Sorenson. Bill to recover for storage on Commonwealth
pier, South Boston. Disposed of.
Strout, Edward E., et al., trustees of Little Nahant Land Com-

130 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

pany, v. Albert E. Turner et al. Petition to the Court of
Land Eegistration to register the title to land in Nahant.
Decree.

Sullivan. Eichard, v. Charles Eiver Basin Commission et al..
Bill to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles River. Pending.

Tillinghast, Edwin L., Jr., Attorney-General ex rel. v. Infor-
mation in the nature of quo warranto to try the title of
the respondent to the office of assistant city auditor of New
Bedford. Eescript.

Titcomb, George H., v. Cape Cod Ship Canal Company, George
A, Marden, Treasurer, et al. Petition for injunction to re-
strain the Treasurer of the Commonwealth from the pay-
ment of money under St. 1883, c. 259, and St. 1891, c. 397.
Pending.

Title Guaranty and Surety Company, Trustees of Massachusetts
Hospital for Epileptics v. Action of contract. Pending.

Trull, William, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Information in the
nature of quo ivarranto to try the title of respondent to
the office of police officer in Lawrence, Information dis-
missed, on motion of Attorney- General.

Tuhill, Thomas, executor of the will of Patrick Haves, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax.
Dismissed.

Turley, Thomas J., et al., administrators of the estate of Mary
Benson, Attorne}^ General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Vahey, James H., administrator d. b. n. of the estate of Ellen
Gougeon, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Vineyard Grove Company, Attorney-General v. Petition for
use of Attorney-General's name in an information in the
nature of quo warranto. Use of name granted.

Wade, Daniel T., executor of the will of Charles C. Eiske,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Einal decree.

Walen, William W., administrator of the estate of Almira C.
Walen, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover
inheritance tax. Pending.

Waltham Watch Company v. Commonwealth. Action to recover
corporation tax for 1908. Pending.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 131

Waltham Watch Company v. Commonwealth. Action to recover
corporation tax for 1909. Pending.

Ware, Mary L., v. Commonwealth. Bill to enjoin Charles River
Basin Commission from maintaining wall. Pending.

Webster & Dudley Street Eailway Company, Attorney-General
v. Pending.

Welch, Mary Ann, executrix of the will of Thomas Welch,
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

Welch, William J., v. John A. Campbell. Action of tort. Pend-
ing.

Welch, William J., v. Hosea M. Quinby, superintendent. Ac-
tion of tort. Pending.

Wenham Mutual Benefit Association, Attorney- General ex rel. v.
Information for failure to comply with E. L., c. 119, § 14.
Disposed of.

Westborough Insane Hospital, Trustees of, v. Daniel A. Dorey
et al. Petition to recover for breach of contract. Pending.

Weston, town of, v. Railroad Commissioners et al. Petition for
certiorari. Pending.

Wheeler, Edward C, executor of the will of Benjamin P. Clark,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

White, Ida M., executrix of the will of Cyrus White, Attorney-
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. Final
decree.

White, Ida V., v. Charles River Basin Commission et al. Bill
to enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian
rights on Charles River. Pending.

White, William P., Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition for
use of Attorney- General's name in an information in the
nature of quo warranto to try the respondent's title to the
office of mayor of Lawrence. Use of name granted.

Whitaker, Elbridge J., executor of the will of Oliver Everett,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Pending.

Whitney, Jophanus H., v. James O'Doherty. Bill of complaint
to restrain respondent from using building for public per-
formances until altered to conform to regulations. Pending.

Whittaker, James, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Information in
the nature of quo warranto to try the title of respondent

132 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

to the office of police officer in Lawrence. Information
dismissed, on motion of Attorney-General.

Wolley, Edwin L., ei al., administrators of 'the estate of Lydia
G. Jennison, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to
recover inheritance tax. Pending.

Worcester & Webster Street Railway Company, Attorney-Gen-
eral v. Pending.

Worcester Art Museum v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Spring-
field. Bill in equity to determine rights of public in
Hamilton Square. Final decree.

Worthen, William F., executor of the will of Charles W. Worthen,
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance
tax. Final decree.

AVvman, Estelle, v. Commonwealth. Writ of error. Pending.

Wyman, Estelle Louise, petitioner. Petition for writ of habeas
corpus. Petition dismissed.

1910.

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

133

COLLECTIONS.

Collections have been made by this department as follows : —

Corporation taxes for the year 1908, overdue and referred
by the Treasurer of the Commonwealth to the Attorney-
General for collection, $134,802 50

Interest, 1,177 62

Costs, 4,394 29

Miscellaneous, 86,045 34

Total, $226,419 75

The following table shows a detailed statement of the same : —

Collected on

Account

of Corporation

Tax for 1908.

Interest.

Totals.

A. C. Grady Loan Company,
A. E, Gloyd Shoe Company,
A. E. Lyon Company, .
A. Foster Brooks Company,
A. H. Nelson Manufacturing Com

pany, ._ .
A. P. Nardini Company,
A. Ziegler & Sons Company,
Acorn Pants Company,
Adams Square Company,
Adamson Publishing Company,
Aldis Owen Halls' System of Busi

ness Enterprises, Inc.,
Alley & Emery, Inc.,
American Carpet Beater Company,
American Cultivator Publishing

Company, .
American Foundry Company,
American Knitting Company,
American Grocery Company,
American Live Poultry Company
Anchor Laundry Company, .
Angier Company, ...
Aronson Brothers, Inc.,
Arthur C. Harvey Company,

$43 05

64 50

7

74

14

44

51

60

86

00

1,255 60

48

92

90

30

17

20

8 85

473

00

14

20

43

00

82

56

129 00

424

15

26

83

68 80

283

64

15

82

2,134

09

$0 25
44

62

25

1 72
3 35

15
15

03
9 46

28

86

60

3 35

11 66

13

7 11

$43 30

64 94

7 74

15 06

51 85
87 72
1,258 95
48 92
90 45
17 35

482 46

14 48

43 86

82 56

129 60

424 15

30 18

68 80

295 30

15 95
2,141 20

134

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account

of Corporation

Tax for 1908.

Interest.

Totals.

American Metal Supply Company,
Atlantic Tea Company,
Atlas Worsted Company,
Austin Furniture Company,
Bacon & Donovan Engine Com

pany,

Bailey Automobile Company,
Balance Shoe Company,
Barbour Stockwell Company,
Barnett Drop Forging Company,
Barthel Blow Lamp Company,
Bartlett Box and Lumber Com

pany,

Bartlett Company,

Bassett Cranberry Company,

Batchelder & Lincoln Company,

Bath Grinder Company,

Bay State Art Company,

Bay State Brass Company, .

Beaudry & Co., Inc.,

Belisle Printing and Publishing
Company,

Benjamin N. Moore & Sons Com-
pany,

Berkshire Mills Supply Company

Bernard Billings Company, .

Big Bargain Clothing Company,

Black Island Granite Associates,

Blake Electric Company,

Blake Pump and Condenser Com-
pany,

Bloodine Corporation, .

Blue Ribbon Laundry Company,

Bon Ton Millinery Company,

Booker Custom Laundry, Inc.,

Boston Advocate Company,

Boston & St. John Tripolite Com-
pany,

Boston & Worcester Street Rail-
way Company, .

Boston Art Silver Plate Company

Boston Bolt Company, .

Boston Book Company, .

Boston Branch, Inc.,

Boston Brass Andiron Company,

Boston Building Wrecking Com-
pany,

Boston Cycle and Sundry Com
pany,

Boston Electric Company, .

Boston Mirror Company,

$30 96

72 24

134 50

259 29

245 01
240 80
34 40
421 40
213 28

239 75

240 80
137 60

17 20

5,160 00

173 72

60 44

306 16

33 02

67 51

1,804 28

412 80

60 20

64 50

5 00

48 71

50 74

30 96
48 59
60 20

68 80
58 68

8 00

16,280 99

25 80

258 00

1,612 50

12 90

30 96

75 68

619 20
130 46
129 00

$1 20

3 60

2 58

2 33

64

3 39

4 27

9 56

2 17

23 22

1 47

69

1 53

69

15 04

2 06

57

77

11

96

45

28

50

43 42

51

17 61

30

20

A AH

$32 16

75 84

137 08

261 62

245 65
244 19
34 40
421
217

40
55
249 31

242 97
137 60

17 20
5,183 22
175

61
307 69

33 02

19
13

2 60
1 16

68 20

1,819 32

414 86

60 77

65 27

5 11

49 67

51 19
31 24

48 59
60 20
68 80
59 18

8 00

16,324 41

26 31

258 00

1,630 11

13 20

30 96

75 88

625 80
133 06
130 16

1910.]

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

135

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Boston Sculpture Company,

$20 64

$20 64

Boston Taxicab Company, .

17 20

$0 17

17 37

Boston Wholesale Grocery Com-

pany,

408 07

1 02

409 09

Bow Ridge Development Com-

pany, ...

237 70

-

237 70

Bowden Felting Mills Company, .

1,746 21

7 57

1,753 78

Brighton Dressed Meat Company,

82 30

1 64

83 94

Bristol County Furniture Com-

pany,

185 76

1 63

187 39

Brockton Concrete Stone and

Brick Company,

10 10

-

10 10

Brockton Die Company,

75 50

48

75 98

Brockton Ideal Shoe Company, .

69 14

-

69 14

Brunswick Company,

104 23

-

104 23

Buck Printing Company,

172 00

75

172 75

Builders Iron and Steel Company,

51 60

48

52 08

Bullock Thread and Twine Com-

pany,

230 82

2 07

232 89

Bun Jun Lo Company, .

12 90

10

13 00

Burmester Rubber Company,

20 64

20

20 84

Burton H. Wiggin Company,

10 32

03

10 35

Butman & Cressy Company,

264 63

2 65

267 28

Butts & Ordway Company, .

567 60

3 40

571 00

C. C. C. Fire Hose Company,

292 40

-

292 40

C. E. Trumbull Company, .

43 00

11

43 11

C. H. Annable Lumber Company,

242 52

2 22

244 74

C. H. Buck Painting Company, .

5 09

06

5 15

C. J. Roadstrand Company, .

262 78

2 62

265 40

C. M. Barrett Company,

10 90

-

10 90

C. S. Viall Chair Company, .

71 38

62

72 00

C. W. Luce & Co., Inc.,

531 05

2 66

533 71

C. W. Stone Company, .

64 67

70

65 37

Cambridge Brass Company, .

51 60

-

51 60

Cambridge Commercial College, .

38 70

-

38 70

Cambridge Market Company,

25 80

-

25 80

Carlton Hotel Company,

43 00

40

43 40

Carmel Tea and Coffee Company, .

12 38

-

12 38

Central Dry Goods Company,

103 20

1 09

104 29

Chapman Company,

34 40

1 18

35 58

Charles A. Lind Company, .

36 55

33

36 88

Charles E. Lauriat Company,

1,720 00

34 40

1,754 40

Charles E. Perry Company, .

254 21

68

254 89

Charles F. Mulliken Oil Com-

pany,

17 20

-

17 20

Charles J. Jacobs Company,

60 20

60

60 80

Charles L. Ireson, Inc., .

412 80

-

412 80

Charles S. Gore Company,

266 60

2 53

| 269 13

Charles West Lumber Company, .

137 60

37

; 137 97

Child Acme Cutter and Press Com-

pany,

141 04

2 82

143 86

136

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Citizens Electric Street Railway

Company,

$2,078 86

$5 54

$2,084 40

Clapp-Eastham Company, .

37 84

36

38 20

Clapp Tea Company,

110 25

90

111 15

Clark & Roberts Company, .

17 20

-

17 20

Cleaveland Securities Company, .

21 07

42

21 49

Coates Clipper Manufacturing

Company,

103 20

2 27

105 47

Cobb-Eastman Company,

584 80

-

584 80

Cold Blast Market Company,

68 73

-

68 73

Collins Hardware Company,

1,496 40

6 48

1,502 88

Colonial File Selling Company, .

