(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Report of the attorney general for the year ending .."

Public Document No. 12 



®I}f (HmnmotUBfaltlf of iMaBHatljusfttB 



REPORT 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL 



Year ending January 21, 1914. 




BOSTON: 

\VEIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

32 DERNE STREET. 

1914. 



<3:i)C ^JTomtnontocam) of itta00acl)W0ett0. 



Department of the Attorney-General, 
Boston, Jan. 21, 1911. 



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, 



JAMES M. SWIFT, 

A ttorney-General. 



®l)e aLotmnontoealtl) of MiaBBat\)xiBtnB. 



DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, 
State House. 



Attorney-General. 
JAMES M. SWIFT. 

Assistants. 
Frederic B. Greenhalge. 
Andrew Marshall. 
Henry M. Hutchings. 
Walter A. Powers. 
Thomas 0. Jenkins. 



Engineer of Grade Crossings. 
Henry W. Hayes. 



Chief Clerk. 
Louis H. Freese. 



Statement of Appropriation and Expenditures. 



Appropriation for 1913, $50,000 00 

Expenditures. 

For law library, $657 44 

For salaries of assistants, 17,861 65 

For expert services, 154 00 

For clerks, 3,807 50 

For office stenographers, 2,900 00 

Telephone operator, 480 00 

For messenger, 1,200 00 

For expenses in the abolition of grade crossings : — 

Salary of engineer, $3,167 43 

Other expenses incidental thereto, . 659 26 

3,826 69 

For advertising unclaimed deposits, 6,190 90 

For office expenses, 2,823 10 

For court expenses, 9,959 06 



Total expenditures, $49,860 34 

Costs collected, 2,476 17 



Net expenditures, ........ $47,384 17 



iHiit (Sommnnmraltli of iMaBsarI|«s?ttB 



Department of the Attorney-General, 
Boston, Jan. 21, 1914. 

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 this department dur- 
ing the year, to the number of 5,735, are tabulated below" : — 

Corporate franchise tax cases, 638 

Extradition and interstate rendition, 96 

Grade crossings, petitions for abolition of, 99 

Indictments for murder, 28 

Inventories and appraisals, 246 

Land Court petitions, 14 

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, 23 

Land-damage cases arising from the taking of land by the Massa- 
chusetts Highway Commission, 17 

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

ropolitan Park Commission, 1 

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

ropoUtan Water and Sewerage Board, 14 

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

Board of Insanity, 7 

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

Everett Reservation Commission, 1 

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

Armory Commissioners, 2 

Miscellaneous cases arising from the work of the above-named 

commissions, 32 

Miscellaneous cases, 582 

Petitions for instructions under inheritance tax laws, ... 47 
Public charitable trusts, ......... 112 

Settlement cases for support of persons in State Hospitals, . 27 
All other cases not enumerated above, which include suits to re- 
quire the filing of returns by corporations and individuals and 
the collection of money due the Commonwealth, . , . 3,745 



viii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

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

DoMENico Beninato, indicted in Middlesex County, Sep- 
tember, 1912, for the murder of Giovannina E'atoli, at Wal- 
tham, on Nov. 21, 1911. He was arraigned Nov. 14, 1912, 
and pleaded not guilty. John J. Mitchell, Esq., was as- 
signed by the court as counsel for the defendant. The de- 
fendant later retracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty 
to murder in the second degree. This plea was accepted by 
the Commonwealth, and the defendant was sentenced to State 
Prison for life. The case was in charge of District^ Attor- 
ney John J. Higgins. 

Stefais^ Boeasky and Axtoxe Koeek, indicted in Hamp- 
den County, December, 1911, for the murder of Rose Aman- 
sky, at Granville, on Sept. 27, 1911. They were arraigned 
May 20, 1912, and pleaded not guilty. Joseph F. Carmody, 
Esq., Frederick B. Spellman, Esq., and James H. Reilly, 
Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for the defend- 
ants. In June, 1912, the defendants were tried by a jury 
before King, J. The result was a verdict of guilty of murder 
in the first degree. The motion of the defendants for a new 
trial was denied. Aug. 1, 1912, suggestion of the death of 
the defendant Antone Kolek was filed. The exceptions of 
the defendant Stefan Borasky were overruled by the Su- 
preme Judicial Court. On April 7, 1913, the defendant was 
sentenced to death by electrocution during the week begin- 
ning June 22, 1913, which sentence was executed June 24, 
1913. The case was in charge of District Attorney Christo- 
pher T. Callahan. 

Jessie M. Chapmax, indicted in Essex County, April, 
1912, for the murder of Eva F. Ingalls, at Lynn, on March 
6, 1912. She w^as arraigned May 7, 1912, and pleaded not 
guilty. W. Scott Peters, Esq., appeared as counsel for the 
defendant. May 16, 1913, the defendant retracted her 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. ix 

former plea, and pleaded guilty to murder in the second de- 
gree. This plea was accepted by the Commonwealth, and 
the defendant was sentenced to the Reformatory for Women. 
The case was in charge of District Attorney Henry C. 
Attwill. 

LuiGi Melinazzo, indicted in Middlesex County, Septem- 
ber, 1912, for the murder of Antonio Lando, at Waltham, 
on Aug. 12, 1912. He w^as arraigned Sept. 12, 1912, and 
pleaded not guilty. Frank M. Zottoli, Esq., was assigned by 
the court as counsel for the defendant. The defendant later 
retracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty to man- 
slaughter. This plea was accepted by the Commomvealth, 
and the defendant was sentenced to State Prison for a term 
not exceeding nine years nor less than six years. The case 
was in charge of District Attorney John J. Higgins. 

]S^iciioi>As TsouKT.ARis, iudictcd in Essex County, July, 

1912, for the murder of George Kashouris, at Peabody, on 
May 3, 1912. He was arraigned July 12, 1912, and pleaded 
not guilty. William H. Eay, Esq., was assigned by the 
court as counsel for the defendant. In July, 1913, the de- 
fendant was tried by a jury before Irwin, J. The result was 
a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity, and the defend- 
ant was thereupon committed to the Bridgewater State Hos- 
pital. The case was in charge of District Attorney Henry 
C. Attwill. 

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

Marsoob Caspaeiai!^, indicted in Essex County, January, 

1913, for the murder of Takoohie Casparian and Anna Bed- 
rosian, at Lynn, on Oct. 19, 1912. He was arraigned Feb. 
28, 1913, and pleaded not guilty. Hon. W. Scott Peters 
and Jacob K. Tertzag, Esq., were assigned by the court as 
counsel for the defendant. On May 26, 1913, the defendant 
retracted 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 sentenced to State Prison for 
life. The case was in charge of District Attorney Henry 
C. Attwill. 

Michael J. Collins, indicted in Middlesex County, 
January, 1913, for the murder of Joseph W. McLaughlin, 
at Somerville, on Dec. 25, 1912. He was arraigned Jan. 23, 
1913, and pleaded not guilty. J. H. O'^N'eil, Esq., was 
assigned by the court as counsel for the defendant. In 
March, 1913, the defendant was tried by a jury before 
Chase, J. The result was a verdict of not guilty by reason 
of insanity. The defendant was thereupon committed to the 
Bridgewater State Hospital. The case was in charge of 
District Attorney John J. Higgins. 

Richard J. Delate y, indicted in E'orfolk County, Sep- 
tember, 1913, for the murder of John Delaney, at Dedham, 
on Aug. 24, 1913. He was arraigned Dec. 15, 1913, and 
pleaded guilty to manslaughter. This plea was accepted by 
the Commonwealth, and the defendant was sentenced to State 
Prison for a term not exceeding eight years nor less than six 
years. The case was in charge of District Attorney Albert 
F. Barker. 

Jennie M. Eaton, indicted in Plymouth County, March, 
1913, for the murder of Joseph G. Eaton, at Norwell, on 
March 8, 1913. She was arraigned March 28, 1913, and 
pleaded not guilty. William A. Morse, Esq., and Erancis 
J. Geogan, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for 
the defendant. In October, 1913, the defendant was tried 
by a jury before Aiken, C.J. The result was a verdict of 
not guilty. The case was in charge of District Attorney 
Albert E. Barker. 

James B. Jennings, indicted in Suffolk County, Janu- 
ary, 1913, for the murder of William H. MacPherson, at 
Boston, on Jan. 1, 1913. He was an^aigned Jan. 16, 1913, 
and pleaded not gTiilty. Melvin B. Breath, Esq., was as- 
signed by the court as counsel for the defendant. In March, 
1913, the defendant was tried by a jury before BroTvm, J. 
The result was a verdict of ffuilty of murder in the second 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xi 

degree, and the defendant was sentenced to State Prison for 
life. The case was in charge of District Attorney Joseph 
C. Pelletier. 

CoLOGERO Maecchese, indictcd in Suffolk County, July, 
1913, for the murder of Luigi Carrabello, at Boston, on 
July 1, 1913. He was arraigned July 19, 1913, and pleaded 
not guilty. J. F. Zottoli, Esq., R. W. ]N'ason, Esq., and F. 
E. Mullin, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel for 
the defendant. In ISTovember, 1913, the defendant was tried 
by a jury before Brown, J. The result was a verdict of 
guilty of murder in the second degree, and the defendant 
was sentenced to State Prison for life. The case was in 
charge of District Attorney Joseph C. Pelletier. 

William A. McDt)NALD, indicted in Middlesex County, 
June, 1913, for the murder of Margaret E. McDonald, at 
Arlington, on March 23, 1913. He was arraigned June 18, 
1913, and pleaded not guilty. R. W. Gloag, Esq., was as- 
signed by the court as counsel for the defendant. The de- 
fendant later retracted his former plea, and pleaded guilty 
to murder in the second degree. This plea was accepted by 
the Commonwealth, and the defendant was sentenced to State 
Prison for life. The case was in charge of District Attorney 
John J. Higgins. 

VllNTCEXZO ElSTAGNO, ToMMASO FiTTANTE, LuiGI LiGARO, 

Gabriele Lepere and Francesco Falbo, indicted in Mid- 
dlesex County, January, 1913, for the murder of Francesco 
Cirillo, at Watertown, on ISTov. 17, 1912. They were sev- 
erally arraigned Jan. 24, 1913, and pleaded not guilty. 
J. H. Vahey, Esq., M. M. Lynch, Esq., R. S. Hoar, Esq., 
J. H. Hurley, Esq., and J. J. Kerwin, Esq., were assigned 
by the court as counsel for the defendants. Later, the de- 
fendants severally retracted their former pleas and pleaded 
guilty to manslaughter. These pleas were accepted by the 
Commonwealth. The defendants Vincenzo Ristagno, Tom- 
maso Fittante and Gabriele Lepere were sentenced to State 
Prison for a term not exceeding ten years nor less than 
six years. The defendants Lui^i Li gar o and Francesco 



xii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Falbo were sentenced to the House of Correction for the term 
of one year. The case was in charge of District Attorney 
John J. Higgins. 

Rose Spogard, indicted in Essex County, April, 1913, 
for the murder of Sven Spogard, at Lynn, on Feb. 24, 1913. 
She was arraigned April 30, 1913, and pleaded not guilty. 
James H. Sisk, Esq., was assigned by the court as counsel 
for the defendant. On May 26, 1913, the defendant re- 
tracted her former plea, and pleaded guilty to murder in the 
second degTee. This plea was accepted by the Common- 
wealth, and the defendant was sentenced to the Reformatory 
for Women. The case was in charge of District Attorney 
Henry C. Attwill. 

Joseph Waexis, indicted in Essex County, January, 
1913, for the murder of Veronica Briten, at Lawrence, on 
Nov. 29, 1912. He was arraigned Feb. 28, 1913, and 
pleaded not guilty. Sept. 22, 1913, the defendant was ad- 
judged insane, and was committed to the Danvers State 
Hospital. The case was in charge of District Attorney 
Henry C. Attwill. 

The following indictments for murder are now pending : — 

Theresa Berxaed, indicted in Suffolk County, Novem- 
ber, 1913, for the murder of John R. Bernard, on Oct. 6, 
1913. She was arraigned Nov. 13, 1913, and pleaded not 
guilty. Richard S. Teeling, Esq., was assigned by the court 
as counsel for the defendant. No further action has been 
taken in this case. The case is in charge of District Attorney 
Joseph C. Pelletier. 

JoHx^ F. Braxaoai^, indicted in Middlesex County, June, 
1913, for the murder of Bridget Hall, at Natick, on May 24, 
1913. He was arraigned June 19, 1913, and pleaded not 
guilty. Edward L. McManus, Esq., was assigned by the 
court as counsel for the defendant. No further action has 
been taken in this case. The case is in charge of District 
Attornev William J. Corcoran. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xiii 

John Bufulini, indicted in Essex County , July, 1913, 
for the murder of Emilio Marchocci, at Swampscott, on July 
14, 1913. He was arraigned July 16, 1913, and pleaded 
not guilty. James H. Sisk, Esq., and William H. Sisk, 
Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel. No further 
action has been taken in this case. The case is in charge 
of District Attorney Henry C. Attwill. 

Anna Catania, indicted in Suffolk County, October, 
1913, for the murder of Agrippino Capra, at Boston, on Oct. 
3, 1913. She was arraigned Oct. 15, 1913, and pleaded not 
guilty. Maurice Caro was assigned by the court as counsel 
for the defendant. 'No further action has been taken in this 
case. The case is in charge of District Attorney Joseph C. 
Pelletier. 

DoMENico D'Alt.essandeo, indicted in Suffolk County, 
September, 1913, for the murder of Antonio Burgio, at Bos- 
ton, on July 28, 1913. He was arraigTied Sept. 9, 1913, 
and pleaded not guilty. Thomas J. Grady, Esq., was as- 
signed by the court as counsel for the defendant. No fur- 
ther action has been taken in this case. The case is in charge 
of District Attorney Joseph C. Pelletier. 

SuPEiANo DA SixvA, iudictcd in Plymouth County, Octo- 
ber, 1913, for the murder of Joquin Esteves, at Plymouth, 
on Aug. 1, 1913. The defendant has not yet been arraigned. 
John P. Vahey, Esq., was assigned by the court as coun- 
sel for the defendant. No further action has been taken in 
this case. The case is in charge of District Attorney Albert 
F. Barker. 

William A. Dore, indicted in Essex County, April, 1912, 
for the murder of George E. Marsh, at T-^yun, on April 11, 
1912. He was arraigned July 12, 1912, and pleaded not 
guilty. C. Neal Barney, Esq., appeared as counsel for the 
defendant. In February, 1913, the defendant was tried by 
a jury before Quinn, J. The result was a verdict of guilty 
of murder in the first degree. The defendant's exceptions 



xiv ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

have been overruled. The case is in charge of District 
Attorney Henry C. Attwill. 

Sam Kalestian, indicted in Middlesex County, Septem- 
ber, 1913, for the murder of Andrew Saul, at Watertown, 
on July 12, 1913. The defendant has not yet been arraigned. 
The case is in charge of District Attorney William J. Cor- 
coran. 

William Kaminski, indicted in Middlesex County, No- 
vember, 1913, for the murder of John Scannell, at Cam- 
bridge, on Sept. 29, 1913. The defendant has not yet been 
arraigned. The case is in charge of District Attorney Wil- 
liam J. Corcoran. 

Samuel Powers, indicted in Hampden County, Decem- 
ber, 1913, for the murder of Minnie Powers, at Springfield, 
on May 4, 1913. He was arraigned Dec. 22, 1913, and 
pleaded not guilty. Edward A. McClintock, Esq., was as- 
signed by the court as counsel for the defendant. 'No further 
action has been taken in this case. The case is in charge of 
District Attorney Christopher T. Callahan. 

James E. Sutherland, indicted in Plymouth County, 
June, 1913, for the murder of Winifred Sutherland, at 
Whitman, on April 28, 1913. He was arraigned - June 4, 
1913, and pleaded not guilty. William F. Kane, Esq., and 
James T. Kirby, Esq., were assigned by the court as counsel 
for the defendant. No further action has been taken in this 
case. The case is in charge of District Attorney Albert F. 
Barker. 

FiNTON Thompson, indicted in Bristol County, June, 
1913, for the murder of Maria Colbaert. No action has been 
taken in this case. The case is in charge of District Attorney 
Joseph T. Kenney. 

Ralph Y. Villiers, indicted in Bristol County, June, 
1913, for the murder of Charles S. Mawhinney. The de- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xv 

fendant has been committed to the Bridgewater State Hospi- 
tal pending determination of his sanity. The case is in 
charge of District Attorney Joseph T. Kenney. 

Geade Ckossiwg. 

In his report for the year 1907 Attorney-General Malone 
recommended that a competent engineer be employed, under 
the direction of the Attorney-General, to make a thorough 
examination of all plans submitted to special commissioners 
appointed in proceedings for the abolition of grade crossings 
and of the actual work of construction, together with all ac- 
counts of expenditures presented to auditors for allowance 
in connection therewith. As a result of this recommendation, 
St. 1908, c. 372, was enacted, authorizing the Attorney-Gen- 
eral to employ a civil engineer, at an expense not exceeding 
$5,000 in any one year, who should, under his direction, 
examine the plans submitted to commissioners for the aboli- 
tion of gTade crossings, the actual work of construction, and 
the accounts of expenditures submitted to auditors therein, 
and perform such other duties in connection mth proceed- 
ings for the abolition of grade crossings as might be assigned 
to him. On June 4, 1908, Mr. Henry W. Hayes of Arling- 
ton was appointed to the position of engineer of grade cross- 
ings, which he retained until January 1 of the present year, 
when he became the engineer of the Public Service Commis- 
sion. 

The importance of the work performed by the engineer 
of grade crossings is shown by the following tabulation of 
the results of only one phase of it, to wit, examining the 
reports submitted to auditors during the years 1909, 1910, 
1911 and 1912: — 



XVI 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Statement of the Expenditures for the Elimination of Grade 
Crossings, which have been examined, from Jan. 1, 1909, to 
Date, to accompany the Report to the Attorney-General 
OF Jan. 1, 1914. 





Detail of Objections pending. 








Ceossings. 


Expended by — 


1 

s 
< 


Amount. 


Totals. 




1909 Accounts. 










~ 


Worcester, .... 
1910 Accounts. 


City, 


7 


- 


S292 81 


6 
16 


East Boston, Boston & Albany 

crossings. 
Worcester 


City, 
City, 


12 
15 


Sl,319 58 
123 59 




55 


Worcester, .... 
1911 Accounts. 


New Hampshire, . 


30 


2,600 00 


4,043 17 






57 

58 


Worcester, ... 1 
Worcester, ... J 


Boston & Albany, . 


31 


$114 25 
152 93 




91 


Boston, Freeport Street et al., 
1912 Accounts. 


New Hampshire, . 


10 


88,000 00 


88,267 18 






102 


Boston, Freeport Street et al.. 


New Hampshire, . 


12 


$9,208 62 




107 


Boston, Freeport Street et al, 


New Hampshire, . 


14 


4,969 50 




108 


Worcester, .... 


City, 


45 


165 19 




112 


Lynn, 


Boston & Maine, . 


2 


27,310 11 




118 


Boston, Freeport Street et al, 


New Hampshire, . 


15 


10,105 47 




120 
128] 


Ware, GUbertvUle Road, J 


Boston & Albany, . 
Boston & Maine, . 


1- 


6,055 76 




129 


Worcester, .... 


Boston & Albany, . 


51 


960 32 




130 J 












132 


Worcester, .... 


City, 


53 


63 50 




134 


Worcester, .... 


Boston & Albany, . 


54 


211 04 




138 


Boston, Freeport Street et al, 


New Hampshire, . 


17 


5,549 82 




146 


Worcester 

1913 Accou7its. 


Boston & Albany, . 


57 


453 89 


65,053 22 






148 


Worcester, .... 


City, 


58 


S88 45 




150 


Worcester, .... 


Boston & Albany, . 


59 


1,128 71 




154 


Lynn, 


Boston & Maine, . 


3 


23,292 53 




159 


Worcester, 


Boston & Albany, 


60 


1,085 38 




162 


Clinton 


New Hampshire, . 


1 


3,521 75 




167 


Worcester, .... 


Boston & Albany, . 


63 


5.172 24 




177 


Clinton, 


Boston & Maine, . 


' 


6,178 84 





1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCmiENT — No. 12. 



xvii 



Statement of the Expenditures for the Elimination of Grade 
Crossings, etc. — Concluded. 

Detail of Objections pending — Concluded. 



si 

1^ 


Crossings. 


Expended by — 


1 

s 

< 


Amount. 


Totals. 


183 
185 
186 

187 


Taunton, 

Somerville, Somerville Avenue, 

Somerville, Webster Avenue, . 

Somerville, Medford and Dane 
streets. 

Total, . '. . . 


New Hampshire, . 
Boston & Maine, . 
Boston & Maine, . 
Boston & Maine, . 


1 

9 

6 

I 


$502 37 

342 67 

1,364 63 

17,275 81 


$59,953 38 








$217,609 76 















Summary by crossings: — 

Boston, Freeport Street et al., 

East Boston, Boston & Albany crossings, 

Clinton, 

Lynn, 

Somerville, Somerville Avenue, 

Somerville, Webster Avenue, Medford and Dane streets, 

Taunton, 

Ware 

Worcester 



$117,833 41 

1,319 58 

9,700 59 

50,602 64 

342 67 

18,640 44 

502 37 

6,055 76 

12,612 30 

$217,609 76 



XVIU 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



1 




^ 


t^ 


00 


CO 


OO 


CO 




M . 


00 






CO 


CO 


t^ 




ii^ 


CJ 


CO 


J^ 












o 


^ 


o 


o 


i 


M 




■«lJ" 


§8 


s 


g 


CO 


r-t 














6% 


<7* 
















^ 








CO 


s 


o 










1 


i 




i 




-3 








CO 


■* 


OO 










e© 




(^ 






^ 


t^ 


00 


CO 




Ol 




to . 


OO 






LO 




CO 






<M 


CO 


t~ 


CO 


1 


Ui 




o; 




CO 


t^ 




t^ 




^ 


rji" 


CO 

OO 


CO 




in 
CO 


s 






OO 


t- 




CO 
















iH 






■o 


00 


CO 




CO 




13 






CO 


■<*< 




00 










1 


2 




s 










lO 


lo" 








"rt 












6% 






^ 


CO 


C5 






CO 




M . 


00 


>o 


CO 






o 






CO 


cq 


s 


1 


' 






1^ 


^ 
n^ 


CO 






CO 




P^^ 






Hi 






CO 


^ 














s 


at 




















C5 


t^ 


•^ 






s 




^3 




CO 


OO 








i| 


,-( 


00 


OO 




' 


OO 




ec 


CO 


05 










ag 


t- 


c^~ 


o 






°- 




a 






'"' 






s 




M . 


cq 


^ 








CO 




<o 


eo 








00 




Cl-H . 






1 


1 


1 






¥^ 




t^ 








CO 






t^ 






















00 




g 


CO* 








^ 


o 














s 


















a 


. "^ 


o 


^ 




' 


' 


s 




i| 


t^ 


OO 








us 




o 


CO 








-^ 




Q o 




o_ 








■^_ 






o 


cT 








Ift 




"3 


^ 


■* 








u 




§„-. 


I- 










I-" ' 




o> 


1 








o> 






s 










o 


1 


1 










i" 




05 










05 




"d 


o 










o 




iP 


00 


' 


' 


' 


' 


en 




51 


^. 










^. 




-3 


s 










i 


C c oj 


CO 


^ 


o 


00 


CO 


t^ 


o 


CO 


00 


t- 


C5 


CO 


CO 


CC 


CO 


o 


t- 


,_( 


Total 

A mo 11 

objec 

to. 


i 


§ 
§ 


i 


S5 


1 


§i 




CO 


o 


^ 


"O 


CO 


1-H 1 


.^■2 
^ fl 


lO 


CO 


o 


CO 


oc 


cq 


_ * 


t^ 






CO 


o 


lO 


"^S 


lO 


>— ' 


CO 


'*. 


l^ 


U3 


o5 


i 


§ 


c^ 


u^' 


1 


d 








'—1 


^ 




UI 


3 


CO 


co" 


co" 


'-' 


- 1 














«l% 1 


Num- 
ber of 

State- 
ments. 


o 


o 


00 


CO 


^ 


00 


lO 


lO 


^ 




"* 


§5 














K 












£ 


< 












s 


>^ 












^ 




oT 


o 




co" 


CO 






o 
















o 


s 


C5 


s 


s 





1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xix 

Bj the end of 1910, however, this work had been so well 
systematized that the Attorney-General suggested that it did 
not require all of the time or attention of the engineer of 
grade crossings for the Commonwealth, and that his services 
be made available for use by the Board of Kailroad Com- 
missioners. The Legislature adopted this suggestion, and 
provided in St. 1911, c. 214, that the Board of Railroad 
Commissioners should be authorized to employ the engineer 
of grade crossings upon engineering work to such extent as 
the Board might deem expedient, provided that such employ- 
ment should not interfere with the duties required of him 
in connection with gi'ade crossings. Since that time the en- 
gineer of grade crossings, in addition to his grade crossing 
work, has devoted a considerable portion of his time to the 
work of the Board of Railroad Commissioners. 

After the enactment of St. 1913, c. 784, which changed 
the name of the Board of Railroad Commissioners to the 
Public Service Commission, and extended their powers, Mr. 
Hayes was appointed engineer of such commission, his ap- 
pointment taking effect on January 1, and since that appoint- 
ment, in addition to his duties as engineer of the commission, 
he has, without inconvenience, continued his grade crossing- 
work. I see no reason why such work should not be trans- 
ferred by statute to the engineer of the Public Service Com- 
mission, to be performed by him or under his direction. 
There is not now, and in my opinion will not be in the future, 
sufficient work in connection with grade crossings alone to 
occupy the time of a competent engineer, and I therefore 
suggest that the office of engineer of grade crossings be abol- 
ished, and that St. 1908, c. 372, be repealed. 

During the year 1913 the following work has been 
done : — 

Thirty-four hearings before commissioners and auditors 
have been attended. 

Construction has been in progress at Clinton, Lynn,. 
Worcester, East Boston, Georgetown, Somerville and West- 
field, and forty-four visits of inspection have been made. 

Statements of expenditures, numbering forty-one, amount- 
ing to $1,440,708.73, have been examined. Objection to 



XX ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

items amounting to $107,457.93 lias been made, $4,519.55 
of which has been disallowed and decisions as to $59,953.38 
are pending. Of objections made in previous years $3,650.12 
has been disallowed. 

Plans and draft reports in two cases have been prepared 
for special commissioners. 

Under authority of chapter 214 of the Acts of 1911 the 
engineer has been employed a total of 42.75 days for the 
Railroad and Public Service Commission. 

Enlarged Powers of the Attorney-General. 
Pursuant to the recommendation made by me in my last 
annual report, to the effect that if it was desired by the Legis- 
lature the Attorney-General should engage in matters involv- 
ing so-called social welfare investigations and prosecutions, 
the law should be amended, and that enlarged authority and 
powers in this regard be established, the Legislature enacted 
chapter 709 of the Acts of 1913, disregarding, however, my 
recommendation that '' a largely increased appropriation of 
money be assigned to " the Attorney-General. The legisla- 
tion enacted provided in section 2 of said act as follows : — 

To carry out the provisions of this act the attorney-general, with 
the consent of the governor and council, may expend a sum not 
exceeding five thousand dollars from the treasury of the common- 
wealth. 

If it was intended that this should be simply an appropriation 
for the first year, the language of the section is not appro- 
priate for this purpose. As it stands, the Attorney-General 
is expressly limited to the expenditure of a sum not exceed- 
ing $5,000 to carry out the provisions of the act, while the 
enlarged powers and duties provided in section 1 thereof con- 
tinue in permanent force. The first matter to come to the 
attention of this department under said act was referred by 
an order of the House of Representatives, requiring an in- 
vestigation of the ice situation, in the prosecution of which 
the amount necessarily incurred exhausted the sum so appro- 
priated. The language of said section 2 does not even permit 
the Attorney-General, when acting under the provisions of 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxi 

this chapter, to expend money from his general appropria- 
tion in case it should be otherwise available. I therefore 
recommend that section 2 be repealed, and that a new section 
be substituted therefor, providing that the Attornev-General, 
to carry out the provisions of this act, may expend such sum 
as shall be authorized from time to time by the Governor and 
Council, in addition to any expenditure that the Attorney- 
General may see fit to make from his general appropriation. 

Service on" Commissions. 

I respectfully direct the attention of the Legislature to the 
fact that the duties and responsibilities of the Attorney-Gen- 
eral are primarily confined to matters of a strictly legal 
nature, and that to properly carry out these specific duties 
all the time and attention of the Attorney-General are re- 
quired. It therefore interferes materially with the perform- 
ance of such duties to assign to the Attorney-General Avork 
of an entirely diiferent nature and character, such as has 
been put upon your law officer by recent Legislatures. Dur- 
ing my term of service I have been required to act as chair- 
man of two commissions appointed by the Legislature, — one 
to investigate voluntary associations, and one to consider the 
laws with reference to stock and bonds in the Commonwealth 
and the advisability of enacting a so-called ^' blue sky " law. 
I have also been required to serve as a member of the Com- 
mission on Water Conservation during the past year. Inas- 
much as any commission delegated by the Legislature to 
investigate these various subjects has the right to the assist- 
ance of the Attorney-General and his department in any 
matters involving legal considerations in connection with 
their deliberations, I respectfully suggest that the Attorney- 
General should not be required to serve as a member of such 
commissions, to the detriment of the legal work of his depart- 
ment. 

Ice Investigation". 

An order of the House of Representatives, dated June 4, 
1913, provided as follows: — 

Ordered, That the Attorney-General be requested to investigate, 
under the authority given him by chapter 709 of the Acts of 1913, 



xxii ATTORXEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

the supply and price at retail of ice in this Commonwealth, to as- 
certain, as far as possible, what quantity of ice is now stored for use 
in this Commonwealth, what quantity of ice owned by ice companies 
in this Commonwealth is stored in other States, and what justifica- 
tion, if any, there is for an increase in the price of ice at the present 
time; or what justification, if any, there may be for an increase in 
the price of ice during the summer of 1913; and to institute pro- 
ceedings, under said chapter 709, if the results of the investigation 
so warrant. 



While the order does not specify what the Attorney-Gen- 
eral shall do with the information when it is obtained, I 
assume that it was intended to report the same to the House 
of Representatives at its next session. Pursuant thereto I 
submit this report. 

Immediately upon receipt of the order I started the in- 
vestigation in all the cities and largest towns of the Com- 
monwealth, simultaneously through the State police and the 
local police departments. The ice companies were requested 
to answer a set of thirty-four questions, and many of these 
answers have been checked by independent investigation. 
•District police officers Keating and Flynn have done much 
efficient work in this regard as well as investigating many 
individual complaints. Much voluntary information which 
has been of assistance has also come from citizens, and many 
individual complaints have been received with reference to 
short weight and the size of the pieces sold by the piece. 
These have been referred to the department of the State 
Sealer of Weights and Measures for prosecution, and a gen- 
eral opinion with reference to the rights of the public in 
this regard was issued by me through the department of the 
Sealer of Weights and Measures, which carried on an active 
campaign against these irregularities. Local authorities 
also were stimulated to carry on this work. 

The last report from the police was received on July 14, 
and all information and answers of the companies inquired 
of were submitted to Duthie-Strachan Co. (Inc.), certified 
public accountants, for analysis and tabulation. It appears 
from this tabulation that the total number of ice dealers, 
covering all the cities in the Commonwealth and some of the 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxiii 

larger towns, is 167. Reports were obtained for the years 
1910, 1911, 1912 and up to June 1 of 1913. The final com- 
parisons are between the years 1912 and 1913, of data as of 
June 1 of each year. The total available supply of ice of 
the 167 companies investigated, including both the supply 
of ice within the Commonwealth and available outside the 
Commonwealth June 1, 1912, was 1,880,734 tons; for 1913, 
1,376,877 tons, or a total diminution of supply of 27 per 
cent. 

A very wide difference among the companies appears in 
different localities, so that a consideration of the shortage 
throughout the Commonwealth as a whole is of no definite 
value with reference to the action of any particular company 
in fixing prices. 

As to the rise in prices, the tabulation shows that a, com- 
paratively small number of ice dealers handle almost half 
the total supply in the Commonwealth. A striking feature 
is that retail prices were not raised by dealers in 18 cities 
and towns supplying 45 per cent, of the total amount 
throughout the Commonwealth, although these dealers suf- 
fered a shortage in supply of 19.5 per cent, under their 1912 
supply. On the other hand, retail prices were raised by 
dealers in 39 cities and towns, controlling 49 per cent, of 
the total supply throughout the Commonwealth, who have 
reported a shortage in their 1913 supply of 33.14 per cent. 
It is apparent that the mere shortage of supply is not con- 
clusive evidence of justification of increase in the prices 
charged for this season. This is also showm by statements 
of the companies themselves in reply to my request to state 
their own reasons for justification for an increase. Of the 
companies inquired of, 11 made no answer; 60 claimed that 
the shortage was responsible; 23 that there was an increase 
in the wholesale price to them ; 2 the necessity of purchasing 
outside the Commonwealth, and 18 claimed as a reason the 
increased cost of business and of handling the ice. 

Consideration of the individual dealers discloses a very 
wide variation in their condition, but it is impossible to cite 
or discuss the particulars with reference to each locality or 
company in a report of this nature. For these I refer to the 



xxiv ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

report of the accountants, herewith transmitted, as well as 
for other factors which must be considered, besides the mere 
question of supply and shortage, in determining justification 
for increases. Various costs, expenses and shrinkages, and 
finally the ratio of profit per ton and the ultimate net profit 
to the dealer, must be ascertained. As much of this in- 
formation required is solely within the control of the ice 
companies themselves, especially the ratio of profit per ton 
and the ultimate net profit to the dealer, and as I have no 
authority or power to command such information, I have 
not attempted to obtain it. I assume, however, that it is 
within the authority of the Legislature, with its broader 
powers, to procure the evidence desired to pursue the results 
of the investigation to a further conclusion. 

With regard to the last requirement of the order of the 
honorable House, ^^ to institute proceedings under said chap- 
ter 709 if the results of the investigation so warrant," I 
have to say that a very careful consideration of the facts 
concerning the situation in each of the localities where there 
was any definite amount of evidence was made by me. ^ot 
only is the law in this regard practically untried within this 
jurisdiction, but the evidence to prove cases which would 
justify a prosecution is most difficult to obtain. The situa- 
tion in the city of Lynn, however, disclosed definite evidence 
of an agreement in writing concerning the ice business, of 
an apparent combination known as the ]^orth Shore Ice 
Delivery Company, combining the Lynn Ice Company, the 
Coolidge Ice Company, the Chase Ice Company, the Inde- 
pendent Ice Company, the Glenmere Ice Company and the 
Brown Pond Ice Company. Inasmuch as the continuous 
hearings in the trial of the case of Haverhill Gas Light Co. 
V. Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners engaged 
practically all my time during the urgent period of investi- 
gation of this ice situation, I employed Lee M. Friedman, 
Esq., of Boston, who has made a special study of this branch 
of the law, to act as special counsel in the prosecution against 
this Lynn combination. All preliminary matters in court 
have been concluded and the case is likely to be reached for 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxv 

trial on its merits at an early date. I believe that the out- 
come of this case will disclose more exactly the value of our 
Massachusetts law covering the situation. 

Supreme Judicial Court. 

As law officer of the Supreme Judicial Court it has come 
to my attention that in the interests of efficiency in the work 
of that judicial body, and so in the interests of the public 
service certain changes should be made with reference to the 
location and work of the court. I deem it my duty to suggest 
these changes to the Legislature, particularly as they supple- 
ment matters discussed recently in the inaugural of His 
Excellency Governor Walsh. In one paragraph of the in- 
augural His Excellency stated : '^ There is urgent need of 
relief for the Supreme Court of Massachusetts." In addi- 
tion to the change therein suggested, it should be called to 
your attention that further relief may be obtained by per- 
mitting the Supreme Judicial Court to hold all of its law sit- 
tings in Boston, and to omit the sittings now required by 
statute to be held in the outside counties, except when for 
particular reasons it may seem to the court advantageous to 
hold the sittings outside of Boston. A very considerable 
amount of time of the court is taken in these sittings in the 
outside counties, but the number of cases and matters pre- 
sented to the court at these sittings is apparently not of suffi- 
cient amount to warrant the time now spent in this method 
of disposing of the business throughout the State. This 
question has already been much discussed among members 
of the bar and by bar associations, and at its recent meeting 
the Massachusetts Bar Association, representing a large pro- 
portion of the bar throughout the Commonwealth, voted to 
take action seeking to bring about the change suggested 
herein. 

Another matter to which I call the attention of the Legis- 
lature is that of quarters for the Supreme Judicial Court. 
These also I suggest in supplement to the recommendation 
in the inaugural of His Excellency, that provision should be 
made in the extensions of the State House to make it, when 



xxvi ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

completed, capable of accommodating all departments of the 
State government. The Supreme Judicial Court is a court 
for the entire Commonwealth, and there is no sound reason 
why such a judicial body should be quartered in the court 
house of Suffolk County. It is a matter of common knowl- 
edge that the county court house in Suffolk is already over- 
crowded, and that suitable quarters for the efficient and 
proper dispatch of its business have not been provided for 
the members of our highest court. With its law sittings in 
the outside counties abolished, so that the court might sit 
continuously in Boston for hearing matters from all parts 
of the Commonwealth, it would be most fitting that this 
court should have quarters provided in the State House, as 
is the case in nearly all the States of the Union and in the 
case of the Supreme Court of the United States at Wash- 
ington. I have already called this matter to the attention 
of the State House Commission and discussed it with them. 
Tentative plans have been suggested which would indicate 
that such quarters could be provided conveniently and eco- 
nomically, so that the court could dispose of its own business 
to much greater advantage. The congestion and overcrowd- 
ing of the other courts in the Suffolk County court house 
would also be relieved. 

I earnestly suggest that this whole matter should receive 
careful consideration at the hands of your honorable bodies. 

The chief justice of the Supreme Judicial Court has also 
suggested to me that with the increase in the number of 
cases that come before that court the amount now. allowed to 
the justices for clerical assistance under the provisions of 
Revised Laws, chapter 156, section 27, is not sufficient. He 
requests that the sum now allowed by that statute of $2,500 
be increased to $6,000, and I recommend that the statute be 
so amended. 

Department of the Attorney-General. 
The pressure of work upon this department has remained 
as during the preceding two years, at a very high point. The 
number of official written opinions given by me during the 
year is 204. The total number of matters requiring the at- 
tention of the office was 5,735. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. xxvii 

During the year, 11 cases have been argued before the 
Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth, and in the 
Supreme Court of the United States there have been argued 
and disposed of the cases involving the constitutionality of 
the law concerning taxation of foreign corporations, Baltic 
Mining Company v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts and 
S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Company v. Common- 
wealth of Massachusetts, in both of which the Commonwealth 
was successful in sustaining the law. There is now pending 
in the United States Supreme Court 1 case, which will be 
reached for argument shortly, this case being Richard G. 
Riley v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, writ of error to 
the Superior Court of Bristol County to set aside a convic- 
tion for violation of the law governing the employment of 
women in factories, and contesting the constitutionality of 
the law and of its provisions with respect to fixing the hours 
of labor for women. It is therefore to be observed that the 
case is of great importance with reference to some of the 
fundamental principles upon which our labor laws are 
founded. 

A very great amount of my time and that of Assistant 
Attorney-General Greenhalge has been taken during the year 
with the various phases of litigation concerning the Haver- 
hill Gas Light Company, for which, by reason of its ex- 
treme importance, the Legislature made a special appropria- 
tion last year of $15,000. The expense made necessary for 
the proper investigation of the affairs of the company has 
caused even a larger expenditure for accountants and in- 
vestigators than I anticipated, and this appropriation has 
already been overdrawn, and I have requested an additional 
appropriation of $10,000 for the ensuing year. It will be 
recalled that the Board of Gas and Electric Light Commis- 
sioners ordered a reduction in the price of gas in Haverhill 
to 80 cents per thousand feet, and that the Gas Light Com- 
pany filed its petition in the Circuit Court of the United 
States to enjoin the Board of Gas and Electric Light Com- 
missioners and the Attorney-General from enforcing this 
80 cent order. The case was referred to a master to take 
the evidence, etc., and some forty hearings have already been 
held on the case, and the Commonwealth is now in the midst 



xxviii ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 1914. 

of presenting its evidence. This case is likely to consume 
much more time before its final disposition. 

By reason of the necessity of almost complete attention for 
many weeks to this case of one of the assistants, it became 
necessary for me to procure additional help for the office, 
and on July 1 I appointed Thomas O. Jenkins, Esq., of 
Salem, as a law clerk. His zeal in the performance of his 
duties and his utility in the office have caused me since that 
time to designate him as an assistant attorney-general. 

During the year, in accordance with the resolve of the 
Legislature of 1913, I have had prepared and published 
volume III. of the Opinions of the Attorneys-General, which 
have just been received from the press and distributed in 
accordance with the authority of said resolve. 

In accordance with the authority granted by the Governor 
and Council, I have also under preparation the publication 
of the trial of Bertram G. Spencer, who was convicted of 
murder in the first degree in Hampden County and later 
executed, after the Supreme Judicial Court had sustained 
the conviction. I assume that this valuable contribution to 
the legal literature of the Commonwealth will be completed 
and published in due course. 

In closing my official connection with this department I 
desire to attest my appreciation of the ability, fidelity and 
earnestness with which the Assistant Attorneys-General, 
Frederic B. Greenhalge, Esq., Andrew Marshall, Esq., 
Henry M. Hutchings, Esq., Walter A. Powers, Esq., and 
Thomas O. Jenkins, Esq., have performed their respective 
duties and responsibilities. They have rendered to the Com- 
monwealth ser^dce of a very high order. 

Annexed to this report are the principal opinions sub- 
mitted during the current year. 

Respectfully submitted, 

JAMES M. SWIFT, 

Attorney-General. 



OPINIONS. 



Statute — Limit of Time for holding Articles of Food in Cold 
Storage — Prospective in Effect. 

The provision of St. 1912, e. 652, § 5, that ''no article of food shall be 
held in cold storage within this commonwealth for a longer period 
than twelve calendar months, except with the consent of the state 
board of health as hereinafter provided," is not retroactive in 
effect, and is not applicable to goods received into cold storage pre- 
vious to Sept. 1, 1912, the date upon which such statute took effect. 

Jax. 1, 1913. 
Mark W. Eichardson, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health. 

Deae Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to whether, 
under section 5 of chapter 652 of the Acts of 1912, providing 
that " no article of food shall be held in cold storage within this 
commonwealth for a longer period than twelve calendar months, 
except with the consent of the state board of health as herein- 
after provided," with reference to goods received into cold stor- 
age previous to Sept. 1, 1912, the period of twelve calendar 
months is to be construed as running from the date when the 
food was actually received into cold storage or from the first 
day of September, 1912, the day upon which, under the provi- 
sions of section 12, the act took effect. 

In my opinion the period of twelve months is to be consid- 
ered as running only from the first day of September, 1912. 
Statutes are considered prospective unless the language is such 
as to show clearly that they were intended to be retrospective. 
North Bridgewater Bank v. Copeland, 7 Allen, 139; Haverhill 
V. Marlborough, 187 Mass. 155; Somerset v. Dighton, 12 Mass. 
383. The statute in question contains no provision indicating 
that it was the intent of the Legislature that the statute should 
have a retroactive effect. On the contrary, section 12 contains 
the simple and unqualified provision that the act shall take 
effect on the first day of September, 1912. 

For the purposes of administration of the law, it would seem 
that no other construction is possible. Section 4 provides that 
all articles of food when deposited in cold storage shall be 



2 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

marked plainly with the date of receipt on the containers in 
which they are packed, but it would hardly be practicable to 
determine the date of receipt of goods received into storage be- 
fore Sept. 1, 1912, in the absence of such markers. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Solitary Confinement — Juvenile Reformatory School — In- 
mate — Officer — *''' Constant Supervision." 

Under the provisions of St. 1911, c. 265, $ 1, that ''it shall be unlawful 
for the officers of any juvenile reformatory school to place an in- 
mate in any cell, room or cage in solitary confinement," the term 
''solitary confinement" imports an involuntary restraint in soli- 
tude, as a disciplinary penalty for some offence committed, and if 
the assignment of an inmate of such a school to a separate room is 
not made as a punishment for an offence committed while an inmate 
thereof, but is due merely to the segregation of inmates in the 
ordinary management and discipline of the school, or is a part of 
the treatment for the correction of moral delinquencies or physical 
defects, it does not constitute solitary confinement within the mean- 
ing of such provision. 

Under the further provision of St. 1911, c. 265, $ 1, that, "whenever 
restraint or separation from the other inmates is necessai-y, confine- 
ment shall be permitted only in a place where the inmate is under 
the constant supervision of an officer of the school," an inmate of 
such a school may be confined alone in a cell, room or cage if such 
confinement is not in the nature of a punishment, or may be con- 
fined in a cell, room or cage as a punishment provided such inmate 
is under the constant supervision of an officer of the school. 

The term "constant supervision," as used in St. 1911, c. 265, $ 1, does 
not mean the continuous or uninterrupted presence of an officer in 
the same cell, room or cage with the inmate, but requires a special 
supervision or observation sufficiently close to keep such officer con- 
stantly informed of the conduct and situation of such inmate. 

Under the provisions of St. 1911, c. 265, § 1, inmates of juvenile re- 
formatory schools occupying their own single bedrooms at night, 
with the doors closed and opening off and upon either side of a 
long corridor, are not so separated from the other inmates as to 
require constant supervision by an officer of such school, but if an 
inmate is, for disobedience, confined alone in such a bedroom either 
with or without further physical restraint, such confinement would 
require the constant supervision of such officer. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 3 

Jan. 15, 1913. 
F. Leslie Hayford, Esq., Executive Secretary, Trustees of Massachu- 
setts Training Schools. 

Dear Sir : — In behalf of the trustees of the Massachusetts 
Training Schools you have submitted to me several questions as 
to the interpretation to be given to St. 1911, c. 265, § 1, which 
provides as follows : — 

It shall be unlawful for the officers of any juvenile reformatory 
school to place an inmate in any cell, room or cage in solitary con- 
finement. Whenever restraint or separation from the other inmates 
is necessary, confinement shall be permitted only in a place where the 
inmate is under the constant supervision of an officer of the school. 

Since the answer to the seventh question is really the key to 
the answers to all the questions, it may serve to simplify the 
discussion if I answer first the question which you ha,ve pro- 
pounded as the seventh. 

7. What constitutes solitary confinement in a cell, cage or room 
within the meaning of these terms as used in said statute? 

The term ^^ solitary confinement," in its ordinary use, has a 
technical meaning, of which the essential elements are involun- 
tary restraint in solitude as a disciplinary penalty for some 
offence committed. The restraint is usually in a special place, 
stripped of most of the bodily comforts except such as are neces- 
sary to maintain health, and designed in the simplicity of its 
equipment to have so far as possible a chastening effect upon 
the occupant. The solitude consists not only of being alone but 
also of being deprived of intercourse with others except for the 
conveyance of food and other necessary purposes. 

The term as used in this statute is, in my opinion, to be con- 
strued as used in its technical sense so far as that technical 
construction is consistent with the other terms of the act. As- 
suming that the act was intended to apply to the Industrial 
School for Girls, the Legislature must be presumed to have had 
knowledge of the tendencies of many of the inmates of the school 
and of the methods of administration which it is necessary to 
adopt to meet and correct those tendencies. The Legislature 
must also be presumed to have knowledge of the fact that the 
construction of the buildings of the institution is specially 
adapted to the needs of the inmates, with single rooms opening 
from common corridors. The statute is to be reasonably con- 



4 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

strued and in accordance with the intent of the Legislature so 
far as that intent may be determined. In the absence of express 
provision to accomplish the result, it is not to be supposed that 
the Legislature, by the enactment of the statute in question, in- 
tended to affect the normal administration of the school, or to 
alter the methods by which the needs of the inmates were min- 
istered unto, or to cause to be changed the physical structures 
of the buildings. The effect of the statute is merely to prohibit 
the trustees from using certain recognized forms of punishment 
for offences committed in the school. If the assignment of an 
inmate to a single, separate room is not made as a punishment 
for an offence committed while an inmate of the school, but is 
merely due to the segregation of inmates in the ordinary man- 
agement and discipline of the school, designed for the benefit 
of all the inmates, or is a part of the ordinary treatment for the 
correction of moral delinquencies or physical defects, it does not 
constitute, therefore, solitary confinement within the meaning 
of the act. 

Resuming, then, the order in which the questions have been 
asked by you : — 

1. Does this act absolutely prohibit the placing of an inmate of a 
juvenile reformatory institution alone, by himself or by herself, in 
" any cell, room or cage ? " Or does it permit it when the inmate is 
under "constant supervision" of an officer? 

In my opinion the statute does not prohibit the placing of an 
inmate of a juvenile reformatory institution alone, by himself 
or by herself, in a room if it is not done as a punishment. It 
does not prohibit placing him or her alone in a cell, room or 
cage if while kept in the cell, room or cage the inmate is under 
constant supervision of an officer, for the reason that if he or 
she is under constant supervision of an officer, as " constant 
supervision " is hereafter defined, he or she is not technically 
in solitary confinement. 

2. What does the phrase " constant supervision " of an officer, as 
used in this statute, mean? Does it mean absolutely the continuous 
or unintermittent presence of an officer with the inmate, or does it 
mean only a special supervision or observation, intermittent, but at 
regular or recurring intervals, sufficiently frequent to secure the well- 
being of the inmate? If an intermittent or recurring period is 
sufficient, how long may this intermission be? 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 5 

In my opinion the term " constant supervision '^ does not 
mean the continuous or unintermittent presence of an officer in 
the same cell, room or cage with the inmate, but rather a special 
supervision or observation of the inmate, sufficiently close and 
immediate to keep the officer informed of the conduct of the 
inmate and to insure detection by the officer of any act or at- 
tempt of the inmate which might affect his or her well-being. 
The statute does not by its terms require that the confinement 
shall be in the actual presence of an officer, and the usual dis- 
tinction between a thing done by or in the presence of a person 
and a thing done under the supervision of a person is not to be 
overlooked in the construction of this statute. The question as 
to the degree in which the observations may be intermittent is, 
of course, purely a matter of administration of the school, which 
will be affected by consideration of the peculiar characteristics 
and requirements of each individual offender. It is, therefore, 
impossible for me to express an opinion in a form more specific 
than that the supervision shall be sufficiently constant and im- 
mediate to meet the needs of each individual case. 

3. Are inmates occupying their own single bedrooms at night with 
the doors closed, and opening off, on either side of, a long corridor, 
so " separated from the other inmates " as to require " constant 
supervision of an officer" within the meaning of this statute? (It 
may be assumed in this question that officers occupy bedrooms on the 
same floor.) 

Assuming that the inmates are merely occupying their own 
bedrooms in the usual course of their life at the school, and not 
as a penalty for an offence committed at the school, the question 
is, in my opinion, clearly to be answered in the negative. The 
mere fact that the inmates occupy single bedrooms does not in 
itself constitute separation as contemplated by the act. 

4. Does the situation where inmates are sent for disobedience to 
their own bedrooms, alone, and told to close the door and remain 
within, without other means of detention, constitute solitary confine- 
ment in a " cell, room or cage" within this act? Does such a situa- 
tion call for "constant supervision of an officer?" 

Considering the phraseology of the statute, including the word 
"room," without qualification, as a contemplated place of con- 
finement, I am of the opinion that the trustees should adopt a 
construction of the statute requiring constant supervision in 



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

such a situation as that presented by this question. Here, again, 
the nature of the constant supervision required would vary ac- 
cording to the disposition of the inmate, according to the serious- 
ness of the offence committed and according to the temper of 
the inmate at the time of confinement. The supervision re- 
quired by the statute in this situation will naturally differ widely 
from that required in the case of an inmate locked in a room 
and restrained in such a manner as to prevent physical violence. 

5. If an inmate is in his or her own single bedroom for cause, and 
is handcuffed or otherwise restrained there, to prevent harm to him 
or herself, or to prevent destruction of the furniture or property in 
the room, does this bedroom become " a cell, room or cage " within 
this act? 

"While the inmate's own room could not be considered as a 
place of solitary confinement except under the phraseology of 
an act so manifestly aimed at limiting and restricting the use 
of the ordinary modes of discipline, I am of the opinion that 
the term " cell, room or cage '' should be considered by the trus- 
tees as sufficiently broad to include the inmate's own bedroom, 
and that therefore the inmate so restrained should be given such 
constant supervision as would be adapted to the needs of the 
situation. 

6. Is sending one or more inmates to the third floor of a cottage 
to sleep in single bedrooms (the rooms being more isolated than in 
question 3), the doors of which are not locked, but in which the in- 
mate is supposed to remain for the night with the door closed, either 
such separation from the other inmates, or such restraint, or such 
confinement, within the words of this act, as to require the " constant 
supervision " as used in this act ? 

If the word " sending *' is to be considered as having merely 
the meaning of "assigning," and such assignment of rooms is 
not made as a penalty for an offence, I am of the opinion that 
the assignment is not subject to the provisions of the statute. 
If, however, the word " sending " is to be considered as having 
the significance of sending as a penalty for an offence, I am of 
the opinion that whether the doors of the rooms to which the 
inmates are sent are locked or unlocked, constant supervision, 
as applicable to the circumstances of the case, is required by the 
terms of the act. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv^ift, Attorney-General. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



City and Town — Regulation of Traffic — Vehicles — Massa- 
chusetts Highway Commission — Approval. 

An ordinance of a city regulating the use of the streets, sidewalks and 
highways therein, and relating to vehicles of all kinds, both "motor 
and horse- drawn," does not require the approval of the Massachu- 
setts Highway Commission under the provisions of St. 1909, c. 534, 
$ 17, that ''the city council of a city . . . may make special regu- 
lations as to the speed of motor vehicles and as to the use of such 
vehicles upon particular ways, and may exclude such vehicles alto- 
gether from certain ways; provided, however, that no such special 
regulation shall be effective . . . until after the Massachusetts high- 
way commission shall have certified in writing, after a public hear- 
ing, that such regulation is consistent with the public interests." 

Jan. 16, 1913. 
Frank I. Bieler, Esq., Secretary, Massachusetts Highway Commission. 

Deae Sir: — Your letter of December 19 states that the Mas- 
sachusetts Highway Commission has received '^ a copy of an 
ordinance and amendment thereto regulating the use of the 
streets, sidewalks and highways in the city of Lawrence, this 
ordinance relating to vehicles of all kinds, motor and horse- 
drawn. The city authorities have referred the matter to the 
commission, a question having arisen as to whether or not the 
ordinance should be submitted to this Board for its approval or 
otherwise, under the provisions of section 17, chapter 534 of the 
Acts of 1909/^ and you inquire whether or not the approval of 
said commission is required in the premises. 

The section to which you refer, so far as material, provides 
as follows : — 

The city council of a city or the board of aldermen of a city hav- 
ing no common council, and the selectmen of a town, and boards of 
park commissioners, as authorized by law, may make special regula- 
tions as to the speed of motor vehicles and as to the use of such 
vehicles upon particular ways, and may exclude such vehicles alto- 
gether from certain ways; provided, however, that no such special 
regulation shall be effective unless it shall have been published in 
one or more newspapers, if there be any, published in the city or 
town m which the way is situated, otherwise in one or more news- 
papers published in the county in which the city or town is situated; 
nor unless notice of the same is posted conspicuously by the city, 
town, or board of park commissioners making the regulation at 
points where any way affected thereby joins other ways; nor until 



8 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

after the Massachusetts highway commission shall have certified in 
writing, after a public hearing, that such regulation is consistent 
with the public interests; . . . 

In my opinion this provision was not intended to require that 
regulations relating to the use of public streets and general regu- 
lations of traffic thereon should be approved by the Massachusetts 
Highway Commission and is applicable only to special regula- 
tions as to the speed of motor vehicles and as to the use of such 
vehicles upon particular ways, including their exclusion there- 
from. Since the particular ordinance submitted to said com- 
mission involves a general regulation of traffic, and is not a special 
regulation applicable only to motor vehicles, it follows that the 
Massachusetts Highway Commission is not required to certify 
in writing that such ordinance is consistent with the public 
interests. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Trust Company — Savings Department — Loan to Single Indi- 
vidual. 

The limitation in section 34 of chapter 116 of the Eevised Laws, relating 
to trust companies, that ''the total liabilities of a person . . . for 
money borrowed ... to such corporations having a capital stock 
of five hundred thousand dollars or more shall at no time exceed 
one-fifth part of the surplus account and of such amount of the 
capital stock as is actually paid up," is inconsistent with the sub- 
sequent provision in St. 1908, c. 590, § 68, regulating the invest- 
ment of deposits in savings banks and the income thereof, that such 
deposits and income may be invested ''in loans of the classes here- 
after described, payable and to be paid or renewed at a time not 
exceeding one year from the date thereof; but not more than one- 
third of the deposits and income shall so be invested, nor shall the 
total liabilities to such corporation of a person, partnership, asso- 
ciation or corporation for money borrowed upon personal security 
. . . exceed five per cent of such deposits and income," which 
provision is made applicable to the savings departments of trust 
companies by St. 1908, c. 520, § 2, and with respect to deposits 
and income in the savings department of a trust company is re- 
pealed by the provision in section 16 of the latter statute that "all 
acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed." 
It follows that the deposits and income in the savings department 
of such trust company may be loaned to a person, partnership, 
association or corporation to the amount of 5 per cent, of such 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Nq. 12. 9 

deposits and income, provided that the borrower is not otherwise in- 
debted to the trust company. If, however, a person, partnership, 
association or corporation borrows to the extent of 5 per cent, of 
such deposits and income, no further loans may be obtained from 
the corporation either in its savings department or in its commercial 
department; and if the loan has already been secured through the 
commercial department in accordance with the provisions of E. L., 
c. 116, $ 34, the amount so obtained must be considered in deter- 
mining the amount of any loan from the savings department so that 
the combined sum of the indebtedness shall not exceed 5 per cent, 
of the deposits and income of the savings department. 

Feb. 5, 1913. 
Hon. Augustus L. Thorndike, Banlc Commissioner. 

Dear Sir : — You have submitted for my consideration an 
inquiry relating to the application of R. L., c. 116, § 34, to the 
savings department of a trust company. This provision is as 
follows : — 

The total liabilities of a person, other than cities or towns, for 
money borrowed, including in the liabilities of a firm the liabilities 
of its several members, to such corjoorations (trust companies) hav- 
ing a capital stock of five hundred thousand dollars or more shall 
at no time exceed one-fifth part of the surplus account and of such 
amount of the capital stock as is actually paid up, . . . 

St. 1908, c. 520, prescribing the manner in which a trust com- 
pany may receive deposits in its savings department, provides, 
in section 2, that — 

All such deposits shall be special deposits and shall be placed in 
said savings department, and all loans or investments thereof shall 
be made in accordance with the statutes governing the investment of 
deposits in savings banks. . . . 

St. 1908, c. 590, § 68, which regulates the investment of de- 
posits in savings banks and the income derived therefrom, pro- 
vides that such deposits and income may be invested : — 

Eighth. In loans of the classes hereafter described, payable and 
to be paid or renewed at a time not exceeding one year from the date 
thereof; but not more than one-third of the deposits and income shall 
so be invested, nor shall the total liabilities to such corporation of a 
person, partnership, association or corporation for money borrowed 
upon personal security, including in the liabilities of a partnership 
or company not incorporated the liabilities of the several members 
thereof, exceed five per cent of such deposits and income. 



10 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Your specific inquiry is whether or not " the provisions of 
section 2, chapter 520, Acts of 1908, enlarge or extend the limi- 
tations upon personal borrowings as first defined in section 34, 
chapter 116, Revised Laws, so that it would be legal for a trust 
company to simultaneously loan the same parties in its banking 
or commercial department to the limit named in said section 34 
and in its savings department to the limit named in the eighth 
clause of section 68, chapter 590, Acts of 1908.'^ 

It is obvious that the limitation in R. L., c. 116, § 34, is in- 
consistent with the subsequent provision of St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 68, cl. 8, and since, in the latter statute, it is provided, in sec- 
tion 16, that " all acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith 
are hereby repealed," I am of opinion that in respect of such 
inconsistency St. 1908, c. 590, § 68, cl. 8, should govern, and 
the deposits and income in the savings department of a trust 
company may be loaned to a person, partnership, association or 
corporation to the amount of 5 per cent, of such deposits and 
income, provided that the borrower is not otherwise indebted 
to the trust company. Since, however, this clause fixes the total 
liability of a borrower from such a corporation at 5 per cent, 
of the deposits and income in the savings department, it follows 
that, having borrowed to that extent, a person cannot obtain 
any further loans from the corporation either in its savings de- 
partment or in its so-called commercial department, and that if 
he has already secured a loan from the commercial department 
in accordance with the provisions of R. L., c. 116, § 34, 
the amount so obtained must be considered in determining the 
amount of any loan from the savings department, so that the 
combined sum of his indebtedness shall not exceed 5 per cent, 
of the deposits and income of the savings department, and that, 
if such person first secures a loan from the savings department 
for an amount which exceeds one-fifth of the capital stock of the 
corporation, he cannot thereafter secure a loan from the com- 
mercial department, since his total liabilities " to such corpora- 
tion " for moneys borrowed already exceeds one-fifth of said 
capital stock. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv\^ift, Attorney-General. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 11 



Commonwealth Pier — Old Colony Railroad Company — Lease 
— Cancellation — Directors of the Port of Boston — 
Agreement — Execution — Date. 

Where the Directors of the Port of Boston, acting under the authority 
of St. 1911, c. 748, $$4 and 5, executed a contract with the Old 
Colony Eailroad Company, and its lessee, the New York, New Haven 
& Hartford Eailroad Company, by which an existing lease to the 
Old Colony Eailroad Company from the Board of Harbor and Land 
Commissioners of the Commonwealth Pier at a quarterly rental of 
$17,500 was cancelled, and it was provided that the Old Colony 
Eailroad Company and its lessee should be absolved and discharged 
from any further obligation or promises under or by virtue of said 
lease, except the payment of any unpaid rent up to July 1, such 
agreement being dated ''this first day of July, 1912, '^ but not 
executed in fact until Oct. 10, 1912, the agreement so drawn and 
executed was effectual to relieve the lessee of th6 obligation to pay 
rental for the period of the continuance of the lease after July 1, 
and the Old Colony Eailroad Company or its lessee may justly claim 
that the rental paid for the months of July and August should be 
reimbursed to it in accordance with the terms of such agreement. 

In view of the fact that the payment was required to be made by force 
of an existing lease, it may be doubted whether such reimbursement 
should be made without express authority from the Legislature. 

William D. Hawley, Esq., Deputy Auditor. ^ ' ' 

Dear Sir: — By an instrument dated Nov. 1, 1910, the Board 
of Harbor and Land Commissioners leased to the Old Colony 
Eailroad Company, for the term of thirty years, the property 
known as the " Commonwealth Pier," the consideration for said 
lease being the payment by the company of the sum of $70,000 
yearly, by quarterly payments, as follows : " Seventeen thousand 
five hundred (17,500) dollars on the first day of March, 1911, 
and the same sum thereafter on the first day of June, Septem- 
ber, December and March in each and every year during said 
term." 

By St. 1911, c. 748, an act relating to the development of the 
port of Boston, the Governor, in section 1, was authorized, with 
the advice and consent of the Council, to appoint three persons 
and the mayor of the city of Boston to appoint one person, to 
constitute the Directors of the Port of Boston. By section 2 
the directors so appointed were made the administrative officers 
of the port, to — 

cause to be made all necessary plans for the comprehensive develop- 
ment of the harbor. 



12 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

and to have immediate charge of the lands now or hereafter 
o\Yned by the commonwealth upon or adjacent to the harbor 
front, except lands under the control of the metropolitan park 
commission or of the metropolitan water and sewerage board, 
and of the construction of piers and other public works therein, 
shall administer all terminal facilities which are under their 
control, shall keep themselves thoroughly informed as to the 
present and probable future requirements of steamships and 
shipping, and as to the best means which can be provided at the 
port of Boston for the accommodation of steamships, railroads, 
warehouses and industrial establishments. 
Section 4 is as follows : — 

All the rights, powers and duties now pertaining to the board of 
harbor and land commissioners in respect to such lands, rights in 
lands, flats, shores, waters and rights belonging to the commonwealth 
in tidewaters and land under water as constitute that part of Boston 
harbor lying westerly and inside of a line drawn between Point Aller- 
ton on the south and the southerly end of Point Shirley on the north, 
or as adjoin the same or are connected therewith, and any other 
rights and powers heretofore vested by the laws of the common- 
wealth in the board of harbor and land commissioners in respect to 
any part of said area, are hereby transferred to and hereafter shall 
be vested in and exercised by said directors. There shall also be 
transferred to and vested in the directors the right to expend any 
unexjDended funds heretofore appropriated to be expended by the 
board of harbor and land commissioners in the area above desig- 
nated, and the right which the board of harbor and land commis- 
sioners has heretofore exercised in regard to moneys paid to the 
commonwealth in accordance with the provisions of section twenty- 
three of chapter ninety-six of the Revised Laws. Said dkectors shall 
also assume and take over, on behalf of the commonwealth, any 
rights, powers and duties of the board of harbor and land commis- 
sioners under any contracts heretofore made for the improvement, 
filHng, sale, use or other disi30sition of the lands, flats or waters of 
the commonwealth within said area, including any structures now 
existing or being built therein or thereon. 

Section 5 provides, in part, that — 

With the consent of the governor and council, the directors may 
take or acquire by purchase or otherwise, and hold, such real prop- 
erty and such rights and easements therein as the directors may from 
time to time consider necessary for the purpose of constructing, or 
securing the constructing or utihzing of, piers and, in connection 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 13 

therewith, highways, waterways, raikoad connections, storage yards 
and sites for warehouses and industrial establishments, and may lay 
out and build thereon and upon such other lands as under section 
four of this act are under its jurisdiction, such piers, with buildings 
and appurtenances, docks, highways, waterways, railroad connec- 
tions, storage yards and public warehouses as, in the opinion of the 
directors, may be desirable. 

Acting under the provisions of, and exercising the very broad 
powers conferred by, these provisions, the Directors of the Port 
of Boston entered into negotiations with the directors of the 
Old Colony Eailroad Company and of its lessee, the New York, 
New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company, looking to the can- 
cellation of the lease already referred to, and a tentative agree- 
ment for that purpose was submitted to the Directors of the 
Port of Boston in a letter addressed to them on July 1, 1912. 
The actual agreement or contract for such cancellation was not, 
however, finally executed by said directors until October 10, 
although it had been executed by the company some days prior 
to that date, and such agreement or contract was not approved 
by the Governor and Council until November 6. The agreement 
as originally drawn and as finally executed by both parties was 
dated "this first day of July, 1912,'' and contained a stipulation 
that — 

The lease dated Nov. 1, 1910, ... is hereby cancelled and termi- 
nated as of the date of this instrument, the Commonwealth assuming 
full control of said property so leased, and the Old Colony and its 
lessee the New Haven being absolved and discharged from any fur- 
ther obligation or promises under or by virtue of said lease, except 
the payment of any unpaid rent up to July 1. 

The Old Colony Eailroad Company or its lessee, the New 
York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company, upon Septem- 
ber 1 paid the quarterly rent as provided for in the lease of 
Nov. 1, 1910, amounting to $17,500, and the lessee, the New 
York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company, in view of the 
terms of the instrument as finally executed, has made formal 
application to the Auditor of the Commonwealth that the 
amount of such pajrment covering the months of July and Au- 
gust, which is $11,666.67, be refunded to it. The matter is now 
before me upon your inquiry as to whether the New York, New 
Haven & Hartford Eailroad Company is entitled to the amount 
claimed by it, and whether, if said company is entitled to the 



14 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

amount claimed, it may be paid without further action of the 
Legislature. 

All deeds or contracts should regularly be dated on the day 
of their execution,^ and in the absence of other evidence upon 
the subject it has l3een held reasonable and safe to conclude in 
any particular instance that a legal instrument by which prop- 
erty is conveyed was completed on the day on which it bears 
date. Smith v. Porter, 10 Gray, 66, 68. This presumption, 
however, is subject to proof by extraneous evidence that the in- 
strument was in fact dated upon another day. Lee v. Massachu- 
setts Insurance Co., 6 Mass. 208; Dresel v. Jordan, 104 Mass. 
407, 417. 

It is clearly established, however, that the date upon a deed 
or contract is not essential to the validity of the instrument. 
Lee V. Massachusetts Insurance Co., supra; Joseph v. Bigelow, 
4 Cush. 82, 84. The agreement now under consideration, in 
respect to its validit}^ would not be aifected if the date of its 
execution were entirely omitted. This being so, I am of opinion 
that the question now raised must depend upon the intention 
of the parties to the agreement and not upon the date of its 
execution. Upon its face it purports to be a cancellation of the 
existing lease, from July 1, 1912, and to release the lessee from 
any obligation to make payments of the rent required thereunder 
which accrued after said date. I am advised that the provision 
that the obligations of the lessee should terminate upon July 1, 
1912, was not intended to be dependent upon the date of the 
actual execution of the instrument, and was designedly retained 
notwithstanding that such execution was not formally completed 
until the month of October. Such being the intent of the 
parties, I am of opinion that the instrument was effectual to 
relieve the lessee of the obligation to pay rental for the period 
of the continuance of the lease after July 1, and that the Old 
Colony Railroad Company or the New York, New Haven & 
Hartford Railroad Company, its lessee, may justly claim that 
the rental paid for the months of July and August should be 
reimbursed to it in accordance with the terms of the agreement; 
but in view of the fact that the payment, when made, was re- 
quired to be made by force of an existing lease, it is doubtful 
if such reimbursement should be made without express authority 
from the Legislature. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 15 

Cities and Towns — Private Way — Width and Grade — Regu- 
lation — Constitutional Law. 
The term '' private way" in its technical sense imports a way laid out 
under the provisions of E. L., c. 48, $ 65, and the following sections, 
and is, in fact, a public way laid out by public officers for the com- 
mon necessity and convenience; and the Legislature may authorize 
a city or town to make ordinances or by-laws controlling the con- 
struction of such ways with respect to width and grade. Upon the 
other hand, a way over private land in which the public has no 
interest cannot be regulated and controlled as to width or grade by 
the ordinances of a city or the by-laws of a town. 

Feb. 6, 1913. 
Hon. Clarence W. Hobbs, Jr., Senate Chairman, Committee on Cities. 

Dear Sir : — On behalf of the committee on cities yon have 
submitted to me the following question of law : " Is it within 
the power of the Legislature to authorize a city or town to make 
ordinances controlling the construction of private ways in re- 
spect to width and grade; and if such authority were given, 
would it be possible for a city or town to provide that all private 
ways must be of a determined width and a grade approved by 
the proper officials of the city or town ? " 

The term "private way," in its technical sense, means a way 
laid out under the provisions of E. L., c. 48, § 65, and the fol- 
lowing sections, and differs from a town way in the fact that 
the damages occasioned by its being laid out are assessed in 
whole or in part upon the person or persons for whose benefit 
it is constructed. Flagg v. Flagg, 16 Gray, 175. " Such ways 
are laid out by public officers as branches of public roads, upon 
the implied ground . . . that the common convenience and ne- 
cessity require such laying out." Denham v. County Commis- 
sioners, 108 Mass. 202. The laying out of either town ways or 
private ways is not restricted in respect to width and grade, such 
matters being left to the discretion of the selectmen or road 
commissioners, to be determined by the public necessity or con- 
venience in each particular case ; but I have no reason to doubt 
that the Legislature may authorize a city or town to limit the 
actual construction of such ways in respect to width and grade. 

Upon the other hand, a way over private land in which the 
public has no interest, the way and the land over which it passes 
being private property, could not be regulated or controlled as 
to width or grade by the ordinances of a city or the by-laws of 

a town. ^- , - 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



16 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



State Board of Health — Cities and Towns — Boards of Health 
— Rules and Regulations relating to the Keeping and Ex- 
posure for Sale of Articles of Food — Approval — Public 
Hearing. 

Under the provisions of E. L., c. 56, § 70, as amended by St. 1912, 
c. 448, that ''boards of health of cities and towns may make and 
enforce reasonable rules and regulations, subject to the approval of 
the state board of health, as to the conditions under which all arti- 
cles of food may be kept for sale or exposed for sale" and that 
"any person affected by such rules and regulations, in the form in 
which they are presented to the state board of health for approval, 
may appeal to the said board for a further hearing," the State 
Board of Health is not required to hold a public hearing before 
approving rules and regulations submitted to it unless some person 
affected thereby has applied to such Board for further hearing. 

Feb. 20, 1913. 
Mark W. Eichardson, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health. 

Dear Sir : — You have called my attention to the provisions 
of E. L., c. 56, § 70, as amended by St. 1912, c. 448. The 
amendment adds to the end of said section 70 certain provisions, 
which, so far as is material to your inquiry, are as follows : — 

Boards of health of cities and towns may make and enforce reason- 
able rules and regulations, subject to the approval of the state board 
of health, as to the conditions under which all articles of food may be 
kept for sale or exposed for sale, in order to prevent contamination 
thereof and injury to the public health. Before the board of health 
of any city or town submits such rules and regulations to the state 
board of health for approval it shall hold a public hearing thereon, 
of which notice shall be given by publication for two successive 
weeks, the first publication to be at least fourteen days prior to the 
date of the hearing, in a newspaper published in such city or town, 
or, if none is so published, in a newspaper published in the county 
in which such city or town is located. Any person affected by such 
rules and regulations, in the form in which they are presented to the 
state board of health for approval, may appeal to the said board for 
a further hearing, and said board shall not grant its approval to rules 
and regulations concerning which such an appeal has been taken 
until it has held a public hearing thereon, advertised in the manner 
specified above in this section with reference to hearings before 
boards of health in cities and towns. 

You state that " a hearing was held before the Boston Board 
of Health in accordance with the statutes, and the rules and 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 17 

regulations were duly presented to the State Board of Health 
for its approval, which approval was given by the State Board 
of Health at a meeting held Feb. 6, 1913;"' and that you have 
received a letter "protesting against these regulations and 
against the action of the State Board of Health in approving 
the said regulations without a public hearing ; " and that " no 
request for such a hearing was made to the State Board of 
Health, however, and the Board concluded, therefore, that there 
was no opposition to such regulations from the citizens of Bos- 
ton." Upon these facts your inquiry is in substance whether or 
not the State Board of Health " acted within its rights in 
approving these regulations without holding an advertised 
hearing." 

In my opinion this inquiry is answered by the provisions above 
quoted, which require public hearings to be held by local boards 
of health before making or enforcing any rules or regulations 
in the premises. The State Board of Health, however, is not 
required to hold public hearings unless a person affected by such 
rules and regulations in the form in which they are presented 
to it appeals to said Board for a further hearing, in which case 
a public hearing, advertised in the same manner as that required 
for hearings before local boards of health, must be held. If, as 
I assume from the statement made by you, no appeal was taken 
to the State Board of Health, it follows that no public hearing 
was required in this particular case; such hearing being required 
only upon appeal to the State Board from the form of the rules 
and regulations adopted by the local Board. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Land — Registration — Assurance Fund — Income. 
In K. L., e. 128, relating to the registration and confirmation of titles to 
land, the provision of $ 100, that the income of the assurance fund 
established by § 93 shall be added to the principal and invested 
until it amounts to $200,000, and thereafter shall be used as far as 
may be to defray the expenses of the administration of the provi- 
sions of this chapter, permits the sum accruing from such fund to 
be used in addition to the annual appropriation made by the Legis- 
lature, unless it is provided that such appropriation shall include 
all other sums previously appropriated for such purpose. 



18 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Feb. 21, 1913. 
Hon. John E. White, Auditor of the Commonwealth. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion concerning the 
provisions of E. L., c. 128, §§ 93, 94 and 100, in the following 
questions : — 

1. Should the assurance fund be increased above the amount of 
$200,000 by the amounts received under the provisions of section 93 ? 

2. Can the income from this fund from invested securities be used 
by the Land Court in addition to the amount which is appropriated 
by the Legislature for expenses of the court? 

R. L., e. 128, §§ 93, 94 and 100, provide as follows: — 

SECTioisr 93. Upon the original registration of land, and also 
upon the entry of a certificate showing title as registered owners in 
heirs or devisees, there shall be paid to the recorder one-tenth of one 
per cent of the assessed value of the land, on the basis of the last 
assessment for municipal taxation, as an assurance fund. 

Section 94. All money received by the recorder under the provi- 
sions of the preceding section shall be paid to the treasurer and 
receiver general, who shall keep it invested, with the advice and ap- 
proval of the governor and council, and shall report annually to the 
general court the condition and income thereof. 

Section 100. The income of the assurance fund shall be added to 
the principal and invested, until said fund amounts to two hundred 
thousand dollars, and thereafter the income of such fund shall be 
used to defray, as far as may be, the expenses of the adnainistration 
of the provisions of this chapter, instead of being added to the fund 
and accumulated. 

I am of opinion that it is the intent of the statute that the 
assurance fund should remain untouched until it has reached 
the sum of $200,000, and that thereafter the interest thereon 
should be used to defray the expenses of the Land Court, and 
that the payments into the fund of the money received under 
section 93 should still continue. 

In my opinion the annual appropriation made by the Legis- 
lature, unless it states that the sum therein named shall include 
all other sums previously appropriated for that purpose, does 
not affect the income from said fund. The sum accruing from 
said fund may be used in addition to the appropriation by the 
Legislature in any given year. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 19 



License — Steam Boiler or Engine — ■ Locomotive. 
A locomotive used by a railroad company for the purpose of making 
steam to heat its passenger cars, or for operating steam drills, or 
for any work necessitating the use of steam power other than the 
actual work of hauling cars, is within the exemption contained in 
E. L., e. 102, § 78, as amended by St. 1911, c. 562, § 1, that ''no 
person shall have charge of or operate a steam boiler or engine 
in this commonwealth, except boilers and engines upon locomotives 
. . . unless he holds a license as hereinafter provided ..." and 
a person in charge of or operating a steam boiler or engine thereon 
is not required to hold a license therefor. 

Feb. 24, 1913. 
Gen. J. H. Whitney, Chief of the District Police. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion on the question 
whether a locomotive when used by a railroad company for the 
purpose of making steam to heat its passenger cars, or for the 
operating of steam drills, or for any work necessitating the use 
of steam power other than the actual work of hauling cars, is 
within the exemption contained in the words " except boilers 
and engines upon locomotives " in E. L., c. 102, § 78, as 
amended by St. 1911, c. 562, § 1. Section 78, as amended, pro- 
vides as follows : — 

No person shall have charge of or operate a steam boiler or engine 
in this commonwealth, except boilers and engines upon locomotives, 
motor road vehicles, boilers and engines in private residences, boilers 
in apartment houses of less than five flats, boilers and engines under 
the jurisdiction of the United States, boilers and engines used for 
agricultural purposes exclusively, boilers and engines of less than 
nine horse power, and boilers used for heating purposes exclusively 
which are provided with a device approved by the chief of the district 
police limiting the pressure carried to fifteen pounds to the square 
inch, unless he holds a license as hereinafter provided. . . . 

Whether a person operating a boiler or engine is within the 
exception of the statute depends, by its very wording, upon 
whether it is upon a locomotive. There is no restriction as to 
the use of a locomotive provided in the enactment. The ques- 
tion whether it is a locomotive or not is determined by its de- 
sign and its potentiality rather than by any use to which it may 
be temporarily applied. In the absence of any facts indicating 
that the locomotive has been changed in form or design, I as- 
sume that it is still a steam engine which travels on wheels 



20 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

turned by its own power and is designed and adapted to travel 
on a railway and having power to haul cars from place to place. 

Upon that assumption, it is still a locomotive according to 
the ordinary acceptation and dictionary definition of that term, 
and a person in charge of or operating a steam boiler or engine 
upon such locomotive is exempted from the requirement for 
holding a license as provided in the statute. If it is desirable to 
restrict the use of such locomotives to hauling cars merely, new 
legislation appropriate to that end will be necessary. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Constitutional Law — Hours of Lahor — Fair, Beasonahle and 
Appropriate Exercise of Police Power — Question of Fact. 

The constitutionality of a proposed measure limiting the hours of labor 
of persons employed in certain designated occupations depends upon 
the determination of the question whether such measure, if enacted, 
would constitute a fair, reasonable and appropriate exercise of the 
police power upon the one hand, or an unreasonable, unnecessary 
and arbitrary interference with the right of the individual to his 
personal liberty to make such contracts as he deems necessary or 
proper upon the other. 

In the absence of evidence bearing upon the relation which exists be- 
tween the occupations so designated and the health of those em- 
ployed in them, the Attorney-General is not sufficiently advised to 
pass upon the question of the constitutionality of such proposed 
measures as a question of law. 

It is for the Legislature, in the first instance, to determine upon the 
facts and considerations presented to it, — whether in its judgment 
there is fair and reasonable ground to say that there is material 
danger to the public health or to the health of the employees if the 
hours of labor in the occupations designated are not curtailed. 

Feb. 28, 1913. 
C. H. Williams, Esq., Cleric, Joint Committee on Labor. 

Dear Sir : — The joint committee on labor has submitted to 
me copies of three bills, providing for the regulation of the hours 
of employment in certain occupations, and has requested my 
opinion as to whether these bills would be constitutional if en- 
acted into law. Senate Bill No. 145 is entitled " An Act fixing 
hours of employment of employees of express companies," and 
provides in section 1 as follows : — 

The hours of emploj^ment of all employees of firms, persons, cor- 
porations or associations engaged in the express business in this 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 21 

commonwealth shall be limited to nine hours within eleven consecu- 
tive hours: provided, however, that in case of emergency an officer 
or agent of such company may request an employee to work over 
and above nine hours, time over and above nine hours to be paid 
extra. On Sundays and legal holidays extra labor may be performed 
at extra compensation and at request of employees. Intimidation of 
employees or threats of loss of employment by any officer or agent 
of any such company shall be considered as coercion and " requir- 
ing " within the meaning of this section. Any company or its agent 
which violates the provisions of this act shall forfeit for each offence 
not less than one hundred nor more than five hundred dollars. 

House Bill 'No. 47 is entitled " An Act relative to the hours 
of labor of drug clerks," and provides as follows in sections 1 
and 2 : — 

Section 1. No registered pharmacist, assistant pharmacist, clerk, 
apprentice or other employee in any pharmacy, drug store or apothe- 
cary shop, shall be required or allowed to work more than twelve 
hours in any consecutive twenty-four, nor more than sixty-five hours 
in any consecutive one hundred and sixty-eight, except in particular 
cases in which the board of registration in pharmacy shall grant 
specific permission, in due accordance with the provisions of this act. 

Section 2. The board of registration in pharmacy shall have 
authority to grant permission to any registered pharmacist who is 
the owner or manager of any pharmacy, drug store or apothecary 
shop, to request and to allow any registered pharmacist, assistant 
pharmacist, clerk, apprentice or other employee to work more than 
twelve hours in any consecutive twenty-four, or more than sixty-five 
hours in any consecutive one hundred and sixty-eight : provided, that 
such registered pharmacist, assistant pharmacist, clerk, apprentice 
or other employee shall not be required or allowed to work more than 
one hundred and thirty hours in any consecutive three hundred and 
thirty-six. 

House Bill No. 1081 is entitled " An Act to regulate the hours 
of labor of certain employees in paper mills and other industrial 
establishments operated day and night," and provides as follows 
in sections 1, 2 and 3 : — 

Section 1. No person who is employed as a tour-worker in any 
paper mill, foundry, factory or any manufacturing or mechanical or 
other industrial establishment which is in operation both day and 
night, either continuously or intermittently, shall, except in case of 
emergency, be required, requested or permitted to work more than 



22 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

forty-eight hours in any one week or more than eight hours in any 
one calendar day. 

Section 2. Only a case of danger to property, to life, to public 
safety or to public health shall be considered a case of emergency 
within the meaning of this act, except in case of employment for 
the repair, renewal, adjustment or care of machinery or appliances 
in order to maintain the same in continuous operation, and except in 
case of employment of a tour-worker in substitution for and in the 
temporary absence of another. 

For the purposes of this act the expression " tour-workere " shall 
mean all employees who tend or are employed for the purpose of 
tending machinery or appliances of any description which are oper- 
ated both day and night, either continuously or intermittently, and 
shall be deemed to include machine tenders and their helpers, en- 
gineers and their helpers, calender tenders and their helpers, cutter 
tenders and all other persons whose attendance is required in conse- 
quence of the continuity of operation of such machinery or ap- 
pliances. 

These three bills refer to entirely distinct occupations, and 
vary in the degree of regulation to which they would subject the 
employment of labor in these occupations. The bills must there- 
fore be considered each upon its own special provisions and upon 
its own individual merits. 

There are, however, certain general principles of law which 
are applicable to the entire class of legislation to which these 
three bills belong, and these general principles may well be 
briefly stated as a basis for the consideration of the particular 
bills. 

Whether such legislation is unconstitutional or not depends 
on whether it unwarrantably deprives those who are subject to 
it of their liberty. The liberty of the individual is guaranteed 
both by the State and Federal constitutions, and it has been 
held that the right to make contracts is embraced in the concep- 
tion of liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution. Allgeyer v. 
Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578; Locliner v. New YorTc, 198 U. S. 45; 
Adair v. United States, 208 U. S. 161; Chicago, Burlington & 
Quincy R. R. Co. v. McGuire, 219 U. S. 549, 566. In the case 
of Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578, 589, the court said, in 
referring to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of 
the United States : — 

The liberty mentioned in that amendment means not only the 
right of the citizen to be free from the mere physical restraint of his 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 23 

person, as by incarceration, but the term is deemed to embrace the 
right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties; 
to be free to use them in all lawful ways ; to live and work where he 
will; to earn his livelihod by any lawful calling; to pursue any live- 
lihood or avocation, and for that purpose to enter into all contracts 
which may be proper, necessary and essential to his carrying out to a 
successful conclusion the purposes above mentioned. 

The right to contract is not, however, an absolute right. It 
is held subject to certain powers inherent in the sovereignty of 
each State and of the United States, which are known as the 
" police powers.'^ The police powers are not easily described, 
and specific limitations of them have not been attempted by the 
courts. They are somewhat elastic in their nature, and they 
grow and vary with public opinion. For present purposes, how- 
ever, it is sufficient to describe them as the powers which the 
sovereignty may exercise in relation to the safety, health, morals 
and general welfare of the public. 

In the exercise of those powers the State may subject the prop- 
erty and the liberty of the individual to reasonable conditions 
without violating the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment 
of the Constitution. 

The question as to the constitutionality of the bills presented, 
therefore, resolves itself into the question whether the bills, if 
enacted into law, would constitute a reasonable exercise of the 
police power by the governing power of the State. The question 
was thus expressed by the United States Supreme Court in the 
case of Adair v. United States, 208 U. S. 161, 173 : — 

In every case that comes before this court, therefore, where legis- 
lation of this character is concerned and where the protection of the 
Federal Constitution is sought, the question necessarily arises: Is 
this a fair, reasonable and appropriate exercise of the police power 
of the State, or is it an unreasonable, unnecessary and arbitrary 
interference with the right of the individual to his personal liberty 
or to enter into those contracts in relation to labor which may seem 
to him appropriate or necessary for the support of himself and his 
family? 

Having thus indicated as a guide to the committee the funda- 
mental question involved in determining whether the proposed 
legislation would be constitutional, it may be of further assist- 
ance if I indicate in what manner a few attempts of the exercise 
of this police power, in the matter of regulating the hours of 



24 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

labor, have been judged by the Supreme Courts of this Com- 
monwealth and of the United States. 

The statutes regulating the hours of labor of employees of 
the Federal, State and municipal governments and of persons 
employed by persons contracting with these governments upon 
public work have been held to constitute a class entirely distinct 
from the statutes regulating the hours of labor of employees of 
private corporations and individuals, and have been sustained 
by a divided court as a lawful exercise of the right of the sov- 
ereign to prescribe the conditions under which it will permit 
work of a public character to be done. Atkin v. Kansas, 191 
U. S. 207, 223. 

Legislation limiting the hours of labor for women and chil- 
dren, while its constitutionality as applied to women has been 
doubted in some States, has been upheld generally and in this 
Commonwealth as a matter of health regulation. Commo7i- 
wealth V. Hamilton Mfg. Co., 120 Mass. 383; Opinion of the 
Justices, 163 Mass. 589, 594; Commonwealth v. Riley, 210 Mass. 
387. 

In the case of H olden v. Hardy, 169 U. S. 366, the question 
of regulating the hours of labor for men was raised, and the 
Supreme Court of the United States, with two justices dis- 
senting, sustained as a valid exercise of the police power a stat- 
ute of the State of Utah entitled " An Act regulating the hours 
of employment in underground mines and in smelters and ore 
reduction works,^' which limited to eight hours per day the 
period of employment in all underground mines and in smelters 
and all other institutions for the reduction or refinement of ores 
or metals, except in case of emergency where life or property 
was in imminent danger. It was pointed out in that case that the 
men worked in an atmosphere of poisonous gases, dust and im- 
palpable substances which in the judgment of the court tended 
to produce morbid, noxious and deadly effects in the human 
system. In the course of its opinion the court said : — 

These employments, when too long pursued, the Legislature has 
judged to be detrimental to the health of the employees, and, so long 
as there are reasonable grounds for believing that this is so, its 
decision upon this subject cannot be re\dewed by the Federal courts. 

In the case of Lochner v. iVew Yorh, 198 U. S. 45, the United 
States Supreme Court, with three justices dissenting, reversed 
the decision of the highest court of Xew York, and held imcon- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCmiEXT — No. 12. 25 

stitutional, as not within the limits of the police power, a statute 
of Xew York limiting to sixty hours in any one week the period 
of employment in a biscuit, bread or cake bakery or confectionery 
establishment, and containing no emergency clause. In this case 
the court referred to the above-mentioned case of Holden v. 
Hardy as one of the " border ones " in which the court had been 
" guided by rules of a very liberal nature." A' careful reading 
of the entire opinion in this case would unquestionably be in- 
structive to the committee, but particular attention should be 
called to the following quotations from the opinion : — 

It is a question of which of two powers or rights shall prevail — 
the power of the State to legislate or the right of the individual to 
liberty of person and freedom of contract. The mere assertion that 
the subject relates though but in a remote degree to the public health 
does not necessarily render the enactment valid. The act must have 
a more direct relation, as a means to an end, and the end itself must 
be appropriate and legitimate, before an act can be held to be valid 
which interferes with the general right of an individual to be free 
in his person and in his power to contract in relation to his own 
labor. — Page 57. 

We think the limit of the police power has been reached and passed 
in this case. There is, in our judgment, no reasonable foundation 
for holding this to be necessary or appropriate as a health law to 
safeguard the public health or the health of the individuals who are 
following the trade of a baker. — Page 58. 

The act is not, within any fair meaning of the term, a health law, 
but is an illegal interference with the rights of individuals, both em- 
ployers and employees, to make contracts regarding labor upon such 
terms as they may think best, or which they may agree upon with 
the other parties to such contracts. — Page 61. 

Other decisions of the courts and of the various State courts 
might be cited, but perhaps enough have been referred to, to 
show the view taken b}^ the majority of a divided court at the 
time when the questions were presented. 

The question of the constitutionalit}' of the legislation pro- 
posed cannot be adequately considered or discussed except upon 
presentation of the facts with reference to the occupation to 
which the proposed legislation is to apply. It is for the Legis- 
lature, in the first instance, to say upon the facts and considera- 
tions presented to it whether in its judgment there is " fair and 
reasonable ground, in and of itself, to say that there is material 
danger to the public health or to the health of the emplo^'ees " 



26 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

if the hours of labor are not curtailed in the occupations to 
which these bills refer. 

I assume that evidence and arguments have been submitted or 
will be submitted to the committee, bearing upon the relation 
which exists between these various occupations and the health 
of those employed in them. No such evidence or arguments are 
before me, and I, therefore, am unable to determine finally the 
character of the employment in these occupations as shown by 
any particular evidence that may have been or may be submitted 
to the committee. 

It is to be noted, however, with reference to Senate Bill No. 
145, limiting the hours of employment of employees of express 
companies, that it purports to limit the hours of employment 
of " all employees " in the express business. It would thereby 
place a person doing light office work, with long intervals of 
comparative leisure, or the person merely exercising the func- 
tions of supervisor of teaming, employed in the open air, upon 
the same basis with the man doing heavy manual labor and one 
exposed to long hours out-of-doors in bad weather. 

It is to be noted, also, with reference to House Bill No. 47, 
limiting the hours of labor of registered pharmacists, assistant 
pharmacists, clerks, apprentices " or other employee " in any 
pharmacy, drug store or apothecary shop, to sixty-five hours in 
any one week, that it applies equally to the pharmacist constantly 
engaged in preparing prescriptions and to the clerk whose only 
duty is to tend the counter at which confections and cigars are 
sold. 

With reference to these bills, and as well to House Bill No. 
1081, limiting to eight hours per day the period of employment 
in any paper mill, foundry, factory or any manufacturing or me- 
chanical or other industrial establishment, as therein provided, 
the committee will have before it sufficient information to enable 
it to determine the question under the principles hereinbefore 
set forth, applying in addition to common knowledge of the facts 
in reference to such business such particular evidence or facts 
as have been, or may be submitted to the committee for the pur- 
pose of enlightening it as to the necessity for such legislation, 
or as indicating that there is danger to health and welfare in 
these various occupations, within the limits hereinbefore set 
forth. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 27 



Constitutional Law — Sale of Fruit, Vegetables and Nuts at Re- 
tail by Dry Measure — Legal Weight. 

The provision of E. L., e. 57, $ 21, as amended by St. 1912, c. 246, 
that *'all fruits, vegetables and nuts, . . . shall be sold at retail by 
dry measure, weight or by numerical count, and all fruits and vege- 
tables for which a legal weight has been established shall be sold 
at retail only by weight or numerical count," may constitutionally 
be amended so as to provide that *''all fruits, vegetables and nuts 
for which a legal weight has been established shall be sold at re- 
tail only by dry measure, weight or numerical count, but not less 
than the legal weight shall be given when the same are sold by 
dry measure." 

If such proposed amendment was enacted, a purchaser buying by dry 
measure would be entitled to receive the established legal weight 
of the commodity purchased so far as a specific weight per unit 
of dry measure was established by law therefor, and the dealer 
would be required to ascertain that the weight for such commodity 
as measured did not fall below the weight required by law in the 
case of the unit of dry measure employed in such sale. 

March 5, 1913. 
John H. Stone, Esq., Committee on Mercantile Affairs. 

Dear Sir : — On behalf of the committee on mercantile af- 
fairs you have submitted for my consideration certain questions 
relating to the effect of a proposed amendment of E. L., c. 57, 
§ 21, as amended by St. 1912, c. 246. This section is as fol- 
• lows : — • 

All fruits, vegetables and nuts, except as hereinafter otherwise 
provided, shall be sold at retail by dry measure, weight or by numer- 
ical count, and all fruits and vegetables for which a legal weight has 
been established shall be sold at retail only by weight or numerical 
count. Whoever violates any jDrovision of this section shaU forfeit 
a sum not exceeding ten dollars for each offence. 

The proposed bill, if enacted, will amend the above section so 
as to provide that — 

All fruits, vegetables and nuts for which a legal weight has been 
established shall be sold at retail only by dry measure, weight or 
numerical count, but not less than the legal weight shall be given 
when the same are sold by dry measure. Whoever violates any pro- 
vision of this section shall forfeit a sum not exceeding ten dollars for 
each offence. 

The effect of this amendment will be to permit sales by dry 
measure provided that the commodity sold therein equals the 



28 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

weight required by law for such dry measure. See R. L., c. 62, 
§ 3, as amended by St. 1902, c. 115, and St. 1911, c. 397; 
§ 4, as amended by St. 1910, c. 297, and St. 1912, c. 284, 
and § 5. 

To the specific inquiries submitted by the committee, I reply 
as follows : — 

First. — Would the proposed amendment be constitutional'? 

Upon the assumption that the original limitation imposed in 
the statute to which the proposed amendment is applicable was 
a reasonable and proper one under the circumstances, I am of 
opinion that said amendment would not be objectionable upon 
any constitutional ground. It goes no further than to require 
that if a dealer in fruits, nuts or vegetables undertakes to sell 
them, or any of them, by dry measure, he must see to it that the 
commodity measured does not weigh less than the weight estab- 
lished by law therefor. 

Second. — Would the purchaser be entitled to the established legal 
weight of such fruit, nuts and vegetables, when the same were bought 
and sold by dry measure, if the proposed amendment became law? 

So far as a specific weight per unit of dry measure was estab- 
lished by law, the purchaser would be entitled to receive it if 
he bought by dry measure. 

Third. — If the proposed amendment became law, and if it is true 
that the established legal weights of certain fmits, nuts and vege- 
tables are sometimes more than the actual weights of the same when 
correctly measured, will the law establishing the legal weight of such 
fruits, nuts and vegetables govern the sale at retail of the same? 

In the case stated the weight of the commodity contained in 
the unit of dry measure must be equal to the established legal 
weight for such commodity as measured, and the dealer is re- 
quired at his peril to ascertain that such weight does not fall 
below the weight required by law in the case of the unit of dry 
measure employed in the sale. 

Fourth. — If the seller gave less than the legal weight, when he 
sold by dry measure fruits, nuts and vegetables for which a legal 
weight has been established, would the Commonwealth have difficulty 
in obtaining a conviction under the proposed amendment if it became 
law? 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 29 

If there was sufficient evidence of such sale I see no reason 
why, as matter of law, there should be difficulty in obtaining a 
conviction. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney- General. 



Insurance Company — Massachusetts Employees Insurance As- 
sociation — Indehtedness for Outstanding Losses — Deter- 
mination. 

The Massachusetts Employees Insurance Association, incorporated under 
the provisions of St. 1911, c. 751, Part IV., is not subject to St. 
1907, c. 576, § 11, as amended by St. 1911, cc. 54, 315, which, in 
providing for the determination of indebtedness for outstanding 
losses, requires an arbitrary charge to be made against any corpora- 
tion writing policies covering insurance against loss or damage re- 
sulting from accident to or injury suffered by an employee or other 
person for which the insured is liable, and against loss from lia- 
bility on account of the death of or injury to an employee not 
caused by the negligence of the employer, to be computed ^s therein 
provided. 

March 7, 1913. 
Hon. Frank H. Harbison, Insurance Commissioner. 