49 02

39

49 41

Columbia Kid Company,

989 00

19 78

1,008 78

Commercial Brewing Company, .

289 56

5 78

295 34

Common Sense Gum Company, .

135 74

5 35

141 09

Commonwealth Mining Company,

40 00

-

40 00

Conant Whiting & Co., Inc., .

18 16

08

18.24

Connecticut Valley Street Rail-

way Company, ....

1,409 53

12 69

1,422 22

Consolidated Wrapping Machine

Company,

947 72

5 53

953 25

Consumers Glue Company, .

64 51

1 28

65 79

Continental Shoe Company,

15 97

40

16 37

Coulter Coal and Lumber Com-

pany,

133 30

1 20

134 50

Crescent Gardens Amusement

Company,

13 76

1 04

14 80

Crocker Pen Company, .

8 53

-

8 53

Crown Novelty Company,

163 40

45

163 85

Cummings & King Company,

210 00

1 05

211 05

Cyrus T. Clark Company,

58 48

29

58 77

D. H. Eames Company,

567 60

4 45

572 05

Daley s Nantasket Express Com-

pany,

55 04

1 85

56 89

Dalton - Ingersoll Manufacturing

Company,

864 30

7 35

S71 65

Daniel Gunn & Co., Inc.,

29 24

26

29 50

Daniel Russell Boiler Works, Inc.,

25 80

1 00

26 80

Davis Cut Sole Company,

43 00

-

43 00

Davis Howard Company,

41 28

88

42 16

Derrin Ice Cream Company,

15 91

11

16 02

Dewey Investment Company,

58 87

2 34

61 21

Dexter Machine Company, .

82 56

-

82 56

Dill Cattle Company,

300 00

6 00

306 00

Dr. Burleigh Corporation,

80 65

80

81 45

Dr. Haliock Drug Company, .

47 47

2 39

49 86

Dorchester Waste Company,

10 00

20

10 20

Douglas Electric Company, .

64 50

17

64 67

Durant Reed Company,

172 00

-

172 00

Durgin McManus Company,

115 41

-

115 41

Dyar Supply Company,

118 19

1 06

119 25

1910."

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

137

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

E. D. Shadduck, Inc., .

$150 50

$1 35

$151 85

E. G. Tutein & Co., Inc.,

13 76

27

14 03

E. H. Saxton Company,

309 60

1 40

311 00

E. L. Wood Box Company, .

172 00

-

172 00

E. R. Brown Beer Pump Com-

pany,

73 96

-

73 96

E. R. Knott Machine Company, .

78 27

55

78 82

E. R. Taylor Company,

93 67

1 86

95 53

E. T. Slattery Company,

1,720 00

34 40

1,754 40

Eastern Carbonic Gas Company, .

206 40

4 12

210 52

Eastern Webbing Company,

11 18

06

11 24

Eastern Furniture Company,

43 86

91

44 77

Edward T. Harrington Company, .

70 64

-

70 64

Ehrman Manufacturing Company,

66 84

-

66 84

Electric Maintenance Company, .

12 45

25

12 70

Electro Weld Company,

73 61

-

73 61

Elk Flint Bottle Company, .

32 00

96

32 96

Ellis & Buswell Company, .

60 20

-

60 20

Elydium Laboratory Company, .

86 00

-

86 00

English & Fleet, Inc., .

210 68

63

211 31

Espinosa Fruit Company,

10 00

08

10 08

Essex Supply Company,

172 00

1 55

173 55

Eureka Valve Company,

25 80

-

25 80

Ewell Drug Company, .

12 90

37

13 27

Excel Leather Company,

66 65

19

66 84

F. S. McDermott Company, .

51 60

24

51 84

F. W. Flosdorf Company,

252 84

-

252 84

Falkson Cohen Company,

774 00

-

774 00

Falmouth Land Company, .

596 66

15 91

612 57

Farrington Printing Company,

43 00

-

43 00

Federal Vending Company, .

31 47

28

31 75

Felton Turner Heating Company,

168 56

1 29

169 85

Ferd F. French & Co., Inc., .

86 00

22

86 22

Ferncroft Inn, Inc.,

92 88

2 32

95 20

Fidelity Listed Securities Corpo-

ration,

189 20

3 78

192 98

Flanders Company,

72 24

1 44

73 68

Flexible Tire Company, Inc.,

209 58

1 99

211 57

Foil Metal Manufacturing Com-

pany,

612 83

52 70

665 53

Ford Steel Column Company,

20 07

20

20 27

Framingham Shoe Company,

3,741 00

55 91

3,796 91

Freeman Clothing Company,

30 96

-

30 96

French Carriage Company, .

448 50

6 20

454 70

Frye & Crawford Drug Company,

34 40

18

34 58

Fyfe-Eskrigge Company,

6 12

06

6 18

G. B. Lawrence Company, .

69 66

60

70 26

G. W. Gilbert & Co., Inc., .

117 13

3 51

120 64

G. W. Peterson Company,

8 60

-

8 60

Gallagher & Munroe Company, .

137 60

1 24

138 84

Garden City Shoe Company,

297 56

"

297 56

138

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account

of Corporation

Tax for 1908.

Interest.

Totals.

Pipe

Gardner Automobile Company,
Gay Automobile Company, .
Geddis Remedy Company, .
Geisel Automobile Station, Inc.
Gem Leather Company,
Genin Automatic Train

Coupler Company,
George C. Melville Company,
George F. Vester Company, .
George G. Snow Company, .
George P. Bingham Company,
George Worcester Furniture Com

pany,

Georgetown Gas Company, .
Gilbert Piano Manufacturing Com

pany, ....
Glendale Laundry, Inc.,
Globe Credit Company,
Globe Gas Light Company
Globe Mattress Manufacturing

Company, ....
Goodale Comb Company,
Gordon Automobile Supply Com

pany,

Gorman Leonard Coal Company,
Grafton Electric Company, .
Graham Company,
Grant-Wat kins Company,
Greater Boston Cigar Company,
Greendale Gas Engine Company,
Greenfield Recorder Company,
Gregory & Brown Company,
Groton Ice Company, .
Grueby-Faience Company, .
Guy Hobbs Amusement Company,
H. B. Stebbins Lumber Company,
H. C. & C. D. Castle, Inc.,
H. C. Girard Company, .
H. C. Greenwood Company,
H. Cabitt Company,
H. M. Kinports Company,
H. Newman & Son, Inc.,
H. W. Forbush Company,
Hackett Brothers Company
Hadley-Gill Cement Company,
Hampden Creamery Company,
Hampden Knitting Company,
Hanemann Monument Company,
Hanson Cedar Company,
Happy Moments Company, .
Harrison Brothers Company,

$9 28

33

54

17

73

32

68

24

08

12

04

154 80

68

80

3,003

24

123 84

65

36

60 20

136 22

17

20

21

50

129

00

81

52

133 30

99 07

30 96

6 45

64 50

62 60

135 45

107

50

25

80

223

60

6

19

292

40

17 20

696 60

160 82

144 48

202

94

25

80

103 20

28

72

86 00

86

00

113

41

92

50

239

51

35

43

109 42

58

30

567

10

$0 02
- 17

68
24

11

1 39
69

70 06

2 47

1 DO

19
1 07

81
33

1 98

03

50

1 25

1 26
61
11

1 38

00
34
86
71
73

20
3 11

84

31

69

1 44

1 69

$9 30
33 71
17 73
33 36

24 32

12 15

156 19

69 49

3,073 30

126 31

66 91
60 20

137 20
17 20
21 69

130 07

82 33
133 63

101 05

30 96

6 48

65 00

63 So

136 71

108 11

25 91
224 98

6 19
294 40
17 54
698 46
162 53
145 21
202 94

26 00
106 31

28 72
86 00
86 00

113 41
92 50

240 35
35 74

110 11
59 74

568 79

1910.

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

139

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Harry R. Stone Company,

$47 47

$47 47

Hartshorn Company,

28 38

$0 11

28 49

Harvard Amusement Company, .

6 02

08

6 10

Harvard Automobile Company, .

86 34

80

87 14

Harvard Baking Powder Com-

pany,

60 20

1 36

61 56

Haskell Sutherland Company,

68 11

41

68 52

Hatch Express Company,

327 66

1 13

328 79

Haverhill Construction Company,

96 61

-

96 61

Haviland Company,

5 16

10

5 26

Hawkes Laundry Company,

7 56

-

7 56

Hayden Photographic Manufac-

turing Company,

73 06

41

73 47

Hemenway Rollins Company,

57 06

51

57 57

Henry H. Tuttle Company, .

451 50

3 98

455 48

Henry Woods Sons Company,

230 91

5 27

236 18

Hibbard & Mason, Inc.,

97 86

-

97 86

Highland Paint and Wall Paper

Company,

67 42

35

67 77

Highland Telephone Company, .

86 00

35

86 35

Hippodrome Amusement Com-

pany,

10 32

08

10 40

Hiram D. Dewar Company, .

31 30

62

31 92

Hitchcock Supply Company,

649 50

1 85

651 35

Hoffecker Company,

109 39

71

110 10

Home Correspondence School,

54 43

36

54 79

Homer Foote & Co., Inc.,

688 00

10 32

698 32

Howe Mill Crayon Company of

Lowell, Mass., ....

25 28

15

25 43

Hugh Nawn Contracting Com

pany,

1,239 69

4 34

1,244 03

Human Life Publishing Company,

159 85

1 59

161 44

Hunt Metal Corner Company,

10 14

05

10 19

Hurst Sporting Goods Company, .

13 93

34

14 27

Hyde Park General Hospital, Inc.,

52 11

48

52 59

Hyland Mattress Company, Inc., .

34 40

-

34 40

Ideal Comb Company, .

48 96

-

48 96

Ideal Dental Laboratory, Inc.,

36 12

41

36 53

Independent Oil Company, .

178 67

1 25

179 92

India Mica Company, .

33 58

67

34 25

Isaac H. Dinner Company,

60 20

54

60 74

J. Brest Company, .

227 04

2 90

229 94

J. G. Bridge Company, .

152 04

-

152 04

J. H. Chandler Company,

25 80

51

26 31

J. H. Gerlach Company,

147 83

83

148 66

J. H. Williams Wall Paper Com-

pany,

86 00

-

86 00

J. M. Howard & Son Company, .

147 06

10 29

157 35

J. Maro Harriman Drug Company,

98 90

1 75

100 65

J. Nardi Company,

86 00

1 72

87 72

J. S. Round & Co., Inc.,

9 00

9 00

140

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

J. T. Tighe Company, .

$344 00

$1 89

$345 89

J. W. Luther Company,

240 80

60

241 40

James B. Wood & Son Company,

190 92

1 71

192 63

James Barrett Manufacturing

Company,

498 80

4 50

503 30

James H. Brown Company, .

17 20

15

17 35

James H. Whittle Company,

302 72

11 81

314 53

James Solomont & Brothers, Inc.,

527 24

4 48

531 72

Jamesville Construction Company,

87 03

2 27

89 30

Jellison Drug Company,

17 20

34

17 54

Jenks-Williams Paving Company,

25 80

-

25 80

Jeremiah Clark Machinery Com-

pany,

188 34

53

188 87

John A. Robinson Company,

38 33

34

38 67

John Briggs & Co., Inc.,

114 24

97

115 21

John C. DeLaney Moulding Com-

pany, . . . ...

30 96

28

31 24

John Cavanagh & Son Building

Moving Company,

258 00

2 94

260 94

John Reardon & Sons Company, .

225 09

1 12

226 21

John W. Luce & Co., Inc., .

17 20

34

17 54

Jordan Drug Company,

43 00

69

43 69

Joseph Andrews Lumber Com- .

pany, ......

37 15

23

37 38

Joseph Bentley Hair Company, .

221 88

-

221 88

Joseph M. Bradley Company,

34 52

31

34 83

Joseph P. Boyce Cigar Company,

175 44

1 57

177 01

K. G. Laham & Co., Inc.,

24 76

49

25 25

Kaleva Co-operative Association, .

41 29

-

41 29

Karrer & Co., Inc.,

138 80

1 20

140 00

Keniston Engineering Company,.

120 40

1 08

121 48

Kent Street Laundry Company, .

30 96

1 80

32 76

King Mining Company,

85 00

77

85 77

Kinney Heating and Supply Com-

pany,

63 64

49

64 13

18 92

-

• 18 92

Krey Music Company, .

43 00

41

43 41

L. A. Littlefield Silver Company,.

172 00

4 30

176 30

L. C. Clark Company, .

29 24

29

29 53

L. D. Hamlin Company,

103 20

88

104 08

L. M. Bowes Company, .

314 76

-

314 76

L. Mazur Company,

79 12

-

79 12

Lake Mew Drug Company, .

43 00

93

43 93

Lang & Jacobs Company,

120 40

56

120 96

Langley Transportation Company,

17 20

51

17 71

Lawrence Produce Company,

69 00

63

69 63

Lease Audit Company, .

8 25

-

8 25

Ley Construction Company,

64 50

-

64 50

Linscott Motor Company,

103 20

1 10

104 30

Linscott Sporting Goods Com-

pany,

86 00

1 00

87 00

1910."

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

141

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Lombard Machine Company,

$62 78

$62 78

London Harness Company, .

645 00

$7 95

652 95

Lord & Co., Inc., ....

140 18

-

140 18

Lott-English Furniture Company,

258 00

1 16

259 16

Louis Sonnabend Company, Inc., .

55 04

1 10

56 14

Lo veil's, Inc., ....

76 81

-

76 81

Lucy Mill and Lumber Company,

5 85

-

5 85

Lynn Shoe Company, .

111 11

97

112 08

M. A. Dame & Son Company,

172 00

1 49

173 49

M. A. Hannigan Company, .

172 00

1 43

173 43

M. & M. Manufacturing Company,

25 80

13

25 93

M. D. Vaughan Company,

15 48

-

15 48

M. Mordell Company,

68 80

-

68 80

Magee Furnace Company,

2,798 99

14 00

2,812 99

Majestic Company,

154 80

69

155 49

Maiden Grain Company,

77 40

1 75

79 15

Manufacturers Bottle Company, .

59 44

1 78

61 22

Marathon Egyptian Cigarette

Company,

26 83

29

27 12

Marlborough-Hudson Gas Com-

pany,

829 38

3 12

832 50

Martin Kelley Company,

361 20

8 90

370 10

Mason Cigar Company, .

32 25

30

32 55

Massachusetts Builders Finish

Company,

68 80

65

69 45

Massachusetts College of Com-

merce, Inc., ....

116 10

1 05

117 15

Massachusetts Confectionery Com-

pany, ......

50 00

-

50 00

Massachusetts Fuel Saving Radi-

ator Company, ....

21 07

-

21 07

Massachusetts School of Law, Inc.,

17 20

-

17 20

Matanzas Telephone Company, .

5 16

-

5 16

Matthew F. Sheehan Company, .

25 80

13

25 93

Menashi Khoury Company, .

11 76

10

11 86

Merchants and Mechanics Consol-

idated Realty and Investment

Company,

86 00

77

86 77

Merrimack Engineering Company,

45 40

1 02

46 42

Merrimac Paper Company, .

1,745 80

-

1,745 80

Metropolitan Air Goods Company,

80 84

1 00

81 84

Metropolitan News and Publish-

ing Company, ....

438 60

17 54

456 14

Miscoe Spring Water Company, .

34 40

09

34 49

Mitchell Press,

72 24

1 44

73 68

Mitchell Publishing Company,

25 80

57

26 37

Model Laundering Company,

34 40

40

34 80

Modern Foundry Company, .

58 82

-

58 82

Monarch Valve and Manufactur-

ing Company, ....

712 64

7 12

719 76

Monn Product Company,

11 16

06

11 22

142

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan,

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Morgan Brothers Company, .

$41 28

_

$41 28

Morgan Creamery Company,

34 40

$0 50

34 90

Mount Desert Granite Company, .

5 22

12

5 34

Mount Pleasant Stable Company, .

25 80

22

26 02

Muir's Laundry, Inc., .

113 52

1 02

114 54

Murphy Boot and Shoe Company,

103 20

98

104 18

Musicians Supply Company,

72 24

36

72 60

Mystic Lumber Company,

51 60

47

52 07

N. Richardson Sous Manufactur-

ing Company, ....

75 28

75

76 03

Navin & Kelly Company,

351 63

13 77

365 40

Neponset River Coal Company, .

363 02

-

363 02

New Bedford Loom Picker and

Strap Company, ....

20 64

50

21 14

New Can Company,

154 80

1 08

155 88

New England Cigar Box Company,

52 42

52

52 94

New England Cloak and Suit

Company,

137 60

5 50

143 10

New England Corset Company, .

146 20

3 23

149 43

New England Office Furniture

Company,

110 08

2 20

112 28

New England Paper Bag Com-

pany,

72 51

-

72 51

New England Reed Company,

448 50

4 04

452 54

New Marshall Engine Company, .

5 00

-

5 00

New Talmud Publishing Com-

pany,

41 28

82

42 10

Newburyport Herald Company, .

20 64

21

20 85

Newport Transfer Express Com-

pany,

7 50

-

7 50

Norris F. Comley Conservatories,

69 66

35

70 01

North Shore Auto-Passenger Com-

pany,

13 76

74

14 50

Northampton Printing and Bind-

ing Company, ....

38 47

-

3S 47

Northwood Manufacturing Com-

pany,

6 65

-

6 65

Norton Door Check Company,

61 92

2 46

64 38

Norwich Belting Company, .

30 50

-

30 50

Noyes & Dewar Company, .

129 00

83

129 83

Oak Hill Nurseries,

90 90

1 20

92 10

Oak Birch Park Corporation,

19 20

22

19 42

Odorless Excavating Company, .

12 90

06

12 96

Oleic Company, Inc.,

11 18

-

11 18

Oliver & Howland Company,

403 23

3 02

406 25

O'Neil Auto Garage Company,

17 20

15

17 35

Park & Pollard Company, .

9 10

-

9 10

Parker-Turco Company,

44 96

25

45 21

Parthenais Brothers Company,

86 00

-

86 00

Peabody Candy Company, .

31 56

-

31 56

Peabody Granite Company, .

122 98

122 98

1910.

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

143

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

Peabody Supply Company, .

$68 00

$0 68

$69 48

Peerless Manufacturing Company,

58 48

20

58 77

Pentucket Narrow Fabric Mills, .

12 90

28

13 18

Peoples Combination Clothing

Company,

110 08

99

111 07

Peoples Drug Store Company,

25 80

23

26 03

Peoples Furniture Company,

103 20

1 06

104 26

Peoples Ice Company, .

17 20

15

17 35

Perkins & Co., Inc.,

318 20

1 80

320 00

Philbrook Distributing Company,

51 60

1 02

52 62

Phillips & Krensky Company,

72 24

1 44

73 68

Phillips Company, ....

13 76

32

14 08

Photo Supply Company,

41 28

44

41 72

Pierce & Barnes Company, .

17 20

10

17 30

Pierce Hardware Company, .

653 60

-

653 60

Pigeon Hill Granite Company,

521 84

2 60

524 44

Pilgrim Foundry Company, .

335 40

13 40

348 80

Pilot Garage and Supply Com-

pany,

216 72

4 55

221 27

Plymouth Press, Inc., .

116 44

-

116 44

Poole & Price Machine Company,

33 16

66

33 82

Prince's Express Company, .

10 93

-

10 93

Providence & Fall River Street

Railway Company,

272 04

73

272 77

Publication Research and Trading

Company,

20 38

81

21 19

Publishers Binding and Mailing

Company,

180 60

1 80

182 40

Puritan Print, Inc.,

15 48

12

15 60

Puritan Confectionery Company, .

19 17

17

19 34

Quaboag Leather Company,

103 20

-

103 20

Quincy New System Wet Wash

Company,

9 11

09

9 20

R. J. Todd Company, .

20 00

-

20 00

R. L. Cleveland Company, .

165 12

1 21

166 33

R. M. Bucknam & Co., Inc.,

22 61

-

22 61

Ralph F. Russell Company, .

86 00

1 72

87 72

Randall-Faichney Company,

868 90

3 26

872 16

Red Dragon Company, .

64 50

1 50

66 00

Reed & Barton Corporation,

5,557 81

14 81

5,572 62

Richard Sayles Woolen Company,

306 50

2 66

309 16

Robbins Spring Water Company,

86 00

43

86 43

Robert G. Wallace Company,

68 80

-

68 80

Robert S. Jones Company, '.

41 96

24

42 20

Rodney Hunt Machine Company,

1,000 00

7 42

1,007 42

Rosengard Furniture Company, .

110 08

28

110 36

Rowe Contracting Company,

223 56

-

223 56

Roxbury Eye and Ear Infirmary,

18 73

09

18 82

Roxbury Shoe Thread Company, .

189 20

1 70

190 90

S. D. Viets Company, .

451 84

1 20

453 04

S. E. Cassino Company,

67 76

67 76

144

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account
of Corporation

Interest.

Totals.

Tax for 1908.

S. L. Gabriel Company,

$29 24

$0 26

$29 50

S. M. Howes Company, .

1,689 04

9 57

1,698 61

S. R. Bailey & Co., Inc.,

990 30

14 50

1,004 80

St. Clair's, Inc., ....

37 30

34

37 64

Salem Barrell Company,

59 08

-

59 08

Salem Commercial School, Inc., .

137 60

1 51

139 11

Samoset Chocolate Company,

354 49

95

355 44

Sample Shoe Shop Company,

61 92

16

62 08

Samuel M. Baker Company,

34 40

34

34 74

Samuel Ward Company,

1,331 28

11 98

1,343 26

Sargent Ice Company, .

7 74

03

7 77

Scandinavian Co-operative Gro-

cery Union, ....

68 80

60

69 40

Scherrer Manufacturing Company,

8 08

08

8 16

Schipper Brothers Coal Mining

Company, Inc., ....

52 64

1 05

53 69

Scott & Sons Company, .

32 85

1 31

34 16

Second Regiment Band,

15 05

05

15 10

Shawmut Waxed Paper Company,

75 68

1 76

77 44

Sheldon Yacht and Power Boat

Corporation, ....

58 48

50

58 98

Silas Peirce & Co., Ltd.,

2,122 84

19 45

2,142 29

Small, Maynard & Co., Inc.,

172 00

65

172 65

Sm alley Jar Company, .

17 20

60

17 80

Snowflake Axle Grease Company,

94 60

65

95 25

Soule Art Publishing Company, .

113 58

1 29

114 87

South Boston Wood and Coal

Company,

16 44

-

16 44

Spatula Publishing Company,

77 40

34

77 74

Specialty Nail Company,

76 11

-

76 11

Springfield Feld Spar and Mica

Company,

100 00

1 00

101 00

Springfield Hat and Cap Company,

110 59

2 21

112 80

Springfield Union Publishing Com-

pany,

202 96

1 69

204 65

Standard Bottling and Extract

Company,

331 96

-

331 96

Standard Concrete Construction

Company,

19 47

19

19 66

Standard Credit Company, .

72 41

-

72 41

Standard Union Company, .

108 84

1 09

109 93

Stanhope Forge and Machine

Works,

16 51

-

16 51

Star Credit Compan}^ .

17 20

48

17 68

Stillson Motor Car Company,

289 82

3 04

292 86

Stoughton Record Company,

33 60

-

33 60

Suffolk Supply Company,

98 00

3 76

101 76

Symonds & Poor Carbonator Com-

panv,

748 20

14 96

763 16

T. D. Cook & Co., Inc., .

326 80

6 53

333 33

T. F. Kilbride Company,

258 00

—

258 00

1910.1

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No 12.

145

Collected on

Account

of Corporation

Tax for 1908.

Interest.

Totals.