Dear Sir : — You have inquired with reference to the appli- 
cation to the Massachusetts Employees Insurance Association of 
so much of St. 1907, c. 576, § 11, as amended by St. 1911, cc. 54 
and 315, as provides that — • 

The indebtedness for outstanding losses under insurance against 
loss or damage resulting from accident to or injuries suffered by an 
employee or other person, for which the insured is liable, and under 
insurance against loss from liability on account of the death of or 
injury to an employee not caused by the negligence of the employer, 
shall be determined 

according to the method therein prescribed, which in substance 
requires an arbitrary charge to any corporation writing policies 
covering any of the kinds of insurance above described of in- 
debtedness for outstanding losses upon such policies, to be deter- 
mined as follows : — 

(10) for all suits being defended under policies written more than 
ten years prior to the date as of which the statement is made, except 
suits in which liability is not dependent upon negligence of the in- 
sured, one thousand dollars for each suit; (11) for all suits being 



30 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

defended under policies written more than five years and less than 
ten years prior to the date as of which the statement is made, except 
suits in which liability is not dependent upon negligence of the in- 
sured, seven hundred and fifty dollars for each suit; (12) for all 
deaths for which the insured are liable without proof of negligence, 
covered by policies written more than five years prior to the date as 
of which the statement is made, the amount necessary to pay for 
such deaths; (13) for all unpaid claims on account of non-fatal 
injuries for which the insured are liable without proof of negligence 
under policies written more than five years prior to the date as of 
which the statement is made, the present value of the estimated 
future payments; (14) for the policies written in the five years 
immediately preceding the date as of which the statement is made 
an amount determined as follows: multiply the earned premiums of 
each of such five years as shown in item (1) by the loss ratio ascer- 
tained as in item (6) on all the policies written in the first five years 
of the said ten-year period, using as the divisor the sum of the 
earned premiums shown in item (1) for said first five years, and as 
the dividend the sum of the payments shown in item (2) for said 
first five,years plus the sum of the charges in items (3), (4) and (5) 
for said first five years; but the ratio to be used shall in no event be 
less than fifty per cent at and after December thirty-first, nineteen 
hundred and eleven, nor less than fifty-one per cent at and after 
December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and twelve, nor less than 
fifty-two per cent at and after December thirty-first, nineteen hun- 
dred and thirteen, nor less than fifty-three per cent at and after 
December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and fourteen, nor less than 
fifty-four per cent at and after December thirty-first, nineteen hun- 
dred and fifteen, nor less than fifty-five per cent at and after De- 
cember thirty-first, nineteen hundred and sixteen; and from the 
amount so ascertained in each of the last five years of said ten-year 
period deduct all payments made under policies written in the corre- 
sponding year as shown in item (2), and the remainder in the case 
of each year shall be deemed the indebtedness for that year: pro- 
vided, however, that if the remainder in the case of any year of the 
first three years of the five years immediately preceding the date as 
of which the statement is made shall be less than the sum of the 
three following items for that year at that date, — {a) the number 
of suits, except suits in which liability is not dependent upon negli- 
gence of the insured, being defended under policies written in that 
year, and a charge of seven hundred and fifty dollars for each suit; 
(6) the amount necessary to pay for all deaths for which the insured 
are liable without proof of negligence, covered by policies written in 
that year; and (c) the present value of estimated unpaid claims on 
account of non-fatal injuries for which the insured are liable without 
proof of negligence, covered by policies written in that year, — then 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 31 

the sum of said items (a), {b) and (c) shall be the indebtedness for 
that j-ear. 

The Massachusetts Employees Insurance Association is a mu- 
tual company organized under the provisions of St. 1911, c. 751, 
Part IV., for the purpose of insuring to employees of persons 
who become members of the corporation or subscribers such com- 
pensation as is provided by the various sections of Part II. of 
said act. 

By section 23 of Part IV., it is provided that — 

The pro^dsions of chapter five hundred and seventy-six of the acts 
of the year nineteen hundred and seven and of acts in amendment 
thereof shall apply to the association, so far as such provisions are 
l^ertinent and not in conflict with the provisions of this act, except 
that the corporate powers shall not expire because of failure to issue 
policies or make insurance. 

From a consideration of the provisions of St. 1911, c. 751, 
which relate to the organization of the Massachusetts Employees 
Insurance Association and prescribe the extent of its liability 
and the manner in which its business is to be conducted, it ap- 
pears that the company is confined to the so-called workmen's 
compensation insurance established by said chapter, — with the 
unimportant exception of its liability in cases of such employees 
as may decline to accept the provisions thereof, — and its sub- 
scribers are limited to employers "in the Commonwealth." Its 
maximum liability upon any particular policy is fixed by the 
statute itself and claims against it are promptly heard and deter- 
mined as they arise. In respect of these characteristics the com- 
pany is to be readily distinguished from other companies which 
may engage in the business of insuring against loss or damage 
resulting from accident to or injuries suffered by an employee 
or other person, for which the insured is liable, or against loss 
from liability on account of the death of or injury to an em- 
ployee not caused by the negligence of an employer, in connec- 
tion with other forms of insurance and in many States, to which 
companies the provisions of St. 1907, c. 576, § 11, are made 
applicable. 

A further and more important distinction, which in my opin- 
ion is decisive of the present question, is that the directors of 
the Massachusetts Employees Insurance Association are required 
to distribute its subscribers into groups in accordance with the 



32 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

nature of the business and the degree of the risk of injury, and 
to fix all premiums, assessments and dividends by and for such 
groups according to the experience of each group. By section 
17 of Part IV. it is provided that any proposed premium, assess- 
ment, dividend or distribution into groups shall not be effective 
until approved by the Insurance Commissioner. The obvious 
purpose of these provisions was to furnish adequate insurance 
to the employee at the least possible cost to the subscriber, and 
the division into groups was required in order that the actual 
cost of such insurance in any group might be readily ascertained 
and established and the surplus remaining in the hands of the 
company might be seasonably returned to those by whom it had 
been contributed, in the proportions fixed by the experience of 
the especial group in which each subscriber was enrolled. In 
view of this purpose, a determination of the indebtedness of the 
company for outstanding losses according to the provisions of 
St. 1907, c. 576, § 11, in its amended form, which would impose 
upon the company an arbitrary charge against each policy, with- 
out reference to the group in which it was placed, would not 
only be not pertinent to the group system but in conflict there- 
with. 

In reply to your specific question, therefore, I have to advise 
you that in my opinion the Massachusetts Employees Insurance 
Association does not come under the provisions of St. 1907, 
c. 576, § 11, as amended by St. 1911, cc. 54 and 315. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General . 



Boston Elevated Railway Company — East Boston Tunnel — 
Tolls — Security for Bonds of City of Boston — Substitu- 
tion of Annual Appropriation — Impairment of Obligation 
of Contract — Constitutional Laiv. 

A proposed bill providing that ''the city of Boston is hereby authorized 
to appropriate from the tax levy each year . . . the sum of one 
hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars to be added to the rental 
received from the Boston Elevated Railway Company for the lease 
of the East Boston tunnel, the sum total of which shall be used 
to provide for the payment of the interest and sinking fund re- 
quirements of the bonds issued for the construction of the East 
Boston tunnel," in so far as it requires that such appropriation 
shall be used for a purpose which amounts to an indirect abolition 
of such tolls in a manner not necessarily in accordance with the 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 33 

provisions of St. 1897, c. 500, § 17, that the city of Boston shall 
collect from each person passing through such tunnel in either direc- 
tion a toll of one cent, to be used with other funds to meet the 
interest and sinking fund requirements of bonds issued by the city 
of Boston to defray the cost of constructing such tunnel unless such 
tolls are abolished or diminished by the Board of Eailroad Commis- 
sioners in the manner and for the reasons set forth in said section, 
if enacted would be unconstitutional and void as impairing the 
obligation of the contract created by such section. 

March 12, 1913. 
Hon. GRArTON D. Gushing, Speaker, House of Bepresentatives. 

Dear Sir : — I have the honor to transmit herewith my opin- 
ion submitted in accordance with the order of the Honorable 
House of Eepresentatives, as follows: — 

Ordered, That the Attorney-General be requested to inform the 
House of Representatives whether, in his opinion, the provisions of 
House Bill No. 1961, being An Act to authorize the city of Boston 
to assume the payment of the tolls for the use of the East Boston 
tunnel, a copy of which is sent herewith, would, if enacted, violate 
any provision of the Constitution of the United States or of the Con- 
stitution of the Commonwealth. 

House Bill 'No. 1961, referred to in said order, is entitled 
" An Act to authorize the city of Boston to assume the payment 
of the tolls for the use of the East Boston tunnel," and provides 
as follows : — 

Section 1. The city of Boston is hereby authorized to appropriate 
from the tax levy each year, until the tenth day of June, nineteen 
hundred and twenty-two, the sum of one hundred and twenty-five 
thousand dollars to be added to the rental received from the Boston 
Elevated Railway Company for the lease of the East Boston tunnel, 
the sum total of which shall be used to provide for the payment of 
the interest and sinking fund requirements of the bonds issued for 
the construction of the East Boston tunnel. Said appropriation may 
be initiated by either the mayor or city council. 

Section 2. This act shall take effect upon its passage. 

While the inquiry of the Honorable House of Representatives 
is very broad in its terms, I assume that it is directed toward the 
effect of such bill, if enacted, upon the provisions of St. 1897, 
c. 500, § 17, of which the material part is as follows: — 

. . . Said city shall collect from each person passing through said 
tunnel in either direction a toll of one cent : provided, hoicever, that 



34 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

if in any year ending on the thirtieth day of September the receipts 
from such tolls, together with the rental above provided for, amount 
to a sum so in excess of the interest and sinking fund requirements 
of said bonds for that year that the board of railroad commissioners 
is of opinion that the toll may be reduced, said board shall on petition 
of ten citizens of said city establish such reduced toll for the period 
of one year from the first day of January next ensuing, as will in its 
opinion yield an amount sufficient to meet, with said rental, said 
interest and sinking fund requirements for that year; or said board 
may altogether discontinue such toll when it is of opinion that such 
rental alone is sufficient to meet said requirements; but any such 
reduction shall be carried into effect by a provision for the sale of 
tickets, and the cash fare shall continue to be one cent. The whole 
amount of such tolls and of said rentals is hereby pledged to meet 
the principal and interest of the bonds issued to pay for the con- 
struction of said tunnel or tunnels, and this pledge shall be expressed 
on the face of such bonds as one of the terms thereof; provided, 
however, that after such tolls have been discontinued if said rentals 
shall for any year ending on the thirtieth day of September yield an 
amount more than sufficient to meet the interest and sinking fund 
requirements of said bonds for such year such excess over said re- 
quirements shall be regarded as general revenue of said city. In case 
in any year the rentals and tolls above-provided for shall not yield 
a sufficient amount to meet said interest and sinking fund require- 
ments the compensation received by said city under section ten of this 
act shall be applied so far as may be necessary toward meeting such 
requirements. Said corporation shall be the agent of said city to 
collect such tolls under such arrangements as shall be agreed upon by 
said city and said corporation, or in case of disagreement, as shall 
be determined by the board of railroad commissioners. 

In discussing an amendment to this section which abolished 
such tolls and instead thereof required the city of Boston to set 
aside from the compensation received by it from the Boston 
Elevated Railway Company under section 10 of the same chap- 
ter a toll of one cent for each person passing through said tun- 
nel in either direction, the then Attorney- Grcneral, in an opinion 
to the committee on metropolitan affairs (II. Op. Atty.-Gen- 
505) said: — 

It is to be observed that the pledge above referred to is obviously 
designed to afford security for the full and timely pajnnent of the 
principal and interest of the bonds issued to pay for the work of con- 
structing the tunnel, by specifically devoting a certain income to that 
purpose. If the income as assigned exceeds the amount necessarj^, 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 35 

the surplus may be treated as the general revenue of the city of 
Boston. If, on the other hand, the specified sources are not sufficient 
to provide the necessary sum, a third source of income is made avail- 
able, namely, the income received by the city as compensation for the 
use of the public streets, ways and places, under the provisions of 
section 10. If, after experiment, it appears to the Board of Rail- 
road Commissioners that the tolls and rental exceed the amount re- 
quired for principal and interest of the bonds issued by the city, 
they may reduce the toll by making provision for the sale of tickets, 
though cash fares must still be paid in the same amount by passen- 
gers; and if the rental alone becomes sufficient for the specified pur- 
poses, the tolls may be discontinued. 

House Bill No. 1192 in effect abolishes one source of income, viz., 
the tolls, and provides that the am.ount which would have been fur- 
nished to the city from such tolls shall be payable out of the com- 
pensation received by the city under section 10. This may or may 
not diminish or materially affect the sources of income available as 
security for the bonds issued, since the amount received as compen- 
sation under section 10 by the city may or may not be sufficient to 
IDrovide for all deficits which may exist from year to year in the 
rental, the significant effect of the provision being to abolish the tolls 
entirely. This, in my judgment, constitutes a material interference 
with and impairment of the obligation of contract between the city 
and the bondholders, created by section 17. If the effect of the pro- 
posed legislation were merely to substitute one security for another of 
equal value, it would be, if compulsory, objectionable on constitu- 
tional grounds; if the compulsory substitution be to provide a secur- 
ity of less value than the original, or one of a lower grade, it cer- 
tainly conflicts with constitutional requirements. 

Again, in discussing the question whether or not it is within 
the constitutional power of the Legislature to abolish the tolls 
provided for in said section, the Supreme Judicial Court, in an 
opinion to the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives 
(Opinion of the Justices, 190 Mass. 605, 608), said: — 

Section 10 of Article I. of the Constitution of the United States 
contains this provision : " No state shall . . . pass any . . . ex post 
facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any 
title of nobility," etc. Upon each of the bonds referred to, issued by 
the city of Boston in accordance with the provisions of the St. of 
1897, c. 500, are stamped the following words: "East Boston Tunnel. 
The whole amount of the rentals for the use of and tolls for persons 
passing through the East Boston tunnel is pledged for the payment 
of the principal and interest of this loan." This statement, which 
was thus made a part of the contract on the faith of which pur- 



36 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

chasers have bought the bonds, was authorized and required by the 
statute. The fact that lies behind the statement, namely, that the 
rentals and tolls are actually set apart and pledged as security for 
this payment, is also a requirement of the statute. We have, there- 
fore, a contract which rests not only upon the agreement of the city, 
made for a valuable consideration, but upon the deliberate action 
and solemnly pledged faith of the Commonwealth. The tolls referred 
to are the tolls then established by law and they cannot be dimin- 
ished without reducing the security to which the owners of the bonds 
are entitled. It is plain that the sale of bonds, carrying on their face 
this stipulation, creates a contract with each purchaser which it is not 
in the power of the Legislature to impair. 

It appears to be well established, therefore, that any legisla- 
tion which affects or impairs the security afforded by the collec- 
tion of the tolls as above required to the holders of bonds to 
meet the principal and interest for which such tolls are pledged 
would clearly be unconstitutional, and this would be true not- 
withstanding the fact that some other form of security was sub- 
stituted therefor. Seihert v. Leivis, 122 U. S. 284, 290; Nelson 
V. 8t. Martin's Parish, 111 U. S. 716; Louisiana v. Pillshunj, 
105 U. S. 278, 287, 288. 

So far as the proposed bill purports to substitute for the se- 
curity afforded by the collection of the tolls from persons passing 
through the East Boston tunnel another and different form of 
security to be paid by the city of Boston from its general revenue 
as raised by taxation, and to abolish such tolls, it would, in my 
opinion, be unconstitutional as impairing the obligation of the 
contract. While the bill is entitled "An Act to authorize the 
city of Boston to assume the payment of the tolls for the use of 
the East Boston tunnel," the bill itself, however, does not in 
terms confer any such authorization. The first part of the bill 
goes no further than to permit the city of Boston to appropriate 
annually the sum mentioned therein, " to be added to the rental 
received from the Boston Elevated Eailway Company for the 
lease of the East Boston tunnel." It does not abolish the tolls 
themselves or affect them except only and in so far as they may 
be reduced or discontinued by the Board of Railroad Commis- 
sioners under the provisions of the section quoted upon the basis 
of a rental which includes the amount actually paid in by the 
Boston Elevated Railway Company, amounting to three-eighths 
of 1 per cent, of the gross receipts for each year ending Septem- 
ber 30 of all lines owned, leased or operated by it, plus the 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 37 

amount appropriated by the city of Boston under the provisions 
of the proposed bill, if added thereto. 

Whether or not such appropriation may be properly added to 
the actual rental as a basis for a reduction or discontinuance of 
the tolls, it is not necessary to decide, for, if such appropriation 
may not legally be added to or considered a part of the rental 
for such purpose, the tolls will not in any wise be affected by 
the enactment of said iirst portion of the proposed bill. 

As to the second portion of the bill, providing that '^ the sum 
total of which shall be used to provide for the pa5rment of the 
interest and sinking fund requirements of the bonds issued for 
the construction of the East Boston tunnel," there seems to be 
constitutional objection in that it requires that the appropriation 
provided by said act " shall be used " in such a way as to amount 
to an indirect abolition of the tolls in a manner not necessarily 
in accordance with the provision of the original statute herein- 
before quoted, St. 1897, c. 500, § 17. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney- General. 



Insurance — Life and Disability Insurance — Separate and Dis- 
tinct Policies — Benefits conditioned upon Disability — 
Waiver of Premiums — Special Surrender Values. 

Under the provisions of St. 1907, e. 576, § 34, as amended by St. 1912, 
e. 524, § 1, that ''contracts of insurance for each of the classes 
specified in section thirty-two shall be in separate and distinct 
policies . . . except that . . . any foreign life insurance company 
authorized to transact business in this commonwealth . . . may in- 
corporate in its policies of insurance provisions for the waiver of 
premiums or for the granting of special surrender values therefor 
in the event that the insured thereunder shall from any cause be- 
come totally and permanently disabled, ..." a foreign life insur- 
ance company authorized to do business in this Conunonwealth may 
incorporate in its policies a provision that in case the insured 
becomes wholly disabled by bodily injury or disease so as to be 
permanently and continuously prevented from engaging in any 
occupation for remuneration or profit after he has attained the age 
of sixty years, the company ''shall waive payment of each premium 
thereafter becoming due during such disability, but the face amount 
of the policy shall be reduced by the amount of each such waived 
premium, ..." the deduction so made being the amount of the 
premium on insurance not presently payable of which the value is 
at all times less than the amount of the premium in cash, and to 
the extent of such difference constituting a voluntary relinquish- 
ment of premium upon the part of such company. 



38 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

March 12, 1913. 
Hon. Frank H. Harbison, Insurance Commissioner. 

Dear Sir : — By a letter dated February 10 you have sub- 
mitted for my consideration certain questions relative to a form 
of policy presented for your approval by the New York Life In- 
surance Company. 

By St. 1907, c. 576, § 34, it was provided that " contracts of 
insurance for each of the classes specified in section thirty-two, 
shall be in separate and distinct policies, notwithstanding any 
provision of this act which permits a company to transact more 
than one of said classes of insurance," and this provision, in 
j^tna Life Insurance Co. v. Tlardison, 199 Mass. 180, was held 
to forbid the offer in a policy of life insurance of any special 
or peculiar benefit in case of impairment of the health of the 
insured by bodily injury or disease, such as to prevent the in- 
sured for the rest of his life from pursuing any gainful occupa- 
tion. 

By St. 1912, c. 524, entitled "An Act relative to lapse and 
surrender values in policies of insurance," in section 1 the sec- 
tion above quoted was amended so as to read as follows : — 

Contracts of insurance for each of the classes specified in section 
thirty-two shall be in separate and distinct policies notwithstanding 
any provision of this act which permits a company to transact more 
than one of said classes of insurance; except that any domestic life 
insurance company, notwithstanding any limitations of its charter 
to the contrary, and any foreign life insurance company authorized 
to transact business in this commonwealth, if it is permitted so to do 
hy its charter or by the state in which it is incorporated, whether or 
not it has a capital stock, may incorporate in its policies of insurance 
provisions for the waiver of premiums or for the granting of special 
surrender values therefor in the event that the insured thereunder 
shall from any cause become totally and permanently disabled, which 
pro\dsions shall state the special benefits to be granted thereunder 
and the cost of such concessions to the insured, and shall define in 
such policies what shall constitute total and permanent disability. 

Under authority of the amended section the New York Life 
Insurance Company has submitted for approval a policy which, 
under the title "A. Waiver of Premiums," provides as fol- 
lows : — 

If, after this policy shall have been in force one full year, and be- 
fore default in the payment of any premium, the company receives 
due proof that the insured before attaining the age of sixty years 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 39 

has become wholly disabled by bodily injury or disease so that he is 
and will be presumably, thereby permanently and continuously pre- 
vented from engaging in any occupation whatsoever for remuneration 
or profit, the company shall waive payment of each premium as it 
thereafter becomes due during the insured's said disability. In mak- 
ing any settlement under this policy the company shall not deduct 
any part of the premiums so waived, and the loan and cash surren- 
der values provided for under section 2 shall increase from year to 
year in the same manner as if the premiums so waived had been paid 
in cash. Under all the conditions aforesaid, except that the insured 
shall have attained the age of sixty years before becoming disabled, 
the Company shall waive payment of each premium thereafter be- 
coming due during such disability, but the face amount of the policy 
shall be reduced by the amount of each such waived premium, and 
the loan and cash surrender values as provided for under section 2 
shall be based upon said reduced amount of insurance in the same 
manner as if the premiums for such reduced amount of insurance 
had been duly paid. 



Upon so much of the paragraph above quoted as provides that 
in case the insured becomes wholly disabled by bodily injury or 
disease so as to be permanently and continuously prevented from 
engaging in any occupation for remuneration or profit after he 
has attained the age of sixty years, " the company shall waive 
payment of each premium thereafter becoming due during such 
disability, but the face amount of the policy shall be reduced by 
the amount of each such waived premium, . . ."' you require my 
opinion as to whether or not " it is actually a waiver of a pre- 
mium when the company immediately reduces the amount of 
the insurance by the so-called waived premium,^' and, also, 
" whether the statute permits a change in the policy by a reduc- 
tion from the amount of insurance upon the happening of the 
contingency in question, viz., total and permanent disability.'^ 

The amendment effected by St. 1912, c. 524, § 1, was not in- 
tended, in my opinion, to permit any general combination of life 
and disability insurance in a single policy, but is limited to and 
includes within its terms only benefits conditioned upon dis- 
ability conferred by waiver of premiums or by special surrender 
values. 

It is well settled that a waiver is an intentional relinquish- 
ment of a known right (Shaw v. Spencer, 100 Mass. 382, 395; 
Worcester v. Piatt, 128 Mass. 367, 372; United Firemen's Insur- 
ance Co. V. Thomas, 82 Eed. Eep., 406, 408) ; and the waiver 



40 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

of a premium, to fall within the terms of the statute, must be 
a voluntaiy relinquishment of such premium either in whole or 
in part. If the effect of the provision in the policy now before 
me were merely to relieve the insured from the burden of paying 
his annual premium and to charge the full amount thereof 
against him by making a corresponding reduction in the obliga- 
tion of the company as set forth in the policy contract, the trans- 
action might well be held to fall short of a waiver of premium, 
since the compan}^ would still be receiving from another source 
the full amount of the premium, and so would relinquish 
nothing. It is to be observed, however, that the deduction from 
the face of the policy is not a deduction of the amount of the 
premium in money but in insurance not presently payable, the 
value of which is at all times less than the amount of the pre- 
mium, and to the extent of such difference, therefore, there is 
a voluntary relinquishment of premium upon the part of the 
company, or, in other words, a partial waiver of premium which 
in my opinion satisfies the requirements of St. 1907, c. 576, 
§ 34, as amended by St. 1912, c. 524, § 1. 

With respect to the reduction of the face of the policy, I am 
further of opinion that said amendment does not, in the precise 
terms of your second inquiry and as an independent proposition, 
" permit a change in the policy by a reduction from the amount 
of insurance upon the happening of the contingency in question, 
viz., total and permanent disability.'^ In the particular case 
under consideration, however, such reduction must be taken in 
connection with the partial waiver of premium and, in my opin- 
ion, may fairly be said to be incidental thereto (see Metropolitan 
Life Insurance Co. v. Insurance Commissioner, 208 Mass. 386), 
and, therefore, permitted by the statute. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-Gefieral 



Constitutional Law — Legislature — Delegation of Legislative 

Power — Act creating Judicial District — Submission to 

Voters of District — Right to require Opinion of Justices 

of Supreme Judicial Court — Important Question of Law. 

The Legislature may constitutionally enact a statute providing that the 

county of Nantucket shall constitute a judicial district under the 

jurisdiction of a court to be called the district court of Nantucket 

and that the act ' ' shall be submitted to the voters of the county 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 41 

of jSTantucket at the annual state election in the current year, and 
if accepted by a majority of the voters voting thereon it shall take 
effect immediately so far as the appointment and qualifying of the 
justices of the court are concerned, and for the remainder of the 
act it shall take effect on the first day of January in the year nine- 
teen hundred and fourteen." 
It is doubtful if an inquiry as to the power of the Legislature to enact 
a statute which shall take effect upon acceptance by a majority 
of the voters in such district voting thereon presents such an im- 
portant question of law as could authorize a request for an opinion 
of the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court. 

March 29, 1913. 

George P. Drury", Esq., Chairman, House Committee on Bills in the Third 

Beading. 

Dear Sir : — ■ In response to your inquiry made in behalf of 
the committee on bills in the third reading as to whether or not 
section 5 of House Bill No. 2159, now pending, a copy of which 
you inclosed, is constitutional ; and also '^ whether or not the 
constitutionality of said section is so doubtful as to require in 
your judgment an opinion of the justices of the Supreme Ju- 
dicial Court before the bill containing that section shall be 
enacted into law/' I have the honor to submit herewith my 
opinion. 

The bill to which said question refers is entitled " An Act to 
establish the district court of Nantucket," and provides in sec- 
tion 1 that — 

The county of Nantucket shall constitute a judicial district, under 
the jurisdiction of a court to be called the District Court of Nan- 
tucket. 



Section 5 is as follows : — 

This act shall be submitted to the voters of the county of Nan- 
tucket at the annual state election in the current year, and if accepted 
by a majority of the voters voting thereon it shall take effect imme- 
diately so far as the appointment and qualifying of the justices of 
the court are concerned, and for the remainder of the act it shall 
take effect on the first day of January in the year nineteen hundred 
and fourteen. 



The precise nature of the constitutional question upon which 
the committee desires to be advised is not stated, but I assume 
that it relates to the power of the Legislature to make the act 



42 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

effective upon acceptance by a majority of the voters of the 
county of Nantucket. 

The right of the Legislature to delegate some of its legislative 
functions to agencies of the State or to municipalities is well 
established. Thus, it may delegate to State or local adminis- 
trative boards or officers the working out of details under a legis- 
lative act {Commonwealth v. 8isson, 189 Mass. 247, 252; Nel- 
son V. State Board of Health, 186 Mass. 330; Sprague v. Dorr, 
185 Mass. 10), and this extends to authority given to State or 
local boards or officers to make rules and regulations which are 
punishable like breaches of the peace (Brodbine v. Revere, 
182 Mass. 598), subject to the condition that such rules and 
regulations shall not change a general law effective throughout 
the Commonwealth. See Wyeth v. Cambridge Board of Health, 
200 Mass. 474, 481. 

With respect to the delegation of legislative powers to be ex- 
ercised in accepting legislation passed by the General Court and 
to become effective upon acceptance, it is well settled that while 
the power to accept a general law by a vote of all the people may 
not be delegated, laws relating to cities and towns which are 
local in their nature, so that they may be differently dealt with 
in different places, may be made to take effect upon acceptance 
by the voters in the municipalities to which they are applicable. 
Opinion of the Justices, 160 Mass. 587. Thus, it is stated in 
Brodbine v. Revere, supra, p. 600, that there is a well-known 
exception to the rule that the Legislature may not delegate the 
general power to make laws, " namely, the existence of town or 
other local governmental organizations which have always been 
accustomed to exercise self-government in regard to local police 
regulations and other matters affecting peculiarly the interests 
of their own inhabitants. On this account the determination of 
matters of this kind has been held to be a proper exercise of 
local self-government which the Legislature may commit to a 
city or town." And the court cites Commonwealth v. Bennett, 
108 Mass. 27; Stone v. Charlestown, 114 Mass. 214; and the 
Opinion of the Justices, 160 Mass. 586, 589. 

The only question presented by the inquiry of the committee, 
therefore, is whether or not the rule so established extends to and 
includes the establishment of a judicial district by the accept- 
ance by the people thereof of the act constituting it. 

I can see no reasonable distinction in principle between the 
acceptance by the voters of a city or town of a statute which 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 43 

deals with the local affairs of that city or town and the accept- 
ance by the voters of any other governmental subdivision of a 
question which deals with the local affairs of such subdivision, 
whether it be a county, a water or fire district or a judicial dis- 
trict. Thus, it has been held that a provision in a statute re- 
lating to the incorporation of irrigation districts, that the 
question whether any proposed district shall be organized there- 
under may be determined by vote of the citizens of such district, 
is not a delegation of legislative power. FallhrooTc Irrigation 
Distnct V. Bradley, 164 U. S. 112. So, also, of the approval 
of an act changing the boundaries of two adjoining counties by 
a two-thirds vote of the voters in the territory affected. JacJcson 
V. State, 131 Ala. 21. See, as to counties, People v. Saline, 
176 111. 165; Ex parte Burnside, 86 Ky. 423; Blach v. Commis- 
sioners of Buncombe County, 129 N. C. 121; Ems v. Hudson, 
36 Mont. 135. 

The fact that the governmental unit to be constituted is a 
judicial district does not, in my opinion, affect the question ad- 
versely. The constitutional provision that "the general court 
shall forever have full power and authority to erect and consti- 
tute judicatories and courts of record, or other courts, . . ." 
(Part the Second, c. 1, § 1, Art. III.), may be exercised in the 
same manner as its authority '^from time to time to make, or- 
dain, and establish, all manner of wholesome and reasonable 
orders, laws, statutes, and ordinances, directions and instruc- 
tions, ... as they shall judge to be for the good and welfare 
of this commonwealth" (Art. IV.). See Russell v. Howe, 
12 Gray, 147. While it is true that in practice the acceptance 
of statutes by popular vote has generally been limited to acts 
relating to matters of local regulation affecting peculiarly the 
interests of the inhabitants of cities and towns, such practice 
does not affect the principle. There is no reason why the same 
authority may not be conferred upon local governmental organi- 
zations other than cities and towns. See language in Brodbine 
V. Revere, supra, p. 600. In Butter v. Sullivan, 25 W. Va. 427, 
it was held that an act constituting a municipal court for the 
city of Huntington should be submitted to the voters of said 
city, and, if accepted by a majority of them, should be effectual, 
and if not so accepted, should be of no effect, was constitutional ; 
and I see no reason why the same result should not be reached 
where the question is submitted to the voters of a county instead 
of a city or town. 



44 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

With respect to the second question submitted by the com- 
mittee, it may be doubted whether the present inquiry is of the 
kind upon which the court is required to express an opinion. 
See Opinion of the Justices, 211 Mass. 630; 208 Mass. 614; 
150 Mass. 598; 148 Mass. 623; and 122 Mass. 600. But whether 
or not it is to be treated as such an important question of law, 
I do not think that it may properly be said to be so doubtful as 
to require such an opinion. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Street Eailiuays — Authority to become Common Carriers of 
Express Matter and Freight — Regulations and Restrictions 
— Board of Railroad Commissioners — Approval. 

Where, under the provisions of St. 1907, e. 402, § 1, that a street rail- 
way company may become a common carrier of newspapers, bag- 
gage, express matter and freight in such cases, upon such parts of 
its railway, and to such extent, in any city or town, as the board 
of aldermen or the selectmen in such city or town and the Board 
of Eailroad Commissioners shall by order approve, and that if the 
board of aldermen or selectmen act adversely upon the petition of 
the company or fail to act within sixty days from the date of the 
filing thereof, the petitioner or interested party may present a peti- 
tion to the Board of Eailroad Commissioners, who, if public neces- 
sity and convenience require the granting of such petition, shall 
make an order requiring any street railway company named in such 
petition to act as such common carrier in such cases, upon such 
parts of its railway and to such extent and under such regulations 
and restrictions as in the opinion of said railroad commissioners 
public necessity and convenience require, the board of selectmen 
of a town had authorized a street railway to become a common 
carrier of newspapers, baggage, express matter and freight, and 
thereafter, before any action was taken by the street railway com- 
pany to obtain the approval of the Board of Eailroad Commis- 
sioners, duly revoked its order, such revocation does not constitute 
adverse action upon the petition which would authorize the Board 
of Eailroad Commissioners to receive and act upon such petition. 
If, however, no further action was taken within sixty days of the 
date of the filing of the petition, the selectmen have failed to act 
within the meaning of the provision above cited and the Board of 
Eailroad Commissioners would be authorized to entertain a petition 
by the street railway company or any other interested party, and, 
after public notice and a hearing, to determine whether or not 
public necessity and convenience required the granting thereof. 

Where a board of selectmen in an order approving of a street railway 
becoming a common carrier of newspapers, baggage, express matter 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 45 

and freight under the provisions of St. 1907, c. 402, includes therein 
illegal limitations or conditions, the Board of Eailroad Commis- 
sioners may disregard such illegal limitations and conditions and 
may approve such matters contained in the order as the selectmen 
were authorized to include therein. 

April 14, 1913. 
Hon. Fred J. Macleod, Chairman, Board of Eailroad Commissioners. 

Dear Sir : — You have submitted for my consideration cer- 
tain general inquiries relative to the application of the provi- 
sions of St. 1907, c. 402, § 1. This section is as follows: — 

A street railway company may become a common carrier of news- 
papers, baggage, express matter and freight in such eases, upon such 
parts of its railway, and to such extent, in any city or town, as, 
after public notice and a hearing, upon the petition of any interested 
party, the board of aldermen or the selectmen in such city or town 
and the board of railroad commissioners shall by order approve. If 
the board of aldermen or selectmen to whom such a petition is pre- 
sented act adversely thereon or fail to act within sixty days from the 
date of the filing of such petition the petitioner or any interested 
party may file such petition with the board of railroad commis- 
sioners, who shall after public notice and a hearing determine 
whether public necessity and convenience require the granting of such 
petition and shall make an order dismissing such petition or requir- 
ing any street railway company named in such petition to act as such 
common carrier in such cases, upon such parts of its railway and to 
such extent, and under such regulations and restrictions, as in the 
opinion of said railroad commissioners public necessity and con- 
venience require. Any street railway company acting under author- 
ity hereof shall be subject to such regulations and restrictions as may 
from time to time be made by the local authorities aforesaid, with 
the approval of the railroad commissioners, and shall also be subject 
to the provisions of all laws now or hereafter in force relating to 
common carriers so far as they shall be consistent herewith and with 
said regulations and restrictions. The authority conferred upon any 
street railway company by wtue of the provisions of this act may 
at any time be revoked or terminated in any city or town or upon 
any part of its railway, by the board of aldermen or selectmen with 
the approval of the board of railroad commissioners. 

You inquire : — 

(1) Assuming that the board of selectmen have by an order after 
notice and hearing authorized a street railway company to become a 
common carrier of newspapers, baggage, express matter and freight 
in accordance with the provisions of chapter 402 of the Acts of 1907, 



46 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

and that before any action is taken by the street railway company 
to obtain approval of the Board of Railroad Commissioners the 
board of selectmen revokes its order. Does this constitute an adverse 
action by the board of selectmen which authorizes the Board of Rail- 
road Commissioners to act upon a petition of the street railway com- 
pany to become a common carrier if public necessity and convenience 
require the granting of such petition in accordance with the provi- 
sions of said chapter? 

Upon the assumption above stated, that the order of approval 
made by the selectmen was duly revoked by them, I am of opin- 
ion that such revocation is not to be regarded as adverse action 
upon the petition before them, but that if thereafter no further 
action was taken within sixty days of the date of the filing of 
said petition, the selectmen have failed to act within the mean- 
ing of the statute and the Board of Railroad Commissioners 
would be authorized to entertain a petition by the street railway 
company or any other interested party, and, after public notice 
and a hearing, to determine whether or not public necessity and 
convenience require the granting of such petition. 

(2) Assuming that a board of selectmen in an order approving of 
a street railway company becoming a common carrier of newspapers, 
baggage, express matter and freight under the provisions of chapter 
402 of the Acts of 1907 include in that order certain provisions which 
the Board of Railroad Commissioners deems improper or illegal, 
such as a twenty-year limitation or requiring the street railway com- 
pany to light the streets of the town, can the Board of Railroad Com- 
missioners approve of said order eliminating in its order such pro- 
visions as it deems improper or illegal? 

I am of opinion that the statute above quoted does not au- 
thorize the selectmen of a town, in making an order approving 
the carrying on' by a street railway company of the business of 
a common carrier of newspapers, baggage, express matter and 
freight, to impose therein either a limitation upon the duration 
of the franchise or conditions requiring the lighting of the 
streets or other similar services. The procedure of the Board, 
however, with respect to an order containing such provisions, 
which is presented for approval, raises a more difficult question. 
It might well be argued that since the approval of the selectmen 
is conditioned upon limitations and requirements which are 
illegal and, therefore, of no binding force and effect, the order 
as a whole should be treated as a nullity, and the moving party 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 47 

should be required to petition the Board to make an order in the 
premises upon the ground that the selectmen had failed to act 
within the required period of time. Upon the other hand, it has 
been held that the acceptance of a grant of location by a street 
railway company does not make valid conditions which the select- 
men could not legally impose. Keefe v. Lexington & Boston 
Street Railway Co., 184 Mass. 183, 185. And the invalidity of 
such conditions does not render invalid the grant of the loca- 
tion. See Keefe v. Lexington & Boston Street Railway Co., 
supra; Selectmen of Wellesley v. Boston & Worcester Street 
Railway, 188 Mass. 250. In the case suggested by your inquiry, 
therefore, there would seem to be authority for the conclusion 
that the imposition of illegal limitations or conditions would 
not render void so much of the order of the selectmen as pur- 
ported to approve the operation of the street railway company 
as a common carrier, the cases in which, the parts of its railway 
upon which, and the extent to which it should so act. This in 
my opinion is the better view, and it would follow that the 
Board of Eailroad Commissioners would be authorized to ap- 
prove such matters contained in said order as the selectmen 
might legally include therein. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Flats — Cultivation of Food and Bait Mollushs — Grant from 
the Commonwealth to Private Individuals of Right to con- 
trol Area between High and Low Water Marie — Eminent 
Domain — Constitutional Law. 

A proposed bill to authorize the Commissioners on Fisheries and Game, 
acting in behalf of the Commonwealth, to grant a license for not 
more than fifteen years to any inhabitant of the Commonwealth to 
plant, grow and dig mollusks or to plant shells for the purpose of 
catching moHusk seed upon and in any territory below mean high 
water mark which contemplates not only the granting of the exclu- 
sive right to take shellfish for such period and to plant and grow 
mollusks and plant shells for the purpose of catching mollusk seed 
upon the area defined in such license, but also the entire exclusion 
of the owner, where such flats are subject to private ownership, 
from any use or occupation of such flats by inclosure or filling, 
cannot be justified as the imposition, under the police power, of a 
reasonable regulation, limitation or restraint in the use and enjoy- 
ment of property to prevent the same from being injurious to 
others, and constitutes so material an interference with existing 



48 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

rights of property in such areas as to amount to an exercise of tlie 
power of eminent domain without due provision for compensating 
the owner of the property taken, and such bill, if enacted, would 
therefore be unconstitutional and void. 

May 1, 1913. 

Benjamin Sharp, M.D., Chairman, House Committee on Fisheries and 

Game. 

Dear Sir : — You have submitted to me on behalf of the com- 
mittee on fisheries and game the following inquiry : — 

May the Commonwealth constitutionally provide for leasing to 
private individuals the right to control the area between high and 
low water marks upon tidal flats, as provided in sections 2 and 5 of 
the proposed act relating to the cultivation of food and bait mol- 
lusks, Avhich is submitted herewith ? — 

The sections to which you refer are as follows : — 

Section 2. The commissioners on fisheries and game may, by 
writing under their hands, grant a license, for a term not exceeding 
fifteen years, to any inhabitant of the commonwealth to plant, gTOW 
and dig mollusks at all times of the year or to plant shells for the 
purpose of catching mollusk seed, upon and in any territory, as here- 
inafter specified and described, below mean high water mark, upon 
such terms and conditions as they may deem proper, not, however, 
materially obstructing navigable waters. 

Section 5. The available territory for the growth and planting 
of mollusks shall be divided into two classes; the shallow waters near 
shore, including the flats, creeks, inlets and bays, which shall be 
allotted to the smaller planters; and the deep or more exposed 
waters, which shall be leased to individual planters, partnerships or 
corporations, who shall give suitable guarantee of sufficient capital 
to develop the same. Due regard for the public fisheries shall be 
given by the commissioners on fisheries and game in granting these 
licenses. 

The question of the committee requires my opinion upon the 
constitutionality of the provision for the granting by the Com- 
monwealth of licenses to individuals, for a fixed term of years, 
to cultivate mollusks upon flats below mean high water mark 
and above extreme low water mark. 

By the colony ordinance of 1641-47 it was provided that 
every inhabitant who was a householder should have free fishing 
and fowling in any great ponds and bays, coves and rivers so 
far as the sea ebbs and flows, within the precincts of the town 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 49 

in which they lived, unless the town had otherwise appropriated 
them, and that in all creeks, coves and other places upon tide- 
waters the proprietors of the upland adjoining should have prop- 
erty to the low water mark where the sea does not ebb above 
one hundred rods and no more whatsoever it ebbs, and, further, 
that such proprietors should not have power to stop or hinder 
the passage of boats or other vessels to any other man's houses 
or lands. See Commomvealth v. Eoxburij, 9 Gray 451 (note). 

The effect of the colony ordinance is stated in Commonwealth 
V. Alger, 7 Gush. 53, 79, to be — 

That it vested the property of the flats in the owner of the upland 
in fee, in the nature of a grant; but that it was to be held subject 
to a general right of the public for navigation until built upon or in- 
closed, and subject also to the reservation that it should not be built 
upon or inclosed in such manner as to impede the public right of way 
over it for boats and vessels. 

Again, in Henry v. Neiuburyport, 149 Mass. 582, 585, in 
speaking of the colony ordinance, the court said : — 

This secured to such proprietor, not merely an easement, but a 
property in the land in fee, with full power to reclaim the flats by 
building wharves, or inclosing them, so as to exclude navigation, 
provided he did not cut off his neighbors' access to their houses or 
lands. He could erect wharves or other structures thereon, could fill 
up the same, and plant stakes thereon, even to the obstruction of the 
public right of fishing. 

The proprietor of the upland, therefore, has a right of prop- 
erty in the adjacent flats between high and low water mark, — 
or between high water mark and a point one hundred rods dis- 
tant therefrom where the sea ebbs more than one hundred rods, 
— of which he may be deprived only by the exercise of the 
power of eminent domain. See Boston & Roxhury Mill Cor- 
poration V. Neivman, 12 Pick. 467; Ashhy v. Easterri Railroad 
Co., 5 Met. 368; Drury v. Midland Railroad, 127 Mass. 571. 
Subject to the provisions of E. L., c. 96, § 17 (1 Op. Atty.-Gen. 
412), he may exclude navigation from his own flats by build- 
ing wharves or other structures down to extreme low water mark 
or for one hundred rods as the case may be, if not prohibited 
from so doing by legislation, and if the structures so erected 
do not materially impede the general navigation of the tide- 
waters of the bay, cove or river upon which they are situated, 



50 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

or cut off access to neighboring houses or lands (Keene v. Stet- 
son, 5 Pick. 492, 495; Davidson v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 
3 Cush. 91, 105; Boston v. Richardson, 105 Mass. 351, 359), or 
ma}^ interfere with the public right of fishing thereon by plant- 
ing stakes. Locke v. Motley, 2 Gray, 265. As was stated by the 
court in Butler v. Attorney-General, 195 Mass. 79, 83 — 

Except as agamst public rights, which are protected for the benefit 
of the people, the private ownership is made perfect. 

And these public rights of fishing, fowling and boating may be 
exercised only so long as the flats are unused and uninclosed. 
See Commonwealth v. Alger, 7 Cush. 53, 79; Weston v. Samp- 
son, 8 Cush. 347, 354; Lakeman v. Burnham, 7 Gray, 437, 441. 

The bill submitted to me purports to authorize the Commis- 
sioners on Fisheries and Game, acting in behalf of the Common- 
wealth, to grant a license for not more than fifteen years to 
any inhabitant of the Commonwealth to plant, grow and dig 
moUusks or to plant shells for the purpose of catching mollusk 
seed upon and in any territory below mean high water mark. 
For the purposes specified the existing public right would per- 
mit no more than an entrance upon the fiats for the taking of 
shellfish. See Packard v. Ryder, 144 Mass. 440, and cases cited. 
The proposed license, however, contemplates not only the grant- 
ing of an exclusive right to take shellfish for a period not ex- 
ceeding fifteen years and to plant and grow mollusks and plant 
shells for the purpose of catching mollusk seed upon the area 
defined in such license but, also, by implication the entire ex- 
clusion of the owner from any use or occupation thereof by 
inclosure or filling. See sections 14 and 17. 

The exercise of the authority so established cannot, in my 
opinion, be justified as the imposition, under the police power, 
of a " reasonable regulation, limitation or restraint in the use 
and enjoyment of property which shall prevent the same from 
being injurious to others,'' such as the establishment of harbor 
lines, as sustained in Commomvealth v. Alger, 7 Cush. 53, 85, 
or the prohibition of the removal of sand or gravel from beaches, 
as in Commonwealth v. Teivkshnry, 11 Met. 55, nor can it be 
regarded as merely a reasonable or proper regulation of or limi- 
tation upon the public right of fishing, such as was sustained 
in Commonwealth v. Vincent, 108 Mass. 441, and Common- 
wealth V. Weatherhead, 110 Mass. 175 (see, also, ^¥atuppa Res- 
ervoir Co. V. Fall River, 147 Mass. 548, 557), for, in addition 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 51 

to the regulation of the public rights the owner of the fee in any 
flats between mean high water mark and extreme low water 
mark is deprived of all use and enjoyment thereof for the dura- 
tion of any license or licenses in which from time to time such 
flats may be included. This constitutes so material an inter- 
ference with existing rights of property in such areas as to re- 
quire me to hold that the bill in effect authorizes an exercise of 
the power of eminent domain without making due provision for 
compensating the owner of the property taken, and that, so far 
as the provisions of said bill purport to confer upon the Com- 
missioners on Fisheries and Game authority to lease any area 
between high and low water mark which is the subject of private 
ownership, they will be, if enacted, unconstitutional and void. 
A^ery truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Register of Deeds — Fee — MinimMm Charge for Recording 
Deeds, Mortgages and Other Instruments. 

The provision contained in St. 1912, c. 502, § 25, entitled ''An Act to 
shorten the forms of deeds, mortgages and other instruments relat- 
ing to real property, ' ' that ' ' fees for recording instruments drawn 
in accordance with the provisions of this act shall be the same as 
those now required by law, but in no case shall the charge tor 
recording a deed or conveyance be less than sixty-five cents, and 
in no case shall the charge for recording a mortgage be less than 
one dollar and twenty-five cents,*' establishes a minimum fee which 
is applicable to all deeds and mortgages whether or not they con- 
form to the provisions of St. 1912, c. 502. 

May 1, 1913. 
Hon. Frank L. Dean, Controller of County Accounts. 

Dear Sir: — Section 25 of chapter 502 of the Acts of 1912, 
entitled " An Act to shorten the forms of deeds, mortgages and 
other instruments relating to real property," provides as fol- 
lows : — 

Fees for recording instruments drawn in accordance with the pro- 
visions of this act shall be the same as those now required by law, 
but in no case shall the charge for recording a deed or conveyance 
be less than sixty-five cents, and in no case shall the charge for 
recording a mortgage be less than one dollar and twenty-five cents. 

You inquire "whether the minimum charge established by this 
section relates only to instruments ' drawn in accordance with 



52 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

the provisions of this act ^ or applies to all instruments whether 
drawn in accordance with this act or otherwise." 

The fees for recording instruments, now required by law, are 
established by E. L., c. 204, § 29, as amended by St. 1908, c. 365, 
and St. 1910, c. 273, and are as follows : — 

The fees of registers of deeds shall be as follows : — 

For entering and recording a deed or other paper, certifying the 
same on the original, and indexing it, and for all other duties per- 
taining thereto, twenty-five cents. If it contains more than one page, 
at the rate of twenty cents for each page after the first: provided, 
however, that if the deed or other paper contains the names of more 
than two parties thereto, other than the husband or wife of the 
grantor or gi*antee, an additional fee of ten cents each shall be 
charged for indexing the names of additional gTantors or grantees 
or other parties thereto. The fees shall be paid when the instru- 
ment is left for record. 

For all copies, at the rate of twenty cents a page. 

For entering in the margin a discharge of a mortgage, twenty-five 
cents. 

For entering a discharge of an attachment or of a lien on build- 
ings and land, if such discharge is certified by them, twenty-five 
cents. 

For entering a partial release of an attachment, twenty-five cents. 

The language of section 25 warrants a conclusion that the 
Legislature intended to establish minimum recording charges 
for deeds and mortgages which should be uniform in applica- 
tion, and in my opinion the provision to which your inquiry is 
directed should be construed to apply to all deeds and mortgages, 
whether or not they conform to the provisions of St. 1912, c. 502. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General . 



Constitutional Law — Appoiiitment of Executive or Administra- 
tive Board or Commission — Confirmation hy Justices of 
Supreme Judicial Court. 

A proposed act which provides that members of a commission estab- 
lished to conserve a water supply of a city shall be appointed by 
the mayor of said city and that such appointment shall be con- 
firmed by the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court where the 
commission so appointed is an executive or administrative depart- 
ment of the municipality and performs no duty properly incidental 
to the administration of justice in or by the courts, if enacted 
would be unconstitutional and void. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 53 

May 7, 1913. 
Hon. Frederic M. Hersey, Chairman, Committee on Water Supply. 

Deak Sir : — On behalf of the committee on water supply you 
have inquired whether or not it is " constitutional and lawful 
for the Legislature to provide that members of a commission 
appointed to conserve a water supply of a city shall be appointed 
by the mayor of said city and that the said appointment shall 
be confirmed by the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court." 

Since the appointments of the commissioners are to be made 
by the mayor of the city, I assume that the commission, when 
constituted and established, is intended to form an executive 
or administrative department of the municipality which is not 
in any way directly responsible to the Supreme Judicial Court, 
does not return to said court an account of its doings for any 
judicial action in the premises, and performs no duty which is 
properly incidental to the administration of justice in or by 
the courts. Upon this assumption, I am of opinion that the 
confirmation of such appointments does not involve the exercise 
of any judicial function and, therefore, cannot be imposed upon 
the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, or any of them, and 
that the provision to which your inquiry refers, if enacted, will 
be unconstitutional and void as being in contravention of the 
provision of Article XXX. of the Declaration of Eights, that 
"the judicial (department) shall never exercise the legislative 
and executive powers, or either of them." See case of Super- 
visors of Election, 114 Mass. 247. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Veteran in the Service of tli€ Commonwealth — Retirement — 
Elective Officer. 