Tavender Process Company,

Taylor Goodwin Company, .

Thayer Woolen Company, .

Theodore Metcalf Company,

Thomas J. Shea Company, .

Thompson, Snow & Davis Com
pany,

Tichnor Brothers, Inc., .

Tilton, Fuller & Milton, Inc.,

Times Newspaper Company,

Tropical Medicine Company,

Tudor Press, Inc., .

Turva Co-operative Store Com
pany,

Union Laundry Company, .

Union Overall Manufacturing
Company, ....

Union Parlor Furniture Company

Union Tool Company, .

Unique Stove Company,

United States Column Company,

United States Land Development
Company, ....

University Schools of Correspond-
ence,

Upton Investment Company,

Vermont Clover Creamery Com-
pany,

Vienna Lunch Company,

Vose-Swain Engraving Company

W. A. Norton Company,

W. H. Saart Company, .

W. K. Farrington Press,

W. P. Goode Brush Company,

Wadleigh Company,

Walker Brothers Dyeing and
Bleaching Company, .

Waltham Watch Tool Company
of Springfield, Mass.,

Warren, Brookfleld & Spencer
Street Railway Company,.

Washington Department Store
Inc.,

Watson Shoe Company,

Wellington-Pierce Company,

Weymouth Pharmacy, .

Whitcomb & Withington Com
pany,

Whitlow Corporation, .

Whittier Woodenware Company,

Wilber Coal and Ice Company,

$6 27

712 51

558 14

1,634 00

50 56

774 00
66 04
86 86
13 07
20 21
78 94

18 57
101 48

232 20
84 62

19 95
42 58

150 75

8 25

258 00
34 40

6 00

51 60
55 04
34 40

537 43
68 80
77 40

122 80

48 84

111 80

189 39

194 01

1,118 00

403 44

72 24

160 47
77 40

412 80
82 56

$0 06

16 62

3 90

22 70

35

2 71
59

72

40
60

13
93

2 00

30

1 80

76

16

2 83

2 65

28

1 37
1 55

62

18
1 11

1 89

1 26

10 06

1 14

42

1 44
70

3 71

51

$6 33

729 13

562 04

1,656 70

50 91

776 71
66 63
87 58
13 07
20 61
79 54

18 70
102 41

234 20
84 62
20 25
44 38

151 51

8 41

260 83
34 40

6 00

54 25

55 04
34 68

537 43
70 17
78 95

123 42

49 02
112 91

191 28

195 27

1,128 06

404 58

72 66

91
10

161

78
416 51

83 07

146

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Collected on

Account

of Corporation

Tax for 1908.

Interest.

Totals.

William A. Davis Company,
William Allen Sons Company
William Bourne & Son Piano

Company, ....
William Walker Company,
Williamstown Press Company,
Winthrop Lunch Company,
Winthrop M. Baker Corporation
Wire Fabric Company,
Wold Machine Company, .
Wood, Barker Company,
Worcester Broken Stone Com

pany,

Worcester Gazette Company,
Worcester Plunger Elevator

Company, ....
Worcester Textile Machine Com

pany,

Worcester Wood Fiber Wall

Plaster Company,
Wordell Plumbing Company,
Young's, Inc.,

$24 08
345 72

43 00
132 57

37 84
10 66
70 58

44 72

45 58
172 00

82 56
151 36

153 94

54 61

17 20
124 25

86 00

$0 48

2 99

40

3 97
80
12
70

1 77
91
57

78
43

58

2 65

1 72

$134,802 50

$1,177 62

$24 56
348 71

43 40

136 54
38 64
10 78
71 28
46 49
46 49

172 57

83 34
151 79

153 94

55 19

17 20
126 90

87 72

$135,980 12

Miscellaneous Collections.

A. Baab & Co., penalty,

A. Cunningham Drug Company, penalty,

A. F. Murphy Die and Machine Company, penalty,

A. F. Ross & Co., Inc., penalty, ....

A. H. Demond Company, penalty, ....

A. H. Nelson Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Abram French Company, R. W. Boyden, receiver
corporation tax for 1901,

Adams, town of, board of paupers,

2Etna Securities Company, penalty,

Agawam Farm and Supply Company, penalty,

Agawam Cranberry Company, penalty, .

Airified-gas Heating and Power Company, excise tax
and penalty,

Albert Culver Company, penalty, ....

Ali, Mohammed, estate of, escheated estate,

Alley & Emery, Inc., claim of the Massachusetts Com-
mission for the Blind

$25 00

5 00

5 00

10 00

25 00

10 00

500

00

8 86

5

00

5

00

15

00

225 00

5

00

474

78

145 47

1910."

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

147

Amalgamated Manufacturing Mining Company, penalty,
American Amusement Company, penalty,
American Citizen Company, corporation tax for 1907,
American Concrete Block Company, penalty,
American Electric Process Company, penalty,
American Industrial Corporation, penalty,
American Iron Company, penalty, ....
American-Newfoundland Packing and Trading Com

pany, penalty, .

American Nitrate Company, penalty, .
American Pneumatic Service Company, penalty, .
Amusement Construction Company, penalty, .
Astor Lunch Company, penalty, ....
Atlantic Park Company, penalty, ....
Atlas Construction Company, steam furnished by Met

ropolitan Water and Sewerage Board,
Atwater, L. C, trustee, board of John R. Atwater at

State Hospital,

Austin Ford & Sons Company, penalties,
Autogenous Welding Equipment Company, penalty,
Automatic Rapid Unloading Company, penalty, .

Azorian Company, penalty,

B. Feinberg Sons Company, penalty,

Baker Yacht Basin, Inc., penalty, ....

Balance Shoe Company, penalties, ....

Bangs Peat and Coke Company, penalty,

Barney & Berry, Inc., penalty, ....

Barthon, Frank, estate of, escheated estate, .

Bassett Cranberry Company, penalty, .

Bates & Guild Company, penalty, ....

Bates, James P., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Bay State Compressed Air Vacuum Cleaner Company

penalty, ........

Bay State Lumber Company, penalty, .

Beacon Loan Company, penalty, .

Beckonert, B. L., guardian, board of William E. Beck

at State Hospital,

Benson Furniture Company, penalty, .

Berkshire Cycle and Automobile Company, penalties,

Bernard Billings Company, penalty,

Beverly, city of, board of paupers,

Beverly Transportation Company, corporation tax

for 1904,

Biddle Baking Company, penalty, ....
Black Island Granite Associates, penalty,

570 29

5 00

70 29

5 00

75 00

5 00

15 00

5 00

10 00

25 00

10 00

5 00

5 00

77 50

294 92

20 00

15 00

5 00

5 00

5 00

5 00

15 00

5 00

5 00

2 88

5 00

10 00

725 10

5 00
5 00
5 00

757 64

15 00

10 00

5 00

4 29

132 80
10 00

5 00

148

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Blackstone, town of, board of paupers, .

Blanehard, Sarah, estate of, inheritance tax

Blandford, town of, board of paupers, .

Bleiler Contracting Company, penalty, .

Boothby Hospital, penalty, .

Boston & St. John Tripolite Company, penalty,

Boston Acetylene Generator Company, penalty,

Boston Branch, Inc., penalty, ....

Boston, city of, board of paupers, .

Boston Coaked Peat Company, penalty,

Boston Cold Storage Company, penalty,

Boston Consolidated Gas Company, excess of sulphur

in gas,

Boston Co-operative Flower Market, penalty,

Boston Cycle and Sundry Company, penalty,

Boston Decorative Plant Company, penalty, .

Boston Dental Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Boston Development Company, penalty, .

Boston Fire Patrol Company, penalty, .

Boston Ice Cream and Baking Company, penalty,

Boston Terrier Record Company, penalty,

Boston Traveler Company, penalty,

Boston Wool and Paper Stock Company, penalty,

Brogan, Hugh H., administrator of the estate of Bridget

C. Brogan, inheritance tax, .
Brooks, Frank H., executor of the will of Charles G,

Brooks, inheritance tax,
Brown-Binnian Company, penalty,
Brown, Henry, executor of the will of Rhoda B. Potter

inheritance tax, .....
Brown Oil Company, penaltj^,
Brown Stocking Company, penalty,
Buckland Manufacturing Company, penalty
Building Trades Credit Agency, penalty,
Burtworth Carpet Company, penalty, .
Butler Auto Supply Company, penalty,
Buzzell Heat and Light Generator Company, penalty,
C. A. Anderson, Inc., penalty,
C. E. Woodward Company, penalty,
C. H. Loveland Company, penalty, .
C. I. Brink-Roys Company, penalty,
C. M. Tyler Company, penalty,
C. W. Alger Company, penalty, .
C. W. Morse Leather Company, penalty,
C. W. Sweetland & Co., Inc., penalty, .

$444 83

94 33

16 80

5 00

15 00

10 00

5 00

10 00

900 11

5 00

15 00

300 00

5 00

20 00

20 00

10 00

10 00

15 00

10 00

5 00

5 00

5 00

91 09

313

71

10

00

487

13

20

00

5

00

5

00

15 00

25

00

25

00

5 00

10

00

10

00

5 00

5 00

10

00

10

00

5

00

10

00

1910.

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

149

Caleicle Process Company, penalty,
Cambridge, city of, board of paupers,
Carleton & Hovey Company, penalty,
Cary, Alice M., estate of, inheritance tax,
Central Laundry Company, penalty,
Central Oil Company, penalty,
Charles A. Bennett Company, penalty,
Cheewawbeek Farm, Inc., penalty, .
Chilmark China Clay Company, penalty,
Churchill Company, penalty, .
Clark & Cole Company, penalty, .
Clark & Roberts Company, penalty,
Clark & Smith Company, penalty, .
Clark Chemical Company, penalty, .
Clark Machine and Foundry Company, penalty,
Cobb, Bates & Yerxa Company, penalty,
College City Cutlery Company, penalty,
Colonial Leather Goods Company, penalties,
Combination Envelope Company, penalty,
Commercial Brewing Company, penalty,
Commercial Express Company, penalty,
Commercial Oil Company, penalty,
Common Sense Gum Company, penalties,
Commonwealth Garage, Inc., penalty, .
Commonwealth Rubber Company, excise tax

penalty,

Compressed Fiber Company, penalty, .

Conant & Donelson Company, penalty, .

Concord, town of, board of paupers,

Concrete Power Block Company, penalty,

Connecticut River Transmission Company, penalty,

Connecticut Valley Street Railway Company, penalty,

Connell, Elizabeth, estate of, inheritance tax,

Consolidated Cape Cod Cranberry Company, penalty

Consumers Sand Company, penalty,

Contractors and Builders Supply Company, penalties,

Cook Fire Door Company, penalty,

Corney, James H., executor of the will of Matilda

Corney, inheritance tax,
Crawford-Plummer Company, penalty,
Credit Reporting Company, penalty,
Criterion Knitting Company, penalty,
Cuban Development Company, penalty,
Cuba Fruit Company, penalty,
Cumberland Development Company, penalty

and

$10 00

317

66

40

00

47

68

10

00

25

00

15

00

10

00

10

00

5

00

10

00

5 00

25 00

5 00

25 00

5

00

5

00

15

00

5

00

10

00

10

00

5

00

30

00

5

00

L

125

00

5

00

5

00

12

40

25 00

50

00

197

50

33

72

15

00

5

00

20 00

5

00

i

38

60

25 00

5

00

5

00

10

00

25

00

10

00

150

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Cummings, John F., administrator of the estate of

John B. Halloran, inheritance tax, .
Cummings, Mary E., estate of, inheritance tax,
Curtis, Susan M., estate of, inheritance tax,
Cutler, Pamelia, estate of, inheritance tax,
D. J. Kiley Construction Company, penalty,

D. W. Pingree Company, penalty, .
Danvers Gas Light Company, excess of sulphur in gas
Darley Engineering Company, penalty,
Davis Sewing Machine Company, penalty,
Dependable American Manufacturing Company

penalty,

Devonshire Overall Company, penalty, .
Dinsmore Express Company, penalty, .
Directory Publishing Company, penalty,
Dodge, Benjamin N., estate of, inheritance tax,
Dowley, George B., administrator of the estate of Lewis

H. Plaisted, inheritance tax,
Dresser-Hull Company, penalty, .
Drew, Stranahan, Hussey Company, penalty,
Driscoll & Co., Inc., penalties, .
Driscoll, John, estate of, inheritance tax,
Dunbar Boot Shop, Inc., penalty, .
Dunlap-Cooke Company, penalty, .

E. A. McMillin Company, penalty,
E. F. Drew & Co., Inc., penalty, .
E. P. Blake Company, penalty,
E. R. Taylor Company, penalties, .
East Boston Gas Company, excess of sulphur in gas,
East Boston-Manhattan Market Company, penalty,
East Weymouth Wool Scouring Company, penalty,
Eastern Beef Company, penalty, .
Eastern Fishing Company, penalty,
Eastern Press, Inc., penalty, .
Eco Manufacturing Company, penalty,
Eddy Company, penalty,
Edwin Shivill Advertising Agencies, penalty, .
Egremont Co-operative Creamery Company, penalty,
Egremont Marble Company, penalty,
Ellicott, Josephine, administratrix of the estate of

Nancy H. Ellicott, inheritance tax, .
Elliott Manufacturing Company, penalty,
Ellis & Buswell Company, penalty. .
England, Lydia P., estate of, inheritance tax,
Equitable Supply Company, penaltjT, .

$97 30
163 93
439 25

55 39
5 00

10 00
100 00

15 00

20 00

5 00

10 00

5 00

5 00

264 64

300 00
20 00

5 00

10 00

213 55

10 00

5 00
10 00

5 00

10 00

15 00

100 00

5 00

5 00
15 00
15 00
10 00

5 00
10 00
15 00

5 00

5 00

123 80

5 00

5 00

87 47

5 00

1910."

PUBLIC DOCUMENT -No. 12.

151

F. J. Chartonnean Company, penalty,

F. L. O'Bryan Company, penalty, ....

F. W. Dodge Company, penalty, ....

Fall River Brick and Concrete Company, penalty,

Fall River, city of, board of paupers,

Farnum Hanscom Company, penalty, .

Fifield, George W., administrator of the estate of Eve
line R. Baldwin, inheritance tax,

Fifield, George W., administrator of the estate of Ruth
S. Shaw, inheritance tax,

Fifth Ward Market Company, penalty, .

Flanders Company, penalty,

Frank Tenney Company, penalty, ....

Franklin Clothing Company, penalty, .

Franklin Square Pharmacy, penalty,

Fred S. & A. D. Gore Corporation, penalty, .

Frederick J. Quinby Company, penalty,

Fyfe & Eskrigge Company, penalty,

Gardner, Henry R., executor of the will of Emily M
Rayner, inheritance tax,

Gem Leather Company, penalty, ....

Genin Automatic Train Pipe Coupler Company, penalty

George P. Bingham Company, penalties,

George Parker Fish Company, penalty,

George T. Hoyt Company, penalty,

George Worcester Furniture Company, penalty, .

Gibbs, H. E., board of Herbert E. Gibbs at State Hos-
pital,

Glen Mills Cereal Company, penalty, .

Glendeves Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Gloucester Dairy Company, penalty,

Golden Rule Company, penalty,

Goodyear Raincoat Company, penalty, .

Green Mountain Lumber Company, penalty,

Grover & Haskell Company, penalty,

Guptill Company, penalty,

H. E. Pinkham Shoe Company, penalty,

H. L. Leonard Company, penalty, .

H. M. Kinports Company, penalty,

Hall, John 0., executor of the will of Mary 0. S. Kent
inheritance tax,

Hanlon Thornton Company, penalty,

Harmon, G: Howard, administrator of the estate
Walter S. Harmon, inheritance tax, .

Harris, Emeline L., estate of, inheritance tax,

of

$5 00
25 00
25 00
5 00
213 14
15 00

685 11

277 36

5

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

15

00

15

00

40

00

5

00

148 26

10

00

10

00

15

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

3 20

5

00

5

00

10 00

10

00

20

00

10

00

15

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

5

00

150

40

20

00

779

46

1,567

63

152

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Hart Renting and Power Company, penalty, .
Haverhill Box Board Company, penalty,
Haverhill Shoe Manufacturing Association, penalty,

Haviland Company, penalty,

Healey Brothers Shoe Company, penalty,

Healey Sewer Machine and Construction Company

penalties,

Highland Telephone Company, penalty, .

Hill-Ray Engineering Company, penalty,

Hind Roofing and Sheet Metal Company, penalty,

Hoffecker Company, penalty,

Holland Electric Company, penalty,

Holyoke Auto Company, penalty, ....

Holyoke Box and Lumber Company, penalty,

Houle, Maria, executrix of the will of Joseph Houle

inheritance tax,

Howard Dustless-Duster Company, penalty, .

Howe, Annie E., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Howe, Irving A., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Howe, Martha S., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Hoyle Lumbering Company, penalty,

Hurst Sporting Goods Company, penalty,

Hyde Park General Hospital, penalty, .

Ideal Cloak and Suit Company, penalty,

Ideal Confectionery Company, penalty, .

International Consolidated Oil Company, penalty, .

Ipswich, town of, board of paupers,

Irving, Eleanor N., executrix of the will of Elizabeth

Conway, inheritance tax, .....
J. B. Judkins Company, penalty, ....
J. E. Elkins Company, penalty, ....
J. H. Chandler Company, penalty, ....
J. H. Gerlach ComjDany, penalty, ....
J. Johnston Company, penalty, ....
J. S. Kennedy Company, penalty, ....
J. S. Turner Manufacturing Company, penalty,
J. W. Calnan Company, penalty, ....
J. W. Streeder Company, penalty, ....
Jackson, Andrew S., guardian, board of Delia Barrett
James B. Wood & Son Company, jztenalties, .
James Bryden Company, Inc., penalty, .
James H. Lamb Company, penalty,
Jap Stick Company, penalty, .....
Jewellers and Silversmiths Co-operative Refining Com

pany, penalty,

1910.]

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

153

John Boyd & Co., penalty,

John Cavanaugh & Son Building Company, penalty,

John Hardy Company, penalty,

John W. Luce & Co., Inc., penalty, .

Joseph Andrews Lumber Company, penalty,

Journeymens Aid, Inc., penalty,

Judah Goldberg Company, penalty,

Kent, George W., executor of the will of Eliza Ann

May, inheritance tax,

Kiernan, Katherine, estate of, board at State Hospital,
Kilroy, John, administrator of the estate of Bridget

Woodsum, inheritance tax,

King Philip Brewing Company, penalty,

Kings Clothing Company, penalty,

Kirkland, Nancy M., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Kissel-Kar Company, penalty, ....

Kohinoor Zinc Company, penalty, ....

Korn Silverman Leather Company, penalty, .

L. G. McKnight & Son Company, penalty,

Lakeside Construction Company, penalty,

Lamson Consolidated Store Company, penalty,

Laney, Isaac H., estate of, inheritance tax, .

Lawrence Athletic Association, penalty, .

Lebosque, Helen, estate of, on account of inheritance tax

Lee the Tailor, penalty,

Lever Cream Separator Company, penalty, .

Lexington Peat Company, penalty,

Liberty Lumber Company, penalty,

Liberty Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Lillian G. Smith Cloak and Suit Company, corporation

tax for 1907,

Lincoln Securities Company, penalty, .

Lincoln, town of, board of paupers,

Linscott Motor Company, penalty, ....

Listed Securities Corporation, penalty, .

Little, George F., executor of the will of Rachael R

Thayer, inheritance tax,

Lock Brackett Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Lombard Fireproofing Company, penalty,

Lowell & Fitchburg Electric Company, penalty,

Lowell Automobile Company, penalty, .

Lowell, city of, board of paupers, ....

Lucy Mill and Lumber Company, penalty,

Lutz & Schramm Company, penalty,

Lynn, city of, board of paupers, ....

$5

00

50

00

15

00

25 00

10

00

5

00

15

00

354 90

425

00

107

27

50 00

10

00

134 55

10

00

25 00

5

00

10

00

10

00

50

00

35 79

25 00

10 00

10

00

25

00

15

00

5

00

5

00

26

18

5

00

8

00

20

00

5

00

110

79

5

00

10

00

15

00

10

00

94

63

10 00

25 00

84 80

154

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Lynn Dwyer Lamp Company, penalty, .

Lynn Hebrew Mutual Loan Company, penalty,

Lynnfield, town of, board of paupers, .

M. J. Doyle Printing Company, penalty,

Mackintosh Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Mahoney, Mary, estate of, inheritance tax, .

Maiden & Melrose Gas Company, excess of sulphur in

Maiden Co-operative Express, penalty, .
Manhattan Collar Company, penalty,
Manning & Armstrong Company, penalty,
Martin Kelly Company, penalty, . • .

Marysville Wood Scouring Company, penalty,
Mason Cigar Company, penalty, ....
Mason Motor Fan Company, penalty,
Massachusetts Automobile Company, penalty,
Massachusetts Belting Company, penalty,
Massachusetts Brick Company, penalty, .
Massachusetts Cigar Dealers Association, penalty, .
Massachusetts College of Commerce, penalty, .
Massachusetts Fuel Saving Radiator Company, penalty
Massachusetts Leather Welting Company, penalty,
Massachusetts Magnetic and Botanic Institute, Inc.

penalty,

Massachusetts Talc Company, penalty, .
Matthew F. Sheehan Company, penalty, .
Mathewson Company, penalty, ....
McBride, Elizabeth C, guardian, board of Matthew T

McBride at State Hospital,

MeGonagle, Francis J., guardian, board of William F

McGonagle at State Hospital, ....
Mcintosh-Brown Company, penalty,
McManus Pharmacy, Inc., penalty.
McQuarrie, Georgianna S., estate of, inheritance tax,
Meisterschaft Publishing Company, penalty, .
Melrose, city of, board of paupers, .

Mercantile Monthly Company, penalties,
Metropolitan Color Printing Company, penalty,
Metropolitan Mercantile and Realty Company, excise

tax, filing fee and penalty, .....
Middlebury Vermont Mining Company, corporation tax

for 1907 and penalty, ......

Middlesex Grocery Company, penalty, .
Miller & Franklin Companj^, penalty,

$10 00

5

00

7

66

5

00

25

00

41

35

800

00

100

00

10

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

25 00

5

00

200 00

223 82
20 00

5 00
48 00
15 00
97 49
20 00

5 00

230 00

.32.-) 00

5 00

25 00

1910.

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

155

Miller, George, settlement of bastardy case, .

Millburn, Jane, estate of, inheritance tax,

Mitchell Press, penalty, .....

Mohawk Dairy Company, penalty,

Monn Products Sales Company, penalty,

Montello Heel Company, penalty, .

Morrison Company, corporation tax for 1907,

Morse, Hattie, estate of, legacy tax,

Mount Desert Granite Company, penalty,

Murphy, Catherine, estate of, inheritance tax,

Mutual Shoe Company, penalty,

N. Richardson Sons Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Nantucket Central Railroad, tax, .

National Automatic Heater Company, penalty,

National Cash Trading System, penalty,

National Electric Equipment Company, penalty,

National Hat and Cap Company, penalty,

National Nitro-Culture Company, penalty,

National Soda Fountain Company, penalty, .

Needham, town of, board of paupers,

Nemasket Springs Company, penalty,

Nemo Heater Company, penalty, .

Neopolitan Ice Cream Company, penalty,

Nesmith Shoe Company, penalty, .

Never Clog Salt Shaker Company, penalty, .

New England Amusement Company, penalty,

New England Concrete Company, penalty,

New England Electric and Supply Corporation, penalty,

New England Engine and Boat Association, Inc.,
penalty,

New England Granite Company, penalty,

New England Trolley Wheel Company, penalty,

New England Waste Cleaning and Oil Extracting Com-
pany, penalty,

New Marshall Engine Company, penalty,

New Talmund Company, penalty,

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company,
reimbursement on account of ' Southborough grade
crossing,

Newark Lunch Company, penalty, ....