The provision of St. 1907, c. 458, § 1, that ''a veteran of the civil war 
in the service of the Commonwealth, if incapacitated for active 
duty, shall be retired from active service, with the consent of the 
governor, ..." does not apply to elective officers and therefore 
does not include registers of probate. 

William D. Hawley, Esq., Deputy Auditor. ^'^^^ ^^' ■^^-^^• 

Dear Sir : — Under date of May 17 you inquire whether or 
not a register of probate who complies with the conditions and 
requirements of chapter 458 of the Acts of 1907 is eligible for 
retirement thereunder. This statute provides in section 1 
that — 



54 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

A veteran of the civil war in the service of the Commonwealth, if 
incapacitated for active duty, shall be retired from active service, 
with the consent of the governor, at one half the rate of compensa- 
tion paid to him when in active service, to be paid out of the treas- 
ury of the Commonwealth : provided, that no veteran shall be entitled 
to be retired under the provisions of this act unless he shall have been^ 
in the service of the Commonwealth at least ten years. But if, in the 
opinion of the governor and council, any veteran of the civil war 
in said service is incapacitated to such a degTee as to render his 
retirement necessary for the good of the service, he may so be retired 
at any time. A veteran retired under the provisions of this act, 
whose term of service was for a fixed number of years, shall be 
entitled to the benefits of the act without reappointment. 

Registers of probate receive salaries from the Commonwealth, 
and are, therefore, in the service of the Commonwealth, if elect- 
ive officers may be said to be in such service. 

The phrase " service of the Commonwealth '^ is broad enough 
to include elective officers, but I am of opinion that the statute 
was not intended to apply to such officers. For one reason, it 
vests in the Governor and Council the power to retire the in- 
cumbent of an office at any time when the good of the service, 
in the judgment of the Governor and Council, may so require, 
and this right seems to me to be too sweeping and novel to have 
been intended to be applicable to elective officers generally. 
Again, in the concluding sentence, it is stated that "a veteran 
retired under the provisions of this act, whose term of service 
was for a fixed number of years, shall be entitled to the benefits 
of the act without reappointment." If elective officers had been 
included, it seems to me the words " or re-election " would have 
been used. 

I therefore answer your inquiry in the negative. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv^ift, Attorney-General. 



Street or Elevated Railway Company — Employee — Hours of 

Labor. 

A proposed act providing that "a day's work for all conductors, 
guards, drivers, motormen, brakemen and gatemen who are em- 
ployed by or on behalf of a street railway or elevated railway shall 
not exceed nine hours, and shall be so arranged by the employer 
that it shall be performed within eleven consecutive hours," and 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 55 

that "on legal holidays and on Sundays and in case of accident or 
unavoidable delay extra labor may be performed for extra compen- 
sation," if enacted, would prohibit the employment by a street 
railway or elevated railway company of any employee, even if such 
employee so desired, for more than nine hours in any one day, such 
employment to be performed in eleven consecutive hours, except on 
legal holidays and on Sundays or in case of accident or unavoidable 
delay. 

June 2, 1913. 
Hon. Grafton D. Gushing, Speaker, House of Eepresentatives. 

Sir : — I have the honor to submit herewith my opinion 
with reference to the order passed on May 26, 1913, and sub- 
mitted to me under date of May 27, as follows : — 

Order ed. That the opinion of the Attorney-General be requested 
upon the following important question, to wit: Under House Bill 
No. 2518 can an employee of the character mentioned in the bill, if 
he so desires, work longer hours than those prescribed in the bill? 

House Bill No. 2518 reads as follows: — 

Section 1. Chapter five hundred and thirty-three of the acts of 
the year nineteen hundred and twelve is hereby amended by striking 
out sections two and three and inserting in place thereof the follow- 
ing : — Section 2. A day's work for all conductors, guards, drivers, 
motormen, brakemen and gatemen who are employed by or on behalf 
of a street railway or elevated railway company shall not exceed 
nine hours, and shall be so arranged by the employer that it shall be 
performed within eleven consecutive hours. No officer or agent of 
any such company shall require from said employees more than nme 
hours' work for a day's labor. Threat of loss of employment or 
threat to obstruct or prevent the obtaining of employment by the 
employees, or threat to refrain from employing any employee in the 
future shall be considered coercion and " requiring " within the mean- 
ing of this section. On legal holidays and on Sundays and in case 
of accident or unavoidable delay extra labor may be performed for 
extra compensation. 

Section 2. A company which violates any provision of this act 
shall forfeit for each offence not less than one hundred dollars nor 
more than five hundred dollars. 

Section 3. This act shall not affect any written contract existing 
at the date of its passage. 

For the purposes of this inquiry I assume the question to be 
whether or not it will be lawful for an employee affected by said 
bill, if he so desires, to work longer hours than those prescribed 



56 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

in the bill. In its final analj^sis the question resolves itself into 
the inquiry as to whether or not a street railway company which 
would be affected by the passage of this bill may permit labor 
to be performed not within the time prescribed in said bill. 

It is a familiar rule of interpretation of statutes that when 
certain exceptions are named in an act, excluding from its op- 
eration the exceptions so declared, other exceptions are thereby 
excluded. The natural conclusion under this rule would there- 
fore be that when the bill, in the last sentence of section 1, 
makes certain exceptions to its prohibitions, in the following 
language — 

On legal holidays and on Sundays and in case of accident or un- 
avoidable delay extra labor may be performed for extra compen- 
sation. 

the exceptions so named are the only occasions when the em- 
ployee may perform labor outside of the time prescribed in said 
section. Consideration of previous legislation covering the same 
subject confirms this conclusion. Section 3 of chapter 533 of 
the Acts of 1912 provides as follows with reference to this par- 
ticular contingency : — 

On legal holidays and on Sundays and in case of unavoidable 
delay or other emergency, or at any time at the request of the em- 
jDloyee, extra labor may be performed for extra compensation. 

It is to be noted that the present bill omits the words " or other 
emergency, or at any time at the request of the employee,'^ 
thereby showing the intention to eliminate the occasions so 
omitted and to more definitely limit the exceptions to those con- 
tained in the bill under consideration, which, it may be ob- 
served, also include the word " accident," which was not in the 
1912 act. The conclusion therefore seems to be irresistible that 
this bill should be so construed as to limit the labor of em- 
ployees covered by it so that it shall not exceed nine hours, so 
arranged that it shall be performed within eleven consecutive 
hours, except on legal holidays and on Sundays and in case of 
accident or unavoidable delay. I assume that the provision 
that on these occasions " extra labor may be performed " should 
be construed to authorize the employers to require the extra 
labor so permitted. Upon consideration of section 1 alone, I 
am forced to the conclusion that upon any other occasion it will 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 57 

not be lawful for the einplo3^er to permit other work even if the 
employee so desires it. 

The provisions of section 2, that '^ a company which violates 
any provision of this act shall forfeit for each offence," etc., also 
confirms this conclusion. The penalty provided is not against 
the requirement by the employer of more than nine hours' work 
for a day's labor, but it is against a violation of any provision 
of this act. The provisions declared in said section 1 which 
might be violated by the employer are : that a day's work shall 
not exceed nine hours; that they shall be so arranged that the 
labor may be performed within eleven consecutive hours; and 
that the employer shall not require more than the nine hours' 
work so established. It would seem that under the broad pro- 
visions of this penalty clause, except as permitted by the excep- 
tions hereinbefore referred to, an employer exceeding nine hours 
of labor or permitting such labor to be performed outside of the 
eleven consecutive hours provided by the bill, even at the re- 
quest of an employee, would be subject to the penalty so pre- 
scribed. The employer, therefore, will be prevented, in my 
opinion, from allowing more than the nine hours' work except 
upon the occasions already noted if said House Bill No. 2518 
becomes a law in its present form. If it is desired to leave the 
situation so that the employee may if he so desires perform 
labor outside of the times prescribed in said act, I respectfully 
suggest that the bill should be amended to make this clear. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Statute — Construction of Contradictory Provisions — Sale of 
Eggs which hy Reason of Decay or Decomposition are Unfit 
for Food — Prohibition. 

The effect of St. 1913, e. 654, $ 1, providing that ''it shall be unlawful 
... to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, or have in possession 
with intent to sell, eggs that are unfit for food within the meaning 
of this act, '^ is limited to the sale, exposure for sale or intent to 
sell eggs which by reason of decay or decomposition are unfit for 
food, notwithstanding that by section 2 such statute is declared to 
be applicable to ''eggs, which, either before or after removal from 
the shell, are wholly or partly decayed or decomposed," and that 
from the viewpoint of the chemist the process of decay or decom- 
position in eggs begins immediately after they have been laid. 



58 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

June 6, 1913. 
Maek W. Eichaedson, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health. 

Dear Sir : — By a letter dated May 24 yon have submitted 
for my consideration an inquiry relating to St. 1913, c. 654, 
which is entitled " An Act relative to the sale and use of eggs 
unfit for food." This inquiry is in terms as follows : — 

Section 1 of this chaiDter states in a general way that eggs that 
are unfit for food shall not be sold, offered for sale, exposed for sale 
or had in possession with intent to sell. 

Section 2 defines under what conditions eggs shall be deemed to be 
unfit for food. This definition, however, would seem to be abso- 
lutely inadequate, inasmuch as in accordance with expert chemical 
opinion eggs begin to decompose immediately after they are laid, so 
that strictly enforced this law would practically prohibit the sale 
for food of all eggs of whatever age or character. 

Will you not, at your earliest convenience, advise this Board as to 
what lines of action it should pursue under the circumstances? 

Section 1 of chapter 654 provides that — 

It shall be unlawful ... to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, 
or have in possession with intent to sell, eggs that are unfit for food 
within the meaning of this act. 

Section 2 is as follows : — 

This act shall apply to eggs, which, either before or after removal 
from the shell, are wholly or i^artly decayed or decomposed, and to 
eggs in the fluid state, any part of which is wholly or partly decayed 
or decomposed, and to eggs, in the fluid state or otherwise, that are 
mixed with parts of eggs which are derived from eggs that are wholly 
or partly decayed or decomposed. This act shall also apply to frozen 
masses of broken eggs, if the mass contains eggs that are wholly or 
partly decayed or decomposed, or that are mixed with parts of eggs 
that have been taken from eggs that were wholly or partly decayed 
or decomposed. 

Section 3 provides that — 

It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation, or any 
officer, agent or emploj^ee thereof, to use eggs that are either wholly 
or partly decayed or decomposed in the preparation of food 
products. And it shall be unlawful to deliver, sell, purchase or 
accept wholly or i^artly decayed or decomposed eggs in or at any 
establishment where food products are prepared or manufactured. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 59 

Section 5 provides that — • 
The state board of health shall enforce the provisions of this act. 

Section 6 provides that — 

Nothing in this act shall be construed to prohibit the purchase, 
sale or possession for other than food purposes of rotten, decayed 
or partly decayed eggs which are unfit for food. 

The provisions above quoted are loose!}' drawn and inartificial 
in terms, but it is, in my opinion, clear from a consideration of 
the act as a whole that it was intended as a prohibition against 
the sale of eggs which by reason of decay or decomposition are 
unfit for use as food. It may be true that standing alone the 
language of sections 2 and 3 is broad enough to include all eggs 
which are wholly or partly decayed or decomposed without refer- 
ence to their fitness or unfitness to be used as food, but if, as 
stated in your inquiry, decomposition and decay in eggs begin 
immediately after they are laid, a literal construction of said 
sections would prohibit any sale of eggs at all, which could not 
have been the intent of the Legislature. The language of these 
sections must, therefore, be so far modified by the other provi- 
sions of the act as to limit the prohibitions contained therein 
to eggs which by reason of decay or decomposition are unfit for 
food. Any other construction would result in an absurdity. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Intoxicating Liquors — Sixth Class License — Breach of Condi- 
tion — Termination — Forfeiture — Unlaivful Sale — Con- 
viction of Cleric of Licensee. 

Under tlie provisions of E. L., c. 100, § 17, that each license to sell in- 
toxicating liquors issued under the provisions of said section shall 
be subject, among others, to the condition ^Hhat the license shall 
be subject to forfeiture, as herein provided, for breach of any of 
its conditions; and that, if the licensee is convicted of a violation 
of any of such conditions, his license shall thereupon become void," 
the conviction of the clerk of a licensee holding a sixth class license 
of an unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor does not in and of itself 
render such license void, although such conviction constitutes a 
breach of the conditions of such license which renders it liable to 
forfeiture. 



60 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

June 11, 1913. 

Peter J. McCormick, Esq., Secretary, Board of Registration in 

Pharmacy. 

Dear Sie : — • The Board of Registration in Pharmacy has re- 
quested my opinion upon the following question : ^^ If the clerk 
of a licensee holding a sixth class license is convicted of the un- 
lawful sale of intoxicating liquor, does such conviction render 
null and void and cause a forfeiture of said license, and dis- 
qualify said licensee in the same manner as if he, the licensee, 
had been convicted of said unlawful sale ? " 

If I understand correctly the question in the minds of the 
Board, their inquiry might be expressed in other words as fol- 
lows: If the clerk employed by a registered pharmacist holding 
a sixth class license to sell intoxicating liquor is convicted of 
the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, does the conviction of 
the clerk, in and of itself, without further action by the licens- 
ing board of the city or town or by the Board of Registration 
in Pharmacy, render null and void the license of the clerk's 
employer, in the same manner as if the employer himself, the 
licensee, had been convicted of said unlawful sale? 

In my opinion the question as stated must be answered in the 
negative. R. L., c. 100, § 17, provides as follows: — 

Each license shall be expressed, to be subject to the following 
conditions : — 

Seventh, That the license shall be subject to forfeiture, as herein 
provided, for breach of any of its conditions; and that, if the 
licensee is convicted of a violation of any of such conditions, his 
license shall thereupon become void. 

It is clear that under this provision of the statute if the em- 
ployer himself, the licensee, is convicted of a violation of any 
condition of his license, the license thereupon becomes void with- 
out further act by any board or commission; but the conviction 
of the emplo3^er's clerk is not the conviction of the employer 
himself, and the provision of the statute that the license shall 
be subject to forfeiture is not the same in effect as the provision 
of the statute that upon conviction of the licensee the license 
shall thereupon become void. 

The unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor by the clerk is a 
breach of the conditions of the license, rendering the license sub- 
ject to forfeiture, but this breach of the conditions of the license 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 61 

does not, in and of itself, work a forfeiture of the license. The 
forfeiture itself results from action taken by the licensing board 
under the provisions of E. L., c. 100, § 47, as amended by 
St. 1908, c. 108, which provides as follows : — 

The licensing board, after notice to the licensee and reasonable 
opportunity for him to be heard by them or by a committee of the 
mayor and aldermen or selectmen, if the license was granted by 
them, may declare his license forfeited, or may suspend his license 
for such i3eriod of time as they may deem iDroper, upon satisfactory 
proof that he has violated or permitted a violation of any condition 
thereof, or any law of the commonwealth. The pendency of pro- 
ceedings before a court or justice shall not suspend or interfere with 
the power herein given to decree a forfeiture. . . . 

The same practical result as that following from a conviction 
of a violation of a condition of a license, and that resulting from 
a forfeiture declared by the licensing board, may also be effectu- 
ated by action taken by the Board of Registration in Pharmacy 
under section 23 of chapter 100 of the Revised Laws as finally 
amended by St. 1909, c. 261. By that section of the statutes 
the Board is authorized to issue to registered pharmacists cer- 
tificates stating that in the judgment of the Board they are 
proper persons to be entrusted with a sixth class license, and in 
the final clause of section 23 it is provided — 

The board may, after giving a hearing to the parties interested, 
revoke or suspend such certificate for any cause that it may deem 
proper, and such revocation or suspension shall revoke or suspend 
the sixth class license granted thereon. 

While the jurisdiction of the Board of Registration in Phar- 
macy, under the provision last quoted, is limited to action upon 
the certificate of fitness, so called, yet, if the action of the Board 
is to suspend or revoke that certificate of fitness, such suspension 
or revocation does by operation of law cause a suspension or 
revocation of the license itself. 

The answer to the question of the Board may, therefore, be 
summed up as follows : In cases where the licensee himself is 
convicted of a violation of the conditions of his license, the li- 
cense becomes void merely through the fact of conviction, and 
no further action by the licensing board or by the Board of Reg- 
istration in Pharmacy is necessary. In cases where there has 
been a breach of any of the conditions of the license, but the 



62 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

licensee himself has not been convicted of the violation of the 
conditions of the license, it is necessary for the licensing board, 
after hearing, to declare the license forfeited, in order to effect 
a forfeiture. In cases where the license has not become void 
through conviction of the licensee of the violation of the condi- 
tions of the license, and in which the license has not been de- 
clared forfeited by the licensing board, the same practical result 
as under the two methods mentioned may be brought about by 
a revocation or suspension by the Board of Registration in Phar- 
macy of the certificate of fitness granted to the licensee under 
the provisions of R. L., c. 100, § 23, and its amendments. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Weymouth BacJc River — Attorney-General — ''Cost and Ex- 
penses " Incidental to Construction of Bridge — Apportion- 
ment hetiveen Commonwealth and Counties of Norfolk and 
Plymouth — Discount or Interest on Loans. 
In St. 1911, c. 739, as amended by St. 1912, c. 227, which established 
a commission to build a bridge over Weymouth Back Eiver, the 
expense thereof to be apportioned between the Commonwealth and 
the counties of Norfolk and Plymouth, the words ''cost and ex- 
penses," as used in section 7, providing that "the cost and ex- 
penses incurred under the provisions of this act . . . shall be borne 
as follows: forty-five per cent by the commonwealth of Massachu- 
setts, twenty per cent by the county of Norfolk, twenty per cent 
by the county of Plymouth, . . ." do not include interest on money 
borrowed by said counties. 

June 13, 1913. 
Hon. John E. White, Auditor of the Commomvealtli. 

Dear Sir : — In a letter of recent date you have stated that 
the commission authorized by chapter 739 of the Acts of the 
year 1911, as amended by chapter 227 of the Acts of 1912, to 
build a bridge over We3^mouth Back Eiver, has practically fin- 
ished its duties, and that before the Commonwealth's portion of 
the cost is paid you wish to obtain my opinion upon the question 
" whether the words ' cost and expenses ' as used in the first 
line of section 7 of chapter 739 of the Acts of 1911 are to be 
construed as including discount or interest on loans. In other 
words, is the State expected to bear its proportion of the ex- 
pense for interest ? " 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. ' 63 

It does not appear either from the statements in your letter 
or from the provisions of the statute referred to how the ques- 
tion persented by j^ou arises in connection with the duties of 
your department at the present time in such a manner as to call 
for an opinion as to the rights of the Commonwealth under the 
act. 

St. 1911, c. 739, § 6, provides as follows: — 

When the said bridge and approaches are completed, and the full 
cost and expenses of the same, including damages, if any, awarded 
under the j^receding section are ascertained, the said bridge commis- 
sioners shall file, in the office of the clerk of the superior court for 
the county of Norfolk, their report of the fact, together with a de- 
tailed statement of the amount of the cost and expense, whereupon 
and upon the application of said bridge commissioners or of any 
party interested, and after such notice as the court may order, a 
hearing shall be had upon the approval and acceptance of the said 
statement, and when the same has been approved and accepted by 
the court it shall be binding upon all parties interested. 

I understand that the report and statement of the amount of 
cost and expense required by the provisions of this section to be 
filed by the bridge commissioners in the office of the Superior 
Court for the County of Norfolk have not yet been filed, for I 
assume that the Commonwealth, through this department, would 
be notified by the bridge commissioners of the filing of such 
report and would be given an opportunity to avail itself of the 
right granted by the section quoted to be heard upon the question 
of the approval and acceptance of the report and statement. 

If I am correct in assuming that the report of the bridge 
commissioners has not yet been filed, it would seem that the only 
officials now having the question of the items to be included 
under " cost and expense " properly before them are the bridge 
commissioners themselves. 

It is at least doubtful whether the bridge commissioners would 
be entitled to ask for an official opinion from the Attorney- 
General upon the question, and since the Commonwealth is one 
of the parties to the apportionment to be made under the stat- 
ute, and will in the usual course be represented by the Attorney- 
General in any hearing upon the question of the acceptance and 
approval of the report of the bridge commissioners filed in court, 
the Attorney-General so representing a party to the apportion- 
ment is hardly in a position to give an opinion which should be 



64 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

considered as having a binding force upon the conduct of the 
bridge commissioners. 

I assume, however, that at some stage of the proceedings, if 
occasion arises, all the parties interested, including the Common- 
wealth, will have opportunity to state their contentions, and 
upon the theory that this case may have the effect of a precedent 
for the determination of other questions which may arise in your 
department, I have no objection to stating, for your informa- 
tion, my views upon the proper construction of the statute, as 
indicating what the contention of the Commonwealth will be 
if occasion arises for stating the position of the Commonwealth 
upon the matter of the apportionment of the expenses incurred 
under this act. 

In my opinion, the words " cost and expense," as used in the 
act, are not to be construed as including interest on money bor- 
rowed by the counties of Norfolk and Ph^mouth. 

The meaning of the act is, at first glance, somewhat obscured 
by the use of the words " cost and expense " instead of the word 
^^ cost " alone, but in my opinion the word " expense " adds 
nothing to the word " cost," and nothing is to be construed as 
included under the term " cost and expense " which would not 
have been included under the term " cost " alone. 

Section 6 of the act quoted above provides that " when the 
said bridge and approaches are completed, and the full cost and 
expenses of the same," that is, the bridge and approaches, in- 
cluding damages, are ascertained, the commissioners shall file 
their report and statement, and that that statement, when ap- 
proved and accepted by the court, shall be binding on all parties 
interested. Section 7 of the act provides as follows : — 

The cost and expenses incurred under the provisions of this act, 
approved by the court as aforesaid, shall be borne as follows : forty- 
five per cent by the commonwealth of Massachusetts, twenty per cent 
by the county of Norfolk, twenty per cent by the county of Plym- 
outh, and fifteen per cent by any street railway company that may 
apply for and be granted a location on said bridge by the towns of 
Weymouth and Hingham in the manner now provided by law; and 
the county of Plymouth and the county of Norfolk shall thereupon 
be reimbursed for such sums of money as they have respectively 
expended under the provisions of this act by said parties and to the 
extent necessary to cause the cost and expense as aforesaid to be 
borne in the proportions aforesaid: provided, however, that any sums 
that may be received from the United States in reimbursement of 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 65 

these expenditures shall be distributed as follows: forty-five per 
cent to the commonwealth of Massachusetts, twenty per cent to the 
county of Norfolk, twenty per cent to the county of Plymouth, and 
fifteen per cent to the street railway company. 

The interest which the counties are required to pay upon the 
money borrowed is not strictly a part of the actual cost of the 
bridge and approaches constructed under the provisions of 
the act. Only the full cost and expense of constructing the 
bridge and approaches is, however, to be included in the state- 
ment filed by the commissioners under the provisions of section 
6, and approved by the court under the same section. Under 
the provisions of section 7, only the cost and expenses approved 
by the court ^' as aforesaid " are to be apportioned between the 
parties. 

The words " cost and expenses incurred hereunder," as used 
in section 2 of the act, when considered with the context and in 
the light of decisions of the court under somewhat similar stat- 
utes, have no broader meaning. 

Under section 2 the county commissioners of Norfolk and 
Plymouth are " authorized and directed to borrow on the credit 
of their respective counties such sums of money as may from 
time to time be required for the said cost and expenses." To 
construe "said cost and expenses," to meet which the county 
commissioners are required to borrow money, as including the 
cost of borrowing that money would be an unusual construction 
of an act of this nature. The words " cost and expenses " are 
rather to be limited to the actual cost of doing the work pro- 
vided for under the act. 

The interest upon the money borrowed is to be regarded as 
a burden which the counties are obliged to assume for the pur- 
pose of putting themselves in a position to do the things which 
they were required under the terms of the act to do. 

The question in its essence is closely similar to that presented 
in the case of Old Colony Railroad Co., petitioner, 185 Mass. 
160. The statute under consideration in that case was St. 1892, 
c. 433, which provided in section 2 as follows : — 

The alterations and improvements prescribed by said commission 
shall be made by the Old Colony Kailroad Company, and the expense 
thereof paid by it, and for that purpose it may issue its stock from 
time to time, etc. 



66 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Section 3 of the same statute provided that the Commonwealth 
should " repay to said railroad company forty-five per cent of 
the cost incurred by said company in carrying out said altera- 
tions and improvements, as audited and approved by the 
auditors.^^ 

The railroad claimed in that case that money paid by way of 
interest on money used to pay for the alterations was a part of 
the " actual cost." The court said : — • 

In a broad sense this is tme of a raih'oad company which is obliged 
to hire money to meet the obligation imposed by the statute. 

But it held that it was not the intent of the statute to include 
such an item under the term " cost incurred," saying : — 

That such a construction would open the door to let in claims that 
would be not only large in amount, but uncertain and contingent in 
their character, is reasonably clear. 

In my opinion, the reasoning in that decision and in the cases 
cited therein is applicable to the question presented by 3^ou. 
Very truty yours, 

James M. Swift, Attojmey-GeneraL 



Hours of Labor — Employees of Street and Elevated Railway 
Companies — Regulation — Legislature — Constitutional 
Ijaw — Police Power — Construction of Statute. 

The reasonable regulation of the hours of labor for employees of a 
street or elevated railway company in such a manner as to conserve 
the health, safety and welfare of the public constitutes a proper 
exercise of the police power. 

In passing an act to provide that ''a day's work for all conductors, 
guards, drivers, motormen, brakemen and gatemen who are em- 
ployed by or on behalf of a street railway or elevated railway com- 
pany shall not exceed nine hours, and shall be so arranged by the 
employer that it shall be performed within eleven consecutive 
hours," it must be presumed that the Legislature had in view the 
protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public, and it 
cannot be said either that such act has no reasonable relation to the 
object for which it was enacted or that the Legislature could not 
have found upon evidence presented to it that a condition of affairs 
existed which required its action in the premises. 

Where the question of the constitutionality of a statute is doubtful, the 
doubt should be resolved in favor of the statute. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Xo. 12. 67 

June 14, 1913. 
His Excellency Eugene N. Foss, Governor of the Commonivealth. 

Sir : — Your Excellency has requested my opinion upon the 
constitutionality of House Bill No. 2518, entitled " An Act rel- 
ative to the hours of labor of employees of street railway com- 
panies/' which is before you for approval or disapproval. The 
bill in its final amended form provides as follows : — 

Section 1. Chapter five hundred and thirty-three of the acts of 
the year nineteen hundred and twelve is hereby amended by striking 
out sections two and three and inserting in place thereof the follow- 
ing : — Section 2. A days' work for all conductors, guards, drivers, 
motormen, brakemen and gatemen who are employed by or on behalf 
of a street railway or elevated railway company shall not exceed 
nine hours, and shall be so arranged by the employer that it shall be 
performed within eleven consecutive hours. No officer or agent of 
any such company shall require from said emploj^ees more than nine 
hours' work for a day's labor. Threat of loss of employment or 
threat to obstruct or prevent the obtaining of employment by the 
employees, or threat to refrain from employing any employee in the 
future shall be considered coercion and '' requiring " within the mean- 
ing of this section. But nothing herein shall prevent an employee of 
the character mentioned in this act, if he so desires, from working- 
more hours than those prescribed in the act for extra compensation. 

Section 2. A company which violates any provision of this act 
shall forfeit for each offence not less than one hundred dollars nor 
more than five hundred dollars. 

Section 3. This act shall not affect any written contract existing 
at the date of its passage. 

It hardly needs to be stated that the Attorney-General, in ad- 
vising the Governor of the Commonwealth upon a question of 
this nature, is not in the position of a court considering the 
constitutionality of the act as applied to a specific case which 
has arisen, and that the opinion of the Attorne3^-General sub- 
mitted in reply to such a question has not the force of an ad- 
judication by the court upon the question of the constitutionality 
of an act whicli has arisen in a case between parties before it. 

Nevertheless, such a question presented to the Attorney-Gen- 
eral must be considered within the same limitations within 
which it would be considered by the court of last resort in a 
specific case, since the only effect of an opinion of the Attorney- 
General is to advise the Governor so far as possible as to how 
the Supreme Court might be expected to rule upon the question 



68 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

now presented, in view of the previously decided cases upon the 
question. 

It has been repeatedly stated in decisions of both the State 
and Federal courts that questions having to do merely with the 
policy of the legislation and the judgment exercised by the Legis- 
lature in its enactment are not matters coming within the pur- 
view of a decision of the courts. That principle was thus stated 
in Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R.R. Co. v. McGuire, 219 U. S. 
549, 569 : — 

The scope of judicial inquiry in deciding the question of power is 
not to be confused with the scope of legislative considerations in deal- 
ing with the matter of policy. Whether the enactment is wise or un- 
wise, whether it is based on sound economic theory, whether it is the 
best means to achieve the desired result, whether, in short, the legis- 
lative discretion within its prescribed limits should be exercised in a 
particular manner, are matters for the judgment of the Legislature, 
and the earnest conflict of serious opinion does not suffice to bring 
them within the range of judicial cognizance. 

And in McLean v. Arha7isas, 211 U. S. 547, 548, it is stated as 
follows : — 

The Legislature, being familiar with local conditions, is, primarily, 
the judge of the necessity of such enactments. The mere fact that a 
court may differ with the Legislature in its views of public policy, or 
that judges may hold views inconsistent with the propriety of the 
legislation in question, affords no ground for judicial interference, 
unless the act in question is unmistakably and palpably in excess of 
legislative power. 

The policy of the legislation in question, therefore, I do not 
discuss. 

The Constitution of Massachusetts provides in Part the Sec- 
ond, Chapter L, Section I., Article IV., as follows : — 

And further, full poAver and authority are hereby given and granted 
to the said general court, from time to time to make, ordain, and 
establish, all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders, laws, stat- 
utes, and ordinances, directions and instructions, either with penalties 
or without ; so as the same be not repugnant or contrary to this con- 
stitution, as they shall judge to be for the good and welfare of this 
commonwealth, and for the government and ordering thereof, and of 
the subjects of the same, and for the necessary support and defence 
of the government thereof. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 69 

It is to be presumed that the Legislature attempted to act 
under and in accordance with this provision in formulating the 
bill presented, and the judicial question presented is whether, 
in so doing, it has in fact exceeded its constitutional powers. 

The only contention which has been raised before me in this 
regard is that it unwarrantably deprives those who are subject 
to it of the liberty guaranteed both by the State and Federal 
constitutions, which, it is well established by many decisions, 
includes the right of contract. 

Both property and liberty, however, are held subject to such 
reasonable conditions as may be imposed by the governing power 
in the exercise of those powers called " police powers," which 
do not permit of exact definition but are generally described in 
the decisions of the United States Supreme Court as " relating 
to the safety, health, morals and general welfare of the public." 

The question of regulating the hours of labor for men has 
been one of great difficulty and has resulted in much difference 
of opinion by the courts. It must be settled on considerations 
differing somewhat from those determining the right to regulate 
the hours of governmental employment and the hours of labor 
of women and children. In the case of H olden v. Hardy, 169 
U. S. 366, the court, with two justices dissenting, sustained as 
a valid exercise of the police power a statute of the State of 
Utah entitled " An Act regulating the hours of employment in 
underground mines and in smelters and ore reduction works," 
which limited to eight hours per day the period of employment 
in all underground mines and in smelters and all other institu- 
tions for the reduction or refinement of ores or metals, except 
in case of emergency. The court, in the course of its opinion, 
said: — 

These employments, when too long pursued, the Legislature has 
judged to be detrimental to the health of the employees, and, so long 
as there are reasonable grounds for believing that this is so, its deci- 
sion upon this subject cannot be reviewed by the Federal courts. 

In the case of Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45, the court, 
with three justices dissenting, reversed a decision of the highest 
court of New York and held unconstitutional a statute of New 
York limiting to sixty hours in any one week the period of em- 
plo3mient in a biscuit, bread or cake bakery or confectionery 
establishment, and containing no emergency clause, as not within 
the limits of the police power, for the reason that it did not 



70 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

appear that the health of either the employees or the public was 
directly involved. 

Some features are presented by the bill now before Your Ex- 
cellency which were not present in the legislation before the 
courts in the cases cited. The employees to which the bill applies 
are employed in operating cars of a street railway. The matter 
of public safety may, therefore, have been considered by the 
Legislature as directly involved in connection with the health of 
the employee. From the viewpoint of the safety of the public 
it is a matter of common knowledge that a high degree of 
efficiency in the persons operating the cars is desirable. In the 
case of Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. Inter-state Commerce Com- 
mission, 221 IT. S. 612, 619, it is said: — 

The length of hours of service has direct relation to the efficiency 
of the human agencies upon which protection of Ufe and property 
necessarily depend. 

Another distinctive feature of the legislation now in question 
is that it deals with public corporations and the use of public 
franchises, and for that reason the Legislature may be consid- 
ered as having wider jurisdiction under the police power than 
it would have in a matter involving private contracts. 

Since 1893 there has existed upon the statute books of this 
Commonwealth a law providing that not more than ten hours of 
labor a day should be exacted of employees of street railway com- 
panies. I am not aware that in this Commonwealth the question 
as to the constitutionality of that provision has been presented 
to the Supreme Court. In an opinion to the Governor on June 
24, 1902, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, however, advised 
that a similar statute was constitutional. 24 R. I. 603. A short 
time after that opinion was rendered the Rhode Island statute 
was so amended as to give the employees of a street railway 
opportunity to work more than ten hours a day if they so de- 
sired, and that law, which in its amended form closely corre- 
sponds to the bill now before Your Excellencv, has remained 
upon the statute books of Rhode Island without challenge since 
its enactment. 

In the case of Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R.R. Co. v. 
McGuire, 219 U. S. 549, 569, the court, after citing many cases 
involving the exercise of the police power, said : — 

The principle involved in these decisions is that where the legis- 
lative action is arbitrarv and has no reasonable relation to a purpose 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 71 

which it is competent for government to effect, the Legislature 
transcends the Hmits of its power in interfering with liberty of con- 
tract; but where there is reasonable relation to an object within the 
governmental authority, the exercise of the legislative discretion is 
not subject to judicial review. 

In the case of McLean v. ArTcansas, 211 U. S. 547, 548, the 
court said : — 

If there existed a condition of affairs concerning which the Legis- 
lature of the State, exercising its conceded right to enact laws for the 
protection of the health, safety or welfare of the people, might pass 
the law, it must be sustained ; if such action was arbitrary interference 
with the right to contract or carry on business, and having no just 
relation to the protection of the public within the scope of legislative 
power, the act must fail. 

Discussing merely the constitutional question which has been 
presented to me, I cannot say either that the legislation under 
discussion has no reasonable relation to the object which I am 
bound to presume the legislation had in view, the protection of 
the health, safety and welfare of the public, or that the Legisla- 
ture cannot have found upon evidence presented to it, which, 
however, is not before me, that a condition of affairs existed 
which required it to enact the legislation in question for the pro- 
tection of the health, safety and welfare of the people. 

In view, also, of the provision that the employees may, if they 
so desire, work more than nine hours in a day, for extra compen- 
sation, the bill does not upon its face appear to be so unreason- 
able and extravagant as to be adjudged an arbitrary interference 
with the right of contract. The contention that the Legislature 
had in view the public health and safety is not necessarily nega- 
tived by the permissive feature with reference to the employees, 
in the latter part of the bill. The Legislature may have pre- 
sumed that the employees would not desire to work longer than 
the hours prescribed unless they were physically able and com- 
petent to do so. While it appears by this provision that the 
Legislature has not gone as far as it might have attempted to in 
protecting the public health and safety, it does not for that rea- 
son make less valid the protection afforded by the enactment. 

It is a rule of constitutional construction that in case of a rea- 
sonable doubt the court is bound to resolve the doubt in favor of 
the statute. 



72 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

In view of all these considerations I am led to the conclusion 
that there is a sti'ong probability that the court of last resort 
would not declare this act unconstitutional. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



State Board of Insanity — Appointment of Agent to fill New 
Position — Appropriation. 

Under the provision of St. 1909, c. 504, § 4, that the State Board of 
Health ' ' may appoint agents and subordinate officers and fix their 
compensation, but the amount paid for their salaries shall not ex- 
ceed the appropriation of the general court for that purpose," a 
position may be created by such Board and an agent appointed to 
fill it at any time if the salary for such agent as fixed by such 
Board may be paid from the existing appropriation. 

June 18, 1913. 
Charles E. Thompson, M.D., Executive Officer, State Board of Insanity. 

Dear Sir : — You have inquired on behalf of the State Board 
of Insanit}^ " whether it may appoint, under section 4, chapter 
504, Acts of 1909, an agent to a new position about to be created 
by the Board, for whom no provision was made at the time the 
appropriation for salaries was granted, but whose salary will be 
paid from the appropriation for this department provided it is 
sufficient." 

The section to which your inquiry refers is as follows : — 

The board may appoint agents and subordinate officers and fix 
their compensation, but the amount paid for their salaries shall not 
exceed the appropriation of the general court for that jDurpose. The 
board may delegate any of its powers and duties to, and may execute 
any of its functions by, agents appointed for that purpose or by 
committees of the board. The board shall hold meetings each month, 
and oftener if necessary. It shall make its own by-laws, and shall 
annually report its doings to the governor and council on or before 
the third Wednesday in March, the report being made up to and in- 
cluding the thirtieth day of November. 

Under this provision the Board is authorized to appoint such 
agents as may be necessary for the transaction of its business and 
may fix their salaries, provided that the amount of the salaries 
so fixed does not exceed the amount appropriated by the Legis- 
lature for the payment of such salaries. This being so, I see no 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 73 

reason why a position may not be created and an agent ap- 
pointed to fill it at any time if the salary for snch agent as 
fixed by the Board may be paid from the existing appropriation 
as required by the section above quoted ; and it is, in my opinion, 
immaterial that the position in question had not been created at 
the time when such appropriation was made. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Collateral. Loan Company — Increase of Capital Stock — Com- 
missioner of Corpo7'ations — Approval. 

The Collateral Loan Company, which is a loan agency engaged in the 
business of making small loans, is a ''corporation heretofore organ- 
ized by special act of the legislature for a purpose or purposes for 
which corporations may be organized under the provisions of chap- 
ter four hundred and thirty-seven of the acts of the year nineteen 
hundred and three and acts in amendment thereof or in addition 
thereto," and is therefore within the provision of St. 1912, c. 586, 
§ 1, that such corporations shall be subject to the provisions of 
St. 1903, c. 437, in respect to the amount of real or personal prop- 
erty which they may hold and may from time to time increase or 
decrease their capital stock in accordance with the provisions of 
such chapter. 

The Commissioner of Corporations may, therefore, approve an increase 
of the capital stock of the Collateral Loan Company duly made in 
accordance with the requirements of St. 1903, c. 437, §$ 40, 41 and 
42. 

July 10, 1913. 

Hon. William D. T. Trefry, Commissioner of Corporations. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tion whether you may approve as conforming to the requirements 
of law certain articles of amendment to its agreement of associa- 
tion which provide for an increase of capital stock, submitted to 
you for approval under the provisions of St. 1903, c. 437, by the 
Collateral Loan Company, purporting to act under authority of 
St. 1912, c. 586. 

St. 1912, c. 586, § 1, provides as follows: — 

Everj^ corporation heretofore organized by special act of the legis- 
lature for a purpose or purposes for which corporations may be or- 
ganized under the provisions of chapter four hundred and thirtj^- 
seven of the acts of the j^ear nineteen hundred and three and acts in 
amendment thereof or in addition thereto, except corporations which 



74 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

are empowered to manufacture, store, transmit, sell or distribute 
power, which now is or may hereafter become subject to said chapter 
four hundred and thirty-seven, shall hereafter, despite any provisions 
contained in its charter, be subject to said chapter in respect to the 
amount of real or personal projoerty which it may hold, and may from 
time to time increase or decrease its capital stock in accordance with 
the provisions of said chapter four hundred and thirty-seven. 



St. 1903, c. 437, § 40, provides as follows : — 

Every corporation may, at a meeting duly called for the purpose, 
by the vote of a majority of all its stock, or, if tw^o or more classes 
of stock have been issued, of a majority of each class outstanding 
and entitled to vote, authorize an increase or a reduction of its cap- 
ital stock and determine the terms and manner of the disposition of 
such increased stock, may authorize a change, etc. 



Section 41 of the same chapter provides 



Articles of amendment signed and sworn to by the president, treas- 
urer and a majority of the directors shall, within thirty days after 
said meeting, be prepared, setting forth such amendment or altera- 
tion, and stating that it has been duly adopted by the stockholders. 
Such articles shall be submitted to the commissioner of corporations, 
who shall examine them in the same manner as the original articles 
of organization. If he finds that they conform to the requirements 
of law, he shall so certify and indorse his approval thereon, and they 
shall thereupon be filed, etc. 

Since nothing appears in your letter to the contrary, I assume 
that the increase in the amount of the capital stock has been 
made in accordance wdth the requirements of section 40 above 
quoted and also in accordance with the provisions of section 42 
of the same chapter. 

The question presented, therefore, is whether the Collateral 
Loan Company is included within the provisions of St. 1912, c. 
586, as a corporation heretofore organized by special act of the 
Legislature for a purpose or purposes for which corporations 
may be organized under the provisions of chapter 437 of the Acts 
of the year 1903, and acts in amendment thereof or in addition 
thereto. 

The question is somewhat complicated by the peculiar terms 
of the original act incorporating this corporation, but in my 
opinion is to be answered in the affirmative. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 75 

The doubt concerning the matter arises chiefly from the fact 
that St. 1903, c. 437, § 1, in providing what corporations should 
be subject to the business corporation law and what corporations 
should not be subject to it, provides ^* it shall not apply to 
corporations organized under general or special laws of this 
commonwealth for the j)urpose of carrying on within the com- 
monwealth the business of a banlc, savings bank, trust company, 
surety or indemnity company, safe deposit compan}^, etc.," and 
from the fact that this corporation in its original charter and 
early amendments thereof is designated as a " bank." 

The corporation was chartered by St. 1859, c. 173, under the 
name of " Pawners' Bank," in the following terms : — 

with the powers and privileges, and to be governed by the rules and 
provisions established by law relative to banks in this Commonwealth, 
so far as applicable to ihe objects of this institution. It shall not 
be a bank of issue, and shall loan on pledge of goods and chattels 
only. 

In substantially every section of the act also the corporation is 
spoken of as a bank, although it clearly appears that the object 
of its incorporation was not the business of a bank in the usual 
sense of the term, but merely the transaction of the business of 
loaning money on pledge of goods and chattels. 

By St. 1869, c. 428, the name was changed to Collateral Loan 
Company, its present name. The nature of the business to be 
transacted was not changed by the provisions of this act, and 
in various sections of the act the corporation was still referred 
to as a bank. 

By St. 1888, c. 170, the corporation was made subject to ex- 
amination by the Bank Commissioner of the Commomvealth. 

But the essential point to be considered in the determination 
of the question presented is not by what name the corporation 
is designated but rather for the purpose of carrying on what 
business the corporation was organized. 

Although the corporation was designated as a bank in the 
charter of the corporation and early amendments thereof, and 
although it might be considered as a sort of bank with narrowly 
limited powers, in my opinion it is not to be considered as hav- 
ing been organized " for the purpose of carrying on within the 
commonwealth the business of a bank," within the meaning of 
the term as used in the business corporation law of 1903. 

The small loan business at the time of the enactment of the 



76 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

business corporation law of 1903 was fully recognized, and for 
many years prior thereto had been recognized as a business 
differing from an ordinary banking business. In the adminis- 
tration of the business corporation law from the date of its en- 
actment to the present time, it has not been considered that 
corporations carrying on a business similar to that carried on by 
the Collateral Loan Company are excluded from the provisions 
of the act on the ground that they are organized for the purpose 
of carrying on the business of a bank. Loan companies have 
been organized in recent years under the provisions of this act 
of 1903 and have otherwise conformed to the provisions of the 
act. The Collateral Loan Company itself was included in the 
original list of corporations existent at the time of the enact- 
ment of the business corporation law of 1903, to which that law 
was to be considered applicable. It has been subjected to the 
provisions of that law both with reference to taxation and other 
matters ever since the enactment of the law, with the acquies- 
cence of all parties in interest. 

Finally, if further evidence be necessary that for the purpose 
of classification the corporation is to be considered as organized 
for the purposes of a loan agency and not for the purpose of 
carrying on a banking business, that evidence is supplied by the 
provisions of St. 1911, c. 727, entitled " An Act to regulate the 
business of making small loans," which subjects all small loan 
agencies in this Commonwealth to the supervision of a State 
officer known as the Supervisor of Loan Agencies; transfers the 
powers and duties formerly exercised by the Bank Commissioner 
to this supervisor, and provides in section 23 as follows : — 

All parts of the charters of the Collateral Loan Company, Work- 
ingmen's Loan Association, Worcester Collateral Loan Association 
and Chattel Loan Company inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. 

Under the terms of this act any parts of the charter of the 
Collateral Loan Company which might be considered as being 
inconsistent with its now being considered and dealt with as a 
loan agency rather than as a bank are repealed, and the intent 
of the Legislature that the company shall be placed upon the 
same basis as other loan agencies is clearly indicated. 

As previously stated, loan agencies may be incorporated 
under the provisions of St. 1903, c. 437, and the Collateral Loan 
Company is, therefore, to be considered as included among the 
corporations " heretofore organized by special act of the legisla- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 77 

ture for a purpose or purposes for which corporations may be 
organized under the provisions of chapter four hundred and 
thirty-seven of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and three," 
and is, therefore, authorized under the provisions of St. 1912, 
c. 586, to increase its capital stock in accordance with the pro- 
visions of the Acts of 1903, 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv^ift, Attorney- General. 



Insane Person — Hospital — Trustees — Authority of Trustees 
to Limit Number of Patients — State Board of Insanity. 

The trustees of a State hospital for the insane have no authority by vote 
or resolution to limit the number of patients to be treated at such 
hospital, and if the State Board of Insanity, in the exercise of the 
power vested in it by St, 1909, c. 504, ^ 10, to make such recom- 
mendations to the trustees of an institution for the insane as it may 
deem expedient, should recommend that accommodations be provided 
for additional patients, it would be the duty of such trustees to 
provide them. 

July 14, 1913. 

Mrs. Mary B. Townsley, Secretary, Trustees of the Monson State Hos- 
pital. 

Dear Madam : — In behalf of the trustees of the Monson 
State Hospital you have sent me a copy of a resolution passed by 
vote of the trustees and have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tions whether the trustees have the power through passing such a 
resolution to limit the number of patients to be treated at the hos- 
pital, and whether the State Board of Insanity may require an 
increase of accommodations for patients beyond the limit fixed 
by the trustees. 

The vote of the trustees was as follows : — 

Voted, That the capacity of this hospital should be hmited to twelve 
hundred patients and that the policy of this Board be to ask only for 
appropriations and buildings sufficient to care for this number of 
patients. 

In my opinion the present laws with reference to the hospital 
are such that the number of patients to be treated at the hospi- 
tal may be absolutely limited only by action of the Legislature, 
and the vote of the trustees has the force only of the expression 



78 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

of the opinion of the trustees as to the policy the pursuance of 
which would enable the hospital to do its best work. 

The provisions of the vote could not be given full effect as a 
practical matter on account of the provisions of law regulating 
admission of patients to the hospital. So far as patients are ad- 
mitted upon application to the trustees, the number of inmates 
of the hospital is to some extent within the control of the trustees, 
but, under the provisions of St. 1909, c. 504, § 58, as amended 
by St. 1911, c. 71, an insane epileptic may be committed to this 
hospital under the laws applicable to the commitment of other 
insane persons, without any action being taken by the trustees, 
and, through the provisions of St. 1909, c. 504, § 12, patients 
may likewise be committed upon application of the State Board 
of Insanity. Xo provision appears to have been made to give 
the trustees power to control the extent to which the number of 
inmates of the hospital may be increased by such commitments. 

That it is not the intent of the statutes that the trustees of 
the hospital shall be vested with authority absolutely to fix the 
limits of the size of the institution seems also to be indicated by 
the provisions of St. 1907, c. 520, which, by the provisions of 
St. 1909, c. 504, § 8, are made applicable to this hospital. Under 
the provisions of the 1907 act plans for new construction or for 
alteration or repairs of existing buildings for which it is intended 
to petition the General Court for appropriations must first be 
submitted to the State Board of Insanitv, and that Board " may 
require such modifications thereof and additions thereto and such 
additional information as it may deem necessary." 

These various provisions are consistent with the terms of the 
original act providing for the establishment of the hospital. St. 
1895, c. 483. Section 6 of that act is as follows : — 

Said trustees shall have the same powers and shall be required to 
perform the same duties in the management and control of said hos- 
pital as are vested in and required of the trustees of the various state 
lunatic hospitals under sections six, seven and nine of chapter eighty- 
seven of the Public Statutes. 



Section 6 of chapter 87 of the Public Statutes, referring to 
the trustees of each hospital, provides as follows : — 

They shall take charge of the general interests of the institution, 
and see that its affairs are conducted according to the requirements 
of the legislature and the by-laws and regulations which the board 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 79 

shall establish for the internal government and economy thereof; and 
they shall be reimbursed all expenses incurred in the discharge of 
their official duties. 

Section 7 of the same chapter provides : — 

They shall establish by-laws and regulations, with suitable penalties, 
for the internal government and economy of the institution ; etc. 

The effect of these various enactments is that although the 
internal government of the institution is in the hands of the 
trustees, it is not within the power of the trustees absolutely and 
finally to determine the place of the hospital in the institutional 
system of the Commonwealth and to limit absolutely the extent 
of the portion of the field of the care of the insane of the Com- 
monwealth which shall be filled by this particular institution. 

So long as " the requirements of the legislature " are that the 
number of patients shall not be absolutely within the control of 
the trustees, but that the trustees shall receive patients com- 
mitted to the hospital by order of court independent of action 
by the trustees, the trustees are bound to conduct the hospital 
according to those requirements so far as it is reasonably pos- 
sible. If in the opinion of the trustees the effectiveness of the 
institution is impaired by reason of the increase of patients be- 
yond certain limits, the remedy, if it is to be effective, must be 
by appeal to the Legislature rather than through an attemj^t 
to enforce a vote of the trustees which has not the force of law. 

The question as to the authority of the State Board of In- 
sanity to require an increase of accommodations beyond the 
limits fixed by the trustees is substantially answered b}^ what 
has been said with reference to the legal effect of the vote of the 
trustees. The providing of accommodations for patients which 
the trustees are bound by law to receive is part of the duties 
of the trustees and is, therefore, required by the statutes rather 
than by the State Board of Insanity. The State Board of In- 
sanity, however, under the provisions of St. 1909, c. 504, is at 
the head of the entire system of caring for the insane, the feeble- 
minded, the epileptics and the dipsomaniacs in the Common- 
wealth, with powers of supervision over all public and private 
institutions and receptacles for such patients. Under the pro- 
visions of section 10 of the statute providing for visitation and 
inspection of the hospitals by the Board and authorizing the 
Board to ^' make such recommendations to the trustees or super- 



80 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

intendent of the institution as it may deem expedient," the 
Board would not in my opinion exceed its powers if, under con- 
ditions which seem to it to demand additional accommodations, 
it should recommend that such accommodations should be pro- 
vided. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Taxation — Domestic Business Corporation — Distribution of 
Tax — Canal Company — Corporation having the Right to 
taJce or condemn Land — The Essex Company. 

The words "domestic business corporation," as used in St. 1910, c. 456, 
$ 1, providing that the tax assessed upon domestic business corpora- 
tions under the provisions of St. 1909, c. 490, Part III., shall be 
distributed, credited and paid to cities and towns or shall be re- 
tained by the Commonwealth in the manner therein provided, are 
to be construed as having the meaning of the same words as used 
in St. 1909, c. 490, Part III., defined in section 39 to include 
"every corporation of the classes enumerated in section one of 
chapter four hundred and thirty-seven of the acts of the year nine- 
teen hundred and three. ' ' 

By St. 1903, c. 437, § 1, after enumerating the classes of corporations 
to which such chapter shall apply, it is provided that ' ' it shall not 
apply to corporations organized under general or special laws of this 
commonwealth for the purpose of carrying on within the common- 
wealth the business of a . . . canal, aqueduct or water company 
... or to any other corporations which now have or may hereafter 
have the right to take or condemn land or to exercise franchises in 
public ways ..." It follows that since the Essex Company, which 
was chartered by special act (St. 1845, c. 163) and owns canals 
and locks in the city of Lawrence, and is vested with the right to 
take or condemn lands and to exercise franchises in public ways, is 
excluded from the provisions of St. 1903, c. 437, the business cor- 
poration law, it is, therefore, not a domestic business corporation 
within the meaning of St. 1910, c. 456, § 1. 

Aug. 27, 1913. 
Charles A. Andrew^s, Esq., Deputy Tax Commissioner. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tion whether the Essex Company, a corporation chartered by 
special act (St. 1845, c. 163), owning the canals and locks in 
the city of Lawrence, is a domestic business corporation within 
the meaning of section 1 of chapter 456 of the Acts of the year 
1910. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 81 

St. 1910, c. 456, § 1, provides as follows: — 

The tax assessed upon domestic business corporations under the 
provisions of Part III. of chapter four hundred and ninety of the 
acts of the year nineteen hundred and nine shall be distributed, cred- 
ited and paid to cities and towns of the commonwealth or shall be 
retained by the commonwealth in the manner following: Such part 
of said tax paid by each of said domestic business corporations as 
is paid on account of shares of stock of said corporations owned by 
non-residents of Massachusetts shall be retained by the common- 
wealth. The remainder of said tax paid by each of said corporations 
shall be distributed, credited and paid to the city or town of the com- 
monwealth where the business of the corporation is carried on, and 
if any such corporation maintains an office, store or factory in more 
than one city or town of the commonwealth this part of the tax paid 
by it shall be distributed, credited and paid to such cities and towns 
in proportion to the value of the tangible property of the corporation 
in each of such cities or towns on the first day of April, as deter- 
mined from the returns or in any other manner : provided^ that if any 
such corporation does not conduct its business in Massachusetts and 
does not own any tangible property in any city or town of the com- 
monwealth, other than furniture and equipment reasonably necessary 
for the use of the clerk or other executive officers of such corporation, 
all of the tax paid by such corporation shall be retained by the com- 
monwealth. 

In my opinion the phrase ^^ domestic business corporation," 
as used in this act, must be construed as having the same mean- 
ing as the same phrase nsed in Part III. of chapter 490 of the 
Acts of the year 1909. St. 1909, c. 490, Part III., § 39, pro- 
vides as follows : — 

The term " domestic business corporation " as used in this act shall 
mean every corporation of the classes enumerated in section one of 
chapter four hundred and thirtj^-seven of the acts of the year nine- 
teen hundred and three; . . . 

Section 1 of chapter 437 of the Acts of 1903 enumerates the 
classes of corporations to which that business corporation law 
shall not apply, as well as the classes to which it shall apply; 
but section 39, above quoted, in referring to '' the classes enu- 
merated in section one of chapter four hundred and thirty- 
seven" can be reasonably construed only as referring to the 
classes enumerated in section 1 as subject to the provisions of 
the business corporation law. 



82 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Section 1, after enumerating the classes of corporations to 
which the law shall apply, provides as follows : — 

It shall not apply to corporations organized under general or 
special laws of this commonwealth for the purpose of carrying on 
within the commonwealth the business of a bank, savings bank, 
co-operative bank, trust company, surety or indemnity company, 
safe deposit company, insurance company, railroad or street railway 
company, telegraph or telephone company, gas or electric light, heat 
or power company, canal, aqueduct or water company, cemetery or 
crematory company, or to any other corporations which now have or 
may hereafter have the right to take or condemn land or to exercise 
franchises in public ways granted by the commonwealth or by any 
county, city or town. 

In my opinion, by these latter provisions the Essex Company 
is expressly excluded from the application of the business cor- 
poration law. The original charter of the corporation, St. 1845, 
c. 163, makes the individuals therein named a corporation " for 
the purpose of constructing a dam across Merrimack river, and 
constructing one or more locks and canals in connection with 
said dam, to remove obstructions in said river by falls and 
rapids, from Hunt's Falls to the mouth of Shawsheen river, and 
to create a water power to use, or sell, or lease to other persons 
or corporations, to use for manufacturing and mechanical pur- 
poses.^' By section 3 of the same act it is " authorized and em- 
powered to construct and maintain a dam across said river, either 
at Deer Jump Falls, or Bodwell's Falls, or some point in said 
river between said falls, and all such canals and locks as may be 
necessary for the purposes aforesaid; and for the purpose of 
making said dam, and constructing the main canal for naviga- 
tion, or transports, may take, occupy, and inclose any of the 
lands adjoining said canals and locks, or dam, which may be 
necessary for building or repairing the same, for towing paths, 
and other necessary purposes, not exceeding twenty feet on each 
side of said canal, or locks, and may blow up and remove any 
rocks in said river, and dig in any of the lands near to said 
river, through which it may be necessary to pass said main 
canal." By section 4 it is provided : — 

If there shall be occasion, in the prosecution of the powers and 
purposes aforesaid, to make a canal across any public highway, or if 
highways shall hereafter be laid out across such canal, it shall be the 
duty of said corporation to make sufficient bridges across said canal, 
and to keep them in good repair. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 83 

By section 6 the company is authorized to erect and forever 
maintain such canal and locks as shall be necessary around any 
dam constructed by it. By section 9, for the purpose of reim- 
bursing the corporation in part for the cost and expense of 
keeping the locks and canals in repair, it is authorized to levy 
tolls. 

The original charter has been amended by various acts, but 
the nature of the corporation has not been changed and its 
powers have not been altered in such a manner as to affect the 
question now presented. 

While the corporation is authorized by its charter to use the 
water power which it creates, for the purpose of manufacturing, 
and although it was made subject to the provisions of the thirty- 
eighth and forty-fourth chapters of the Eevised Statutes, and 
has been in many respects given the powers and privileges and 
has been subjected to the liabilities of manufacturing corpora- 
tions, nevertheless, it must, in view of the object of its in- 
corporation and the powers vested in it by its charter, be con- 
sidered as a canal company within the meaning of section 1 of 
the business corporation law. This view has recently been taken 
by the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth, in the case of a 
petition for tax abatement brought by the Essex Company against 
the city of Lawrence, 314 Mass. 79, 87. In that case it was 
said by the chief justice : — 

It has been faintly argued that R. L., c. 14, § 42, was repealed by 
St. 1903, c. 437, § 95. But this is not so, for the reason among others 
that e. 437, according to § 1, does not apply to a canal corporation, 
which the petitioner is in some aspects of its charter duties. 

In my opinion the corporation is to be considered as excluded 
from the provisions of the business corporation law also for the 
reason that it is a corporation having the right to take or con- 
demn land or to exercise franchises in public ways granted by 
the Commonwealth, or by any county, city or town. The cor- 
poration was given authority by section 3 of its charter, above 
quoted, to take or condemn land, and since I have no infor- 
mation that at the time when the business corporation law went 
into effect the corporation had entirely exhausted its powers to 
take land, I must assume that at the time when that law took 
effect this corporation was still a corporation having the right to 
take land. 

In my opinion, therefore, the Essex Company is not a corpo- 



84 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

ration of the classes enumerated in section 1 of chapter 437 of 
the Acts of 1903 as subject to the provisions of that act, and is 
therefore not a domestic business corporation within the mean- 
ing of that term as nsed in St. 1910, c. 456. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Weights and Measures — Weighing and measuring Devices for 
Hire or Reward — Testing and sealing Gas or Electric 
Light Meters. 
Gas or electric light meters are not measuring devices within the mean- 
ing of St. 1909, c. 412, § 1, that "the provisions of chapter sixty- 
two of the Kevised Laws relating to the adjustment, testing and 
sealing of weights, measures and balances shall apply to all weigh- 
ing and measuring devices used for the purposes of weighing and 
measuring for hire or reward.'' 

Sept. 3, 1913. 

Thure Hanson, Esq., Commissioner of Weights and Measures. 

Dear Sir: — -Under date of August 25 you requested my 
opinion as follows : — 

I would respectfully refer you to section 1, chapter 412, Acts of 
1909, which reads as follows : — 

" The provisions of chapter sixtj^-two of the Revised Laws relating 
to the adjustment, testing and sealing of weights, measures and bal- 
ances shall apply to all weighing and measuring devices used for the 
purposes of weighing and measuring for hire or reward." 

Will you kindly advise if in your opinion a gas or electric light 
meter would be a measuring device in the meaning of this section ? 

In my opinion your inquiry should be answered in the nega- 
tive. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Railroad Corporation — Board of Railroad Commissioners — 
Certificate that Requirements of Latu Preliminary to Incor- 
poration have 'been complied with — Revision by Court or 
Other Tribunal — Description of Route in Agreement of 
Association — Certificates of Agreement as to Route in 
Cities and Towns — Hampden Railroad Corporation. 
Where the Board of Eailroad Commissioners, under the provisions of 
St. 1906, c. 463, Part 11., $ 24, has duly certified that the require- 
ments of such chapter preliminary to the incorporation of a railroad 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 85 

corporation under general laws have been complied with, the deci- 
sion of such Board in the premises should not be considered as sub- 
ject to revision by any other executive or administrative board or 
commission. 
The powers vested iu a railroad corporation organized under general 
laws with respect to fixing the route of its railroad are to be deter- 
mined not only from the description of such route contained in its 
certificate of organization, but also from the certificates fixing the 
route in the several cities and towns through which such railroad 
is to pass, as provided for in St. 1906, c. 463, Part II., §§ 20-24, 
inclusive. The Hampden Eailroad Corporation may, therefore, con- 
struct its railroad upon the route shown to be fixed by the certifi- 
cates annexed to the agreement of association on file in the office 
of the Secretary of the Commonwealth in accordance with the pro- 
visions of section 24; and the description of the route contained in 
such agi-eement of association, so far as it is not required by law 
and is inconsistent with the route fixed under authority of sections 
20 and 21, may be disregarded. 

Sept. 15, 1913. 
Hon. Fred J. Macleod, Chairman, Public Service Commission. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tion whether, in view of the facts contained in a statement sub- 
mitted by you, the Hampden Eailroad Corporation has kept 
within the powers conferred upon it by its charter and the laws 
of the Commonwealth so that the Public Service Commission, 
acting under St. 1913, c. 784, § 16, may lawfully approve an 
issue of bonds by that corporation to the amount of $2,500,000, 
to provide means for funding its floating debt incurred in the 
construction and equipment of its railroad, the proposed bonds 
to be secured by a mortgage of the railroad, its equipment, fran- 
chises and al] other property now owned by it or hereafter ac- 
quired. 

The facts submitted by you as bearing upon the question are 
as follows : — 

Acting under St. 1906, c. 463, Part IL, §§ 13-28, the asso- 
ciates forming the Hampden Eailroad made an agreement of 
association, dated June 1, 1910. Copies of this agreement were 
published as required by section 16 of the statute. 

On Aug. 4, 1910, the directors named in the agreement of 
association petitioned the Eailroad Commissioners, under section 
18, for a certificate that public convenience and necessity re- 
quired the construction of a railroad as proposed in said agree- 
ment and in the petition and as shown upon certain maps, plans 
and profiles. These maps, plans and profiles were filed with the 
petition, together with an estimate of cost and a description of 



86 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

the proposed route of the railroad. Upon this petition an order 
of notice by publication and service of copy was issued by the 
Board of Railroad Commissioners on Aug. 4, 1910. After hear- 
ing on the petition and after a contest the Railroad Commis- 
sioners, on Sept. 20, 1910, issued a certificate of public con- 
venience and necessity, under section 18. In this certificate the 
Board called attention to the fact that two features of the pro- 
posed railroad remained open for discussion; one was the loca- 
tion in the city of Chicopee, and the other the location in the 
city of Springfield. It was stated that since the route through 
the city of Chicopee, as proposed, was subject to local objection, 
the Board would take note of the suggestion of the municipal 
authorities of the city of Chicopee if it became the duty of the 
Board of Railroad Commissioners to fix the route in that city. 
It stated that if it became the duty of the Board to fix the route 
in the city of Springfield, the Board in fixing the route in that 
city would take note of the river front improvements contem- 
plated by the city. 

Subsequently, the incorporators, acting under sections 19 and 
20 of the statute, agreed with the towns of Ludlow, Belchertown 
and Palmer upon the routes of the railroad in those to\\Tis, and 
in October, 1911, the selectmen of these towns certified the routes 
agreed upon. The routes so fixed in these three towns were 
substantially the same as the routes shown with map accompany- 
ing the petition for a certificate of exigency. 

On Sept. 30, 1910, the directors of the Hampden Railroad sub- 
mitted to the aldermen of the city of Springfield the map and 
engineer's report which had been submitted to the Railroad Com- 
missioners at the time of the filing of the petition for a certificate 
of exigency, and also on September 30 petitioned the board of 
aldermen asking it to agree with the directors upon the route 
and location of the tracks of the railroad in Springfield, under 
sections 19 and 20. The matter was laid upon the table on 
Oct. 10, 1910. 

At a meeting of the aldermen of Springfield on April 3, 1911. 
the petition was taken from the files and it was voted to give a 
hearing to all persons interested, on April 17. On April 17, 
1911, at the hearing on the petition Ralph D. Gillett appeared 
on behalf of the petitioner and stated that the plan of the corpo- 
ration had been changed somewhat and that under the proposed 
plan the location asked for would not go through or across any 
land owned by tha city of Springfield. A revised plan of the lo- 



191-1.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 87 

cation was presented. No one appeared in opposition. The hear- 
ing was closed, and on motion of Alderman Wight it was voted 
that the location be granted as prayed for. 

The city clerk of Springfield issued a certificate under date of 
April 17, 1911, as follows: — 

I hereby certify that at a meeting of the board of aldermen of the 
city of Springfield, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, held April 17, 
1911, after a hearing duly posted and advertised as required by law, 
it was voted in the matter of the petition of the Hampden Railroad 
for a location in the city of Springfield that said location be gTanted 
as prayed for. 
Attest : 

(Signed) E. A. Newell, 

City Clerk. 

The new plan referred to in this vote was a plan showing the 
location in Springfield upon which the railroad has been actually 
constructed, but a location different from the location shown 
upon the map filed with the Eailroad Commissioners with the 
joetition for a certificate of exigency. 

Between the date when the original petition was filed with the 
aldermen of Springfield and the date when the new plan was 
finally acted upon, the New York Central Eailroad, as lessee of 
the Boston & Albany Eailroad, had made an agreement in Febru- 
ary, 1911, with the New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad 
that such through routes over the lines of the New Haven system 
and Boston & Albany Eailroad as the public interest might re- 
quire should be established. After this agreement, but before 
July, 1911, Mr. Mellen suggested the possibility of establishing 
a connection of the Hampden Eailroad with the Boston & Al- 
bany at Athol Junction and of making arrangement for the use 
of the Boston & Albany tracks between Athol Junction and 
Springfield. The suggestion was favorably received but no actual 
and formal agreement concerning the subject was made until 
July 10, 1912, when an agreement was made between the New 
York Central and the Boston & Maine for the use of these tracks. 

In the city of Chicopee the associates were unable to agree 
with the aldermen upon a route in that city, whereupon, acting 
under section 21, on Feb. 10, 1911, they petitioned the Board of 
Eailroad Commissioners to fix the route in that city. An order 
of notice was issued upon this petition, and on Jime 2, 1911, the 



88 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Board of Railroad Commissioners fixed the route of the Hamp- 
den Railroad in Chicopee. 

'No route was ever fixed in the city of Holyoke. A petition 
was, however, brought by the Hampden Railroad to the aldermen 
of Holyoke, dated Sept. 30, 1910, asking the Board to agree 
upon a route in Holj^oke. This petition was referred Oct. 4, 
1910, to a committee, and no further action was ever taken 
upon it. 

On May 8, 1911, the directors of the corporation petitioned 
the Board of Railroad Commissioners for a certificate of compli- 
ance, under section 24, which provides in substance that when it 
is shown to the satisfaction of the Railroad Commissioners that 
the requirements of the chapter preliminary to the incorpora- 
tion of a railroad corporation have been complied with, and that 
payment for all damages is adequately guaranteed, the clerk 
of the Board shall, on its order, annex to the agreement of asso- 
ciation a certificate stating that such requirements have been 
complied with. This certificate was issued by the clerk upon 
order of the Board on June 2, 1911. 

On the same date, June 2, 1911, the agreement of association, 
with its certificates' annexed, was filed in the ofiice of the Secre- 
tary of the Commonwealth, and a certificate of incorporation was 
issued in accordance with the provisions of section 24 of the 
statute. 

The capital stock of the corporation as fixed in the agTeement 
of association was $1,000,000. On July 20, 1911, it was voted 
to increase the capital stock to $1,400,000. 

On Aug. 17, 1911, the corporation filed with the Board a pe- 
tition for a certificate preliminary to location, under section 71 
of the statute, and on the same day the clerk of the Board, by 
order of the Board, gave a certificate under this section. 

On Dec. 5, 1912, the corporation petitioned the Board, under 
section 65 of the statute, to determine that capital stock to the 
amount of $1,400,000 was reasonable and necessary for the con- 
struction and equipment of its railroad. On this petition an 
order of notice was issued by publication in the newspapers, and 
on Dec. 13, 1912, the Board approved the issue of this stock to 
this amount at par, the proceeds " to be applied only toward the 
payment and capitalization, necessary cost of building and 
equipping its railroad, and the purchase of property necessary 
for its operation.*^ 

On Oct. 8, 1912, the corporation petitioned the Board, under 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 89 

section 78 of the statute, and nnder St. 1912, c. 725, Part II., 
§ 2, to prescribe the limits within which additional land might 
be taken by it within the city of Springfield, outside the limits 
of its route already fixed, for the purpose of obtaining additional 
land for depot and station purposes, etc. Upon notice duly pub- 
lished the Board, on Nov. 16, 1912, prescribed the limits as 
prayed for. 

On June 3, 1913, the corporation filed its petition for a certifi- 
cate preliminary to operation, under section 127 of the statute, 
and on June 18, 1913, the Board certified that "all laws rela- 
tive to the construction of the Hampden Railroad have been 
complied with, and that the railroad appears to be in safe condi- 
tion for operation. ^^ 

From the facts stated it appears that on June 2, 1911, the 
Board of Eailroad Commissioners, the predecessor of the present 
Public Service Commission, certified under St. 1906, c. 463, 
Part IL, § 24, that the requirements of the chapter preliminary 
to the incorporation of a railroad corporation under general 
laws had been complied with. Section 24 provides as follows : — 

When it is shown to the satisfaction of the board of railroad com- 
missioners that the requirements of this chapter preliminary to the 
incorporation of a railroad corporation have been complied with, 
. . . the clerk of said board, upon its order, shall annex to the agree- 
ment of association a certificate stating that such requirements bave 
been complied with. The directors shall thereupon file the agreement 
of association, with all the certificates annexed thereto, in the office 
of the secretary of the commonwealth; who, upon the payment to 
him of a fee of fifty dollars, shall receive and preserve the same in 
form convenient for reference and open to jDublic inspection, and 
shall thereupon issue a certificate of incorporation . . . 

In my opinion, it is clear from the provisions quoted that the 
Legislature intended that the Board of Eailroad Commissioners 
should act as final arbiters upon the question whether the in- 
corporators had complied with the requirements of the statute 
preliminary to incorporation, and that when that Board had 
certified that it had been shown to its satisfaction that the re- 
quirements of the law had been complied with, the Secretary of 
the Commonwealth, the incorporators, the investors and the pub- 
lic might rely upon the decision, and that all parties should be 
bound by the record. 

It appears not to have been determined by the Supreme Ju- 
dicial Court of this Commonwealth that the decision of the Board 



90 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

upon this point is subject to revision by the court on a question 
of law. In the case of Kilty v. Railroad Commissioners, 184 
Mass. 310, at pages 311, 312, the court said: — 

It is unnecessary to determine whether the decision of the Eaih-oad 
Commissioners under the R. L., c. Ill, § 46, upon the question 
whether the preliminary requirements of the chapter have been com- 
plied with is final, or is subject to revision by this court on questions 
of law. 

The provisions of section 46 of chapter 111 of the Revised Laws 
are now incorporated in the provisions of St. 1906, c. 463, Part 
IL, § 24. No adjudication upon the point appears to have been 
made in any later case arising under the statute. 

In the absence of an adjudication that the decision of the 
Board upon this point is subject to revision in matters of law 
by the Supreme Judicial Court, it should not, in my opinion, be 
considered as subject to revision by any other tribunal. There 
is no occasion, therefore, to enter into a detailed discussion of all 
the provisions included within sections 13 to 28, and of the 
various things done for the purpose of complying with those pro- 
visions, and the request of the commission I do not construe as 
a request for a revision of all these matters. It must, of course, 
be presumed in favor of the various decisions and certificates of 
the Board of Railroad Commissioners that, acting as a public 
Board, it has been fully satisfied that the incorporators, in all 
acts requiring the approval of the Board, have acted in good 
faith; that the rights of the public and all parties interested in 
the proceedings have been protected by the Board so far as the 
statutes permit such protection; and that the interests of the 
public have been served by the manner in which the requirements 
of the chapter preliminary to incorporation have been complied 
with. 

An opinion upon the question '^ whether upon the facts stated 
the Hampden Railroad has kept within the powers conferred 
upon it by its charter and the laws of the Commonwealth " in- 
volves, however, a determination of what powers have been con- 
ferred upon the corporation, and the consideration of that 
question must of necessity involve some discussion of the require- 
ments of the statute preliminary to incorporation and of the 
manner in which those requirements have been complied with. 

The question is made difficult chiefly through the form in 
which the original agreement of association was drawn. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 91 

Section 13 of the statute requires that the agreement of asso- 
ciation shall state these facts with reference to the proposed lo- 
cation of the railroad : — 

(c) The termini of the railroad. 

(d) The length of the railroad as nearly as may be. 

(e) The name of each county, city and town in which the railroad 
is to be located. 

(/) The gauge of the railroad. 

The agreement of association in this case contained the fol- 
lowing statements: — 

The termini of the proposed road are the city of Springfield and the 
city of Holyoke on the west, and near the village of Bondsville in 
the town of Palmer on the east, all in said county of Hampden. . . . 

The length of the railroad as nearly as may be determined is 
twenty-five miles. 

The said railroad is located, as above indicated, in the cities of 
Springfield, Chicopee and Holyoke and in the towns of Ludlow and 
Palmer, all in the said county of Hampden, and in the town of 
Belchertown, in the county of Hampshire. 

These facts wdth reference to the location of the proposed rail- 
road were all that the statute required, but the agreement, after 
the statement quoted above with reference to termini, continues 
somewhat inartificially as follows : — 

The road is more particularly described, as to termini, as fol- 
lows : — 

Commencing at a point in the city of Springfield, at or near the 
Connecticut River, north of Bridge Street, and extending thence 
northerly through the city of SiDringfield to the city of Chicopee, in 
said county, thence easterly through that part of Chicopee known as 
Chicopee Falls, thence crossing the Chicopee River and extending to 
and through the town of Ludlow, in said county, to the town of 
Belchertown, in the county of Hampshire, and in the said last men- 
tioned town to a connection with a branch of the Boston & Albany 
Railroad known as the Athol Branch, and the New London Northern 
Railroad, and crossing the said branch of the Boston & Albany Rail- 
road, and the said New London Northern Railroad, thence to a con- 
nection with the tracks of the Central Massachusetts division of the 
Boston & Maine Railroad at a point near the village of Bondsville, 
in said town of Palmer, together with an extension from a point in 
the indicated line in the city of Chicopee northwesterly through that 
portion of Chicopee known as Willimansett to the Connecticut River, 
thence across said river to and into said Holyoke. 



92 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

It appears that although designated as a " more particular de- 
scription as to termini," this latter description is in fact not a de- 
scription as to termini but of the route between the termini as 
contemplated by the associates at the date of the agreement of 
association. 

Since the statute provides that by agreement with municipal 
authorities or by order of the Board of Railroad Commissioners 
the route proposed by the incorporators may be altered and the 
location fixed anywhere within the limits of the city or town 
for which the respective municipal authorities are acting, it is 
evident that the Legislature did not contemplate the insertion of 
a detailed description of a route in the agreement of association, 
and such a description has no place in a carefully drawn agree- 
ment of association. 

Section 24 prescribes the form for the certificate of incorpo- 
ration, which includes a description of the railroad as in the 
agreement of association. It provides that the certificate of in- 
corporation shall be signed by the Secretary of the Common- 
wealth and " shall have the force and effect of a special charter." 
This provision that the certificate shall have the force and effect 
of a special charter did not appear in the statutes regulating the 
incorporation of railroads under general laws until the enactment 
of St. 1906, c. 463, Part 11. The form of the provision was 
undoubtedly copied from the business corporation law, St. 1903, 
c. 437, § 12, and, if the same construction were to be given to 
the provision in this statute as is given to the provision as it 
occurs in the business corporation law, there might be strong 
reason for holding that the Hampden Railroad Corporation had 
no authority to construct a railroad on a route other than that 
described in the agreement of association. 

But in my opinion that provision cannot be so construed if 
proper effect is to be given to the other provisions of the rail- 
road law. 

Section 19 of the railroad statute provides that the directors 
shall submit to the board of aldermen of every city and to the 
selectmen of every town named in the agreement of association 
a map of the route as originally proposed. Section 20 provides 
that these boards of aldermen and selectmen may agree with the 
directors of the railroad " as to the said route or as to any route 
of the railroad in said city or town," and that such an agreement 
shall fix the route in the respective cities and towns. Section 
21 provides that if the municipal authorities fail to agree with 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 93 

the directors, the Board of Eailroad Commissioners ma}- fix the 
route in the city or town. Section 23 requires the directors, clerk 
and treasurer of the corporation to certify that it is intended 
"in good faith to locate, construct, maintain and operate the 
railroad upon the route fixed." Section 24 requires the direc- 
tors to file the certificates fixing the route, together with the 
agreement of association, in the olBfice of the Secretary of the 
Commonwealth, and requires the Secretary of the Common- 
wealth to keep these certificates annexed to the agreement of 
association " in form convenient for reference and open to public 
inspection." 

It is clear from these provisions that the powers conferred 
upon a corporation are not to be ascertained solely by inspection 
of the certificate of incorporation. They are conferred partly 
through certificates fixing the route, given under authority of 
sections 20 and 21 of the statute. These certificates are to be 
read with the certificate of incorporation, for the purpose of 
ascertaining upon what route the corporation is authorized to 
construct its railroad. 

The jurisdiction of the aldermen of cities and of the select- 
men of towns is, of course, confined to their respective cities and 
towns, but within these limits they are, under the terms of this 
statute, the guardians of the interests of their municipality, and 
they may agree upon the route as they see fit in their own 
municipality, provided only the route is consistent with the de- 
scription of the road required by law to be contained in the 
agreement of association, consisting of the statement of the 
termini, the approximate length of the road, and the counties, 
cities and towns through which the road is to pass. 

In my opinion the superfluous and inartificial description of 
the proposed route of the railroad is not to be construed either 
as abridging the rights of the municipal authorities to fix a route 
different from that so described, or as depriving the incorpora- 
tors of the rights acquired by stating in the agreement of asso- 
ciation all that the statutes specifically required. 

This view is confirmed by an examination of the provisions' 
with reference to incorporation by special charter, which differ 
from those with reference to incorporation under general laws. 
Sections 11 and 12 provide, with reference to special charters, 
that the railroad shall be confined by the special charter within 
the limits indicated by the notice given upon its petition, and 
that the route of the railroad established by special charter shall 



94 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

be fixed "according to the provisions of sections 20 and 21, 
except so far as they may have been fixed ty special statute.'* 
The language of these sections indicates that in this act, when 
the Legislature has meant to limit the exercise of the authority 
vested in the local boards, under sections 20 and 21, it has so 
limited it by apt provision. 

In my opinion a fair construction of the statute requires me 
to conclude that the Legislature has left the matter of the route 
in elastic form, and has given to the municipal boards powers 
which amount to authority to amend the charter of the rail- 
road in matters concerning the route, provided only they keep 
within the outside limits of the route stated in the agreement of 
association, namely, the termini, and the counties, cities and 
towns in which the road is located. 

The provisions of section 76 also appear to confirm this view. 
That section provides that a railroad corporation, having taken 
land for its railroad, may vary the direction of said railroad in 
the city or town in which the land is situated, " but it shall not 
locate any part thereof outside the limits of the route fixed under 
the provisions of sections twenty and twenty-one, without the 
consent in writing of the hoard of aldermen or selectmen, if it 
was fixed under the provisions of section twent}^ or of the board 
of railroad commissioners if it was fixed under the provisions 
of section twenty-one. ^^ Under the earlier provisions of law 
upon which this section is based the route could be varied only 
within the limits fixed by the act of incorporation. Under the 
present section the route may be varied not only from the route 
originally proposed under authority of sections 20 and 21, but 
also from the route fixed under sections 20 and 21, by consent 
of the board of aldermen or selectmen in writing. 

I am led to the conclusion, therefore, that the Hampden Rail- 
road Corporation has the right, under its charter and the laws 
of the Commonwealth, to build its road upon the route shown 
to be fixed by the certificates on file in the office of the Secretary 
of the Commonwealth, annexed to the agreement of association ; 
and the description of the route contained in the agreement of 
association, so far as it is not required by law and is incon- 
sistent with the route fixed under authority of sections 20 and 
21, is, in my opinion, to be disregarded. 

Among the acts stated as having been done by the corporation 
since the time when the commission certified that all require- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 95 

ments of the statutes preliminary to incorporation had been com- 
plied with, I find none which the corporation was not authorized 
to do by its charter and the laws of the Commonwealth. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Eggs — Cold Storage — Sale at Retail upon Order — Delivery 

in Marked Container. 
The provision of St. 1913, c, 538, ^ 1, that whenever eggs that have 
been in cold storage are sold at retail, or offered or exposed for 
sale, the basket, box or other container in which the eggs are placed 
shall be marked plainly and conspicuously with the words 'cold 
storage eggs,' requires that the basket, box or other container in 
which such eggs are placed when delivered by a retail dealer to a 
consumer, upon orders taken at the home of the consumer, or by- 
telephone, where such consumer does not have an opportunity to see 
such eggs in a marked container at the store, shall be marked with 
the words ''cold storage eggs." 

Sept. 24, 1913. 
Mark W. Eichardson, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tion whether the provisions of St. 1913, c. 538, require that the 
basket, box or other container in which eggs are placed when 
delivered by a retail dealer in eggs to a consumer, upon orders 
taken at the home of the consumer, or by telephone, or by any 
other method by which the consumer does not have an oppor- 
tunity to see the eggs in a marked container in the store, shall 
be marked with the words " cold storage eggs." 
St. 1913, c. 538, § 1, provides as follows: — 

Whenever eggs that have been in cold storage are sold at retail, or 
offered or exposed for sale, the basket, box or other container in 
which the eggs are placed shall be marked plainly and conspicuously 
with the words " cold storage eggs ", or there shall be attached to 
such container a placard or sigTi having on it the said words. If 
eggs that have been in cold storage are sold at retail or offered or 
exposed for sale without a container, or placed upon a counter or 
elsewhere, a sign or placard, having the words " cold storage eggs " 
plainly and conspicuously marked upon it, shall be displayed in, 
upon or immediately above the said eggs; the intent of this act being 
that cold storage eggs sold at retail or offered or exposed for sale 
shall be designated in such a manner that the purchaser will know 



96 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

that they are cold storage eggs. The display of the words " cold 
storage eggs ", as required by this act, shall be done in such a man- 
ner as is approved by the state board of health. 

For the purpose of preventing evasion of the requirements of 
the statute through divergent interpretations of its provisions, 
the Legislature expressly stated the intent of the law to be that 
cold-storage eggs sold or offered or exposed for sale at retail 
should be designated in such manner as to give the purchaser 
notice of the fact that they are cold-storage eggs. If a purchaser 
should not go to the store to make his purchase, obviously, the 
expressed intent of the law would not be satisfied if the con- 
tainer in which the eggs were delivered were not marked in such 
a manner as to give him notice. The construction which requires 
the container in which the eggs are delivered to the consumer so 
ordering the eggs to be marked with the words " cold storage 
eggs," is, therefore, not only demanded by the words of the first 
sentence of the section, which require not only that the container 
of eggs which are offered or exposed for sale but also the con- 
tainer of eggs ivhich are sold shall be marked plainly and con- 
spicuously, but it is also the only construction which gives effect 
to the clause stating the intent of the law. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Boards of Health — Articles of Food — Sale — Rules and Regu- 
lations — State Board of Health — Approval — Regulation 
of Sale of Milk. 

The provision of St. 1912, c. 448, amending E. L., c. 56, § 70, that 
'^ boards of health . . . may make and enforce reasonable rules and 
regulations, subject to the approval of the state board of health, 
as to the conditions under which all articles of food may be kept 
for sale or exposed for sale, ..." must be construed in connection 
with the original provision of section 70, that '^boards of health 
. . . 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 ''if, on such inspection, it is 
found that such carcasses or articles 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 otherwise than for food," and the appli- 
cation of the words ''all articles of food" in the amendment must 
be limited to the articles of food enumerated in the original provi- 
sion. It follows, therefore, that such provisions do not authorize 
the regulation of the sale of milk. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 97 

Sept. 29, 1913. 
Mark W. Eichabdson, M.D., Secretary, State Board of Health. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion as to whether 
milk is to be considered an article of food as affected by the pro- 
visions of chapter 448 of the Acts of 1912, and whether, there- 
fore, any rules and regulations made concerning the sale of milk 
must not be duly advertised and submitted to the State Board of 
Health for its approval before being enforced. 

Chapter 448 of the Acts of 1912 is an amendment of Section 
70 of chapter 56 of the Revised Laws, and said section as so 
amended reads as follows : — 

Boards of health of cities and towns, by themselves, their officers 
or agents, 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 articles are tainted, diseased, corrapted, 
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 otherwise than for food. All money received 
by the board of health for property disposed of as aforesaid shall, 
after deducting the expenses of said seizure, be paid to the owner of 
such property. If the board of health seizes or condemns any such 
carcass or meat for the reason that it is affected with a contagious 
disease, it shall immediately give notice to the board of cattle com- 
missioners of the name of the owner or person in whose possession 
it was found, the nature of the disease and the disposition made of 
said meat or carcass. 

Boards of health of cities and towns may make and enforce reason- 
able rules and regulations, subject to the approval of the state board 
of health, as to the conditions under which all articles of food may 
be kept for sale or exposed for sale, in order to prevent contamina- 
tion thereof and injury to the public health. Before the board of 
health of any city or town submits such rules and regulations to the 
state board of health for approval it shall hold a public hearing 
thereon, of which notice shall be given by publication for two suc- 
cessive weeks, the first publication to be at least fourteen days prior 
to the date of the hearing, in a newspaper published in such city or 
town, or, if none is so published, in a newspaper published in the 
county in which such city or town is located. Any person affected by 
such rules and regulations, in the form in which they are presented 
to the state board of health for approval, may appeal to the said 
board for a further hearing, and said board shall not grant its ap- 



98 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

proval to rules and regulations concerning which such an appeal has 
been taken until it has held a public hearing thereon, advertised in 
the manner specified above in this section with reference to hearings 
before boards of health in cities and towns. 

In the original provisions of Revised Laws, chapter 56, the enact- 
ments concerning milk are contained in sections 51 to 69, in- 
clusive. Section 70 comes under the heading " Meat and Pro- 
visions," and is intended to cover other articles than milk. 

In my opinion, although the words " all articles of food " are 
broad enough in a general sense to include milk, as used in this 
particular enactment, the intention is to limit the application 
of these words to the articles of food properly coming within 
the scope of the original section. I do not think its applica- 
tion is to be extended to apply to milk, and I, therefore, answer 
your inquiry in the negative. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Schools — Attendance — Children under Sixteen Years of Age 
— Employment Certificate — Transcript of Birth Certifi- 
cate — Fees. 

The provision of St. 1913, c. 779, § 18, amending St. 1900, e. 514, $ 60, 
as amended by St. 1910, c. 257, § 4, that "no fee shall be exacted 
for an employment certificate or for any of the papers required by 
this act," in connection with the employment of children under six- 
teen years of age, is not applicable to birth certificates or duly 
attested transcripts thereof made by registrars of vital statistics, 
city or town clerks, or other officers charged with the duty of re- 
cording births. 

Oct. 8, 1913. 
EoBERT N. Turner, Esq., Acting Deputy Commissioner of Labor. 

Dear Sir : — On behalf of the State Board of Labor and In- 
dustries you have inquired whether or not the provisions of St. 
1913, c. 779, § 18, amending St. 1909, c. 514, § 60, as pre- 
viously amended by St. 1910, c. 257, § 4, that "no fee shall be 
exacted for an employment certificate or for any of the papers 
required by this act," is applicable to birth certificates or duly 
attested transcripts thereof made by registrars of vital statistics, 
city or town clerks, or other officers charged with the duty of 
recording births. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 99 

St. 1913, c. 779, § 1, provides that — 

every child under sixteen years of age who has not received an em- 
ployment certificate as provided in this act . . . shall attend a public 
day school . . . 

Section 16, which amended St. 1909, c. 514, § 58, as amended by 
St. 1911, c. 269, by striking out said section and inserting among 
other things the following, provides : — 

The person issuing emjDloyment certificates shall in each case, be- 
fore issuing a certificate, receive, examine, approve and file the fol- 
lowing papers, duly executed : — 

(1) A pledge or promise signed by the employer or by an author- 
ized manager or superintendent, setting forth the character of the 
employment, the number of hours per day during which the child is 
to be regularly employed and the name and address of the employer, 
in which pledge or promise the employer agrees to employ the child 
in accordance with the provisions of this act, and to return the em- 
ployment certificate as provided in section fifty-seven. 

(2) The school record of such child, properly filled out and signed 
as hereinafter provided. 

(3) A certificate signed by a school or family physician, or by a 
physician appointed by the school committee, stating that the child 
has been thoroughly examined by said physician and, in his opinion, 
is in sufficiently sound health and physically able to perform the 
work which the child intends to do. 

(4) Evidence of age showing that the child is fourteen years of 
age, which shall consist of one of the following proofs of age : 

(a) A birth certificate, or a duly attested transcript thereof, made 
by a registrar of vital statistics or other officer charged with the duty 
of recording births. 

(b) A baptismal certificate, or a duly attested transcript thereof, 
showing the age and date of baptism of the child. 

(c) In case none of the aforesaid proofs of age is obtainable, and 
only in such case, the person issuing employment certificates may 
accept in lieu thereof a passport or a duly attested immigration 
record, or transcript thereof, showing the age of the child : provided, 
that it shall appear to the satisfaction of said person that the same 
is good and sufficient evidence of the child's age. 

(d) In case none of the aforesaid proofs of age is obtainable, and 
only in such case, the person issuing employment certificates may 
accept in lieu thereof a record of age as given on the register of the 
school which the child first attended in the commonwealth: provided, 
that such record was kept for at least two years during the time when 
such child attended school. 



100 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

{e) In case none of the aforesaid proofs of age is obtainable, and 
only in such case, the person issuing employment certificates may 
receive the signed statement of the school physician, etc. 

Said section 18 provides, in part, as follows : — 

The employment certificate required by this act shall . . . certify 
that . . . all the papers required by section fifty-eight have been 
duly examined, approved and filed and that the conditions and re- 
quirements for issuing an employment certificate have been fulfilled. 
It shall state the grade last completed by said child. Every such 
certificate shall be signed in the presence of the person issuing the 
same by the child in whose name it is issued. It shall state the name 
of the employer for whom, and the nature of the employment in 
which, the certificate authorizes the child to be employed. It shall 
bear a number, show the date of its issue and shall be signed by the 
person issuing it. No fee shall be exacted for an employment cer- 
tificate or for any of the papers required by this act. Duplicate em- 
ployment certificates shall not be issued until it shall appear to the 
satisfaction of the person authorized to issue certificates that the 
original certificate has been lost. . . . 

If the provision that " no fee shall be exacted for an employ- 
ment certificate or for any of the papers required by this act" 
is to be construed broadly, it would probably apply to all of the 
papers required under the provision of section 16 above quoted, 
including the papers specified as suflScient evidence for showing 
that a child is fourteen years of age, if such papers can be said 
to be required, but, for the reasons hereafter stated, I am of 
opinion that it cannot be so broadly construed. 

This provision with respect to fees obviously applies to all 
records and papers required by said section 60, as amended by 
section 18 of chapter 779, and would doubtless apply to certifi- 
cates or other papers signed by officials connected with the 
schools of any city or town, and required under any of the pro- 
visions of the act. It could not, however, apply either to the 
certificate of the family physician [see (3)], or to a baptismal 
certificate, or a duly attested transcript thereof [see (6)], or 
to a passport, or a duly attested immigration record, or tran- 
script thereof, or other official or religious record of a child's 
age [see (c) under (4)], relating to evidence of age, for the 
reason that the Legislature has no authority to compel a physi- 
cian in private practice to perform gratuitous services or the 
keeper of private records to supply transcripts thereof without 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 101 

compensation. Neither has it the authority to forbid the Fed- 
eral authorities to charge fees for copies of their records relat- 
ing to immigration. The Legislature has authority to require 
the issuance of certificates by public officials, such as the birth 
certificates in question, or copies thereof, without compensation. 
This can easily be declared in unmistakable language, but it is 
not made plain in the present legislation. I am led to the con- 
clusion that the exemption from fee does not apply to fees for 
certificates for which there is other existing authority. 

Moreover, it may be doubted whether a certificate by a family 
physician is required, in the sense in which the word is used in 
section 18, in the provision under discussion. It is only one of 
several alternatives, any one of which would satisfy the require- 
ments, and the same is true of the evidences of age required 
under paragraph (4). Each of the subheads, including that in 
which a birth certificate, or a duly attested transcript thereof, 
is to be found, is an alternative, and no one of them is specifically 
required. 

Wliile the question is not entirely free from doubt, I am led 
to the opinion that birth certificates, or transcripts thereof, are 
not required to be furnished without the fee now provided by 
law therefor, and that for this reason also your specific inquiry 
should be answered in the negative. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv^ift, Attorney-General. 



Commonwealth — Employees — Retirement — Head of Depart- 
ment — Chairman of Board or Commission. 

The chairman of a Board or commission, consisting of three or more 
members appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Coun- 
cil, for terms of years and receiving salaries from the Common- 
wealth, is not the head of a department within the meaning of 
St. 1911, c. 532, § 3, par. (4), providing that "any member who 
reaches the age of sixty years and has been in the continuous service 
of the commonwealth for a period of fifteen years immediately pre- 
ceding may retire or be retired by the board of retirement upon 
recommendation of the head of the department in which he is em- 
ployed ..." 

Mr. Lloyd A. Foye, Secretary, Board of Betirement. ' 

Dear Sir : — In behalf of the Board of Retirement you have 
requested my opinion upon a question which has arisen from the 
administration of the provisions of St. 1911, c. 532, entitled " An 



102 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Act to establish a retirement system for the employees of the 
commonwealth.'^ 

That statute, as amended by St. 1912, c. 363, defines " em- 
ployees " as " permanent and regular employees in the direct 
service of the commonwealth or in the metropolitan district serv- 
ice, whose only or principal employment is in such service." 

By section 3 of the act a retirement association is established 
and membership in that association is made optional for all em- 
ployees in the service of the Commonwealth on Jan. 1, 1912, and 
compulsory for persons under fifty-five years of age thereafter 
entering the service of the Commonwealth who were not entitled 
to a pension from the Commonwealth for any reason other than 
membership in the association. 

Section 3 also provides in the paragraph numbered (4), as 
follows : — 

Any member who reaches the age of sixty years and has been in 
the continuous service of the conmaonwealth for a period of fifteen 
years immediately preceding may retire or be retired by the board of 
retirement upon recommendation of the head of the department in 
which he is employed, and any member who reaches the age of 
seventy must so retire. 

There are in the Commonwealth a number of commissions 
consisting of three or more members who were appointed by the 
Governor, with the consent of the Council, for terms of years 
and who receive salaries from the Commonwealth, — the chair- 
man of the commission sometimes receiving a salary in excess 
of that received by the other members of the commission by 
virtue of being chairman. As persons on the pay roll of the 
Commonwealth, employed in the direct service of the Common- 
wealth, whose only or principal employment is in such service, 
certain members of such commissions become members of the 
retirement association organized under the provisions of sec- 
tion 3. 

The question upon which you request my opinion is, whether 
the chairman of such a commission is to be considered, within 
the meaning of paragraph (4), above quoted, "the head of the 
department " in the sense that he can recommend the retirement 
of one of the other members of the commission of which he is 
chairman. 

In my opinion the chairman of such a commission as those 
referred to is not, within the meaning of the j^rovision quoted, 
" the head of the department.'' 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 103 

The members of such commissions are, in contemplation of 
law, equal in their jurisdiction and powers. The fact that the 
Board is organized, for convenience in the transaction of busi- 
ness, with a chairman as presiding officer does not transform 
the Board into a single-headed department and does not consti- 
tute the chairman head of the department in the sense that he 
may recommend the retirement of his fellow members of the 
commission. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attometj- General. 



Antomohiles owned by the Commonwealth — Negligence of 
Chauffeur in the Employment of the Commonwealth — 
Personal Liability — Members of Boards or Commissions. 

Where an automobile is under the care and control of a State Board or 
commission or the members thereof and is used by such commission 
or by its members or executive officers or agents, with the consent 
of the commission, for the purpose of traveling upon official busi- 
ness, such commission or members, officers or agents are not per- 
sonally liable for injury caused by such automobile to persons or 
property through the negligent conduct of the chauffeur if such 
commission, members or officers or agents at the time of using such 
automobile are engaged in the proper performance of their official 
duties and are not themselves negligent or otherwise at fault in their 
direction of such chauffeur in such a manner as to contribute to the 
cause of the injury. 

Oct. 22, 1913. 
George Lyman Eogers, Esq., Secretary, Metropolitan Parle Commission. 
Dear Sir : — In behalf of the Metropolitan Park Commis- 
sion you have requested my opinion upon certain questions aris- 
ing from the following facts as stated by you : — 

The Metropolitan Park Commission has under its care and control 
an automobile used by the commission, or members thereof, or by the 
secretary or engineer with the consent of the commission, for the 
purpose of traveling on official business of the commission. When- 
ever the commission or members thereof, or the secretary or the 
engineer, travel in this automobile, the machine is driven by a 
chauffeur employed by the commission and paid out of its mainte- 
nance appropriation. In such cases the chauffeur is subject to the 
direction and control of the member or members of the commission, 
or of the secretary or engineer, as the case may be, for the time being, 
riding in the machine. 



104 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

The questions submitted by you are as follows : — 

(1) If the commission or any member thereof should be traveling 
on official business in said automobile, driven by such a chauffeur 
subject to the general direction of the commission or such member 
thereof, and, through the negligent conduct of the chauffeur, injury 
should be caused by such automobile to person or property, would 
the commission, or any member or members thereof, traveling as 
stated at the time, be personally liable for such injury? 

(2) If the secretary or the engineer should be traveling on official 
business in said automobile, driven by such a chauffeur, subject to 
the general direction of the secretary or engineer, as the case might 
be, and, through the negligent conduct of such chauffeur, injury 
should be caused by such automobile to person or property, would 
the secretary or engineer, traveling as stated, under the circumstances 
be personally liable for such injury? 

I infer from the statement that the automobile mentioned is 
" under the care and control " of the commission, that it is an 
automobile paid for and owned by the Commonwealth. I un- 
derstand also that the chauffeur is an emplo3^ee of the Com- 
monwealth whose salary is paid from the treasury of the 
Commonwealth. 