Newburyport Fish Cold Storage Company, penalties,

Nichols & Drown Company, penalty,

Non-Corrosive Valve and Pipe Company, penaltj^, .

Noonan, Ellen, estate of, inheritance tax,

$50 00

30

00

15

00

10

00

5

00

10

00

6

32

89

20

5

00

49 85

5

00

5

00

4 49

25

00

5

00

15

00

5 00

10

00

20

00

17

60

15

00

25

00

10

00

5

00

5 00

5

00

15

00

25

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

10 00

10 00

177

71

10

00

10

00

15

00

5

00

48

32

156

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

North Dighton Co-operative Association, penalty, .
North, Lucy A., administratrix of the estate of Horatio

S. Ware, inheritance tax,

North Shore Transit Company, penalty, .

Norton Door Check Company, penalty, .

Norwood, town of, board of paupers,

Noshake Grate and Heating Company, penalty,

O'Neil Auto Garage Company, penalty,

Orient Distributing Company, penalty. .

Orient Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Oulton Motor and Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Oxford Fiber Company, penalty, ....

P. P. Emory Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Pach Brothers Company, penalty, ....

Parker & Coran, Inc., penalty, ....

Peckham Davis Company, penalty,

Peoples Legal Company, penalty, ....

Pepperell, town of, board of jDaupers,

Peter F. Tague Company, penalty, ....

Phoenix Lunch Company, penalty, ....

Photo Supply Company, penalty, ....

Pierce Hardware Company, penalty.

Pigeon Hill Granite Company, penalty.

Pilgrim Rubber Company, penalty.

Pine Grove Mineral Spring Company, penalty,

Plymouth Cement Stone Company, penalty, .

Portsmouth & Lynn Express Company, penalty.

Practical Politics, penalty, .....

Pratt, G. J., administrator of the estate of Daniel TV

Pratt, inheritance tax,

Publication Research and Trading Company, penalty,

Publishers Press, penalty,

Purcell, Edward H., estate of, inheritance tax,

Purdy & Henderson, penalty,

Quality Saw and Tool Works, penalty, .
Quansett Mining Company, penalty,
Quincy Hack and Stable Company, penalty. .
R-A-C Business Expansion Company, penalty,
Ralph F. Russell Company, penalty.
Ray Lawson Granite Company, penalty,
Reading Co-operative Association, penalty, .
Reliable Manufacturing Company, penalty, .
Relindo Cushion Shoe Company, penalty.
Remington Tool and Machine Company, penalty, .
Revere, town of, board of paupers,

[J

an.

$5 00

120

00

40

00

5

00

77

77

5

00

10

00

15

00

25

00

10

00

25

00

25

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

12 40

5

00

15

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

10

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

10

00

173

48

5

00

10

00

337

99

5

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

25

00

20

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

5

00

53

20

1910."

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

157

Rocky Hill Crystal Spring Water Company, penalty,

Roebling Construction Company, penalty,

Rogers, Morrison, executor of the will of John P. Mc-

Elroy, inheritance tax,

Ross Towboat Company, damage to Cambridge Bridge

Roll Stationery Company, penalty,

Roxbury Storage Salesrooms, penalty, .

Ruth Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Ryan, John J. executor of the will of Margaret Gorman

inheritance tax,

Sampson Press, Incorporated, penalty, .
Sanitary Plumbing Company, penalty, .
Santa Sofia Mines and Milling Company, fee for filing

first papers, ........

Sawyer Belting Company, penalty,
Saxtons River Soap Stone Company, penalty,
Shawmut Consolidated Copper Company, penalty,
Sheldon Yacht and Power Company, penalty,
Shove & Gage Company, penalty, ....

Smith, Susan, executrix of the will of Eliza Ann Smith

inheritance tax,

Sorenson, Alfred, storage on Commonwealth pier, South

Boston,

Springfield Business School, penalty,
Springfield Feldspar Company, penalty,
Springfield Navigation Company, penalty,

Stafford Company, penalty,

Standard Labelling Machine Company, penalty,
Standard Paper Tube Company, penalty,
Standard Ring Traveller Company, penalty, .
Star Credit Company, penalty, ....
Star Inter-State Express Company, penalty, .
Sterling Manufacturing Company, penalty, .
Stone Telegraph and Telephone Company, penalty,
Story-Sirnnions Compan3r, penalty,
Strong & Garfield Company, penalty,
Suburban Club House Corporation, penalties,
Suburban Gas and Electric Company, excess of sulphur

in gas,

Suffolk Lighting Company, penalty,
Suffolk Loan Company, penalty,
Suffolk Supply Company, penalty,
Sullivan, Mary, estate of, inheritance tax,
Sulphume Company, penalty, .
Superior Laundry Company, penalty,

$5

00

50

00

181

66

100

00

5

00

15 00

5

00

214 15

10

00

10

00

25

00

5

00

5

00

75 00

15

00

15

00

81 25

100

00

10

00

25 00

5 00

250

00

5

00

25

00

15

00

15

00

10

00

5 00

25 00

10

00

5

00

25

00

200

00

5

00

3

00

25

00

98 64

25 00

5

00

158

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

Sylvester Tower Company, penalty,

T. H. Buckley Car Manufacturing Company, penalty,

Tailby-Nason Company, penalty, ....

Terminal Wharf and Railroad Warehouse Company
penalty, .

Thomas J. Young Company, penalty,

Time Saver Company, penalty, ....

Tirrells Pharmacy, penalty, . . .

Traders Wharf and Warehouse Company, penalty,

Travers Colten Company, penalty, ....

Triumph Safety Burner Company, penalty, .

Tucke & Parker Company, penalty,

Twin Elm Spring Corporation, penalty, .

Tyler Chapman Company, penalty,

Union Comb Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

United States Appraisal Company, penalty, .

United States Banana Company, penalty,

United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, payment
of indemnity bond in the case of Hersey v. Common-
wealth,

United States, Spanish war claim, .

Universal Marine Company, penalty,

Universal Oil Company, penalty, .

Upton Investment Company, penalty,

Van Kannell Revolving Door Company,

Vellumoid Paper Company, penalty,

Vernon Court Hotel Company, penalty,

Vestal Oil Company, penalty,

Victor Manufacturing Compaiw, penalty

Vienna Lunch Company, penalty, .

Viscoloid Company^, penalty, .

W. & V. 0. Kimball Company, penalty

W. E. Woodman Company, corporation tax for 1905,

W. H. Mague Company, corporation tax for 1907, .

W. W. Reed Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Wakefield, town of, board of paupers, .

Walfair Construction Company, penalty,

Waltham, city of, board of paupers,

Warren Manufacturing Company, penalty, .

Watertown, town of, board of paupers, .

Waverly Magazine Company-, penalty, .

Webster & Southbridge Gas and Electric Light Com
panyT, excess of sulphur in gas, ....

Welch Motor Car Company, penalty,

West Disinfecting Company, penalty,

penalty,

$5 00

10 00

5 00

15 00

5 00

20 00

5 00

5 00

10 00

5 00

15 00

10 00

10 00

5 00

15 00

25 00

10,300 80

47,957 82

5 00

10 00

15 00

5 00

15 00

10 00

20 00

20 00

5 00

15 00

25 00

200 00

105 58

10 00

74 00

5 00

1,056 72

5 00

36 80

5 00

200 00

5 00

15 00

1910.]

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

159

Westfielcl Marble and Sandstone Company, penalty,

Westport, town of, board of paupers,

Wheelock Fence Company, penalty,

Whilow Corporation, penalty,

White, Ida M., executrix of the will of Cyrus White,

inheritance tax, .....
Wilder Snow Plow Manufacturing Company,
Wilson Building Moving Company, penalty,
Winthrop Lunch Company, penalty,
Wire Fabric Company, penalty,
Wire Goods Company, penalties, .
Wirt Manufacturing Company, penalties,
Witch City Bottling Works, Inc., penalty,
Wood-Barker Company, penalty, .
Worcester, city of, board of paupers,
Worcester Coal Company, penalty,
Worcester Envelope Company, penalty, .
Worcester Hotel Company, penalty,
Worcester Shoe Machinery Company, penalty.
Workers Co-operative Company, penalty,
York, George H., board of Emeline York at

pital,

Young, William H. A., estate of, inheritance tax,

$10 00

40 40

5 00

5 00

353 20

5 00

5 00

5 00

3 00

25 00

25 00

5 00

5 00

394 87

10 00

10 00

10 00

5 00

25 00

25 00

100 00

$86,045 34

160

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

O

S
P3

pq

EH
P3

O

EH

prl

a

o

03

a»

w

^3

-h>

>■>

-C

O

r^

Cu

O

a>
Hi

3J

'C

p

03

P

p

O

O

a

rQ

c3

03

>

B

ci

c3

—

M

a>

o

rj

o

-/.

•i — .

crs

rj

o

o

r— 1

%-

«^

05

CO

a;

>

.

4-3

bfi

Q

*-*—

bD

;_,

a

c

t:

03

oj

a

c

ci

— i

03

m

P*>

[3

03

C^

-a

CJ

-4-3

bfi

o £

is ■4-3

^ -d,

03 ST

hn

c

•f

£

ja

c

"*"•

0

o

'—

0)

0

—

a

— 1

OJ

k

0

a

i

a

g'

g

3

g'

d

s

3

g

a

u

-

-

c

c

cS

0

,o

0

£

<2

0

•2

•2

0

«2

<H

M

h

u

»H

^

u

u

tH

tH

h

u

CJ

a)

Ci

OJ

o>

<a

<a

Oi

OJ

0>

0)

a

a

ft

a

a

-

ft

ft

ft

ft

o

£

'c

E

2

S

2

£

O

0
u

a

£

a

a

a

a

a

a

ft

ft

ft

a.

o>

.g

.g

.3

a

_g

_3

#3

.3

_3

.3

#g

Ph

73

73

13

TJ

-3

—j

—

73

—

T3

73

3

d

a

3

3

3

5

d

d

ca

03

03

03

o3

e3

03

c3

c3

o3

03

3

3

3

"s

"3

3

3

"^

3

"3

J=

«4H

><-i

£

£

?

T*

's

|

S

£

^

*

&

oa

c3

c3

o3

o3

03

03

03

c3

J

h1

iJ

^

£

k!

d

o.2

„

2 3

.3

g

2 °

3 OJ

0
S
>>

-^'

^*

_i

-i

-«

jM

Is

_f

jif

>8

1

1

X*

o>

83

t3

1

83

03

5

Ph

3

3

=

0

3

OJ

0

3

E

02

CC

H

QQ

5

X

02

pq

^

02

3

.O

'^

0

2

G

O

03

0

S?

«*H

.

c3

O

^

3
O

O

.3

O

CJ

flj

03

5

OJ

O

-u

ft

J

'$

r3

03

g

O

bD

g

2

d
3

J

>>

b

£

"z
0

>.

^

>>

~

^

>"

o3

3

-0

3
03

3

o>

d

3

03

3

3

0)

0

ft

3

0>

-

M

O

OJ

1?

0

0

03

o3

-

0

>,

0

p

(-.

u

CJ

I

Fh

(h

-

(h

3

J

^

e3

03

03

03

*o

03

o3

pq

<U

H]

w

<

Hi

h!

Ph

■^

Hi

01

3

73

In

c3

O

o5
>

03

=

'43

g

'So

H

3

Ph

3

0

03

E

-

s-,

6
0

o>

3

8

0

o>
bO

>>

d

0

3

T3

0
H

1

^4

o3

03
>

S

H

O

W

O
•-9

Ph'

0

-

73
3

c3

.S*

0

01

d

r

s

.2

'3

0

0>

<

0h

03
0>

6

O

O

T3
03

1

—

3
<

I

02

0

>

e or Country
hose Execut
[uisition was
made.

^

,2

■a

J.