My opinion upon your first question is that the commission 
or members thereof are not personally liable for injury caused 
by the Commonwealth's automobile to persons or property 
through the negligent conduct of the chauffeur if the commis- 
sion or members thereof traveling at the time are engaged in 
the proper performance of their official duties and are not them- 
selves negligent or otherwise at fault in their direction of the 
chauffeur in such a manner as to contribute to the cause of the 
injury. 

My opinion upon your second question is that the secretary 
or engineer is not personally liable for injury caused by the 
Commonwealth's automobile to persons or property through the 
negligent conduct of the chauffeur if the secretary or engineer 
traveling at the time is engaged in the proper performance of 
his official duties and is not himself negligent or otherwise at 
fault in the direction of the chauffeur in such a manner as to 
contribute to the cause of the accident. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 105 



PJmrmacy Law — Business of Pharmacy — Dry Goods and Mer- 
cantile Corporation — Lease of Floor Space to Registered 
Pharmacist — Oivnership of StocJc in Trade. 

Where a corporation, organized to carry on- a dry goods and mercantile 
business, leases floor space to a registered pharmacist to conduct the 
business of pharmacy upon the condition that the leased premises 
shall be held by the lessee "for and during such time as he shall 
continue to run the drug store therein, yielding and paying therefor 
as rent such proportion of the gross profits arising from the opera- 
tion, conduct and maintenance of said store as shall be agreed to 
between said lessor and said lessee,*' the lessor retaining the owner- 
ship of all stock in trade, and the only interest of the registered 
pharmacist being that of lessee, such corporation is engaged in 
retailing, compounding for sale or dispensing for medicinal pur- 
poses drugs and medicines, within the provisions of K. L., c. 76, 
$ 18, as amended by St. 1913, c. 720, $ 1, that ''whoever, not being 
registered as aforesaid, retails, compounds for sale or dispenses for 
medicinal purposes drugs, medicines, chemicals or poisons, . . . shall 
be punished by a fine of not more than fifty dollars, . . .'* and 
that "no unregistered co-partner or unregistered stockholder in a 
corporation doing a retail drug business shall hereafter be actively 
engaged in the drug business," and, not being registered, is un- 
lawfully engaged therein. 

Oct. 27, 1913. 

Peter J. McCormick, Esq., Secretary, Board of Begistration in 

Pharmacy. 

Dear Sir : — In behalf of the Board of Registration in Phar- 
macy you have requested my opinion upon questions arising 
from the following facts as stated by you: — 

The Shepard Norwell Company, incorporated to do a dry goods 
and niercantile business, desires to do a drug business in the follow- 
ing manner, — to lease space in its place of business to a registered 
pharmacist under the accompanying form of lease, Shepard Norwell 
Company owning the stock in said space so leased, the registered 
pharmacist owning nothing. They desire said pharmacist to procure 
a sixth class license. 

The form of lease submitted with this statement provides that 
the Shepard ISTorwell Company shall lease space in its Boston 
store to the lessee — 

To have and to hold the same to the said lessee (but not to his 
executors, administrators or assigns) for and during such time as he 
shall continue to run the drug store therein. 



106 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Yielding and paying therefor as rent such proportion of the gross 
jDrofits arising from the ojDeration, conduct and maintenance of said 
store as shall be agreed to between said lessor and said lessee. 

The lease also contains the following clauses : — 

The lessee farther covenants that he will not advertise said store, 
or the business therein conducted, except in such advertisements as 
shall first be apj^roved by the lessor, and then only in connection 
with other advertisements of the lessor, or in such places, newspapers, 
periodicals and mediums as the lessor shall designate. 

The lessee further covenants that he will as such lessee in the con- 
duct of such drug store comply with such rules and regulations as to 
the management and upkeep thereon as the lessor shall lay down for 
the general guidance of its store conducted at the above number; and 
he will make no alterations in the leased premises without on each 
occasion first procuring the written consent of the lessor thereto; 
that the lessor and its agents and servants may at any time and from 
time to time enter and view the leased premises and make such re- 
pairs or alterations therein as shall be necessary. 

The questions submitted by you are : — 

1. Can the Board of Registration in Pharmacy recognize said drag 
store as being lawfully conducted ? 

2. Could a certificate for sixth class license be granted to the lessee 
of said space? 

In my opinion both questions must be answered in the nega- 
tive. 

R. L., c. 76, § 14, as amended, requires that persons wishing 
to do business as pharmacists shall be examined and registered 
by the Board of Registration in Pharmacy. Section 18 of said 
chapter, as amended by St. 1913, c. 720, § 1, provides as fol- 
lows : — • 

Whoever, not being registered as aforesaid, retails, compounds for 
sale or dispenses for medicinal purposes drugs, medicines, chemicals 
or poisons, except as provided in section twenty-three, shall be pun- 
ished by a fine of not more than fifty dollars, but the provisions of 
this section shall not prohibit the employment of apprentices or 
assistants and the sale by them of any drugs, medicines, chemicals or 
poisons under the personal supervision of a registered pharmacist. 
No unregistered co-partner or unregistered stockholder in a corpora- 
tion doing a retail drug business shall hereafter be actively engaged 
in the drug business. Every registered pharmacist carrying on the 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 107 

drug business as proprietor or as manager shall cause his name to 
appear on every sign indicating or advertising his place of business 
and on every label used for medicinal preparations compounded in 
his place of business. The term " personal supervision " as used in 
the act shall mean that a registered pharmacist is in charge and 
present in the store. 

In my opinion it is clear from an examination of the facts 
stated and the terms of the lease submitted that the Shepard 
Norwell Company would under such circumstances be engaged 
in retailing, compounding for sale or dispensing for medicinal 
purposes drugs and medicines. 

The fact that the terms upon which the person who is to have 
supervision of the drug business is employed take the form of 
a lease, does not alter the essential fact that the business is 
owned and managed by the Shepard Xorwell Company. Since 
that corporation is not registered in accordance with the provi- 
sions of law, its drug store could not be considered by the Board 
as being lawfully conducted. 

Section 23 of chapter 100 of the Eevised Laws, as amended 
by St. 1909, c. 261, authorizes the Board of Registration in 
Pharmacy to issue certificates to persons, stating that in the 
judgment of the Board they are proper persons to be intrusted 
with a sixth class license. Section 22 of the same chapter of 
the Eevised Laws, as amended by St. 1913, c. 410, provides as 
follows : — • 

One or more licenses of the sixth class shall be granted annually by 
the licensing board of cities, or by the mayor and aldermen of cities 
having no such board, or by the selectmen of towns, to retail drug- 
gists or apothecaries who are registered jDharmacists actively engaged 
in business on their own account, upon presentation to the licensing 
board of the certificate prescribed by the following section, if it 
appears that the applicant is a proper person to receive such license, 
and is not disqualified to receive it under the provisions of sections 
fifty-three and fifty-four. A registered pharmacist who owns stock 
of the actual value of at least five hundred dollars in a corporation 
which has been incorporated for the purpose of carrying on the drug 
business, and who conducts in person the business of a store of such 
corporation, shall be considered as actively engaged in business on his 
own account and as qualified to receive a license for such store. 

In my opinion the lessee of the Shepard Norwell Company 
cannot be considered upon the facts stated to be a registered 



108 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

pharmacist " actively engaged in bnsiness on his own account/^ 
and so to be qnahfied to receive snch a license. 

The fact that a drug business cannot lawfully be carried on 
under such circumstances as appear in this case, under existing 
law, appears to have been recognized by the Legislature in the 
enactment of St. 1913, c. 705, entitled " An Act to provide for 
registering and licensing stores for transacting retail drug busi- 
ness." That act provides that the Board of Registration in 
Pharmacy may issue permits to keep open stores for the trans- 
action of a retail drug business to such persons, firms and cor- 
porations as the Board may deem qualified to conduct such a 
store. Since, however, this act by its terms does not take effect 
until the first day of January, 1914, its only bearing upon the 
questions presented is to confirm the view above expressed, that 
under existing law such a drug store would not be lawfully con- 
ducted. 

Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



Commonwealth — Land and Buildings belonging to State Hos- 
pital — Trustees — Exclusion of Public from Use of Land. 

The Board of Trustees of the Worcester State Hospital have the right 
to prevent persons from entering upon the property of the Common- 
wealth devoted to the purposes of such hospital for any purpose for 
which such persons are not authorized by law to enter upon the 
premises, and if, in the judgment of such trustees, it is for the best 
interest of such institution that the public, unless entering for cer- 
tain specified purposes, should be excluded from the land and build- 
ings belonging thereto, they are authorized to exclude it. 

Nov. 1, 1913. 
T. HovEY Gage, Esq., Chairman, Trustees of Worcester State Hospital. 

Dear Sir : — As chairman of the Board of Trustees of the 
Worcester State Hospital you have requested my opinion as to 
certain rights and duties of that Board. The questions sub- 
mitted by you are as follows : — 

1. Have we the right to prevent people coming on property of the 
Commonwealth used for the care of the State's wards'? 

2. If we have the right, is it our duty to prevent persons who come 
on for the purpose of getting, or being on the premises on legitimate 
business avail themselves of the opportunity to get, photographs of 
patients who happen to be outdoors? 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 109 

In my opinion you clearly have the right as matter of law to 
prevent people from coming on the property of the Common- 
wealth devoted to the uses of the institution for any purposes 
for which they are not authorized by law to enter upon the 
premises. 

The mere fact that the land and buildings of the institution 
are owned by the Commonwealth does not give to the general 
public the same rights which they have in a public park or com- 
mon or recreation grounds. 

The lands and buildings of the institution have been set apart 
by the Legislature representing the public for a certain specific 
use, — the care of the insane. Under the statutes of the Com- 
monwealth the trustees of each institution for the insane have 
charge of the general interests thereof and are vested with the 
government of the institution. If, in the judgment of the Board 
of Trustees acting reasonably and in good faith, it is for the 
best interests of the institution and the inmates thereof that 
people should be excluded from the land and buildings of the 
institution unless entering for certain defined purposes, the trus- 
tees are not only authorized by law to exclude them but are 
bound in the proper performance of their duties to exclude them. 

Your second question, so far as it is a question as to your 
rights, is answered by the reply to the first. Whether it is your 
duty to prevent the taking of photographs of patients who hap- 
pen to be out-of-doors on the premises of the institution, is 
rather a question of policy than a question of law and is, there- 
fore, not strictly a question upon which it is my ofiicial duty to 
advise. If my opinion upon this question will be of any assist- 
ance to you, however, I have no objection to stating that in my 
opinion no court would hold unreasonable a regulation by the 
trustees, and the public at large would not consider unjustified 
such action by the trustees, as would prevent photographs being 
taken for exhibition in the public press or other purposes of 
those who are so unfortunate as to be suffering from disordered 
minds, to the distress of their relatives and friends. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Swift, Attorney-General. 



110 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



Insurance — Title Insurance — Guaranty Fund — Investment 
— Mortgages — StocJc in Trade — Trading Capital. 

A title insurance company organized under the laws of this Common- 
wealth may not use as ordinary trading capital the guaranty fund 
which is required to be created and maintained by St. 1907, c. 576, 
$ 64, providing that every such corporation shall set apart and in- 
vest as a trust for the benefit of its policyholders not less than two- 
fifths of its capital to be applied only to the payment of losses and 
expenses incurred by reason of the guaranty or insurance contracts 
of the corporation and may not use as stock in trade the mortgages 
in which such fund is invested. 

Nov. 21, 1913. 
Hon. Frank H. Hardison, Insurance Commissioner. 

Dear Sir : — You have requested my opinion upon the ques- 
tion whether a title insurance company organized under the 
laws of this Commonwealth may trade in the mortgages in 
which its guaranty fund is invested, for the purpose of obtaining 
capital to carry on its business. 

The guaranty fund of a domestic title insurance company is 
required to be created and maintained under St. 1907, c. 576, 
§ 64, which provides as follows : — 

Every such corporation shall set apart an amount not less than 
two fifths of its capital, and not less than one hundred thousand 
dollars in any case, as a guai'anty fund, and shall invest it subject 
to the same limitations as are imposed upon the investment of the 
capital of domestic insurance companies, and shall issue no policy 
and make no contract of guaranty or insurance until such amount 
is so set apart and invested. 

The principal of such guaranty fund shall be a trust for the pro- 
tection of policy holders, and shall be applied only to the payment 
of losses and expenses incuiTed by reason of the guaranty or insur- 
ance contracts of the corporation. Whenever the corporation shall 
increase its capital, two fifths or a sufficient part of the increase shall 
be set apart and duly invested and added to the guaranty fund so 
that such fund shall always be not less in amount than two fifths of 
the entire capital. 

If, by reason of losses or other cause, the guaranty fund is less 
than two fifths of the capital, the company shall make no further 
contract of guaranty or insurance until the fund is made good. 

Section 37 of the same chapter, regulating the investment 
of the capital of domestic insurance companies, provides in para- 
graph numbered 4 that the capital of such companies may be 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No.. 12. Ill 

invested in loans upon improved and -anincunibered real prop- 
erty in any State of the United States, provided that no loan 
on such property shall exceed 60 per cent, of its market value, 
and that fact shall be properly certified. 

According to the statement of facts contained in your letter 
the title insurance company in question has a guaranty fund 
of the amount required by law, which is invested in mortgages 
of $6,000 or less, and I infer from your letter and the oral state- 
ment accompanying it that the requirements of section 37 have 
been complied with, so that the investment is lawful in character. 

In my opinion the company may not properly use its guar- 
anty fund for trading purposes. The language of section 64, 
above quoted, is clear and unequivocal in the expression of the 
legislative intent that the fund shall not be used as ordinary 
trading capital, and that the mortgages in which the fund is in- 
vested shall not be used as stock in trade. 

The statute provides that the company shall '^ set apart " a 
certain fund for guaranty purposes, thus segregating it from its 
active funds. It provides that the fund shall be " invested " sub- 
ject to certain limitations, implying a permanency of investment 
inconsistent with speculative and active trading. It provides that 
" the principal of such guaranty fund shall be a trust for the pro- 
tection of policy holders," and limits the application of the fund 
to the payment of losses and expenses incurred by reason of the 
guaranty or insurance contracts of the corporation, and it care- 
fully guards the integrity of the fund. 

The corporation is, of course, not to be considered as prevented 
by these provisions from making such changes in the mortgages 
in which the guaranty fund is invested as the interests of the 
beneficiaries of that fund may require. It is not only authorized 
but is required by these provisions to make changes in the in- 
vestment if it is necessary to do so to prevent impairment of the 
security afforded by the fund. The essential point is that the 
statute requires that this fund shall be set apart as a trust fund 
for purposes of protection, and that it shall be administered in 
accordance with the character given it by the statute and not as 
active trading capital. See 1 Op. Atty.-Gen. 41. 
Very truly yours, 

James M. Sv^ift, AUorneij-General. 



112 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



INDEX TO OPINIONS. 



Automobiles, negligence of chauffeur in employment of Commonwealth, 

personal liability of members of boards or commissions for, . 103 

Board of Railroad Commissioners, approval of regulations and restrictions 
upon street railways as common carriers of express matter and 
freight, ......... 

Railroad corporation, compliance with requirements of law, prelimi- 
nary to incorporation, determination of route. 

Boards of health, approval by State Board of Health of rules and regula- 
tions for the sale of articles of food; regulation of sale of milk, , 

Boston Elevated Railway Companj'-, East Boston Tunnel tolls, constitu- 
tional law, ......... 

Canal company, distribution of tax assessed upon, ... 

Cold-storage eggs sold at retail upon order in marked container. 

Cold storage, limit of time for holding articles of food in. 

Collateral Loan Company, approval of increase of capital stock by Com- 
missioner of Corporations, ....... 

Commonwealth Pier, cancellation of lease to Old Colony Railroad Com- 
pany, .......... 

Constitutional law, confirmation of appointment of administrative or ex- 
ecutive officer by justices of Supreme Judicial Court, 
Delegation of legislative power by submitting act creating judicial 
district to voters, ........ 

Exercise of police power in fixing hours of labor. 

Grant to private indi\dduals of right to control area between high 

and lew water mark, ........ 47 

Regulation by cities and towns of width and grade of private ways, 15 

Regulation of hours of labor of employees of street and elevated rail- 
way companies, ........ 

Sale of fruit, vegetables and nuts at retail by dry measure, 

"Cost and expenses" incidental to construction of bridge over Weymouth 
Back River, apportionment of, .... . 

Deeds, mortgages and other instruments, minimum charge for recording, 

East Boston Tunnel tolls, substitution of annual appropriation for, 

Eggs, cold-storage, delivery in marked container. 

Unfit for food, construction of statute prohibiting sale of, 

Eminent domain, grant from Commonwealth of right to cultivate mol 
lusks on flats between high and low water mark, 

Employee of street or elevated railwaj' company, hours of labor. 

Employees of Commonwealth, retirement of; chairman of board or com 
mission as head of department, ..... 

Express matter and freight, street railways as common carriers of; local 
regulations, ......... 

Fee, for transcript of birth certificate in connection with employment of 
chnd under sixteen years of age, ..... 
Minimum charge by register of deeds for recording instruments, 

Flats, grant of, to private individuals for cultivation of moUusks, constitu- 
tional law, .......... 47 



66 
27 

62 
51 
32 
95 

57 

47 
54 

101 

44 

98 
51 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 113 



Fruit, vegetables and nuts, constitutionality of restriction of sale of, at 

retail 27 

Gas or electric light meters as weighing and measuring devices for hire or 

reward, .......... 84 

Hampden Railroad Corporation, certificate of Board of Railroad Com- 
missioners that requirements of law preliminary to incorpora- 
tion have been complied with, ...... 84 

Health, State Board of, approval of regulation of sale of milk as article of 

food, 96 

Hospital, State, exclusion of public from use of land belonging to, . 108 

Hours of labor of employee of street or elevated railway company, 54 

Employees of street and elevated railway companies, regulation; 

constitutional law, ........ 66 

Exercise of police power in fixing ; constitutional law, . . .20 

Insane hospital, authority of trustees to limit number of patients, . . 77 

Insanity, State Board of, appointment of agent to fill new position; ap- 
propriation, ......... 72 

Insurance, determination of indebtedness of Massachusetts Employees 

Insurance Association for outstanding losses, . . . .29 

Guaranty fund of title insurance company as trading capital, . .110 

Life and disability, separate and distinct policies, benefits conditioned 

upon disability, ......... 37 

Intoxicating liquors; sixth-class license, breach of conditions of, convic- 
tion of clerk of licensee, ....... 59 

Judicial district, act creating, submission of, to voters, constitutional law, 40 

Land belonging to State hospital, exclusion of public from use of, . . 108 

Registration of; income of assurance fund, ... . . .17 

Lease of Commonwealth Pier to Old Colony Railroad Company; can- 
cellation, .......... 11 

License, sixth-class, conviction of unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor by 

clerk of licensee; forfeiture, ....... 59 

To run steam boiler or engine or stationary locomotive, . . .19 

Loan by trust company to single individual, ..... 8 

Locomotive, stationary, license to run steam boiler or engine of, . . 19 

Massachusetts Employees Insurance Association, determination of in- 
debtedness for outstanding losses, ...... 29 

Massachusetts Highway Commission, approval of local regulations of 

traffic, 7 

Mollusks, cultivation of, grant of flats between high and low water mark; 

eminent domain, ........ 47 

Negligence of chauffeur in employment of Commonwealth, personal liabil- 
ity of members of boards or commissions for, .... 103 

Officer, elective, veteran, retirement, ....... 53 

Pharmacy law, business of pharmacy conducted by dry goods and mer- 
cantile corporations by lease of floor space to registered phar- 
macist, .......... 105 

Police power, exercise of, in fixing hours of labor, ..... 20 

Private way, regulation of width and grade by cities and towns; consti- 
tutional law, ......... 15 

RaUroad corporation, compliance with requirements of law preliminary 
to incorporation; determination of route; Board of Railroad 
Commissioners, ......... 84 

Reform school, juvenile, solitary confinement of inmate of, . . .2 

Register of Deeds, minimum charge for recording instruments, . ,51 

Registration of titles to land, income of assurance fund, . . .17 



114 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 1914. 



Regulation of sale of milk by boards of health; approval by State Board 

of Health as an article of food, ...... 96 

Of traflfic, local, approved by Massachusetts Highwaj' Commission, 

when, ........... 7 

Of width and grade of private ways by cities and towns; constitu- 
tional law, .......... 15 

Retirement of employees of Commonwealth; chairman of board or com- 
mission as head of department, ...... 101 

Sa^dngs department of a trust company, loan to single individual, . . 8 

Schools, employment certificate of children under sixteen years of age; 

fee for transcript of birth certificate, ..... 98 

Solitary confinement of inmate of juvenile reform school, ... 2 
Statute, establishing limit of time for holding articles of food in cold 

storage; perspective in effect, ...... 1 

Prohibiting the sale of eggs unfit for food, construction of, . . 57 

Street or elevated railway company, employee of, hours of labor, . . 54 

Street or elevated railway companies, regulation of hours of labor of em- 
ployees of; police power, ....... 66 

Street railways as common carriers of express matter and freight; regu- 
lations and restrictions, ....... 44 

Supreme Judicial Court, confirmation of appointment of administrative 

or executive officer by; constitutional law, . . . .52 

Taxation of domestic business corporation, distribution of tax of canal 

company, .......... 80 

The Essex Company, distribution of tax assessed upon, . . .80 

Traffic, regulation of, by cities and towns, approval by Massachusetts 

Highway Commission, ....... 7 

Trust company, loan to single individual, ...... 8 

Trustees of insane hospitals, authority to limit number of patients, . 77 

Veteran in the service of the Commonwealth, retirement, elective ofiicer, 53 
Weight, legal, in sale of fruit, nuts and vegetables at retail, ... 27 
Weights and measures, gas or electric light meters as weighing and meas- 
uring devices, ......... 84 

Weymouth Back River, "cost and expenses " incidental to construction 

of bridge over; apportionment, ...... 62 



LIST OF CASES 



IN WHICH THE 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL 



HAS APPEARED 



During the Year 1913. 



GEADE CROSSINGS. 



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

Berkshire County. 

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

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



118 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

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. 

Stockbridge, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abolition 
of ^'Eiver Eoad^' crossing in Stockbridge. James B. Car- 
roll, Edward B. Bishop and Lnther Dean appointed com- 
missioners. Commissioners^ report filed. Wade Keyes ap- 
pointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pending. 

Stockbridge, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
South Street crossing. Railroad commissioners appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. A. W. DeGoosh 
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. Pending. 

Stockbridge. Berkshire Railroad, petitioner. Petition for aboli- 
tion of Glendale station crossing. Pending. 

West Stockbridge, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of grade crossing at Albany Street. Pending. 

Bristol County. 

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

Fall River, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of Brownell Street crossing and other crossings in 
Fall River. 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 
Railroad 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 commis- 
sioners. George F. Swain appointed commissioner in place 
of Wm. Jackson, deceased. Pending. 

New Bedford, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of certain grade crossings in New Bedford. George 
P. Richardson, Horatio G. Herrick and Wm. Wheeler ap- 
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Fred 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 119 

E. Jones appointed auditor. Auditor's fifteenth report 
filed. Pending. 

Somerset. New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Com- 
pany, petitioner. Petition for abolition of grade crossing at 
Wilbur Avenue. James D. Colt, Henry H. Baker and 
Louis Perry appointed commissioners. Commissioners' re- 
port filed. Pending. 

Swansea. New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad Com- 
pany, petitioner. Petition for abolition of grade crossing at 
Eiver Eoad. James D. Colt, Henry H. Baker and Louis 
Perry appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report 
filed. Pending. 

Taunton, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of grade crossings at Danforth and other streets in 
Taunton. Thomas M. Babson, George F. Swain and Edwin 
U. Curtis appointed commissioners. Charles H. Beckwith 
appointed commissioner in place of Thomas M. Babson, 
deceased. Commissioners' report filed. James A. Stiles 
appointed auditor. Pending. 

Essex County. 

Georgetown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition 
of grade crossing at AVeston's Crossing. Petition dismissed. 
Crossing abolished under an agreement approved by the 
Board of Eailroad Commissioners. 

Gloucester. Boston & Maine Eailroad, petitioner. Petition for 
abolition of crossings at Magnolia Avenue and Brays cross- 
ing. Arthur Lord, Moody Kimball and P. H. Cooney ap- 
pointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. A. 
W. DeGoosh appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. 
Pending. 

Gloucester. Directors of Boston & Maine Eailroad, petitioners. 
Petition for abolition of grade crossing between Washing- 
ton Street and tracks of Boston & Maine Eailroad. Pend- 
ing. 

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. E. A. 
McLaughlin appointed auditor in place of Fred E. Jones, 
deceased. Auditor's fifteenth report filed. Pending. 



120 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

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 ap- 
pointed auditor. Auditor's fourth report filed. Pending. 

Lawrence, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of crossing at Merrimac and other streets in 
Lawrence. Robert 0. Harris, Edmund K. Turner and 
Henry V. Cunningham appointed commissioners. 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. 
Champlin and Edmund K. Turner appointed commis- 
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. Edward A. McLaugh- 
lin appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. Pend- 
ing. 

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

Salem. Directors of Boston & Maine Railroad, petitioners. Peti- 
tion for the abolition of grade crossings at Bridge, Wash- 
ington, Mill, ISTorth, Flint and Grove streets in Salem. 
Patrick H. Cooney, George F. Swain and William A. Dana 
appointed commissioners. Pending. 

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

Franhlin County, 

Deerfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
" Upper Wisdom Road " crossing. Edmund K. Turner, Cal- 
vin Coolidge and Hugh P. Drysdale appointed commis- 
sioners. Commissioners' report filed. L5Tnan W. Griswold 
appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. 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. 

Greenfield, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossing at Silver Street. Stephen S. Taft, Henry 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 121 

P. Field and Thomas J. O'Connor appointed commissioners. 
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. 

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

"Russell, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Mont- 
gomery Eoad crossing. Eailroad Commissioners appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Thomas W. 
Kennefick appointed auditor. Auditor's second report filed. 
Pending. 

Westfield, Attorney-General, petitioner. Petition for abolition 
of grade crossings at Lane's and Lee's crossings in West- 
field. Patrick H. Cooney, Eichard W. Irwin and Franklin 
T. Hammond appointed commissioners. Chas. E. Hibbard 
appointed commissioner in place of Eichard W. Irwin, re-' 
signed. Commissioners' report filed. Pending. 

Hampshire County, 

Amherst, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossings at Whitney, High and Main streets. Eail- 
road Commissioners appointed commissioners. Pending. 

Belchertown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the aboli- 
tion of crossing of road from Belchertown to Three Eivers 
and road from Bondville to Ludlow. Edmund K. Turner, 
F. G. Wooden and George P. O'Donnell appointed com- 
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending. 

Middlesex County. 

Acton, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Great 
Eoad crossing in Acton. Benj. W. Wells, George D. Bur- 
rage and William B. Sullivan appointed commissioners. 
Commissioners' report filed. Fred Joy appointed auditor. 
Pending. 

Belmont, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
crossings at Waverley station. Thomas W. Proctor, Pat- 
rick H. Cooney and Desmond FitzGerald appointed com- 
missioners. Pending. 



122 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Chelmsford, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossing at Middlesex Street. Pending. 

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

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for the abo- 
lition 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 Wanshaknm streets crossings. Pending. 

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

Framingham, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition 
of grade crossing at Willis Crossing. Pending. 

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo- 
lition of Middlesex and Thorndike streets crossings. George 
F. Swain, Patrick H. Cooney and Nelson H. Brown ap- 
pointed commissioners. Pending. 

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo- 
lition of Boston Road or Plain Street, School, Walker and 
Lincoln streets crossings. Arthur Lord, David F. Slade and 
Henry A. Wyman appointed commissioners. Commissioners' 
report filed. A. W. DeGoosh appointed auditor. Audi- 
tor's sixth report filed. Pending. 

Lowell, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for abo- 
lition of crossing at Western Avenue and Fletcher Street. 
Pending. 

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

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 fifth report 
filed. Pending. 

Marlborough, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of Hudson Street crossing in Marlborough. Walter 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 123 

Adams, Charles A. Allen and Alpheus Sanford appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending. 

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

Newton, Mayor 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 the 
abolition of Glen Avenue 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 
seventeenth report filed. Disposed of. 

North Reading, Selectmjen 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. Thomas W. 
Proctor appointed auditor. Auditor's first report filed. 
Pending. 

Somerville, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of Park Street, Dane Street and Medford Street 
crossings in Somerville. George W. Wiggin, George F. 
Swain and James D. Colt appointed commissioners. Com- 
missioners' report filed. Patrick H. Cooney appointed audi- 
tor. Auditor's fifth report filed. Pending. 

Somerville, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of Somerville Avenue crossing in Somerville. 
George W. Wiggin, George F. Swain and James D. Colt 
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. 
Patrick H. Cooney appointed auditor. Auditor's eighth 
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. 



124 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

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 
crossings in Waltham. Arthur Lord, Patrick H. Cooney 
and George F. Swain appointed commissioners. Pending. 

Watertown, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossings at Cottage, Arlington, School, Irving and 
other streets in Watertown. Pending. 

Wayland, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossing at State Road. George F. Swain, Harvey 
E. Shepherd and Arthur W. DeGoosh appointed commis- 
sioners. Pending. 

Weston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
Church Street, Pigeon Hall and Concord Road crossings. 
Railroad Commissioners appointed commissioners. Commis- 
sioners' report filed. Joseph W. Lund, Esq., appointed 
auditor. Auditor's third report filed. Pending. 

Weston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossings at Central Avenue, Conant Road, Church 
and Viles streets. P. H. Cooney, Louis A. Frothingham 
and xA.ndrew M. Lovis 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 IST. 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. Commissioners' re- 
port filed. Pending. 

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



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 125 

Canton. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Eail- 
road Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Ded- 
ham Eoad crossing in Canton. Samuel L. Powers, Stephen 
S. Taft and Wm. Jackson appointed commissioners. Com- 
missioners report filed. Recommitted. Pending. 

Dedliam, 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. 

Dover, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of grade 
crossing at Springdale Avenue and Dedham and Haven 
streets. Public Service Commission appointed commis- 
sioners. Pending. 

Foxborough. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford 
Railroad Compan}^ petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossing at Cohasset and Summer streets in Fox- 
borough. Samuel L. Powers, Stephen S. Taft and Wm. 
Jackson appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report 
filed. Recommitted. Pending. 

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. Commissioners' report filed. 
Thomas W. Proctor appointed auditor. Auditor's third re- 
port 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 Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Saville 
and Water streets crossings in Quincy. John L. Bates, 
Winfield S. Slocum and Arthur H. Wellman appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending. 

Sharon. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford Rail- 
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. Commissioners' report filed. Re- 
committed. 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. 



126 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Sheldon appointed auditor. Auditor's fourth report filed. 
Pending. 

Westwood. Directors of New York, New Haven & Hartford 
Railroad Company, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
Green Lodge Street crossing in Westwood. Samuel L. 
Powers, Stephen S. Taft and Wm. Jackson appointed com- 
missioners. Commissioners' report filed. Recommitted. 
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 tenth 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. Auditor's twentieth report filed. Pend- 
ing. 

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. Audi- 
tor's twenty-first 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 seventeenth report filed. 
Pending. 

Boston, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for aboli- 
tion of crossings at Saratoga, Maverick and Marginal 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 127 

. streets in East Boston. Eailroad Commissioners appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. Pending. 
Revere, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of Win- 
throp Avenue crossing in Eevere of the Boston, Revere 
Beach & Lynn Railroad. Pending. 

Worcester County. 

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. Commissioners' 
report filed. David F. Slade appointed auditor. Pending. 

Fitchburg, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of Rollstone Street crossing in Fitchburg. Ed- 
mund K. Turner, Edwin U. Curtis and Ernest H. Vaughan 
appointed commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. 
James A. Stiles appointed auditor. Auditor's fifth report 
filed. Pending. 

Harvard. Boston & Maine Railroad, petitioner. Petition for 
abolition of a grade crossing near Harvard station. Pend- 
ing. 

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

Hubbardston, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition 
of Depot Road 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. Commissioners' report filed. 
Pending. 

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. Commissioners' report 
filed and recommitted. Pending. 

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



128 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Webster, Selectmen of, petitioners. Petition for abolition of 
grade crossing at Main Street. Pending. 

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

Worcester, Mayor and Aldermen of, petitioners. Petition for 
abolition of crossings at Exchange, Central and Thomas 
and other streets. Arthur Lord, George F. Swain and Fred 
Joy appointed 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. 
Dmibar, James H. Flint and George F. Swain appointed 
commissioners. Commissioners' report filed. James A. 
Stiles appointed auditor. Auditor's sixty-third report filed. 
Pending. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 129 



CASES ARISING IN THE COURTS 



UNDER THE 



Acts kelative to Inheritance and Succession Taxes. 



Petitions for Instructions. 
Essex County. 

Clines, Mary G., estate of. Catherine A. Laycock, administra- 
trix, petitioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Lane, Annie B., estate of. Helen N. Allen, executrix, petitioner. 
Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pending. 

Meserve, Chastina S., estate of. James W. Leitch, executor, 
petitioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Nichols, Mary C, estate of. Frank 0. Woods, executor, peti- 
tioner. Pending. 

Franhlin County. 
Bassett, Sylvia H., estate of. Joseph W. Stevens, executor, pe- 
titioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Attor- 
ney-General waived right to be heard. 

Hampden County. 

Bates, Henry C, estate of. Charles H. Barrows, executor, peti- 
tioner. Pending. 

George, Julinah R. C, estate of. Allen Webster, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pend- 
ing. 

Moore, Margaret, estate of. Charles H. Barrows, executor, peti- 
tioner. Pending. 

Hampshire County. 
Welton, Walter B., estate of. Henry W. Kidder, administrator, 
petitioner. 



130 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



Middlesex County. 

Aspell, Mary Louise, estate of. Jane L. Quinn, petitioner. 
Pending. 

Bancroft, Frederick, estate of. John F. Moors, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pending. 

Blood, Benjamin F., estate of. Stanley E. Bryant et al., exec- 
utors, petitioners. Decree. 

Bouton, Eliza J., estate of. Louis Bell et al, executors, peti- 
tioners. Pending. 

Brooks, Andrew B., estate of. Eebekah J. Brooks, executrix, pe- 
titioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Decree. 

Hobart, William D., estate of. Clarence P. Weston, administra- 
tor c. t. a., petitioner. Petition for abatement of inherit- 
ance tax. Pending. 

Loring, Charles W., estate of. Francis C. Welch et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Decree. 

Moor, James C, estate of. William R. Whittemore, executor, 
petitioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Decree. 

Perry, Emery B., estate of. Thomas Weston, executor, petitioner. 
Pending. 

Proudfoot, David, et al. v. Third Congregational Society in 
Cambridge et al. Pending. 

Scott, Julia A., estate of. Emma E. Doty, executrix, petitioner. 
Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pending. 

Slater, Andrew C, estate of. Joseph T. Brown et al., executors, 
petitioners. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Spear, Viana M., estate of. Frank W. Spear, administrator, pe- 
titioner. Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Wolfe, Georgette Emeline, estate of. Newton Trust Company, 
administrator, petitioner. Pending. 

Norfolk County. 

Fisher, Charles H., estate of. Lydia M. Fisher, executrix, peti- 
tioner. Decree. 

Hill, William H., estate of. William H. Hill et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Pending. 

Kaffenburgh, Isaac, estate of. Helene W. Kaffenburgh et ah., 
executors, petitioners. Decree. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 131 

Nichols, Lucy, estate of. Edward H. Nichols et al., administra- 
tors, petitioners. Petition for abatement of inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Tobin, Ellen A., estate of. William Sullivan, executor, peti- 
tioner. Pending. 

Tobin, Lawrence, absentee, estate of. Howard A. Wilson, re- 
ceiver, petitioner. Pending. 

Plymouth County. 

Blenkinsop, James S., estate of. John E. Mills, administrator, 
petitioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Jones, Augustus T., estate of. Harriet D. Jones et al., executors, 
petitioners. Decree. 

Peirce, Harriot 0., estate of. Osgood Putnam, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pending 

Suffolk County. 

Amory, Arthur, estate of. Ingersoll Amory, trustee, petitioner. 
Pending. 

Bliss, Cornelius N., estate of. Cornelius N. Bliss, Jr., et als., 
executors, petitioners. Petition for abatement of inherit- 
ance tax. Pending. 

Burnham, John A., estate of. William A. Burnham et at., peti- 
tioners. Pending. 

Dwight, Mary S., estate of. Grenville Clark et als., petitioners. 
Pending. 

Hunnewell, James F., estate of. William Farnsworth, executor, 
petitioner. Decree. 

Kelly, Thomas, estate of. Harriet L. Kelly, petitioner. Decree. 

Osgood, Elizabeth B., estate of. Katherine C. Stackpole et at., 
executors, petitioners. Decree. 

Osgood, Henry B., estate of. Katherine C. Stackpole, adminis- 
tratrix, petitioner. Decree. 

Park, William D., estate of. Osmond S. Park, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. Pend- 
ing. 

Phillips, Charles H., estate of. Old Colony Trust Company, 
executor, petitioner. Decree. 



132 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



Smith, Charles Gaston, et ah, trustees, v. Carl Youngren et at., 
executors. Decree. 

Tucker, Lawrence, estate of. Robert H. Gardiner, et al., execu- 
tors, petitioners. Pending. 

Worcester County, 

Metcalf, Caleb B., estate of. George L. Clark, executor, peti- 
tioner. Dismissed. 

Putnam, Henry, estate of. Willis E. Sibley et al., executors, pe- 
titioners. Petition for abatement of inheritance tax. At- 
torney-General waived right to be heard. 

Taylor, Ransom C, estate of. Ransom F. Taylor et al., adminis- 
trators, petitioners. Pending. 

Inventories. 
Barnstable County. 

Curran, David, estate of. James E. Curran, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Berkshire County. 

Bossidy, Patrick, estate of. James O'Brien, executor. Decree. 

Boyne, Thomas A., estate of. James O'Brien, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Lavigne, Agnes, estate of. Alaric P. Lavigne, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Lisee, Armidas, estate of. Marie Lisee, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Roberts, Herbert L, estate of. Lura M. Roberts, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Bristol County. 

Brogan, Edward, estate of. Mary A. Brogan, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

DePina, Epoldo T., estate of. Casimiro T. DePina, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Dorais, Aureiie, estate of. Arthur Dorais, executor. Dismissed. 

Fortes, Jose F., estate of. Henry E. Woodward, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Gilford, William, 2d, estate of. C. P. Sherman, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Kennedy, Joseph A., estate of. Clara J. Kennedy, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 133 

McKenna, Patrick ¥., estate of. James F. Kiernan, administra- 
tor. Pending. 

Sanford, Susan, estate of. Foster E. Greene, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Walsh, Patrick C, estate of. Annie M. Walsh, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Essex County. 

Britt, Eebecca W., estate of. Lena L. Bishop, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Brown, Lucy E., estate of. Nellie Brown, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Burrill, Louise, estate of. Augustus L. Burrill, administrator. 
Pending. 

Carter, Emma, estate of. James J. Carter, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Driscoll, Cornelius, estate of. Julia A. Driscoll, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Foley, Henry J., estate of. Elizabeth L. Foley, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Gaffney, James F., estate of. Julia A. Crossley, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Heenan, William, estate of. E. G. Patten, executor. Dismissed. 

Hilton, John S., estate of. Frances L. Hilton, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

King, Mary A., estate of. Katherine E. McCullough, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Leone, Joseph, estate of. Alphonse Leone, administrator. De- 
cree. 

Murphy, John D., estate of. Dennis J. Murphy et al., executors. 
Dismissed. 

Orne, John, estate of. Carrie A. Orne, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Parlardy, C. A. W., estate of. Alden P. \A^iite, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Pike, Hattie K., estate of. Grace E. Beard, administratrix 
c. t. a. Pending. 

Eoach, John J., estate of. Michael J. Eeardon, executor. De- 
cree. 

Smith, Oren, estate of. Edith M. Smith, executrix. Dismissed. 

Starr, Walter, estate of. Gussie Starr, special administratrix. 
Dismissed. 



134 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Tedford, John, estate of. Mary A. Tedford, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Zavarello, Louis, estate of. Liberato Zaverella, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Frariklin County. 

Wells, Lucina C, estate of. James W. Clapp, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Hampden County. 

Clarke, Emily B., estate of. William Mauer, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

De Giacomo, Alfonso, estate of. Gaetano Poccardi, adminis- 
trator. Pending. 

Halstead, Lillian, estate of. John McKean, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Kelley, Margaret, estate of. Ella J. Carrigan, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Melaszansky, Joseph, estate of. Ursula J. Melaszansky, admin- 
istratrix. Pending. 

Miller, Diana, estate of. John McKean, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Nicholson, Mary, estate of. Margaret King, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Ostiguy, Marie Papineau, estate of. Clarisse Papineau Parent, 
executrix. Dismissed. 

Picard, Julia, estate of. Edward H. Cullen, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Eeed, John H., estate of. Scott Adams, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Eooney, John, estate of. Margaret Rooney, administratrix. De- 
cree. 

Hampshire County. 

Lindanovice, Adam, estate of. William J. Eeilley, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Middlesex County. 

Brock, Patrick, estate of. Patrick M. Brock, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Brouillette, Joseph P., estate of. Esmeralda M. Brouillette, ad- 
ministratrix. Dismissed. 

Cahill, Elizabeth, estate of. Mary A. Kahn, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 135 

Calef, Helen M., estate of. Susan M. Barker, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Callahan, Margaret, estate of. Hanora Callahan, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Chadbourne, Marshall W., estate of. Addie Chadbourne, execu- 
trix. Pending. 

Collins, Michael E., estate of. Leslie C. Brown, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Crotty, Patrick, estate of. Mary E. Crotty, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Doerfler, Margaret, estate of. Minnie Dunnells, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Edmands, Hannah B., estate of. George E. Crafts, administra- 
tor. Pending. 

Ellis, Mary A., estate of. Annie E. Chadwick et al., executors. 
Dismissed. 

Eletcher, Mary J., estate of. Nancy M. Fletcher, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Elynn, Teresa, estate of. Daniel C. Flynn, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Frotton, Peter E., estate of. Frank H. Frotton, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Gallagher, Nellie A., estate of. Matthew F. Gallagher, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Gilchrist, Isabella L, estate of. John J. Briggs et al., executors. 
Pending. 

Hamell, Sarah, estate of. James Hamell, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Harrington, Jeremiah, estate of. Minnie Harrington, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Harwood, Elizabeth M., estate of. Bertha W. Harwood, execu- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Hunt, Ann, estate of. Clara A. Farwell, executrix. Dismissed. 

Jordan, Susan, estate of. Percie, D. Jordan,, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Lambert, Vivian L., estate of. William J. Lambert, administra- 
tor. Pending. 

Lang, Augustus M., estate of. Harriet E. Lang, executrix. 
Pending. 

Lawrence, Arthur F., estate of. Arthur P. French, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 



136 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Leahan, Dennis, estate of. P. Sarsfield Cunniff, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Loring, Euphemia I., estate of. Sarah S. Loring, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

McDonald, James J., estate of. Elizabeth F. McDonald, admin- 
istratrix. Dismissed. 

Means, George W., estate of. George B. Means et al., executors. 
Decree. 

Morandi, Carmela, estate of. Antonio Morandi, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Murray, Martha L., estate of. Mary L. Whittemore, adminis- 
tratrix. Dismissed. 

Myers, Emma P., estate of. Margaret A. Murray, administra- 
trix. Decree. 

N'ash, Joseph, estate of. Pauline T. Nash, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Nicholson, John W., estate of. Charles H. Molloy, executor. 
Dismissed. 

O^Brien, Martin, estate of. Winifred E. McHugh, administra- 
trix. Decree. 

Pesachovitz, Joseph, estate of. Jacob Bargar, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Pierlot, Annie F., estate of. Agnes J. Pierlot, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Eevelle, John J., Jr., estate of. John J. Eevelle, administrator. 
Pending. 

Rice, Emeline S., estate of. Helen E. Stevens et ah, executrices. 
Dismissed. 

Eiley, Mary E., estate of. Ella E. McHugh, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Eobard, Samuel E., estate of. Catherine King, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Eogers, Albert E., estate of. Annie B. Eogers, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Eussell, Walter A., estate of. Mary H. Eussell, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Scott, Eebecca, estate of. Margaret A. GrifiSths, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Sebastian 0, Eigoli, estate of. Antonio Paladino, administrator. 
Pending. 

Shine, Cornelius, estate of. Ellen Shine, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 137 

Stewart, Nettie McL., estate of. Allen H. Stewart, administra- 
tor. Decree. 

Sweeney, Thomas P., estate of. John J. Egan, administrator. 
Pending. 

Tower, Levi L., estate of. Fred E. Kimball et al., executors. 
Dismissed. 

Upton, Sarah J., estate of. John W. Eoberts, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Vallin, Edward, estate of. John Tapper, executor. Dismissed. 

Norfolk County. 

Foss, Sarah M., estate of. Mary H. Sampson, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Healey, Thomas P., estate of. Thomas F. Healey, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Higgins, Albert H., estate of. Alice L. Higgins, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Howard, Mary A., estate of. John Everett, executor. Dismissed. 

Jones, Jane E., estate of. Laura J. Jones, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Katz, Harry, estate of. Eachel Katz, administratrix. Decree. 

McPherson, Mary A., estate of. Duncan McPherson, adminis- 
trator. Pending. 

Eeed, Napoleon B., estate of. Eose A. Eeed, administratrix. 
Decree. 

Tannam, Margaret M., estate of. George T. Tannam, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Tauber, Alfred B., estate of. Olga A. Tauber, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Thayer, Emily P., estate of. Frank I. Sherman, executor. De- 
cree. 

Tower, Levina, estate of. Albert F. Elwell, administrator. De- 
cree. 

Waite, Enoch, estate of. Amanda M. Waite, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Wolfe, Sarah E., estate of. John W. S. Wolfe, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Plymouth County. 

Butler, Lucitta, estate of. Samuel S. Butler, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Gushing, William L., estate of. Emma F. Gushing, adminis- 
tratrix. Dismissed. 



138 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Gibbs^ Charles F., estate of. James U. Potter, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Joyce, Mary, estate of. Helen L. Joyce, administratrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Manuel, Julia L., estate of. Francis M. Costello, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Raymond, Albert R., estate of. Mary F. Raymond, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Riddle, Harriett, estate of. Priscilla W. Bailey, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Twohig, Hanora, estate of. James Twohig, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Suffolk County. 

Acomb, Violet M. J., estate of. Thomas W. Acomb, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Adolph, Joseph, estate of. Isaac Klein, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Almeida, Christiano F., estate of. Angelina F. Almeida, ad- 
ministratrix. Decree. 

Aspell, Catherine M., estate of. Thomas J. Aspell, administra- 
tor. Decree. 

Bailen, Annie J., estate of. David Bailen, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Bartholomew, Susan W., estate of. Sarah B. James, administra- 
trix. Pending. 

Baxter, Albert, estate of. Elizabeth A. Baxter, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Berry, Catherine, estate of. Edward Berry, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Bershinsky, John, estate of. Lihba Bershinsky, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Betts, James S., estate of. George R. Betts, special administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Bishop, George, estate of. Addie N. Bishop, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Bliss, Leonard C, estate of. Fred H. Williams, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Boleisha, Kazimerz C, estate of. Mary Boleisha, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Bonney, Sarah A. W., estate of. Morton CoUingwood, executor. 
Dismissed. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 139 

Bowen, Edward, estate of. Nellie E. Bowen, administratrix. 
Decree. 

Brehm, Charles W., estate of. Estella F. Brehm, administra- 
trix. Decree. 

Brennan, William, estate of. Annie Brennan, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Brickley, Madell T., estate of. Patrick J. Brickley, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Brutcher, Margaret, estate of. Thomas J. Brutcher, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Byrne, William E., estate of. Catherine M. Byrne, administra- 
trix. Pending. 

Cameron, John C, estate of. Maria J. Cameron, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Campbell, • Patrick J., estate of. John J. Campbell, adminis- 
trator. Pending. 

Carakalios, Constantinos, estate of. Cooly A. Contos, adminis- 
trator. Decree. 

Cardany, Wilfred U., estate of. Raymond U. Cardany, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Carmichael, Margaret V., estate of. Frederick R. Carmichael, 
executor. Dismissed. 

Carroll, James A., estate of. Josephine M. Carroll, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Carroll, John T., estate of. Herbert Carroll, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Casey, Frank, estate of. Abbie Casey, administratrix. Pending. 

Chaplin, Matilda C, estate of. Samuel Chaplin, administrator. 
Pending. 

Ciolfi, Giovanni, estate of. Frank Leveroni, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Clifford, Mary A., estate of. James F. Clifford, executor. 
Pending. 

Cordeiro, Antoine P., estate of. Mary E. Cordeiro, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Cotter, Mary, estate of. Gertrude Cotter, administratrix. Filed. 

Curran, James F., estate of. Stephan Curran, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Daly, Michael, estate of. Ellen E. Murray, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Di Maino, Eaffaele, estate of. Luigi DiMaino, administrator. 
Dismissed. 



140 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Dlott, Louis, estate of. Israel Dlott, administrator. Dismissed. 

Donohue, Thomas, estate of. Mary Bonohue, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Donovan, Cornelius J., estate of. John W. Donovan, admiQis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Donovan, Patrick, estate of. Margaret Donovan, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Dorini, Celestina, estate of. Antonio Dorini, administrator. 
Pending. 

Drew, George E., estate of. Charlotte A. Drev^^, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Ferullo, Tony, estate of. Luigi Matarazzo, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Flaherty, Margaret, estate of. Margaret J. Burns, administra- 
trix. Pending. 

Flood, Mary E., estate of. Edward L. Flood, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Galligan, Brian B., estate of. Richard J. Galligan, administra- 
tor. Pending. 

Giacobbe, Marianna, estate of. Santo Giacobbe, administrator. 
Pending. 

Greenough, Louie P. E., estate of. Herbert F. Callahan, admin- 
istrator. Dismissed. 

Hagan, Michael, estate of. Francis Hagan et al., executors. 
Dismissed. 

Harrington, Cornelius J., estate of. Margaret G. Hartnett, ad- 
ministratrix. Dismissed. 

Hart, John H., estate of. William H. Hart, administrator. 
Pending. 

Hegarty, Michael, estate of. Margaret Hegarty, executrix. De- 
cree. 

Higgins, Catherine, estate of. P. S. Cunniff, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Hill, Emogene B., estate of. Myrton 0. Hill, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Imparata, Angelo, estate of. Giuseppe Imparata, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Kilday, Thomas, estate of. Patrick Kilday, administrator. 
Pending. 

Killeen, Daniel J., estate of. John B. Killeen, administrator. 
Decree. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 141 

Kilroy, Mary E., estate of. Martin J. Kilroy, administrator. 
Pending. 

King, James T., estate of. Augusta King, administratrix. De- 
cree. 

Levy, Benjamin, estate of. Edward M. Levy, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Lindquist, Chester \Y., estate of. Sehna Lindquist, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Littig, Katherine, estate of. Henry Zepp, executor. Pending. 

Lucy, Ellen M., estate of. Daniel J. Lucy, administrator. Pend- 
ing. 

Lyons, Maria, estate of. Charles F. Lyons, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Mansfield, Patrick J., estate of. Prank Leveroni et al., adminis- 
trators. Dismissed. 

Marr, Ella G., estate of. Myron L. Marr, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

McCorkle, James E., estate of. Madeline M. McCorkle, admin- 
istratrix. Dismissed. 

McCue, Michael, estate of. Margaret McCue, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

McCutcheon, George H., estate of. George 0. McCutcheon, ad- 
ministrator. Dismissed. 

McDonald, Mary E., estate of. Patrick J. O'Brien, executor. 
Dismissed. 

McHale, John F., estate of. Annie J. McHale, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

McNamara, Catherine, estate of. Timothy F. Callahan, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Mendelson, Samuel, estate of. Rose Mendelson, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Miller, Sarah F., estate of. Mary E. Hines, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Moriarty, Patrick J., estate of. Edward P. Barry, administra- 
tor. Pending. 

Murphy, Bridget A., estate of. Emily W. Coughlin, adminis- 
tratrix. Decree. 

Murphy, Catherine, estate of. Eugene J. Murphy, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Murphy, George, estate of. Nicholas Murphy, administrator. 
Dismissed. 



142 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Murray, William J., estate of. William H. Murray, administra- 
tor. Dismissed. 

Norcross, Frederick H., estate of. Mary Norcross, adminis- 
tratrix. Decree. 

O'Farrell, Mary M., estate of. John D. Carmody, executor. 
Pending. 

O'lSTeil, Ellen, estate of. John O'Neil, administrator. Pending. 

Parillo, Rose, estate of. Joseph Parillo, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Poulos, Thomas, estate of. Amanda Teresa Poulos, adminis- 
tratrix. Pending. 

Price, Michael, estate of. James M. Price, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Riley, John C, estate of. James Riley, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Rouke, Alfonsus L., estate of. Fabian J. Rouke, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Rowel], Samuel C, estate of. Louise H. Rowell, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Santoorj, Samuel, estate of. Margaret Mikaelian, executrix. 
Pending. 

Shields, Peter, estate of. William Shields, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Silberg, Joseph, estate of. Samuel Silberg, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Sirvain, Marcelin, estate of. Aglar Sirvain, executor. Pend- 
ing. 

Spangler, Frank, estate of. August Weitz, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Sullivan, Daniel J., estate of. Annie T. Sullivan, executrix. 
Pending. 

Sullivan, Mary, estate of. Mary E. Sullivan, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Tortorella, Francesca, estate of. Ignazio Tortorella, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Urban, Elisabeth, estate of. Lizzie Urban, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Vose, Andrew J., estate of. Abbie T. Vose, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Walenszius, Anthoney, estate of. Katorina Walenszius, adminis- 
tratrix. Dismissed. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 143 

Walker, Matilda, estate of. Eebecca Black, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Warren, Katherine E., estate of. H. Ernest Warren, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Woodlin, Mary E., estate of. Eobert Gallagher, administrator. 
Decree. 

Znffante, Michele, estate of. Giuseppe Zuffante, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Worcester County. 

Barker, Eacyetta, estate of. Everett N. Barker, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Booth, Byron A., estate of. Harry C. Bascom, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Chadbourne, Alonzo H., estate of. Bertha M. Dean, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Chadwick, James S., estate of. Cora J. Chadwick, administra- 
trix. Dismissed. 

Curran, John J., estate of. Peter F. Curran, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Deland, Edward M., estate of. Earl C. Deland, administrator. 
Dismissed. 

Gallant, Prosper, estate of. Mary S. Gallant, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Goodwin, Calvin L., estate of. E. Clairmont Goodwin, admin- 
istrator. Dismissed. 

Groezinger, Charles G., estate of. Charles F. Groezinger, ad- 
ministrator. Dismissed. 

Hart, Harriet, estate of. Melvin Hart, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 

Hartwell, Eveline E., estate of. Susan E. Hartwell, adminis- 
tratrix. Pending. 

Higgins, Milton P., estate of. Katharine C. Higgins, executrix. 
Dismissed. 

Kennedy, Thomas F., estate of. Eose Kennedy, administratrix. 
Pending. 

Langton, Mar^y, estate of. Frank E. Langton, administrator. 
Decree. 

Leonard, Michael, estate of. Mary A. Martin, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

McGowan, Peter J., estate of. Catherine E. McGowan, exec- 
utrix. Dismissed. 



144 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Midgley, B. Ellen, estate of. James Midgley, executor. Dis- 
missed. 

Power, Margaret, estate of. Bridget M. Power, executrix. Dis- 
missed. 

Santore, Frank, estate of. Mary F. Santore, administratrix. 
Dismissed. 

Schwager, Kathrina, estate of. John M. Schwager, adminis- 
trator. Dismissed. 

Tappan, Curtis B., estate of. Harriet T. Brigham, executrix. 
Decree. 

Toto, Lucia, estate of. Michele Toto, administrator. Dismissed. 

Vivier, Joseph E., estate of. Fred Martin, administrator. Dis- 
missed. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 145 



PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUSTS. 



Barnstable County. 
Mckerson, Joseph, estate of. Arthur W. Hartt, petitioner. Pe- 
tition for appointment of trustee. Attorney-General waived 
right to be heard. 

Berkshire County. 

Camp, Daniel A., estate of. James B. Turner, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Lenox Library Association v. David Lydig et als. Bill of com- 
plaint brought to confirm trust deeds. Decree. 

Newton, Maria H., estate of. A. Chalkley Collins, adminis- 
trator, petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Bristol County. 
Preese, John Wesley, estate of. Helen M. Preese, executrix. 

petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 
Eichard, Joseph A., estate of. Thomas C. Sadler, petitioner. 

Petition for appointment of trustee. Attorney- General 

waived right to be heard. 
White, John, estate of. Iram IST. Smith, executor, petitioner. 

Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Essex County. 

Atwood, Margaret, estate of. Henry B. Little et als., peti- 
tioners. Petition for appointment of petitioners as trus- 
tees. Pending. 

Barr, Henry, estate of. Salem Young Men's Christian Associa- 
tion, petitioner. Petition for authority to sell real estate. 
Pending. 

Breed, Nathan, estate of. Edmund F. Buffington et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Corliss, Mary, estate of. George H. Carleton, administrator 
c. t. a., petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 



146 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

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. Dismissed. 

Hahn, Eliza J., estate of. Charles A. Cross, trustee, petitioner. 
Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Haskins, Leander M., estate of. Grafton Butman, petitioner. 
Petition for appointment of trustee. Pending. 

Hawks, Esther H., estate of. Frank W. Atkins et al., executors, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of fourth and fifth and 
final accounts. Attorney- General waived right to be heard. 

Hawks, Esther H., estate of. Hannah T. Carret et ah., trus- 
tees, petitioners. Petition for allowance of fifth account. 
Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Healy, Jeremiah J., estate of. Dennis Healy, executor. Peti- 
tion for instructions. Decree. 

Lennon, Patrick, estate of. James F. Leonard, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Moore, Martha, estate of. Mary Barker, executrix, petitioner. 
Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Moseley, Julia M., estate of. Oliver H. Perry et al., executors, 
petitioners. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Otis, Margaret Sigourney, estate of. Philip Dexter et al., execu- 
tors. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Eobbins, Mary B., estate of. Charles E. Sawyer, trustee. Peti- 
tion for instructions. Decree. 

Smith, John, estate of. J. Duke Smith, trustee. Petition for 
instructions. Decree. 

Stearns, Artemas W., estate of. John P. Sweeney et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of first account. Pend- 
ing. 

Franklin County. 

Davenport, George W., estate of. Josiah W. Stevens et al., 
trustees, petitioners. Petition for authority to sell real 
estate. Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Delano, Lucy J., estate of. Thomas. F. Harrington, petitioner. 
Petition for appointment of trustee. Pending. 

Field, Simeon A., estate of. Henry W. Montague, trustee, peti- 
tioner. Petition for allowance of third account. Pending. 

Stratton, Abigail, estate of. Frank H. Montague et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of tenth account. Pend- 
ing. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 147 



Hampden County. 

Capen, Meriva L., estate of. Frank S. Keith, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment of trustee. Attorney-General waived 
right to be heard. 

Dearborn, Danville A., estate of. American Baptist Home Mis- 
sion Society, petitioner. Petition for authority to sell real 
estate. Pending. 

Mead, Charles W., estate of. Jennie L. Bixby, executrix, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Attorney-General waived 
right to be heard. 

Winter, Sarah J., estate of. Thomas W. Kenefick, executor, pe- 
titioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Hampshire County. 
Russell Church in Hadley. Francis S. Reynolds, trustee. Peti- 
tion for instructions. Pending. 

Middlesex County. 

Abbott, Carrie F., estate of. Winthrop P. Soule, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for allowance of first account. Attorney- 
General waived right to be heard. 

Berry, Mabel, estate of. Frank W. Kaan, petitioner. Petition 
for appointment of trustee. Attorney-General waived right 
to be heard. 

Bugbee, Samuel W., et al. v. Attorney-General. Petition for 
instructions. Pending. 

Bull, Sara C, estate of. Joseph G. Thorp et al. v. John Lund 
et al. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Child, Lydia Maria, estate of. Eleanor G. May, petitioner. Pe- 
tition for leave to transfer trust fund. Pending. 

Copeland, Sarah E., estate of. Alba A. Giles, executor, petitioner. 
Petition for allowance of second account. Pending. 

Donaghey, Henry, estate of. William E. Whitney et al v. Annie 
J. Davenport et al. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Hammond, George P., estate of. Elizabeth F. Johnson, execu- 
trix, petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Hopkins, Lucretia A., estate of. James A. Bancroft, executor, 
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Hoyt, Eli W., estate of. Alexis D. Sargent, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment of trustee. Attorney- General waived 
right to be heard. 



148 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Mellen, William H., estate of. Town of Framingham, petitioner. 
Petition for authority to sell real estate. Pending. 

Sawyer, Emily E., estate of. Frederick W. Stone et al., execu- 
tors', petitioners. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Shepherd, Obed C, estate of. Charles H. Sherman, executor, 
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Simonds, Marshall, estate of. Otis Simonds et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for allowance of first account. Attorney- 
General waived right to be heard. 

Simonds, Marshall, estate of. Town of Burlington v. Attorney- 
General. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Tabor, Frances F., estate of. Charles S. Norris, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Rescript. 

Talbot, Isabella AY., estate of. Adelbert L. "Wait et at., petition- 
ers. Petition for appointment of trustees. Pending. 

Thompson, Emulus, estate of. Melvin G. Rogers, administrator, 
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

White, Daniel, estate of. Winslow Warren et al., trustees, peti- 
tioners. Petition for allowance of sixteenth, seventeenth and 
eighteenth accounts. Pending. 

Nantucket County. 
Enas, Sally Maria, estate of. Lauriston Bunker, trustee, peti- 
tioner. Petition for allowance of first account. Account 
allowed. 

Norfolk County. 

Bartlett, Schuyler S., v. William Endicott et al., petitioners. Pe- 
tition for instructions. Pending. 

Lee, Henry, estate of. Schuyler S. Bartlett, executor, petitioner. 
Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Mann, Jonathan, estate of. John F. Brown et al., executors, 
petitioners. Petition for instructions. Reserved for full 
court. 

Mann, Jonathan, estate of. Carrie S. Leeds, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for removal of trustee. Pending. 

Quincy, City of, v. James M. Swift, Attorney-General, et als. 
Petition for authority to sell land held in trust and reinvest 
proceeds. Pending. 

Sears, David, estate of. Francis I. Amory et al., trustees, peti- 
tioners. Petition for authority to sell real estate. Attor- 
ney-General waived right to be heard. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 149 



Suffolk County. 

Amory, Francis L, eir al, v. Trustees of Amherst College et al. 
Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Ashton, Elisha V., estate of. Charles P. Greenough et al., 
trustees^ petitioners. Petition for authority to sell real 
estate. Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Ashton, Elisha Y., estate of. Charles P. Greenough, trustee, pe- 
titioner. Petition for allowance of twenty-second to twenty- 
fifth accounts, inclusive. Attorney- General waived right to 
be heard. 

Beals, Nancy, estate of. Emily H. Treadwell, trustee, petitioner. 
Petition for allowance of second account. Attorney-Gen- 
eral waived right to be heard. 

Bird, John H., estate of. George A. Thayer et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for allowance of thirty-seventh and 
thirty-eighth accounts. Attorney- General waived right to be 
heard. 

Bird, John H., estate of. George A. Thayer et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for allowance of thirty-ninth account. 
Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Bird, John H., estate of. J. Alfred Mitchell, petitioner. Pe- 
tition for appointment of trustee. Attorney-General waived 
right to be heard. 

Blake, Clarence J., et als., trustees under an agreement and dec- 
laration of trust, V. Attorney-General et al. Petition for 
authority to modify trust. Final decree. 

Brown, Josiah W., estate of. Sewall F. Abbott et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petitions for instructions. Decree. 

Church Street Methodist Episcopal Church, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for authority to mortgage trust estate. Attorney-Gen- 
eral waived right to be heard. 

Gushing, Henriette J., estate of. Constance J. Bessey, execu- 
trix, petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Dewing Memorial v. Attorney-General. Petition for leave to sell 
real estate. Pending. 

Dix, John H., estate of. Charles P. Greenough et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of fourteenth and 
fifteenth accounts. Attorney- General waived right to be 
heard. 

Forbes, Sarah S., estate of. James S. Eussell et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for leave to transfer trust fund. At- 
torney-General assented to petition. 



150 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Gurney, Elizabeth F., estate of. Warren Avenue Baptist Churcli 
V. Attornej^-General. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Hartshorn, Sarah Ella, estate of. John Herbert et als., execu- 
tors, petitioners. Petition for authority to adjust contro- 
versy. Assented to decree. 

Healy, Anna M., estate of. William Eopes Trask, executor, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Jones, Maria, estate of. Ernest V. Munroe, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment of trustee. Attorney- General waived 
right to be heard. 

Kingsbury, Jesse, estate of. Conray P. Hall et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Lang, Betsey E., estate of. Enoch Foster, trustee, petitioner. 
Petition for allowance of third and final account. Pending. 

Lang, Betsey R., estate of. William A. Patten, petitioner. Pe- 
tition for appointment of trustee. Assented to appointment 
of William A. Patten as trustee. 

Lawrence, Abbott, estate of. John Lawrence et al,, trustees', pe- 
titioners. Petition for allowance of twenty-third account. 
Attorney- General waived right to be heard. 

Lincoln, Annie Preston, estate of. J. Ellwood Lee Company v. 
The Grace Hospital. Petition brought by receivers to col- 
lect legacy under will. Decree. 

Liversidge, Thomas, estate of. Richard C. Humphreys et als., 
trustees, petitioners. Petition for allowance of twenty-sixth 
to thirty-third accounts, inclusive. Pending. 

Locke, Elbridge W., estate of. Otis Merriam et al., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Mabie, William L, et al., v. Edwin S. Gardner and the Attorney- 
General. Petition for instructions regarding a public char- 
itable trust under will of Mary Redding. Pending. 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology v, Attorney-General. Pe- 
tition for authority to sell real estate. Attorney- General 
waived right to be heard. 

Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 
V. J. Pickering Putnam et al. Petition for instructions. 
Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Patterson, Adoniram J., estate of. William N. Swain, trustee, 
petitioner. Petition for authority to sell real estate. De- 
cree. 

Patterson, Adoniram J., estate of. William N. Swain, trustee, 
petitioner. Petition for allowance of first and final account. 
Attorney- General waived right to be heard. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 151 

Peterson, Ellen, estate of. Mary M. Anderson, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment of trustee. Attorney- General assented 
to appointment. 

Potter, Sarah E., estate of. New Bedford Free Public Library, 
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Eead, Charles C, et al. v. The Frances E. Willard Settlement 
et al. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Smith, James, estate of. Samuel M. Jackson et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of first and third ac- 
counts. Accounts allowed. 

Smith, James, estate of. Willard N. Poland, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment of trustee. Attorney- General assented 
to appointment. 

Soren, George Wales, estate of. Lucy E. Buffington, petitioner. 
Petition for appointment of trustee. Pending. 

Sterling, Virginia A., estate of. William H. Ballou et al., exec- 
utors, petitioners. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Thompson, Thomas, estate of. Laurence Minot et al., trustees, 
petitioners. Petition for allowance of eleventh and twelfth 
and final accounts. Attorney- General waived right to be 
heard. 

Thompson, Thomas, estate of. Eichards M. Bradley et al., trus- 
tees, petitioners. Petition for allowance of first' account. 
Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

Thorndike, George L., estate of. William A. Morrison et al., 
trustees, petitioners. Petition for allowance of third and 
fourth accounts. Accounts allowed. 

Warren Avenue Baptist Church v. Attorney-General. Petition 
for authority to use a certain trust fund. Pending. 

Weber, Frederick E., estate of. George M. Amerige, petitioner. 
Petition for appointment of trustee. Attorney-General 
waived right to be heard. 

Whitney, Sarah W., estate of. Charles A. Stone, trustee, peti- 
tioner. Petition for leave to sell real estate. Decree. 

Whitney, Sarah W., estate of. Charles A. Stone, trustee, peti- 
tioner. Petition for allowance of first and second accounts. 
Pending. 

Willard Hospital v. Frances E. Willard Settlement et als. Pe- 
tition for instructions. Decree. 



152 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



Worcester County, 

Bemis, George, estate of. M3a'on A. Craig et al., trustees, peti- 
tioners. Petition for allowance of first account. Attorney- 
General waived right to be heard. 

Brooks, Sarah, estate of. Thomas H. Russell, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for appointment as trustee. Attorney-General assented 
to appointment. 

Cummings, Lurinda, estate of. Moses P. Greenwood, executor, 
petitioner. Petition for instructions. Pending. 

Fuller, Dana L., estate of. Louie C. Fuller, executrix, peti- 
tioner. Petition for instructions. Decree. 

Grout, Eliza P., estate of. Robert L. Carter et als., trustees, pe- 
titioners. Petition for allowance of eighth account. Attor- 
ney-General waived right to be heard. 

Merriam, Sybil A., estate of. Frank 0. Lothrop, petitioner. 
Petition for appointment of trustees. Attorney-General 
waived right to be heard. 

Stockwell, George K., estate of. Charles F. Stevens et al., exec- 
utors, petitioners. Petition for authority to adjust by com- 
promise controversy in regard to will. Decree. 

Wilhams, Henry, estate of. Reason T. Lee et als., trustees, v, 
Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States et al. Pe- 
tition for instructions. Pending. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 153 



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. 
Eobinson, Sumner, et al. v. Commonwealth. Settled. 

2. Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board. 
Petition 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. 

Middlesex County. 
Braman, Caroline P., v. Commonwealth. Settled. 
Stoneham, Town of, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Ward, George A., et als. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

Worcester County. 
Allen, Byron D., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Allen, Byron D., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Bradley, Patrick, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Cutting, Louis, administrator, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Kendall, Sanford C, v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 
Keyes, Henry P., v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 
Knight, Asa E., v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 
Welch, James E., v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 
Wood, James H., et al. v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 
Wood, J. Frank, et als. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Wood, J. Frank, et als. v. Commonwealth. Disposed of. 



154 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



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. 

Barnstable County. 
Phillips, Martha B., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Settled. 

BerTcshire County. 
Connelly, William H., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Eogerson, Sophia, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Stevens, John A., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

Bristol County. 
Cooper, Frederick P., v. Commonwealth. Dismissed. 
Seabury, Phoebe W., v. Commonwealth. Settled. 

Essex County. 
Bishop, Emeline, v. Commonwealth. Settled. 
Donovan, John, v. Commonwealth. Settled. 
Perley, Osborne, v. Commonwealth. Settled. 

Hampshire County. 
Flagg, Lucretia Taft, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Nash, Harlan E., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Taft, Kate P., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

Middlesex County. 
Huntington, Herbert R., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Mower, Clara I., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Nourse, Joseph P., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Nourse, Joseph P., v. Commonwealth. Settled. 

Norfolk County. 
Laycock, Berry, v. Commonwealth. Settled. 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 155 



4. Board of Harbor and Land Commissioners. 
Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages 
alleged to have been sustained 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 
alleged to have been sustained by the taking of land by said 
commissioners. 

Suffolk County. 
Apthorp, Octave L., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Barstow, Catherine A., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Brown, Rebecca W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Cotting, Charles E., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Edmands, Katherine B., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Fields, Annie, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Hooper, James R., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Hooper, Robert C, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Inches, Louise P., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Jewell, Edward, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Niles, Sarah F., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Parker, George W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Pierce, Katherine C, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Prince, Fannie L., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Prince, Lillian C, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Sears, Mary C, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Sears, Richard D., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Shaw, Francis, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Tarbell, Arthur P., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Taylor, Georgianna 0., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Taylor, Mary M., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Whitney, Christiana S., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Williams, John D., trustee, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 



156 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



6. Armory Commissioners. 
Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages 
alleged to have been sustained by the taking of land by the said 
board. 

BerTcshire County. 

Pittsfield & North Adams Railroad et al. v. Commonwealth. 
Pending. 

Essex County. 
Griffin, Henry, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

7. State Board of Insanity. 
Petitions to the Superior Court for assessment of damages 
alleged to have been sustained by the taking of land by the said 
board. 

Suffolh County. 
Beatty, John F., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Callahan, Frank J., et al. v. Commonwealth. Settled. 
Callahan, George A., et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Flint, James H., et al., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Holbrook, Wellington, et al. v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Kiley, Daniel J., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 
Shea, Julia A., et als., trustees, v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

8. Mount Everett Reservation Commission. 
Berkshire County. 
McNaughton, Elizabeth T., v. Commonwealth. Pending. 

9. Miscellaneous Cases from Above Commissions. 

Essex County. 

Cilley, Orran G., v. Cattle Bureau. Petition to recover the value 

of cattle condemned by Cattle Bureau. Pending. 
Reed, William H., v. Commonwealth. Claim for damages on 

account of injury to horse on State highway in Gloucester. 

Pending. 
Tremblay, Paul, v. Commonwealth. Action of tort for injuries 

caused by defect in State highway in East Boston. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 157 



Middlesex County. 

International Automobile and Vehicle Tire Company v. Com- 
monwealth. Petition to recover damages caused by con- 
struction of bridge across Charles Eiver under St. 1903, 
c. 391. Pending. 

McFarland, Mark, v. Edward J. Doyle. Claim for damages al- 
leged to have been caused by collision with motorcycle 
owned by the Metropolitan Park Commission. Pending. 

Plymouth County. 

Bates, Abbie L., v. Metropolitan Park Commission. Action of 
tort to recover damages alleged to have been caused by de- 
fect in a sidewalk, Nantasket Beach Eeservation. Dis- 
posed of. 

Suffolk County. 

Davis, James A., et al. v. Commonwealth et al. Petition to re- 
cover for labor and materials used in construction of sewer. 
Pending. 

De las Casas, William B., et al. v. Sewer Commissioners of 
Eevere. Petition for injunction to restrain town from 
obstructing sewer built by the Park Commission for bath 
house. Pending. 

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. 

Eastman, Charles Albert, v. Board of Eegistration in Medicine. 
Bill in equity to enjoin Board from revoking certificate. 
Pending. 

Ellin wood, Ealph E., Commonwealth v. Petition to restrain re- 
spondent from infringing park regulations on Eevere boule- 
vard. Pending. 

Franklin County Lumber Company et al. v. Commonwealth. 
Claim for money due under contract. Decree. 

Gibbons, William H., v. Commonwealth. Damage caused by 
blasting in construction of metropolitan sewer. Pending. 

H. B. Smith Company v. Commonwealth. Claim for money due 
under contract for Boston State Hospital. Pending. 



158 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Jenkins, Jennie L., v. Sumner Coolidge, M.D., superintendent 
of Lakeville State Hospital. Suit to enforce the provisions 
of written- lease. Disposed of. 

Kinmond, John D., v. Commonwealth. Action of tort to recover 
for injuries caused by defect in State highway in Salisbury. 
Pending. 

Lake, Alexander G., v. Commonwealth. Action of tort to recover 
for injuries caused by defect in State highway in Natick. 
Pending. 

McGinniss, Margaret T., Commonwealth v. Bill in equity to re- 
strain defendant from encroaching on land of the Common- 
wealth. Pending. 

National Contracting Company et ah, Commonwealth v. Action 
of contract to recover on bond. Pending. 

Niland, Michael, v. Commonwealth. Petition for assessment of 
damages caused by blasting for metropolitan sewer. Pend- 
ing. 

Mland, Michael, v. Edward AY. 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. 

Normile, Francis, v. Edward W. Everson & Co. and Henry H. 
Sprague et al. Action of tort. Pending. 

Old Colony Construction Company, Commonwealth v. Action 
of contract to recover on bond. Pending. 

Pacific Surety Company v. Commonwealth et al. Petition to 
recover from McBride & Co. certain sums expended by pe- 
titioner. Pending. 

Phillips, Eeuben J., v. William B. de las Casas et als. Petition 
for writ of mandamus to compel reinstatement of the pe- 
titioner as a police sergeant. Rescript. 

Simmons, George H., v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover for 
injuries alleged to have been caused by a defect in a State 
highway in Whitman. Disposed of. 

Smith, Frederick W., et al. v. Commonwealth. Claim for money 
due under contract for Boston State Hospital. Pending. 

Waterproof Leatherboard Company, Henry H. Sprague et als., 
Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board, v. Bill of com- 
plaint to restrain respondent from discharging factory 
wastes into Beaver Dam Brook. Pendinof. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 159 

AVaterproofing Company, The, v. Commonwealth. Claim for 
money due for labor performed on Psychopathic Hospital. 
Pending. 

Worcester County. 

Lamb, Aroline M., v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover dam- 
ages caused by change in grade of highway in Boylston. 
Disposed of. 

10. State Boards of Charity and Insanity. 
Actions of contract pending in the Superior Court to recover 
charges for the support of persons in State hospitals. 

Suffolk County. 
Chapin, Treasurer, v. Charles A. Mullin. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Warren M. Andrews. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Boston. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Boston. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Boston. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Boston. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Charles F. Bushby. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Caroline E. Clasby. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Caroline E. Clasby. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Mary E. Clasby, Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Joseph C. Colligan. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. John J. Cronin, administrator of the estate 

of Mary Murphy. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Catherine Darcy. Settled. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Bertie L. Dow. Settled. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Fall Eiver. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. John Grieneeks. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Michael Harper, guardian. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Lowell. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. New Bedford. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Newton. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Newton. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Emma C. Eussell, guardian. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Eutland. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Josiah Eyder. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Thomas J. Sexton, guardian. Pending. 
Stevens', Treasurer, v. Julia Tully. Pending. 
Stevens, Treasurer, v. Louise C. Westcott. Pending. 



160 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



MISCELLANEOUS CASES. 



A. C. Lawrence Leather Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

A. C. Lawrence Leather Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

A. C. Lawrence Leather Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Abbott, Lilian, administratrix of the estate of Eunice M. Ab- 
bott, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inher- 
itance tax. Pending. 

Abington Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Ahmeek Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreigTi corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Ahmeek Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Ahmeek Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Aldrich, Frank E., petitioner. Petition to register title to land 
in Northfield. Pending. 

Algomah Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Algomah Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

AUain, Marguerite, administratrix of the estate of Maxime T. 
Allain, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Decree. 



1914.] PrBLIC DOC^UMEXT — Xo. 12. 161 

Allouez Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Allouez Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Amalgamated Xevada Mines Conipan}' v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Amalgamated Xevada Mines Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American Agricnltnral Chemical Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

American Agricnltnral Chemical Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

American Axe and Tool Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

American Axe and Tool Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

American Bank Xote Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

American Bank Xote Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

American Brass Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Brass Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Can Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

American Can Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign coi-poration. 
Pending. 



162 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

American Can Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

American Chicle Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Chicle C*ompany r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Dyewood Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Dyewood Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Hide and Leather Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American Plide and Leather Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American Investment Securities Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by for- 
eign corporation. Pending. 

American Investment Securities Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by for- 
eign CO rporation . Pending. 

American Laundry Machinery Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American Locomotive Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

American Locomotive Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

American Piano Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Pneumatic Service Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the ^-ear 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pendino^. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 163 

American Pneumatic Service Company v. Coimnon wealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American Eadiator Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Eadiator Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Eadiator Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Seating Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

American Seating Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

American Soda Fountain Company, Attorney-General ex rel. v. 
Dumping material into tide water. Pending. 

American Soda Fountain Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

American Soda Fountain Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

American Soda Fountain Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

American Steel and Wire Company of Xew Jersey v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1910 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

American Steel and Wire Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

American Steel and Wire Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

American Sugar Eefining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 



164 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

American Thread C*onipany of Xew Jersey v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

American Thread Company of Xew Jersey v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the A^ear 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

American Woolen Company v. CommonAvealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the years 1909 and 1910 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

American AYoolen Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

American Woolen Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreig-n corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Ames Shove] and Tool Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Ames Shovel and Tool Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Amoskeag ^Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Amoskeag ]\Ianufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Anderson, Mary J., administratrix of the estate of Elizabeth P. 
Anderson, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Pending. 

Andover Savings Bank. Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Androscoggin Mills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. Final 
decree. 

Androscoggin Mills r. Commonwealtli. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Final 
decree. 

Androscoggin Mills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Final 
decree. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 165 

Arizona Commercial Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Arlington Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

Armstrong Cork Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. ^ 

Armstrong Cork Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Armstrong Cork Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Asbestos Protected' Metal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
for abatement of franchise tax. Pending. 

Ashland Emery and Corundum Company r. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by for- 
eign corporation. Pending. 

Ashland Emery and Corundum Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Ashland Emery and Corundum Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by for- 
eign corporation. Pending. 

Atlas Tack Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Atlas Tack Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Attleborouofh Savings Bank, Attorney-General r. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

B. F. Goodrich Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Ball, Eustace H., executor of the will of Harriet S. Ball, Attor- 
ney-General ecc rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Baltic Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Decision from United States Supreme Court. 



166 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Baltic Milling Compaiw r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the 3'ear 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Baltic Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Barre Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. -590, § 56. Decree. 

Bates Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Bates Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
13oration. Pending. 

Belding Brothers & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Belding Brothers & Co. r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
" Pending. 

Berry Brothers, Ltd. v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Berry Brothers, Ltd. r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the vear 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Bingham Mines Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Blake & Knowles Steam Pump Works i'. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Bleiler, Frederick, v. Commissioner of Animal Industry. Claim 
for damages for death of horse. Pending. 

Bohemia Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Boston & Corbin Copper and Silver Mining Company v. Com- 
monwealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the 3'ear 1912 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Boston & Northern Street Railway Company. Claim for amount 
expended in relaying water pipes in Washington Street, 
Lynn, destroyed by electric currents. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCOIEXT — No. 12. 167 

Boston &: Eoxbury Mill Corporation, petitioner for dissolution. 
Petition of the Commomvealth for leave to intervene. Pend- 
ing. 

Boston & Worcester Street Eailway Company v. Board of Eail- 
road Commissioners. Petition for modification of rnling 
by Railroad Commissioners. Pending. 

Boston Bedding Snpply Company v. Commonwealth et al. Peti- 
tion for assessment of damages alleged to have been caused 
by the passage of legislation restricting the right to draw 
water from the Charles River during certain seasons. Pend- 
ing. 

Boston Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Boston Railroad Holding Company r. Commonwealth. Petition 
for abatement of franchise tax. Rescript. 

Boston Safe Deposit and Trust Company, Attorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Boston Securities Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Boston Securities Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Bosworth. Charles 0., executor of the will of John P. Campion, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Brackett, Arthur L., v. Commonwealth. Petition for assessment 
of damages caused by the erection of the new " Stadium 
Bridge." Charles K. Darling, John T. Swift and Joseph 
A. Conry appointed commissioners. Pending. 

Breakwater Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 19]! paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Breakwater Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax vfor the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Brennan, James M., i'. Charles E. Woodburv, Superintendent. 
Action of tort for personal injuries. Pending. 

Bridgewater Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 



168 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Briggs, Benjamin F.^ v. Elmer A. Stevens. Treasurer and Ee- 
ceiver-General. Appeal from decree of Land Court. Pend- 
ing. 

Brighton Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Bristol County Savings Bank, Taunton, Attorney-General' v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

BroadAvay Savings Bank, Lawrence, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
% 56. Decree. 

Brookline Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Brookside Mills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Brookside Mills r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign co]-poration. Pend- 
ing. 

Brookside Klines v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Brown, Maud P., r. Charles T. Davis et ah, judges of the Land 
Court et ah Petition for writ of prohibition. Pending. 

Browning, King & Co. i?. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Bryne, Andrew W., et ah. v. Conmionwealth et al. Petition to 
recover money in hands of Commonwealth. Pending. 

Buick Motor Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Bulkeley, Morgan C, et al. v. New York, New Haven & Hart- 
ford Railroad Company and the Public Service Commis- 
sion. Petition for annulment of an order of the Public 
Service Commission aj^proving the issue of certain deben- 
ture bonds by the New York, New Haven k Hartford Eail- 
. road Company. Pending. 

Burke, Edmund, administrator of the estate of John Kelley, At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pendino\ 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCOIEXT — No. 12. 169 

Bush, Samuel B., executor of the will of Martha E. Eichmond, 
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Final decree. 

Busteed, Emma M., et als. v. Commonwealth. Petition for re- 
covery of an escheated estate. Decree. 

Butchers' Slaughtering and Melting Association r. Common- 
wealth. Petition for assessment of damages caused by the 
erection of the new '^ Stadium Bridge." Charles K. Dar- 
ling, John T. Swift and Joseph A. Conry appointed commis- 
sioners. Pending. 

Calumet & Hecla Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Calumet & Hecla Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Cambridgeport Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Pend- 
ing. 

Campbell, ]\lary, et al., administrators of the estate of Ellen Ma- 
honey, Attorney-General ev rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Decree. 

Canada, Atlantic & Plant Steamship Company Ltd. v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise taxes for the years 1905, 
• 1906, 1907, 1908 and 1909 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Cape Ann Savings Bank, Gloucester, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Cape Cod Five Cents Savings Bank, Harwich, Attorney-Gen- 
eral V. Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, 
c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Gate, Martha G., petitioner. Petition to register title to land 
in Ashland. Decree. 

Centennial Copper j\Iining Company r. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Centennial Copper ]\Iining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Chamber of Commerce of the State of Xew York v. Xew York 
Central & Hudson Eiver Eailroad Company et als. Peti- 
tion to intervene in differential rate cases. Pending. 



170 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Cliampion Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Champion Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911. Paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Champion Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Charles H. Schieren Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Charlestown Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney- General v. Pe- 
tition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Chase, AA^illiam E., et als., petitioners. Petition to register title 
to land in Xewburyport. Pending. 

Chattel Loan Company, E. Gerry Brown, Supervisor of Loan 
Agencies, v. Bill in equity to enjoin defendant from charg- 
ing rates of interest higher than ordered by plaintiff. In- 
junction issued. 

Chelsea Day Nursery and Children's Home v. Eufus S. Frost 
General Hospital. Bill of complaint to compel defendant to 
perform contract. Pending. 

Cheney Brothers v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Cheney Brothers v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Children's Health Fund, Attorney-General v. Information in 
the nature of quo luarranto to test the right of the corpora- 
tion to continue to exercise its franchise as a charitable cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Childs' Dining Hall Company v. Comanon wealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Childs' Dining Hall Company r. Commonweal tli. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

City Five Cents Savings Bank, Haverhill, Attorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

City Institution for Savings, Lowell, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908. e. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Xo. 12. 171 

Clapp, George W., executor of the will of Elmira S. Hinman, At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Clinton Savings Bank^ AttorneA-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Coblents, Salenda E., executrix of the will of Arthur A. Aver- 
ille, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inher- 
itance tax. Dismissed. 

Columbian National Life Insurance Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petitions for abatement of franchise tax paid in 1903, 1904, 
1905, 1906 and 1907. Pending. 

Commonwealth v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Eailroad 
Company. Action of tort for damage to property of Massa- 
chusetts Eeformatory, caused by fire. Pending. 

Commonwealth v. Worcester. To recover for land taken from 
the Commonwealth. Pending. 

Consolidated Eendering Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Consolidated Eendering Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Consolidation Coal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1909 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Consolidation Coal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Consolidation Coal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Continental Gin Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Continental Gin Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Continental ^lills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Copper Eange Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the ^Tar 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 



172 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Copper Range Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Copper Range Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Copper Range Consolidated Company i\ Commonwealtli. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Copper Range Consolidated Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Costello, Michael E., executor of the will of Catherine Costello, 
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Creaden, William T., administrator of the estate of Xellie Rear- 
don, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheri- 
tance tax. Pending. 

Cudahy Packing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Currier, John E., administrator of the estate of Caroline E. 
Currier, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Decree. 

Curtis Publishing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Curtis Publishing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Curtis Publishing Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Cushman, Ernest W., executor of the will of Martha C. Roberts, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Decree. 

Dan vers' Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Davis Sewing Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreigTi cor- 
poration. Pending. 



19U.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 173 

Davis Sewing Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the 3'ear 1912 paid b}^ foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Dean, John J., et al., executors of the will of Thomas H. Bnck- 
le}^, xlttorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheri- 
tance tax. Pending. 

Dedham Institution for Savings, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590. § 56. 
Decree. 

Dedham Institution for Savings, Attorney-General r. Petition 
for Avithdrawal of deposits under E. L., c. 113, § 55. De- 
cree. 

Dewey, Henry S., v. State Officers. Actions to replevy copies 
of notes of proceedings in the case of Dewey v. Good Gov- 
ernment Association. Pending. 

Dineen, Timothy, executor of the will of Julia Dineen. Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

di Pesa, Alfred, petitioner. Petition for registration of title to 
land. Pending. 

Dolan, Arthur ^Y., Pegister of Probate and Insolvency for the 
County of Suffolk, petitioner. Petition for authority to 
pay to the Treasurer and Eeceiver-General money deposited 
with said register to secure payment of fees. Disposed of. 

Donahue, Abbie A., executrix of the will of Abbie McDonald, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Draper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Drohan, John, executor of the will of Anastasia Clapp, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

E. H. Eollins & Sons v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

E. I. du Pont de Xemours Powder Company r. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Final decree. 

E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Company r. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Final decree. 



174 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Earl & Wilson v. Commomvealtli. Petition to recover excise tax 
for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

Earl & Wilson v. Commomvealtli. Petition to recover excise tax 
for the 3^ear 1913 paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

East Boston Company v. Directors of the Port of Boston. Writ 
of entry. Pending. 

East Boston Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 

Ea>t Butte Copper Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

East Butte Copper Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

East Cambridge Savings Bank, x\ttorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

Edgerly, Frank H., et al. v. Cattle Bureau. Bill to recover for 
horse killed by order of Cattle Commissioner under R. L., 
c. 90. Pending. 

Edwards Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Edwards Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Eliot Five Cents Savings Bank, Boston, xVttorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Elm River Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Ennis, John D., et al., administrators of the estate of Edmund 
Walsh, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Essex Savings Bank, Attorney- General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Everett, Willard S.. executor of the will of Elizabeth Davis, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Disposed of. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMEXT — No. 12. 175 

Everton, Elfonso I., administrator of the estate of Charles H. 
Dimoncl, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Pending. 

F. Blnmenthal Compan}- v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Fairbanks Company v. Commonwealth. 'Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Fairbanks Company v. Commonwealth. Petition for recovery of 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Fall Eiver Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Fall Eiver Gas AVorks Company v. Board of Gas and Electric 
Light Commissioners. Petition for certiorari. Eescript. 

Fall Eiver Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Fallon, Patrick H., administrator of the estate of Frank J. Fal- 
lon, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheri- 
tance tax. Decree. 

Farr Alpaca Company r. Commonwealth. Petition for abate- 
ment of franchise tax for the year 1912. Pending. 

Field, John Q. A., executor of the will of Caroline AVood, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Fields, Annie* r. Charles Eiver Basin Commission. Bill to 
enjoin Commonwealth from interfering with riparian rights 
on Charles Eiver. Pending. 

Fifield, George W., executor of the will of Euth S. Shaw, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Fishley, Cora 0., executrix of the will of Edward E. Fishley, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Fleming, Henry E.. v. State Board of Health. Appeal from an 
order of the State Board of Health in regard to the use of 
ice cut from Flax Pond. Pending. 

Foss-Hiighes Company v. Commonwealth. Petition for abate- 
ment of franchise tax. Pendino^. 



176 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Fowler, Charles F., executor of the will of Eliza E. Crocker, 
Attorn e3^-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Foxborough Savings Bank, Attorney-General i\ Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § o6. Decree. 

Francis, Corabelle G., petitioner. Petition to register title to 
land in Wayland. Decree. 

Franklin Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Franklin Mining Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Free Home for Consumptives, Attorney-General /•. Information 
in the nature of quo ivarranfo to annul the charter of the 
respondent because of the misuse of its charter privileges 
and franchises. Pending. 

Frontenac Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Frontenac Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Galena Signal Oil Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Galvin, Stephen P., administrator of the estate of Calvin E. 
Baker, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Gamewell Fire Alarm Telegraph Company r. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by for- 
eign corporation. Pending. 

Gamewell Fire Alarm Telegraph Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

General Baking Powder Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Georgia Home Insurance Company r. Commonwealth. Action 
to compel Treasurer and Receiver-General to return bond 
deposited with him by said company. Penrling. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Xo. 12. 177 

Globe-Wernicke Company, The, v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Final decree. 

Globe-Wernicke Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

Gloncester, City of, James M. Swift, Attorney-General, v. Peti- 
tion for writ of mandamus to compel said city to establish 
a hospital for persons ill with contagions diseases. AYrit 
issued. 

Gorton-Pew Fisheries Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Gorton-Pew Fisheries Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Grant, Eobert, Jndge of Probate, v. William AY. Eisk et ah 
Contract on bond as public administrator. Pending. 

Gratiot Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Gratiot Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Gratiot Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Great Barrington Savings Bank, Attorney- General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Great Western Cereal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Griffin Wheel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 



178 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Griffin AVheel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Gutta-Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

H. & B. American Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

H. J. Heinz Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

H. J. Heinz Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

H. J. Heinz Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid bv foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

H. W. Johns-Manville Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

H. W. Johns-Manville Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Hale, Josiah L., executor of the will of Pauline H. Patterson, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Handrahan, James E., administrator of the estate of Margaret 
Handrahan, Attorney-General ex rel. r. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Decree. 

Harmon, Rollin H., Judge of Probate, r. Samuel D. Hildreth 
et al. Action to recover on administrators' bond. Pending. 

Harrington. Charles C, executor of the will of Elizabeth A. 
Harrington, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Pending. 

Hastings, George A., v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover un- 
claimed bank deposit in the hands of the Treasurer. Pend- 
ing. 

Haverhill Gas Light Company v. Forrest E. Barker et aJs., Board 
of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners et al. Bill of 
complaint brought in the L^nited States Circuit Court to 
restrain the Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners 



1914.1 PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 179 

from enforcing an order in regard to the price of gas. 
Pending. 

Haverhill Gas Light Compan}^ Attorney-General v. Informa- 
tion in equity to restrain, respondent from transferring its 
franchises and property. Peserved for full court. 

Haverhill Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Healy, Mary, executrix of the will of Patrick Healy, Attorney- 
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Hecker-Jones-Jewell Milling Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Hecker-Jones-Jewell Milling Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Henry K. Wampole & Co., Inc., v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Herbert, John, executor of the will of Edward T. Cowdrey, At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Decree. 

Hill, Anna C, v. Old Colony Trust Company. Petition of 
Treasurer and Eeceiver-General for leave to intervene. De- 
cree. 

Hill, Sarah T., executor of the will of Powena Hill, Attorney- 
General ex rel. r. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Holden, Xicholas F., r. Civil Service Commission. Petition for 
writ of mandamus to compel the respondents to authorize 
the reinstatement of the petitioner as a member of the police 
department of Worcester. Pending. 

Houghton Copper Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Houghton Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Houghton, Xeidhard H., administrator of the estate of Julius 
H. Houghton, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to re- 
cover inheritance tax. Pendins:. 



180 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Howes Brothers Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

Howes Brothers Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

Hyde Park Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 

Institution for Savings in Newbury port, Attorney- General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

International Automobile and Vehicle Tire Company v. Com- 
monwealth. Petition for damages to petitioner's property 
caused by change of east branch of Charles Eiver by Park 
Commission. Pending. 

Isle Eoyale Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Isle Royal Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

J. A. Selsman Compan}'-, Bankers, Inc., Augustus L. Thorndike, 
Bank Commissioner, v. Information to enjoin the defend- 
ant corporation from doing further business. Injunction 
issued and Frank Leveroni, Esq., appointed receiver. 

Jackson Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Jackson Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Jackson, Ethel M., administratrix of the estate of George F. 
Bailey, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Jacob Dold Packing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

James Cunningham Son & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the 3^ear 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

James Cunningham Son & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Xo. 12. 181 

Jenney, E. C, executor of the will of Maria P. Stark^ Attorney- 
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Jennings, Malaclii L., administrator of estate of Mary McGee- 
han, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheri- 
tance tax. Pending. 

John L. Whiting- J. J. Adams Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the 3'ear 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

John L. "\^Tiiting-J. J. Adams Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

John P. Squire Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

John P. Squire & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

John P. Squire & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Judkins, C. Ernest, executor of the will of Gertrude I. Sawyer, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Kenn}', Thomas J., administrator d. b. n. of the estate of Joseph 
H. Horgan, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Disposed of. 

Keystone Watch Case Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Rescript. 

Keystone Watch Case Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

King Philip Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Lake Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Lake Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pendinof. 



182 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Lake Milling, Smelting and Refining Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Lake Milling, Smelting and Refining Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Lake Superior Smelting Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Lamont-Corliss Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Lamont-Corliss Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Lamson Consolidated Store Service Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Lanston Monotype Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Lanston Monotype Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Lanston Monotype Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

LaSalle Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

LaSalle Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

LaSalle Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Lanriiim Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Laurium Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 183 

Lawrence Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, e. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Lehigh Valley Coal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

Lehigh Valley Coal Sales Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Decree. 

Leland, Percy F., petitioner. Petition for registration of title 
to land in Ashland. Pending. 

Leominster Savings Bank, i^ttorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Lever Brothers Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Lever Brothers Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Libby, George W., administrator of the estate of Oliver Libby, 
Attorney-General ex rel v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Library Bureau v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Library Bureau v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Tiink-Belt Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover ex- 
cise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Link-Belt Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Liquid Carbonic Company, The, v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Liquid Carbonic Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Little, George T., et aL, executors of the will of Eachel R. 
Thayer, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Disposed of. 



184 ATTORXEY-GEXERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Locomobile Company of America v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Locomobile Company of America v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

LoPiano^ Peter, Augustus L. Thorndike^ Bank Commissioner, 
V. Information in equity for writ of injunction and ap- 
pointment of receiver. Pending. 

Lowell, City of^ James M. Swift, Attorney-General, v. Petition 
for writ of mandamus to compel said city to establish a hos- 
pital for persons ill with contagious diseases. Writ issued. 

Lowell Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

Lowell Institution for Savings, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

L}Tin Institution for Savings, Attorney- General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Mahar, Joseph P., executor of the will of Thomas J. Eehill, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Manchester, Abraham, executor of the will of Abraham E. Man- 
chester, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Manitou Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

]\[anitou Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Marlborough Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Pend- 
ing. 

Martin L. Hall Company v. Commonwealth. Petition for abate- 
ment of franchise tax. Rescript. 
Massachusetts Catholic Order of Foresters v. Elmer A. Stevens, 
Treasurer and Receiver-General. Petition for writ of man- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCOIEXT — Xo. 12. 185 

damns to compel respondent to deliver securities to peti- 
tioner. Pending. 

Massachusetts Consolidated Mining Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Massachusetts Consolidated Mining Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. Boston Society of Natu- 
ral History et ah. Petition brought in the Land Court 
for instructions as to certain alleged easements in land 
bounded by Berkeley, Boylston, Clarendon and Xewbury 
streets, Boston. Pending. 

Mayflower Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the j^ear 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Mayflow^er Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

McCann, Charles J., et al. v. Charles Warren et als., Civil Serv- 
ice Commissioners. Petition for writ of mandamus to 
■ compel certification of the petitioners' names by the Civil 
Service Commissioners. Decree. Appeal by petitioners. 

McClusky, Clara B., executrix of the will of Annie B. Dunn, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

McColiff, Julia, petitioner. Petition for writ of habeas corpus. 
Petition dismissed. 

McColiff, Julia I., petitioner. Petition for writ of habeas corpus. 
Petition dismissed. 

McDonald, Theodore H., Insurance Commissioner of Connecti- 
cut V. The ^Etna Indemnity Company. Intervening peti- 
tion of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Pending. 

McGuirk, Ann, executrix of the will of Terrence Farley, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Mclntire, Charles H., trustee under the will of Maria T. Clark, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

McLoughlin, Francis J., petitioner. Petition for registration of 
title to land in Becket. Pendinsf. 



186 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Compan}^ v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Mechanics Savings Bank, Lowell, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise taxes for the years 1909 and 1910 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Michigan Smelting Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Midvale Steel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Midvale Steel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Moore, Mary, executrix of the will of Ellen M. Aston, Attorney- 
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Moore, William H., ei ah, executors of the will of Edward W. 
Murray, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Morgan, Thomas, et ah, executors of the will of Martha Frank- 
land, Attorney-General ex reh v. Petition to recover inher- 
itance tax. Disposed of. 