'3
>

4

.

S3
3

c3
O

"o
3

3

5

O

"5

-£ P x

0

O

0

0

O

'—

■p

- -

-^ den

>*

m
3
3

^
&

O

.=

.2"

0

OJ

3

d

0

O

0>

©

a;

01

«

—

-

O

fc

£

Pn

55

5?

>

n

c

»

O

ft

CN

J_J

■<*

-r

/

/

0

c^f

N-"

3S

^h"

?i

<N

<M

71

Date

of
Refer
ence.

S

^ s

3*

3

3*

•

oa

c3

e3

a

03

5

£

•-9

H>

t-s

»-9

—.

»-9

•-S

^

»-s

1-5

1910.] • PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 161

£

£

B

£

g

B

g

£

£

Ih

B

s

g

B

£

2

E

£

a

a

F

£

«2

,0

o

O

0

0

£

O

<2

«2

•2

o

,0

c

=

a

g

0

3

Fh

u

Ih

F-l

Ih

Ih

Ih

Ih

ft

ft

c

ft

ft

ft

ft

ft

ft

OJ

OJ

-

OJ

ft

01

-

03
ft

03
ft

OJ

o,

OJ

flv

OJ

OJ

C

a

£

t

(J

y

CJ

o

S

8

S

p

R

P

F

c

F

o

p

ft

a

ft

ft

^

ft

&

ft

a

a

a

o.

ft

ft

ft

&

a

a

a

a

d

d

d

a

-d

T3

73

—

T3

13

T3

T3

T3

T)

T)

T5

T!

T)

Tl

_

^

_

d

Pi

g

a

d

=1

fl

d

d

d

d

2

d

d

7-,

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

c3

03

03

03

cj

c3

d

d

d

d

d

d

9

d

d

d

~

"ri

is

p3

"d

t*

IS

IS

ts

E=

£

IS

IS

£

is

k

Is

is

+3

|s

<

>

>

03
fa

03

fa

c3

Hi

fa

c3
Hi

03
Hi

03
fa

oj
fa

03
fa

03

fa

h1

03
fa

03
fa

03

o

03
fa

o3
fa

53

fa

S

o3
fa

33

X

2

X

M

X

X

M

X

o

OJ

u

-ii

^

oj

ft

j^

01

^

^

S

o

-_

^

CO
03

M

CO

03

^:"

M

J.

^

^

y

o

-0

£

o3

-

~

u

-

—

—

—

0

~

0

-

o

ifi

5t5

T)

CC

-r

kH

e=

-d

—

~

id

~

sa

kd

Sd

;-

ffl

fn

d
X

CO

S

§

3U

^

d

CO

§

CO

d

CO

d

CO

3
CO

d

CO

OJ

d
£

bll

OJ

n

b(

bp

g

g

g

Ih

^

HJ

Ih

>,

d

g

3

d

3

d

3

q

03

-

T3

(1

TJ

T)

J-i

o

03

0
£

0

E

>>

9

d

03

T3

d

b

3

d

d

b

d

b

d

d

>>

d

d

£

_g

>>
ri

>.

>>

a

03

oj

o

a

d

M

fa

d

■=■

Ih

Ih

-

o

B1

£L

o

Ih

d

03

p

03

CJ

~

ej

u

r^

o

R

T3

c3

BS

o

el

o

crt

,<-!

r^

CO

Bj

Ih

^

J

<

fa

fa

X

fa

Hi

fa

fa

y.

fa

-«J

fa

<

O

fa

fa

fa

fa

<j

fa

3

,d

~

«5

-3

c

2
c3

CO

CO

3 d
bC 0>

£ w

03 d^i

P fa

fa

d

b

03

w

d"

e

0

b

o3

w

>>

OJ

>

Ih

c3

-p

Ih
OJ

,C

O

fa
O

P
CJ

d
,d

a

c3

o
d

T3
0)

d"

CO

B

DO

I

0

fa

Ih

O

£

03

fa

fa

d
o

d*

o3

OJ

pq

0)
CO

d

0

rd

a

5

CO

o3

fa

OJ

J

fa

a

OJ

•/.
o

O
fa

=1

"a

'd

OJ

3

o

<

03

a

03

'3

fa
_o
'5
S
d

OJ

d
c
o

fa

T3

T3

g

03

fa

d
g

03

o

'if:

|

ft
OJ

0

0
—
rn

£

OJ
03

OJ

03
T3

M

d
j=i
o

03*

3

_J

g

hQ

3

p

8

2
d

OJ

fa

>"

>I

e3

g

M

^

^s

ot

M

M

M

o

^

fa

^

M

J4

03

J<!

>

Ih

~

d

B

OJ

B

OJ

Ih

,0

02

o

o

O

0

O

0

o

o

0

0

o

o

V

P
O

s*

'3

a

!*

>H

>H

>H

>H

d

oj"

^

>H

t*

>H

>H

>H

-p

u

£

is

£

d

&

Ss

^

OJ

^

_=

^

^

^

pi

£

&

^

03

o

£

OJ

OJ

o>

OJ

OJ

03

03

OJ

OJ

03

OJ

ft

£

HH

fe

S5

fa

a

f5

fc

<

fe

--•

^

^

5?

J5

£

55

fc

0?

lO

e©

fa

,_?

of

lO

CO

h>r

i^

cq"

<N

cm"

CO

d

l>

CO

co"

fa

r

d

l-l

i-H

i-H

i-H

i-H

i-<

CN

CM

CN

0)

CO

i-l

1-*

i-<

oi

CM

,d

X

nd

fa

~

^J

-d

fa

nd

fa

,d

,d

hO

hQ

,Q

rt

c3

e3

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

-

03

ft

ft

a

e

a

fa

fa

fa

§

S

S

3

§

g

S

g

P^

>:

r-i

?.

<

<

<

<

<

<j

162

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

a

a

a

d

a

g

d

g

a

g*

a

g"

g

d"

a

E

a

d'

o

o

0

ro

o

o

z

o

rc

rc

,o

O

rc

po

o

rc

c

o

u

td

u

(h

,_

u

h

._,

Fh

M

h

0>

0)

0>

0)

0>

(B

0)

0)

<a

0)

0)

CJ

o>

0>

a

a

a

a

z.

a

a

a

a

a

ft

ft

o

g

o

2

o

c

c

o

s

s

2

c

£

2

s

2

p

c

s-

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

ft

ft

ft

a

O

a

a

a

d

d

d

d

d

3

d

d

3

d

d

d

d

3

d

3

K

73

13

73

73

73

"0

73

13

73

73

T-

—

73

—

73

71

73

Tl

c

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

c

d

08

OS

ci

Oj

«

OS

cs

03

rt

03

03

03

c3

03

03

o3

03

c3

3

-

d

3

d

3

d

d

3

3

3

-

d

d

3

3

~

t*-i

£

is

£

is

£

is

is

is

oS

c3

d

rfl

trt

nrl

Gl

01

(rt

(St

rrl

oS

03

ort

Hi

Hi

1— 1

^

h-1

^

h!

Hi

1-1

i-l

t-1

H-l

h-1

(-1

Hi

kJ

Hi

_ c
U2

d £

M

i

d

.3,

^"

^*

^

d

0)

-M

s

tn

O)

u

O)

to

o

^s"

M

3
O

a

^4

X

0)

X

0>

X

>2

£

d

-

=

£

O

Id

o

g

03

S

o

u

£

a

S

o3

M

c

3
0Q

<i

Ph

-

d

3

d

X.

*

^

DO

3

3

ro

ro

d

^

3

73

o>

O

M

3

M

bfl

_2

M

bO

d

01

.a

o3

•£

■£

+s

"g

-3

i

d

s

o

0>

a

a)

73

0)

<L>

d
o

—

3
£>
o3

3
o>

73

^j-

d

-

d

d

u

d

o3
M

pd

M

03

&

£

b

ft

=

03

d

_d
d

o>

Pi

d

03

d

a

3
-

3

m

05

lw

u

N)

ro

p

01

(Si

rrt

=<

o

M

3

03

o

03

o

u

03

o

d

oS

o

Hi

O

01

X

-

r^

el

n

Hi

ffl

pq

pq

In

<j

PQ

1-1

w

h-1

H-1

yA

pq

h-1

Ph

!5

J3

U

0)

>

'■+3

1

3

N

3

e

Ph

O
ffl

a

oS

■a

C

M

o
73

d

o3
X

!-
0>

Ph

<

d

=

H

pq
6

m
ffi

oS

o

B

j3
O

O

-=

"3

ZJ

W

J=

0
i-s

o

c

s

03
O

d*

o

ro

d

0
i-s

<

73

d

o3

-3
g

03
C

d

Hi

73

>

d

O)

TO

c3

Pm

Xi
O
o

03

I-?

o

~
O

■§

o
o3
i-s

oT

0)
bfi
03
~.

O
■g

73

S*

0)

an
o

Hi

0>

o

01

O

£

3

pq

tH
0)

73

3
03
X

<

ro
<B

.2
'S

3
oS

Ph

o>
d

3
X

ft
0)

o

Hs

ntry

ecutivo

was

.

of

s

5 x ,-.

3

-•"

State or

pon whose

Requisit

mat

3
o

>;

"3

"o

4*

c3

3

IT

o

o

o

■a

o

o

a

■a

o

0)

E

03

3
O

_0

n

•a

o

*0!)

'3

Ft

0

c

rC
03

■f.

'5

d

o>

H5

ro

d

d

a

-/.
"3

=

0)

3

^
&

3

o

03

0)

o

—

0)

0)

-i

0)

0)

o

o>

55

B

£

O

£

^

O

M

O

^

fc

Ph

H

|-(

O

^

^

©

d

o

©

■*

»o

I>

^,

-r

lO

T4

IC

»o

i>T

(N

ci

CO

»o

Date

of
Refer-
ence.

1-1 a

cc

CO

'5

CO

>>

01

OS

oil

oil

>>

(73

>>

oS

-.'1

e8

(N

>>

-

(N

>>
OS

0)
3
3
i-s

0>

d

3
Hs

0)

d
3
i-s

o>
3

d

i-s

<

<

<

<

s

s

a

^

s

S

S

§

^

S

1910.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 163

s

g

g

g

g*

g

a

g

g

a

a

f3

a

a

1

g

=

d

d

d

d

o

0

-

0

3

0

3

o

O

o

:

,p

o

tp

,p

p

o

3

O

,p

o

u

h

,_

hi

Ph

hi

hi

hi

(H

t-

u

u

hi

^

hi

h

u

0>

0)

0)

0)

Q)

n>

0>

02

02

a>

02

02

o>

0>

-

a

a

ft

a

U

ft

a

a

ft

ft

a

a

a

::.

ft

ft

a

a

a

s

s

8

s

£

£

s

o

2

e

£

p

g

a

E

E

?,

O

£

£

o

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

ft

a

a

a

a

ft

a

ft

a

a

a

d

d

d

g

.a

tj

-d

T)

-d

-d

T3

T3

■d

-d

T)

T3

-d

■d

"0

-d

'd

Tl

T3

T!

TJ

-3

a

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

r^

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

03

o3

03

rt

Sj

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

03

c3

03

03

03

03

03

=

d

d

=

3

3

d

-

=

d

fl

d

d

d

d

3

3

r2

d

d

3

&

*

\t

03

crt

rl

<n

en

rt

Bt

n

03

m

eH

c3

rl

rl

of

-

est

03

efl

03

h-1

Hi

h-1

i-l

h-1

h!

h-1

h1

Hi

i-l

h-1

h-1

1-1

hI

h-j

h-i

Hi

h-1

hi

Hi

h-1

-d

d*

J3

X

.J4

d
o

M

-^

jW

M

-^

_^

rM

^

JM

M

■d

^

3
O

03

-^

M

Jd

X
o>

c

0

O

a1
>>

Ph

o

O

o

O

o

o

O

r

0

a

g

—

r.

O

O

sa

to

C

C

to

SB

id

Ed

tc

id

\a

c3

'a

~

id

kd

to

d

CZ2

/.

Xi

7.

7.

O!

J.

Oi

i.

7.

Oi

02

02

bb

?

2

•S

"o

d
0

0

~

o

|

s

3

c3

pj

-

Fh

02

t-

o3

o

O

rl

o

rl

o

>>

>>

rl

,d

>>

d

=

b

ft

d

t?

o

0>
02

d

>>

d

>5

d

>>

d

tf

>>

d

ft

3

d

!i>

T3

^

01

o

02

0!

02

•E

02

o>

R

£

£

«

153

-_

d

&

d

•-

•:'

hi

£

hi

hi

d

c3
h!

>3

►3

J

$

pq

o3
hi

o

3

o
5

i-5

o

<

a

Hi

r^

-
hi

03
Hi

^

Hi

5

03

-d

"C

.

00

e

o3
g

d

02

0

o

M

u
o

bb

d

.Q

a

d?

i5

oS

.

M

o

02

02

d"

-r

02

o

d

0>

-d

12

—

3
P

d

ft

c3
ft

pq

u

c3

c

d*

d

03

15

d

O

d*

02
ft

O

c3

14

"o

a
a
C

g

^

P

02

p

d

03

d

03
-

E

g

U

d

5

i-s
h<

hi

02
Hi

d

3

HI

o

«3

3

pq

g
.2

%

O

§

<

ft

o>

02

o

.a
a
©

03

o

h.

s

>-5

-d
2

02
0)

DO

o

r2

c3

,d

ft

02
T.

o

d
g

c3

02

w

o

m
02

0
c3

N

03

0>

'E
d

02

.2

£

03

o

.2
*d

,d

02

o,

d

d

O

>>

-£

-

o3

03

a

03

;-

-li

^4

M

■-

c3

>

d

0

03

02
Hj

0

to

o

g
O

.2

>j

w

a

o

O

o

O

02

>-

>H

>5
0!

0

;>

d

=

3

b£

*

^

O

^

&

d

&

Ft

d

=

o

*

.n

0)

rd

£

— i

>

O

3

>

Ph

fc

O

»

o

^

fc

^

55

Pm

W

o

&

IN*

T_j

on

CO

IN

N

IN

CO

CO

o

d

_;

M

iO

iO

iO

©

cn

_;

CN

CM

CN

OJ

02

3
1-2

d

d

•-9

"d

d

>>

bb

d

bb

d
<

<

bb

d
<!

bb

d
<

bb

d

a

02

a

02
7.

-h>

a

0>

m

"o

02

-i-j
ft

02

a

02

02

a

01

u
02

O

164

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT.

[Jan.

d

d

a

g

S

d

a

d

a

a

a

a

a

a

d

E

B

^

j-

E

^

-

c

c

Fh

o

o

c

c

0

o

o

o

<2

«H

o

o

o

o

o

<4H

u

Fh

Fh

Fh

(H

M

t.

Fh

Fh

F-i

Fh

Fh

Fh

o>

o>

Q

0)

0)

01

0>

0>

<u

01

CO

0)

0)

o>

0)

a

a

0.

ft

a

a

a

a

a

a

ft

a

1

p

s

s

2

s

£

o

o

£

2

£

2

£

2

u

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

O

a

_3

.3

.3

a

a

.3

.S

_s

_B

oj

73

—

t3

-_.

-c

T3

T3

T3

T)

13

T3

-a

T3

T3

-3

3

3

3

3

3

0

3

3

3

3

1

a

3

3

3

03

08

a

03

03

03

o3

o3

03

o3

o3

03

03

c3

3

"3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

1

Is

Is

£

*£

"£

Is

^

S

^

^

^

le

1

^

c3
h-1

3

o3
(J

o3
h-1

03

03
h^

03

03

c3

3

J

J

J

03
h-1

03

ti

m"£

X*

x"

^=

2 3

CO

0>

2 °

3 0>

jM

M

-i

^J"

jM

--£

03

J.

_£

_£

3
O
=

a

M

0) 03

>2

O

SB

fc§

X*
0>

93

|

X
0)

5

3

S3

x"

01
03

^B

-

5

Stt

3
r

I

Ph

3

=

r
CD

3

3
QQ

3
CO

H

S

§

CQ

25

'Jl

.3

"o3

3

0)

T3

M

CD

bO

be

_a

3

'£

5
,3

'Fh

s

3
0)

b

3

CJ

0)

2d

.a

'C
O

"oi

a.a

>>

>j

>>

T3

3
c3
bO

£

>>

£

bO

a

'z.
a

>"

E

>J

>>

J2

3

5j

3s

a

3

a

3

3

3

03

3

3

o>

<D

0J

^!

a;

o>

0>

CJ

bC

01

o

3

o

O

a

c3

o

a

u

o

>.

^

t>

c3

0)

3 5

c3 a

f»

Fh

Oi

Fh

t-

(-

-

Fh

%

.a

rr

o3

f.

no

03

03

03

__;

c3

c3

fJ w

e-1

h-1

h-1

pq

h-1

^

(J

W

^

Ph

1-5

H^

<

3

"=)

6

s-T

>

O

-2

'-*3

+J

f-

'5)

t-T

'I
3

.2

00

3

d

fh"

3

1

o
Ah

.3

t*

d

3

>>

0>

1

o
O

3*

3

5

3

3

.9

s*

a

3
3

O

|

o>

-3

s"

w

3

1

0)

"3
►f3

5

3

03

25

"a

8

pq

o>
O

03

g

o

H

►4

S

c3

c3

Tr

3

o

3

O

i-a

3
o3

s

_c3

ixj

01
O

d

3

—
O

a

£

T3

3
<

J8

a

.9*

3
Ph

1-5

—

i

3

0>
>

3 o> P

3 X H

.

.

7, ®.-t! S

c

o c.22 g

.it*

>>

0)

m

_i

^T

_£

rilr

j2

s

_/

J4

-^

13

o

£

O

.

o

o

.

"to

l-H

-
o

M

bfi

.3

03

o

O

Fh

o

a

3

><

03

3

o3

.3

,0

0)

o

03

0

=

>-

o>

5

01

0)

01

c3

01

o>

-3

o>

^

©

0>

o>

25

a

25

W

25

25

PB,

ti

~

25

-

25

25

25

t>

00

eo

— '

CO*

CO-

CO

00*

o

©

^

©

c-

lO

■*

IN

CM

Date

of
Refer
ence.

8

o

o

o

o

«

>

o

>

o

o

>

o

ci

0)

ci

0)

ci

0)

6

o>

ci

Oi

O

O

o

C

O

O

25

25

25

25

-

-

Q

P

p

1910.1

PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12.

165

O o

•J .S

2 s

•Pa 3
M

a c
p

o

C« CI
<U ,-1

Vj *"

o

«M

<y

o

A

i_

<u

hr

""^

a

n

o

-^

CI

—

a>

a

CO

*H

0J

OS

p74

O

aw

a

.s

o>

,5

o

O

— ■
a

<v

o>

■*->

*-■

>>

a;

<U

'C

o>

02

^

W

n

a

o

>>

— '

02

r—

a

O)

o

ri

VI

GJ

%—

05

a>

C71

,_,

OJ

1

bn

^2

a

a

'£

.a

o

o

0?

a

o

.a

c3

O

H

CO

03

<D

rQ

■+3

U

o

03

£<£©

© o»

H ©

d d

• • 5 ' ■ ' |

S 2

a a
©...©....

J3 m

«s £

© ■ • • 0) © .

73 73 a

§ § .-I

■ ' I * * ' §? • ■ § I • 3 :

. I if s I i s 5 j

s" • C • -(DC ■©©... .M

0J 73

— S *h

S pE( O

O O O O Q

£? W "©

« Ph

S f^ O <! ft

d

•2

<-T

^

©

d
o

e

3

©
U

1

©

03

c3

CO

o
6

—

X

g

d

w

W

=

b9

d

3

5

ei
02

©

Ph

.5
1

GO

<

I g

.2* .2 § .2*

,c ,c 3 -C
O O B O

> O

2 . « .-d .-d

§ «5 5- a

1-5 S < <

iH tH Ci)

Q Q Q G

166 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan.

RULES OF PRACTICE

In Interstate Rendition.

Every application to the Governor for a requisition upon the
executive authority of any other State or Territory, for the de-
livery up and return of any offender who has fled from the
justice of this Commonwealth, must be made by the district or
prosecuting attorney for the county or district in which the
offence was committed, and must be in duplicate original papers,
or certified copies thereof.

The following must appear by the certificate of the district or
prosecuting attorney : —

(a) The full name of the person for whom extradition is
asked, together with the name of the agent proposed, to be
properly spelled.

(b) That, in his opinion, the ends of public justice require
that the alleged criminal be brought to this Commonwealth for
trial, at the public expense.

(c) That he believes he has sufficient evidence to secure the
conviction of the fugitive.

(d) That the person named as agent is a proper person, and
that he has no private interest in the arrest of the fugitive.

(e) If there has been any former application for a requisition
for the same person growing out of the same transaction, it
must be so stated, with an explanation of the reasons for a
second request, together with the date of such application, as
near as may be.

(/) If the fugitive is known to be under either civil or crim-
inal arrest in the State or Territory to which he is alleged to
have fled, the fact of such arrest and the nature of the pro-
ceedings on which it is based must be stated.

(g) That the application is not made for the purpose of en-
forcing the collection of a debt, or for any private purpose what-
ever; and that, if the requisition applied for be granted, the
criminal proceedings shall not be used for any of said objects.

1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 167

(h) The nature of the crime charged, with a reference, when
practicable, to the particular statute defining and punishing the
same.

(i) If the offence charged is not of recent occurrence, a satis-
factory reason must be given for the delay in making the appli-
cation.

1. In all cases of fraud, false pretences, embezzlement or
forgery, when made a crime by the common law, or any penal
code or statute, the affidavit of the principal complaining wit-
ness or informant that the application is made in good faith,
for the sole purpose of punishing the accused, and that he does
not desire or expect to use the prosecution for the purpose of
collecting a debt, or for any private purpose, and will not di-
rectly or indirectly use the same for any of said purposes, shall
be required, or a sufficient reason given for the absence of such
affidavit.

2. Proof by affidavit of facts and circumstances satisfying
the Executive that the alleged criminal has fled from the jus-
tice of the State, and is in the State on whose Executive the
demand is requested to be made, must be given. The fact that
the alleged criminal was in the State where the alleged crime
was committed at the time of the commission thereof, and is
found in the State upon which the requisition was made, shall
be sufficient evidence, in the absence of other proof, that he is a
fugitive from justice.

3. If an indictment has been found, certified copies, in dupli-
cate, must accompany the application.

4. If an indictment has not been found by a grand jury, the
facts and circumstances showing the commission of the crime
charged, and that the accused perpetrated the same, must be
shown by affidavits taken before a magistrate. (A notary
public is not a magistrate within the meaning of the statutes.)
It must also be shown that a complaint has been made, copies
of which must accompany the requisition, such complaint to
be accompanied by affidavits to the facts constituting the offence
charged by persons having actual knowledge thereof, and that a
warrant has been issued, and duplicate certified copies of the
same, together with the returns thereto, if any, must be fur-
nished upon an application.

5. The official character of the officer taking the affidavits or
depositions, and of the officer who issued the warrant, must be
duly certified.

168 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 1910.

6. Upon the renewal of an application, — for example, on
the ground that the fugitive has fled to another State, not having
been found in the State on which the first was granted, — new
or certified copies of papers, in conformity with the above rules,
must be furnished.

7. In the case of any person who has been convicted of any
crime, and escapes after conviction, or while serving his sen-
tence, the application may be made by the jailer, sheriff, or other
officer having him in custody, and shall be accompanied by cer-
tified copies of the indictment or information, record of con-
viction and sentence upon which the person is held, with the
affidavit of such person having him in custody, showing such
escape, with the circumstances attending the same.

8. No requisition will be made for the extradition of any
fugitive except in compliance with these rules.