Morse, Electra A., et ah v. David Ferguson et ah Action of 
tort. Pending. 

Moulton, Abbie L., petitioner. Petition for writ of error. Re- 
script. 

Murphy, James S., administrator c. t. a. of the estate of Charles 
H. Young, Attorney-General ex reh v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Pending. 

Murphy, Mary E., executor of the will of Delia Martin, Attor- 
ney-General ex reh v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Murphy, Michael, v. Harrie \Y. Pierce, Agent of the Commis- 
sioner of Animal Industry. Claim for damages for death 
of horse. Pending. 

N. K. Fairbank Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCOIEXT — No. 12. 187 

N". K. Fairbank Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

T^. K. Fairbank Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Xantucket Institution for Savings, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Disposed of. 

jSTashua Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign 
cor|;)oration. Pending. 

Nashua Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Xatick Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General i-. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

National Calfskin Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

National Calfskin Comj)any v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

National Calfskin Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

National Casket Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

National Casket Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

National Contracting Company v. Commonwealtli. Petition to 
recover under E. L., c. 201. Pending. 

Xew Bedford Five Cents Saving Bank, Attorney-General v. 
Five petitions for withdrawal of deposits under E. L., c. 
113, § 55. Disposed of. 

Xew Bedford Five Cents Saving Bank, Attorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
S 56. Decree. 



188 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

New Bedford Institution for Savings, Attorne\'-General v. Two 
petitions for withdrawal of deposits under E. L., c. 113, 
§ 55. Decree. 

New Bedford Institution for Savings, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Disposed of. 

Newburyport Five Cents Savings Bank, i^ttorney- General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1910 
paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 
paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 
paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

New England Maple Syrup Company v. Henry P. Walcott 
et als. Bill in equity for an injunction. Pending. 

New England Trust Company of Boston, Attorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Newport Fisheries, Ice and Cold Storage Company v. Common- 
wealth. Petition for abatement of franchise tax for the 
year 1912. Pending. 

North Easton Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 

North End Savings Bank, Boston, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under E. L., c. 113, § 55. 
Pending. 

North End Savings Bank, Boston, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

North Packing and Provision Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

North Packing and Provision Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 
tition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

North Packing and Provision Company v. Commonwealth. Pe- 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — Xo. 12. 189 

tition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

Northwestern Consolidated Milling Company, The, v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Northwestern Consolidated Milling Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Nye, Helen M. S., executrix of the will of Sarah E. Lane. At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

O'Connor, John J., administrator of the estate of Charles O'Con- 
nor, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheri- 
tance tax. Decree. 

Odd Fellows Mutual Eelief Association of Worcester County. At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Information at the relation of the 
Insurance Commissioner for violation of insurance laws. 
Injunction issued and Alfred S. Pinkerton appointed re- 
ceiver. 

O'Donohue, Lillie B., executrix of the will of Joseph J. O'Dono- 
hue, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inherit- 
ance tax. Pending. 

Ohls, Frederick W., et ah, State Board of Charity v. Action to 
recover on bond. Pending. 

Old Colony Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Old Colony Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the 3'ear 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Old Colony Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Oliver Typewriter Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Oliver Typewriter Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the 3'ear 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Oliver Typewriter Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 



190 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Osceola Consolidated Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Osceola Consolidated Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Osceola Consolidated Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Oxford Linen Mills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover ex- 
cise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Oxford Linen Mills v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Palmer Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Parker, Galen A., executor of the will of Martha E. Temple, 
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Parmenter, Freeman A., petitioner. Petition for registration of 
title to land in Dover. Pending. 

Patten, Ina F., administratrix of the estate of Carrie M. Fitz, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Peoples Savings Bank, Worcester, Attorney-General r. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Pepperell Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

Pepperell Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

Pepperell ^Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

Pillsbury Flour Mills Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Pillsbury Flour Mills Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCOIEXT — No. 12. 191 

Piper, Edith B., executrix of the will of Frederick B. Fanning, 
Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

Plymouth Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney- General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Plymouth Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits imder St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Pocahontas Fuel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid hy foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Pocahontas Fuel Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign coi-pora- 
tion. Pending. 

Pope Manufacturing Company, The, r. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Porter, Eose M., r. Frank H. Hardison. Action of tort. Pend- 
ing. 

Providence Ice Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the years 1910 and 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Providence Ice Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Providence Ice Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Provident Institution for Savings, Amesbury, Attorney-General 
v. Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 
590, § 56. Decree. 

Quaker Oats Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Quaker Oats Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Eamsdell, Hattie, petitioner. Petition for writ of habeas corpus 
for discharge of Elton Eamsdell et ah. from the custody of 
the State Board of Charity. Pending. 

Eeed, Andrew F., et al., petitioners. Petition in equity for re- 
moval of certain restrictions on land, Xantasket Beach 
Eeservation. Pending. 



192 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Eegal Shoe Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Eegal Shoe Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Eeilley, William J., et ah, executors of the will of Charles A. 
Goessman, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover 
inheritance tax. Pending. 

Eice & Hutchins, Incorporated, v. Commonwealtli. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Eice & Hutchins, Incorporated, v. .Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Eichardson Silk Company i\ Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the 3'ear 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Eichardson Silk Company r. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Eichardson Silk Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the 3'ear 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Eiley, Eichard G., v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts. AVrit of 
error to the Superior Court of Bristol County to set aside a 
conviction for violation of the law governing the employ- 
ment of women in factories. Pending in Supreme Court 
of the United States. 

Eitchie, Christina, v. Treasurer and Eeceiver-General. Action 
of contract under E. L., c. 128, § 96. Pending. 

Eoche, Teresa G., administratrix of the estate of Mary A. 
Eoche, Attorney- General ea- rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Bockland-Eockport Lime Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the 3'ear 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Eussell-Miller Milling Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Eussell-Miller Milling Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pendincr. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 193 

S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Decision from United States Su- 
preme Court. 

S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Salem Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney- General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Salem Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Salisbury Land and Improvement Company, petitioner. Peti- 
tion for registration of land in Salisbury. Rescript. 

Saxonville Mills, petitioner. Petition for registration of land 
in Framingham. Pending. 

Seager Engine Works v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Sealshipt Oyster System v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Sealshipt Oyster System v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Seamen's Savings Bank, Provincetown, Attorney- General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Seneca Mining Com^pany v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Shannon Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Shannon Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Shapleigh, Samuel B., executor of the will of Ellen L. Shap- 
leigh, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Shepard & Morse Lumber Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the j^ear 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 



194 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Shepard Norwell Company, James M. Swift, Attorney- General, 
V. Petition for temporary injunction to restrain the re- 
spondent from permitting the emission of smoke from a 
smokestack on its property, in violation of an order of the 
Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners. Injunc- 
tion issued. 

Shields, Mary Ellen, executrix of the will of Mary Ducey, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Decree. 

Shumway, Dwight F., et dls., Attorney-General v. Application 
for the use of the Attorney-GeneraFs name in an informa- 
tion in equity to restrain the respondents and all other per- 
sons from holding a fair upon the public park or common 
or elsewhere in the town of Belchertown. Use of name 
allowed. 

Silver Fox Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Simons, Charles L., v. Commonwealth. Claim for reward 
offered by Commonwealth for apprehension of the murderer 
of Martha B. Blackstone. Pending. 

Skehill, Patrick J., administrator of the estate of John E. Ske- 
hill, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Slade, Ruthven Tucker, v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
bank deposit in hands of Treasurer. Pending. 

Smith & Dove Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Smith, Mary E., executrix of the will of Philip Smith, Attorney- 
General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Decree. 

Southbridge Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 

South Lake Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

South Lake Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 195 

Springfield Breweries Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Springfield Breweries Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Springfield Provision Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Final decree. 

Springfield Provision Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Final decree. 

St. Mary's Mineral Land Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

St. Mary's Mineral Land Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Stafford Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Stafford Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

Standard Plnnger Elevator Company v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign 
corporation. Pending. 

Stone, Ann Elizabeth, Attorney-General v. Information for col- 
lection of inheritance tax. Decree. 

Stone, Frank Victor, Attorney-General v. Information for col- 
lection of inheritance tax. Decree. 

Stone, Stephen Stoddard, Attorney-General v. Information for 
collection of inheritance tax. Decree. 

Stoughton Mills, Incorporated, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Bill 
in equity to enjoin defendant from discharging waste into 
Neponset River. Pending. 

Submarine Signal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Submarine Signal Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 



196 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Suffolk Savings Banlc, Boston, Attorney-General v. Two peti- 
tions for withdrawal of deposits under E. L., c. 113, § 55. 
Decree. 

Sullivan, Joseph M., administrator of the estate of Willis F. 
Day, Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Decree. 

Superior Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Superior Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Swampscott, Town of, v. Richard L. Beyer. Appeal from order 
of inspector of factories and public buildings. Pending. 

Swan, Julia T., et al., executors of the will of Estella P. Tilden, 
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Decree. 

Swift & Co. V. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise tax 
for the years 1910 and 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 

Swift & Co. V. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise tax 
for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

Swift & Co. V. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise tax 
for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

Tamarack Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Tamarack Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Tarbell, Arthur P., v. Boston Athletic Association et al. Bill 
in equity to enjoin defendant from building a boathouse on 
Charles River basin. Disposed of. 

Taimton Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Templeton Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for 
withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. De- 
cree. 

Trimountain Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Trimountain Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 197 

recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Turley, Thomas J., et ah, administrators of the estate of Mary 
Benson, Attorne}^- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Union Copper Land and Mining Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Union Copper Land and Mining Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by for- 
eign corporation. Pending. 

Union Copper Land and Mining Company v. Commonwealth. 
Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by 
foreign corporation. Pending. 

Union Institution for Savings, Boston, Attorney-General v. Pe- 
tition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Union News Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Union News Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Union Savings Bank, Fall River, Attorney-General v. Petition 
for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Union Square . Methodist Episcopal Church, petitioner. Peti- 
tion to register title to land in Charlestown. Pending. 

United States Radiator Corporation v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

United States Radiator Corporation v. Commonwealth. Peti- 
tion to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign 
corporation. Final decree. 

United States Worsted Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

United States Worsted Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Final decree. 

Upham, George F., petitioner. Petitioner for registration of 
title to land in North Brookfield. Pending. 



198 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Valvoline Oil Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Valvoline Oil Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Victoria Copper Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Victoria Copper Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Victoria Copper Mining Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Vining, Floretta, executrix of the will of Elizabeth Jacobs, At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 

W. L. Douglas Shoe Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

Walen, William W., administrator of the estate of Almira C. 
Walen, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Pending. 

Walpole Rubber Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Walpole Rubber Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Waltham Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Pending. 

Waltham Watch Company v. Commonwealth. Action to recover 
corporation tax for 1908. Pending. 

Walton, John E., executor of the will of Delia Walton, Attor- 
ney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Decree. 

Ward Baking Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1913 paid by foreign corporation. 
Einal decree. 

Ward-Corby Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Final decree. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 199 

Wareham Savings Bank^ Attorney- General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Warren Brothers Company v. Conunonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Final decree. 

Warren Five Cents Savings Bank, Peabody, Attorney-General 
V. Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, 
c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Warren Institution for Savings, Boston, Attorney- General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Watt, William D., executor of the will of Mary J. Pierson, At- 
torney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance tax. 
Pending. 

Webster Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Welch, Mary Ann, executrix of the will of Thomas Welch, At- 
torney-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. Quimby, superintendent. Ac- 
tion of tort. Pending. 

Wellfleet Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Petition for with- 
drawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Welsbach Street Lighting Company of America v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Welsbach Street Lighting Company of America v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1912 
paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co. v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

"ViHiitaker, Elbridge J., executor of the will of Oliver Everett^ 
Attorney- General ex rel. v. Petition to recover inheritance 
tax. Pending. 



200 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 

Whitall-Tatum Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

Whitall-Tatum Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover 
excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. 
Pending. 

White Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corporation. Pend- 
ing. 

White Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover excise 
tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corporation. Pending. 

White Pine Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

White Pine Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

White Sewing Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

White Sewing Machine Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Whiting, Alonzo B., administrator of the estate of Alvah Lin- 
wood Whiting, petitioner. Petition to recover unclaimed 
bank deposit in the hands of the Treasurer and Receiver- 
General. Attorney- General waived right to be heard. 

Wild, Amy P., petitioner. Petition to register title to land in 
Charlestown. Attorney-General waived right to be heard. 

William L. Gilbert Clock Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

William L. Gilbert Clock Company v. Commonwealth. Petition 
to recover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign cor- 
poration. Pending. 

Winona Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Winona Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1912 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 201 

Winslow Brothers & Smith Company, Attorney-General ex rel. v. 
Bill in equity to restrain defendant from discharging waste 
into Neponset Eiver. Pending. 

Woburn Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Pending. 

Worcester County Institution for Savings, Worcester, Attorney- 
General V. Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 
1908, c. 590, § 56. Decree. 

Worcester Five Cents Savings Bank, Attorney-General v. Peti- 
tion for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, § 56. 
Decree. 

Worcester Trust Company of Worcester, Attorney-General v. 
Petition for withdrawal of deposits under St. 1908, c. 590, 
§ 56. Decree. 

Wrinn, James J., administrator of the estate of Genevieve F. 
Hickey, Attorney-General ex rel. v. Petition to recover in- 
heritance tax. Dismissed. 

Wyandot Copper Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to re- 
cover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpora- 
tion. Pending. 

Wyman, Hattie E., v. Commonwealth. Petition to recover sav- 
ings bank deposit in hands of the Treasurer. Pending. 

Yale & Towne Manufacturing Company, The, v. Common- 
wealth. Petition to recover excise tax for the year 1911 
paid by foreign corporation. Final decree. 

York Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1910 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 

York Manufacturing Company v. Commonwealth. Petition to 
recover excise tax for the year 1911 paid by foreign corpo- 
ration. Pending. 



202 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



COLLECTIONS. 



Collections have been made by this department as follows: — 

Corporation taxes for the year 1912, overdue and referred 
by the Treasurer of the Commonwealth to the Attorney- 
General for collection, $167,668 35 

Interest, 1,391 22 

Costs, 2,452 84 

Miscellaneous, 113,259 42 

Total, $284,771 83 

The following table shows a detailed statement of the Corporation 
Taxes: — 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






A. Edgecomb Company, 


$292 01 


$1 17 


$293 18 


A. Homer Skinner Lumber Com- 








pany, 


718 80 


12 94 


731 74 


A. L. Banks & Co., Inc., 


46 61 


47 


47 08 


A. P. Downs Company, 


90 71 


45 


91 16 


A. P. Nardini Company, 


175 80 


88 


176 68 


A. S. Norss Company, . 


973 97 


6 02 


979 99 


A. S. Tucker Company, 


16 11 


- 


16 11 


A. W. Chesterton Company, 


630 74 


1 89 


632 63 


Aaron F. Smith Company, . 


1,144 04 


4 20 


1,148 24 


Adams Pond Company, 


23 36 


12 


23 48 


Airey & Place Company, 


53 91 


28 


54 19 


Albany Supply and Chemical 








Company, 


34 75 


1 14 


35 89 


Aldis Owen Hall's System of Busi- 








ness Enterprises, Inc., 


7 40 


10 


7 50 


Alley & Emery, Inc., 


355 80 


18 14 


373 94 


Alpha Investment Company, 


16 00 


10 


16 10 


Alynbrooke Press, Inc., . 


89 85 


- 


89 85 


American Belting and Tanoing 








Company, 


318 59 


8 28 


326 87 


American Cloak Company, . 


150 94 


75 


151 69 


American Color and Chemical 








Company, 


10 00 


— 


10 00 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



203 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






American Cork Company, In^., . 


$140 16 


$0 70 


$140 86 


American Cultivator Publishing 








Company, 


44 92 


1 16 


46 08 


American Fireworks Company, . 


114 28 


69 


114 97 


American Jewel Company, . 


291 50 


46 


291 96 


American Paper Stock Company, 


143 76 


86 


144 62 


American Stable Company, . 


89 85 


3 05 


92 90 


American Typographic Company, 


218 87 


- 


218 87 


American Wholesale Grocery 








Company, 


778 31 


5 48 


783 79 


Amoroso, Inc., .... 


148 25 


2 96 


151 21 


Andrews Dykeman Company, 


134 77 


67 


135 44 


Apsley Rubber Company, 


9,362 33 


45 81 


9,408 14 


Archibald Wheel Company, . 


1,647 09 


8 23 


1,655 32 


Auto Renting Company, 


44 92 


- 


44 92 


Auto Sales Company, . 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


Automobile Lighting Company, . 


80 79 


1 15 


81 94 


Automobile Omnibus Company, . 


57 50 


- 


57 50 


Ayer Tanning Company, 


1,163 55 


3 10 


1,166 65 


B. F. PhiUips Company, 


211 02 


1 06 


212 08 


B. F. Smith Construction Com- 








pany, 


662 19 


3 11 


665 30 


Baer Clothing Company, 


62 89 


32 


63 21 


Baker Construction Company, 








Inc., 


47 44 


2 51 


49 95 


Baldwin Chain and Manufactur- 








ing Company, .... 


1,491 15 


7 45 


1,498 60 


Bangs & Ramsey Express Com- 








pany, 


76 37 


30 


76 67 


Barker Lumber Company, . 


221 13 


1 10 


222 23 


Bartlett Box and Lumber Com- 








pany, 


269 55 


90 


270 45 


Barton Child Company, 


106 02 


53 


106 55 


Baseball Magazine Company, 


48 21 


20 


48 41 


Bath Grinder Company, 


831 11 


4 44 


835 55 


Bay State Cotton Corporation, . 


6,065 37 


39 22 


6,104 59 


Bay State Dredging Company, 








Ltd., 


1,139 29 


3 42 


1,142 71 


Bay State Packing Company, 


75 47 


38 


75 85 


Bay State Sign Company, 


42 22 


21 


42 43 


Beacon Finance Company, . 


8 98 


29 


9 27 


Beacon, Inc., 


327 05 


1 63 


328 68 


Bean Shoe Company, Inc., . 


26 95 


1 67 


28 62 


Bear Creek Oil Company, 


7 14 


- 


7 14 


Bedford-Willis Company, 


251 58 


- 


251 58 


Belisle Printing and Publishing 








Company, 


94 52 


1 79 


96 31 


Belmont Spring Water Company, 


174 30 


87 


175 17 


Bennett's, Inc., .... 


269 55 


4 04 


273 59 


Berkeley Trust Associates, Inc., . 


9 88 


05 


9 93 



204 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Collected on 




Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Tax for 1912. 




$343 22 


$1 14 


235 40 


1 18 


10 00 


06 


10 78 


22 


19 40 


60 


215 64 


68 


154 63 


93 


53 91 


- 


30 54 


61 


1,257 90 


6 29 


287 52 


1 34 


1,239 93 


10 43 


21 56 


12 


2,521 92 


12 60 


60 28 


- 


26 95 


_ 


80 00 


40 


16 17 


53 


192 27 


1 15 


5 75 


_ 


140 34 


4 77 


269 55 


1 35 


117 34 


59 


18 32 


05 


26 57 


- 


17 97 


31 


73 62 


- 


157 30 


3 14 


3,434 03 


17 75 


15 09 


- 


71 88 


3 83 


143 76 


55 


14 16 


10 


419 41 


7 29 


87 53 


87 


54 28 


27 


92 90 


42 


27 67 


22 


40 61 


- 


51 75 


- 


42 82 


- 



Totals. 



Berkshire Motors Company, 
Berkshire Vinegar Company, 
Beverly Chemical and Supply 

Company, 

Beverly Confectionery Company, 
Bianco Brothers Company, . 
Blacker & Shepard Company, 
Blanchard & Co., Inc., . 
Bon-Ton Millinery Company, 
Bonnie Brae Farms, Inc., 
Boston Arena Company, 
Boston Bolt and Iron Company, . 
Boston Book Company. 
Boston Builders Finish Company, 
Boston Condensed Milk Com- 



pany, 

Boston Gazette Company, . 

Boston Hat and Bonnet Frame 
Company, .... 

Boston Holding Company, . 

Boston Institute, Inc., . 

Boston Sash Weight Company, 

Boston Stitching and Plaiting 
Company, .... 

Boston Store, Inc., . 

Boston Upholstering Company, 

Boston Willow Furniture Com- 
pany, 

Boyden & Co., Inc., 

Braley Sporting Goods Company 

Broadway Pharmacy, 

Brockton Box Toe Corporation, 

Brockton Die Company, 

Brockway-Smith Corporation, 

Brookline Press, 

Brown-Binniam Company, . 

Brown Garage and Carriage Com^ 
pany, 

Brown's Enamel Works, Inc., 

Bruce-Hibbard Electric Com- 



pany, 

Builders Iron and Steel Company 

Bullard Company, , 

Bullock Thread and Twine Com- 
pany, 

Bunkio Matsuki Corporation, 

Burkinshaw Knife Company, 

Burleigh & Martin, Inc., 

Burns Jewelry Manufacturing 
Company, 



$344 36 
236 58 

10 06 

11 00 

20 00 
216 32 
155 56 

53 91 
31 15 

1,264 19 

288 86 

1,250 36 

21 68 

2,534 52 
60 28 

26 95 

80 40 

16 70 

193 42 

5 75 
145 11 
270 90 

117 93 
18 37 

26 57 
18 28 
73 62 

160 44 

3,451 78 

15 09 

75 71 

144 31 
14 26 

426 70 
88 40 

54 55 

93 32 

27 89 
40 61 
51 75 

42 82 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



205 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






Burton Dentists, Inc., 


$43 48 


_ 


$43 48 


Butler Chuck Company, 


89 85 


$2 42 


92 27 


Butman & Cressey Company, 


287 52 


2 21 


289 73 


C. & C. Raincoat Company, 


89 85 


45 


90 30 


C. D. Wright Company, 


98 83 


1 98 


100 81 


C. E. Davenport Company, . 


56 60 


23 


56 83 


C. H. Batchelder Company, . 


662 37 


1 99 


664 36 


C. I. Nesmith Company, . < 


33 74 


67 


34 41 


C. W. Luce & Co., In •., . . 


292 01 


5 94 


297 95 


C. W. Stone Company, . 


62 66 


31 


62 97 


Cape Light, Heat and Power 








Company, 


17 97 


05 


18 02 


Carstens Packing Company, . 


1,556 30 


2 00 


1,558 30 


Carter & Woodman Company, 


8 00 


- 


8 00 


Carter Ticket Company, 


201 62 


4 43 


206 05 


Caverly-Plumer Company, . 


20 70 


- 


20 70 


Caxton Society, Inc., 


102 39 


2 45 


104 84 


Central Cloak Company, 


106 99 


53 


107 52 


Central Garage, Inc., 


50 31 


- 


50 31 


Central Hard Fibre Company, . 


40 25 


20 


40 45 


Central Ice Manufacturing Com- 








pany, 


582 22 


2 91 


585 13 


Centreville Wine Company, . 


89 85 


45 


90 30 


Ceylon Tea Growers, Inc., . 


62 82 


31 


63 13 


Champion-Draper Company, 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


Champion Spark Plug Company, . 


30 00 


- 


30 00 


Charles E. Perry Company, . 


219 89 


1 75 


221 64 


Charles F. Page Company, . 


395 34 


4 88 


400 22 


Charles P. Whittle Manufacturing 








Company, 


187 31 


1 22 


188 53 


Charles S. Gove Company, . 


161 73 


81 


162 54 


Charles S. Hodsdon Company, 


59 30 


30 


59 60 


Charles West Lumber Company, . 


143 76 


72 


144 48 


Chattel Loan Company, 


1,347 75 


67 67 


1,415 42 


Chelsea Investment Association, 








Inc., 


58 11 


35 


58 46 


Chelsea Twenty Associates, Inc., 


16 29 


- 


16 29 


Church's Booking Office, Inc., 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


Ciambelli Drug Company, . 


31 91 


1 34 


33 25 


Cincotta Cusolito Company, 


30 18 


- 


30 18 


Clark & Smith Company, 


628 95 


3 14 


632 09 


Clarke Printing Company, . 


16 35 


- 


16 35 


Cleghorn Clothing Company, 


80 86 


40 


81 26 


Coates Clipper Manufacturing 








Company, 


202 16 


4 45 


206 61 


Colonial Bed Company, 


143 76 


7 66 


151 42 


Colonial Engraving Company, 


215 64 


2 16 


217 80 


Columbia Comb Company, . 


116 80 


50 


117 30 


Columbia Manufacturing Com- 








pany, Inc., 


89 85 


5 21 


95 06 



206 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Collected on 

Account 

of Corporation 

Tax for 1912. 



Interest. 



Totals. 



Com 



Columbia Securities Company, 
Columbian Furniture Company, 
Common Sense Gum Company, 
Commonwealth Avenue P'har 

macy, Inc., .... 
Commonwealth Garage, Inc., 
Consolidated Canoe Works, Inc., 
Cooper & Cooper Company, 
Co-operative Fund, Inc., 
Corporation Security Company, 
Crown Laundry Company, . 
Crown Packing Company, 
Cummings Machine Works, . 
Curtis Drug Companj^, . 
Curtis Provision Company, 
Gushing Medical Supply 

pany, .... 
Dadmun Company, 
Dalton-Ingersoll Manufacturing 

Company, .... 
Daudelin & Cotton, Inc., 
Davies Rose & Co., Ltd., 
Day Emerson Shoe Company, 
Demarest Heater Company, 
Densmore Mercantile Corpo 

ration, 

Directory Publishing Company, 
Dr. Mann Home Remedy Com 

pany, .... 
Dodge & Gray, 
Dodge Furniture Company, 
Donoghue Silk Company, 
Douglas Granite Company, 
Dow Surgical Battery Company 
Driscoll & Co., Inc., 
Dukelow & Walker Companj^, 
Dustbane Manufacturing Com- 

pam^, 

Dyna-Como Company, . . 
E. E. Lincoln Shoe Company, 
E. G. Tutein & Co., Inc., 
E. L. Smith Company, . 
E. Noyes Whitcomb Company, 
E. P. Scighana & Co., Inc., . 
E. R. Brown Beer JPump Com- 
pany, 

East Douglas Clothing Company, 
Eastern Metal and Refining Com- 
pany, 

Eastern Showcase Company, 



$316 27 

53 87 

305 92 

80 86 

20 66 

12 57 
23 18 

274 40 

5 39 
53 91 
71 88 

123 39 
10 78 
28 35 

251 58 
107 82 

1,260 59 

21 11 
154 54 

28 60 
64 69 

14 07 
32 34 

47 70 
494 17 
281 67 
377 37 

48 51 
85 71 
71 88 
43 12 

366 58 

13 15 
43 12 

114 28 
80 86 
61 09 

6 10 

38 74 
18 86 

104 67 

35 94 



$3 53 
1 00 

8 87 

4 12 

1 25 

43 

60 

1 37 
27 

2 69 
36 
68 



12 64 
54 

8 82 



67 
86 
25 



1 57 

2 64 

1 40 

2 45 

43 
65 
21 

3 67 



3 81 

1 77 
18 
04 



09 

52 
17 



$319 80 

54 87 

314 79 

84 98 
21 91 

13 00 
23 78 

275 77 

5 66 
56 60 
72 24 

124 07 
10 78 

28 35 

264 22 
108 36 

1,269 41 

21 11 

155 21 

29 46 
64 94 

14 07 
32 34 

49 27 

496 81 

283 07 

379 82 

48 51 

86 14 

72 53 

43 33 

370 25 
13 15 
43 12 

118 09 
82 63 
61 27 

6 14 

38 74 
18 95 

105 19 
36 11 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



207 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






Eastern Underwriting Company, 


$138 97 


$3 58 


$142 55 


Eaton Candy Company, 


10 78 


- 


10 78 


Eco Manufacturing Company, 


52 65 


- 


52 65 


Economy Drug Company, . 


25 15 


43 


25 58 


Edward A. Tucker Company, 


15 09 


- 


15 09 


Edward A. Tucker, Inc., 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


Edward Holden Company, . 


125 79 


- 


125 79 


Edwards & Poor Company, . 


40 43 


60 


41 03 


Edwin CuUin Company, 


20 21 


- 


20 21 


EUioutt's Hotel, Inc., . 


28 50 


68 


29 18 


Elston & Swift, Inc., . . . 


44 92 


27 


45 19 


Eouitable Co-operative Associa- 








tion, 


24 02 


- 


24 02 


Essex Brass Foundry Company, 


161 73 


1 44 


163 17 


Essex Company, .... 


9,481 69 


47 40 


9,529 09 


Essex Hosiery Company, 


1,292 04 


9 04 


1,301 08 


Essex Investment Company, 


67 38 


62 


68 00 


F. A. Teeling Carriage Company, 


8 62 


_ 


8 62 


F. H. Putnam Company, 


89 85 


45 


90 30 


F. T. Morcombe White Company, 


63 79 


2 10 


65 89 


Falcon Press, 


35 16 


10 


35 26 


Federal Paper Box Machinery 








Company, 


43 88 


- 


43 88 


Felton-Turner Heating Company, 


251 58 


1 25 


252 83 


Finance Club, Inc., 


194 52 


3 89 


198 41 


Fitchburg Real Estate and Loan 








Company, 


90 38 


1 69 


92 07 


Foley's Clothing Store, Inc., 


9 88 


- 


9 88 


Ford & Allen, Inc., 


14 82 


07 


14 89 


Four Seas Company, 


46 38 


30 


46 68 


Framingham Commission House, 








Inc., 


73 37 


75 


74 12 


Frank P. Bennett & Co., Inc., . 


118 60 


65 


119 25 


Frank P. Brown Company, . 


34 50 


35 


34 85 


Franklin Clothing Company, 


89 85 


60 


90 45 


Franklin Park Lumber Company, 


296 50 


1 48 


297 98 


Fred A. Loud Company, 


135 81 


2 71 


138 52 


Fred D. Sperry Company, . 


163 52 


82 


164 34 


Fred S. & A. D. Gore Corporation, 


89 85 


4 57 


94 42 


G. B. LaTVTence Company, . 


119 59 


2 13 


121 72 


G. C. Hudson & Co., Inc., . 


158 15 


79 


158 94 


G. H. Chessman Company, . 


5 01 


- 


5 01 


G. W. Lord Company, . 


200 00 


2 51 


202 51 


G. W. Peterson Company, . 


8 62 


08 


8 70 


Gale-Sawyer Company, . 


251 58 


75 


252 33 


Gambs & Bishop Company, . 


53 91 


4 13 


58 04 


Gardner General Foundry Com- 








pany, 


374 81 


1 87 


376 68 


Geddis Remedy Company, . 


18 52 


- 


18 52 


George A. Turner Company, 


53 91 


" 


53 91 



208 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL^S REPORT. 



[Jan. 





Collected on 









Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






George C. Melville CompaDy, 


$17 97 


$0 05 


$18 02 


George F. Vester Company, . 


44 92 


- 


44 92 


George H. Ball Company, 


179 70 


90 


180 60 


George H. Sallaway Company, . 


203 77 


1 02 


204 79 


George M. Edgarton Company, 








Inc., 


14 34 


06 


14 40 


George Miles Company, 


20 48 


10 


20 58 


George P. Bingham Company, . 


53 91 


1 94 


55 85 


Georgetown Gas Company, . 


83 56 


2 12 


85 68 


Globe Clothing Company, 


92 40 


- 


92 40 


Goldman Brothers Company, 


34 92 


- 


34 92 


Gordon & Sparrow Company, 


197 67 


99 


198 66 


Gould Box Toe Company, . 


19 76 


- 


19 76 


Go ward 's Market Company, 


44 92 




44 92 


Graham Company, 


53 91 


32 


54 23 


Graustein Company, 


242 59 


1 21 


243 80 


Gray & Davis, Inc., 


4,224 56 


21 12 


4,245 68 


Greendale Gas Engine Company, 


112 31 


34 


112 65 


Greylock Hotel Company, 


165 32 


83 


166 15 


Grocers Supply Company, Ltd., . 


41 51 


31 


41 82 


Grout Automobile Company, 


680 16 


3 40 


683 56 


Guilford, Kendrick & Ladd, Inc., 


404 32 


2 02 


406 34 


Gunning Boiler and Machine Com- 








pany, 


35 94 


19 


36 13 


Guy S. Leavitt Company, 


152 74 


- 


152 74 


H. and B. Manufacturing Com- 








pany, 


92 09 


1 23 


93 32 


H. C. Girard Company, 


150 94 


75 


151 69 


H. D. Hall Company, . 


35 94 


36 


36 30 


H. M. Kinports Company, . 


85 57 


1 96 


87 53 


H. Newman & Son, Inc., 


30 00 




30 00 


Hackett Brothers Company, 


54 95 


- 


54 95 


Halford Company, .... 


137 65 


7 16 


144 81 


Hall Automobile Specialties Com- 








pany, 


14 37 


- 


14 37 


Hailstone Electric Company, 


38 20 


77 


38 97 


Hamlin Street Sprinkler Company, 


89 85 


23 


90 08 


Hampden Creamery Company, . 


185 01 


90 


185 91 


Hampshire Furniture Company, . 


107 82 


- 


107 82 


Hanscom Construction Company, 


575 04 


5 27 


580 31 


Harrington Manufacturing Com- 








pany, 


101 08 


50 


101 58 


Harriott Company, 


45 00 


- 


45 00 


Harry Eldredge Goodhue Com- 








pany, 


89 85 


1 79 


91 64 


Harry Sacks & Co., Inc., 


23 27 


- 


23 27 


Hart Private Hospital, Inc., . 


53 91 


54 


54 45 


Haverhill Base Ball & Athletic 








Association, 


10 78 


30 


11 08 


Haverhill Construction Companj^, 


162 00 


1 05 


163 05 



1914. 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



209 



Collected on 




Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Tax for 1912. 




$53 91 


$1 04 


44 92 


- 


150 94 


3 01 


62 31 


31 


122 10 


3 66 


49 59 


- 


426 78 


14 23 


71 88 


72 


224 62 


1 12 


1,076 40 


10 76 


86 25 


43 


207 93 


1 00 


179 70 


1 62 


133 87 


28 


82 66 


42 


36 02 


18 


351 92 


10 90 


35 94 


20 


36 40 


- 


26 95 


21 


21 56 


- 


9 70 


_ 


89 85 


27 


22 31 


11 


801 91 


4 81 


89 85 


- 


198 80 


99 


12 57 


25 


171 97 


1 45 


44 92 


3 05 


199 28 


1 60 


79 96 


1 60 


359 40 


1 73 


83 02 


2 73 


19 40 


56 


57 50 


25 


39 30 


25 


521 13 


2 60 


251 58 


66 


258 26 


8 52 


89 85 


1 34 



Totals, 



Haverhill Motor Mart, Inc., . 
Haverhill Supply Company, . 
Henry F. Farrow Company, . 
Henry Graj^ Company, . 
Hercules Motor Truck Company, 
Hertig Furnace Company, 
Hetherston Importing Company, 
Highland Paint and Wall Paper 

Company, .... 
Hill Dryer Company, 
Hodgson, Kennard & Co., Inc., 
Hoffecker Company, 
Holbrook Manufacturing Com- 



pany, 

Hollander Motor Company, . 

Holyoke Box and Lumber Com- 
pany, 

Hooper Printing Company, . 

Howe Stove and Furniture Ex- 
change, Inc., 

Hoyt Company, . . . ' 

Hutchinson's Pharmacy, Inc., 

Hy-Sil Manufacturing Company 

Ideal Dental Laboratory, Inc., 

Interstate Oil Company, 

Italian Co-operative Company of 
Weymouth, .... 

J. A. Keating Company, 

J. A. Selsman Company, Bankers 
Inc., 

J. B. Judkins Company, 

J. D. Gossehn Company, 

J. E. Paris Company, 

J. F. WiiUams Company, 

J. G. Bridge Company, . 

J. G. Gallishaw Company, 

J. G. Walker & Son Corporation, 

J. L. Legein Ice Cream Companj^, 

J. Lipsitz Company, 

J. Nardi Company, 

J. S. Round & Co., Inc., 

J. V. Abbott Manufacturing Com- 
pany, 

Jamaica Plain Auto Station, Inc., 

James Barrett Manufacturing 
Companj'-, 

John Cashman & Sons Company, 

John Cavanagh & Son Building 
Mo^dng Company, 

John Chmiell Company, 



$54 95 
44 92 

153 95 
62 62 

125 76 
49 59 

441 01 

72 60 

225 74 

1,087 16 

86 68 

208 93 
181 32 

134 15 

83 08 

36 20 
362 82 
36 14 
36 40 
27 16 

21 56 

9 70 

90 12 

22 42 
806 72 

89 85 

199 79 
12 82 

173 42 
47 97 

200 88 
81 56 

361 13 
85 75 
19 96 

57 75 
39 55 

523 73 
252 24 

266 78 

91 19 



210 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Collected on 

Account 

of Corporation 

Tax for 1912. 



Interest. 



Totals. 



John Foster Company, . 
John Harriott, Inc., 
John J. Cluin Company, 
John O'Connell, Inc., 
John Quin & Son Company, 
John W. Crooks Chocolate Com 

pany, . 
John W. Moore, 
Johnson- Jordan 



Inc., 
Lumber 



Com- 



pany, 

Jordan-Goodridge Company, 
Jos. M. Wade PubHshing Com^ 

pany, 

Karl Andren Company, 
Kelly Leather Goods Companj^, 
Keniston Engineering Company, 
Kennard Thomas Company, 
Kenney Brothers Company, . 
Kensington Press, Inc., . 
Kimball Aeroplane Company, 
King Mining Company, 
King Printing Company, 
Kinney Heating and Supply Com 

pany, 

Kinnej^ Manufacturing Company 
Kleno Manufacturing Company, 
L. G. Fisk-Mooers Company, 
Labelle Gas Regulator Companj^, 
Lambert Morin Automobile and 

Carriage Company, . 
Lamere & Robinson Company, 
Lane & Co., Inc., . 
Lang & Jacobs Company, 
Lawler Printing Companj^, 
Lawncrest Inn Company, 
Lawrence B. Smith Company 
Leavitt's Scotch Polish Company 
Leicester Polar Spring Company 
Leighton Roofing Company, 
Leominster Electric Company 
Leona Mining Company, 
Lewis A. Brown Compan}^ 
Lewis F. Small, Inc., 
Lincoln Brothers Companj'' 
Linscott Motor Company, 
Linscott Supply Company, 
London Harness Company, 
Lord Manufacturing Company, 
Lovells, Inc., .... 
Lozier Motor Company of Boston, 



$1,240 05 


$9 51 


8 62 


04 


44 92 


11 


36 65 


1 20 


418 73 


3 63 


175 47 


5 12 


16 17 


04 


122 19 


43 


137 38 


42 


89 85 


45 


179 70 


5 51 


34 21 


34 


89 85 


52 


179 70 


90 


160 11 


80 


16 53 


33 


12 93 


- 


85 00 


2 87 


76 37 


2 01 


34 53 


_ 


1,182 12 


5 91 


17 97 


- 


359 40 


1 75 


20 70 


- 


62 89 


1 26 


57 00 


71 


342 27 


1 71 


89 85 


45 


61 15 


2 74 


71 16 


2 37 


400 96 


2 00 


23 63 


- 


21 56 


- 


15 09 


50 


23 86 


24 


70 26 


42 


359 40 


2 87 


17 97 


- 


34 14 


- 


364 79 


2 61 


361 75 


2 18 


808 65 


8 08 


37 73 


- 


71 88 


40 


89 85 


46 



$1,249 56 

8 66 

45 03 

37 85 

422 36 

180 59 
16 21 

122 62 
137 80 

90 30 

185 21 

34 55 

90 37 

180 60 

160 91 

16 86 
12 93 
87 87 
78 38 

34 53 
1,188 03 

17 97 

361 15 

20 70 

64 15 
57 71 

343 98 
90 30 
63 89 
73 53 

402 96 

23 63 

21 56 
15 59 

24 10 
70 68 

362 27 
17 97 
34 14 

367 40 

363 93 
816 73 

37 73 
72 28 
90 31 



1914.] 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



211 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






Lunt Moss Company, . . 


$682 41 


$2 41 


$684 82 


Lynch Company, .... 


172 51 


86 


173 37 


Lyon Company, .... 


160 25 


81 


161 06 


Lyric Amusement Company, 


168 01 


3 86 


171 87 


M. J. Silva Company, . 


19 04 


76 


19 80 


MacDonald Ice Cream Company, 


23 36 


- 


23 36 


MacLean Produce Company, 


80 86 


1 43 


82 29 


Madam Whitney Toilet Com- 








pany, 


8 40 


- 


8 40 


Magee Furnace Company, . 


2,064 32 


10 32 


2,074 64 


Majestic Company, 


215 64 


1 29 


216 93 


Maiden City Lumber Company, . 


661 29 


2 44 


663 73 


Maiden Grain Company, 


30 54 


20 


30 74 


Manliattan Company, . 


19 40 


65 


20 05 


Mansfield Cracker Company, 


401 53 


2 00 


403 53 


Mansfield Drug Company, . 


62 89 


38 


63 27 


Mansfield Printing Company, 


15 52 


52 


16 04 


Manufactm-ers Shoe Trimming 








Company, 


51 68 


2 01 


53 69 


Marcuson & Levy, Inc., 


97 03 


28 


97 31 


Market Supply Company, 


144 82 


72 


145 54 


Marlborough Times Publishing 








Company, 


10 78 




10 78 


Massachusetts Fuel Saving Radi- 








ator Company, .... 


26 00 


- 


26 00 


Massachusetts Investment Com- 








pany, 


19 49 


09 


19 58 


Massachusetts Net Companj^, 


736 98 


12 12 


749 10 


Massasoit Company, 


547 72 


3 83 


551 55 


Matthew F. Sheehan Company, . 


359 40 


2 40 


361 80 


Mayflower Laundry Company, . 


116 80 


2 14 


118 94 


Maynard & Co., Inc., . 


876 03 


3 07 


879 10 


McCabe & Finzel Company, 


26 95 


54 


27 49 


McKenzie Engraving Company, . 


118 74 


1 00 


119 74 


McLean-Jones Oil and Supply 








Company, 


129 07 


77 


129 84 


McMinn & Quigley Steel Com- 








pany, 


53 51 


32 


53 83 


Mellish & Byfield Manufacturing 








Company, 


120 39 


72 


121 11 


Metropolitan Air Goods Com- 








pany, 


84 45 


1 26 


85 71 


Middlesex Co-operative Garden 








Company, 


64 69 


39 


65 08 


Miller Brothers, Inc., 


279 97 


4 94 


284 91 


Mitchell Press, .... 


11 14 


41 


11 55 


Monarch Valve and Manufactur- 








ing Company, .... 


792 29 


4 49 


796 78 


Moore Drop Forging Company, . 


217 43 


68 


218 11 


Motor Specialties Company, 


80 86 


3 40 


84 26 



212 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Collected on 

Account 

of Corporation 

Tax for 1912. 



Interest. 



Totals. 



Muir's Laundry, Inc., . 
Nashua Specialty Companj^, 
Natick Pressed Stone Companj^, 
National Credit Company, . 
National Investment and Security 

Company, .... 
National Knitting Compan}^ 

Inc., 

National jManufacturing Com 



pany, 

National Matzo Company of 

Boston, 

National Publishing and Trading 

Company, .... 
Neal Pond Ice Company, 
Nelson Color Company, 
Nevelson Machine Company, 
New Bedford Auto Compan}^, 
New Can Company, 
New England Biscuit Company, 
New England Cloak and Suit 

Company, .... 
New England Die Company, 
New England Engineer, Inc., 
New England Index Companj^, 
New England Live Stock Com 

pany, 

New England Pant Company, 
New England Reed Company, 
New England Tanners' Egg Com 

^pany, 

New York Mattress Company, 
Newburyport Broom Companj^ 

Inc., 

Newburyport Fish Cold Storage 

Compaity, .... 
Newport Fisheries, Ice and Cold 

Storage Company, 
Nobscot iMountain Spring Com 

pany, 

Norcross Brothers Companj^, 
Norfollc Blanket Cleansing Com- 
pany, 

North Shore Breeze Company, 
North Shore Transportation Com' 

pany, 

Northrup Hotel Company, . 
Norton Water Motor Companj^, 
Noshake Qrate and Heating Com 

pany, 



$G2 89 

80 86 

52 40 

5 39 

215 64 

150 94 

309 08 

20 98 

28 75 

35 94 

104 22 

35 04 

35 94 

233 61 

255 17 

181 49 

5 57 

6 90 

21 31 

157 23 

32 34 

589 05 

16 17 
161 73 

9 88 

296 50 

464 52 

242 18 
4,341 48 

8 98 
25 15 

17 97 
43 12 
12 79 

106 20 



$0 96 

1 62 
80 
56 



17 

63 
1 10 

7 70 
1 02 

91 
06 
23 



94 

2 95 

24 

81 

17 

1 48 

1 93 

1 21 
36 19 

06 
49 

29 

3 50 



$62 89 

81 82 

52 40 

5 39 

217 26 

151 74 

309 64 

20 98 

28 92 

35 94 
104 85 

36 14 
35 94 

241 31 
256 19 

182 40 
5 63 
7 13 

21 31 

158 17 

32 34 

592 00 

16 41 
162 54 

10 05 

297 98 
466 45 

243 39 

4,377 67 

9 04 
25 64 

17 97 
43 41 
12 79 

109 70 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



213 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






0. W. Lord Company, . 


$79 53 


$0 40 


$79 93 


Ocean Mills Company, . 


142 14 


71 


142 85 


Office Appliance Company, . 


35 94 


- 


35 94 


Office Specialties de Luxe, Inc., . 


99 55 


50 


100 05 


Oran McComiick Publishing Com- 








pany, 


35 94 


1 26 


37 20 


Orent & Co., Inc., .... 


174 30. 


46 


174 76 


Oscar T. Gove Company, Inc., . 


128 48 


58 


129 06 


Oxford Rubber Company, 


434 87 


4 30 


439 17 


Oxidite Manufacturing Company, 


25 87 


- 


25 87 


P. Creedon Company, . 


215 64 


43 


216 07 


P. H. Prior Company, . 


370 25 


75 


371 00 


P. J. Imberger & Son, Inc., . 


44 92 


26 


45 18 


Palmer Hunter Lumber Com- 








pany, 


449 25 


1 27 


450 52 


Palmer Renting Company, . 


147 35 


5 79 


153 14 


Pam_ott Mines Company, 


90 00 


59 


90 59 


Park Amusement Company, 


17 97 


10 


18 07 


Parker Brothers Iron Company, . 


67 74 


2 50 


70 24 


Parker's Store, Inc., 


21 56 


- 


21 56 


Parsons IManufacturing Companj- , 


413 31 


2 48 


415 79 


Paye & Baker Manufacturing 








Company, 


578 16 


10 99 


589 15 


Payson INIitchell Company, . 


89 85 


1 80 


91 65 


Pean Medical Company, 


32 83 


58 


33 41 


Pemberton Sales Company, . 


52 11 


89 


53 00 


Pentucket Shoe Trimming Com- 








pany, 


17 97 


45 


18 42 


Peoples Drug Store Company, 


24 25 


- 


24 25 


Peoples Express, Inc., . 


44 92 


- 


44 92 


Peoples ' Furniture Company, 


71 88 


48 


72 36 


Perfected Mantle Company, 


81 76 




81 76 


Perfection Wet Wash Laundry 








Companj^, 


89 85 


90 


90 75 


Perkins & Co., Inc., 


251 58 


1 17 


252 75 


Perlmuter Brothers Company, 








Inc., 


35 94 


18 


36 12 


Perry & Ayers, Inc., 


7 18 


07 


7 25 


Perry Mason Company, 


6,080 72 


29 39 


6,110 11 


Phenix Securities Company, . 


5 39 


- 


5 39 


Phihp Holland, Inc., . ^ . 


50 74 


46 


51 20 


Philip Slater Company, . 


7 90 


- 


7 90 


Pickett Plastic Plug Company, . 


8 08 


- 


8 08 


Picture Shop, Inc., .... 


35 94 


- 


35 94 


Pierce & Barnes Company, . 


21 56 


14 


21 70 


Pierson Pharmacy Company, 


143 76 


1 92 


145 68 


Pike Tobacco Company, 


39 53 


95 


40 48 


Pitt Soap Company, 


14 37 


23 


14 60 


Plymouth jManufacturing Com- 








pany, 


75 72 


45 ; 

i 


76 17 



214 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






Plymouth Seam Face Granite 








Company, 


$110 19 


$0 72 


$110 91 


Post Office Pharmacy, Inc., . 


64 69 


1 15 


65 84 


Potter Welding and Brazing Com- 








pany, 


44 92 


89 


45 81 


Practical Politics, Inc., . 


6 46 


_ 


6 46 


Prince Medicine Company, . 


50 63 


1 00 


51 63 


Prospect Auto Company,*^ . 


48 87 


- 


48 87 


Puritan Mills, 


216 19 


8 86 


225 05 


Purity Confectionery Company, . 


64 69 


32 


65 01 


Queensbury Mills, .... 


2,962 01 


88 86 


3,050 87 


Quincy Electric Light and Power 








Company, 


2,575 55 


9 87 


2,585 42 


Quinsig Ice Company, . 


7 18 


- 


7 18 


R. Ardolino & Co., Inc., 


25 15 


80 


25 95 


R. F. Dodge Company, . 


26 95 




26 95 


R. Hohnan Company, . 


104 22 


3 31 


107 53 


Ranelegh Hotel Company, . 


17 93 


- 


17 93 


Ray Detective Agency, Inc., 


21 56 


- 


21 56 


Revere Cloak and Suit Company, 


62 53 


58 


63 11 


Richard D. Kimball Company, . 


26 46 


- 


26 46 


Riclunond Garage and ]\iotor 








Company, 


71 88 


25 


72 13 


Riverview Laundry Company, . 


247 44 


2 59 


250 03 


Robt. R. McNutt, Inc., 


8 08 


24 


8 32 


Robinson-Brockway Manufactur- 








ing Company, .... 


101 71 


67 


102-38 


Rondeau Engraving Company, . 


12 93 


04 


12 97 


Rosenguard Furniture Company, . 


168 91 


51 


169 42 


Roxbury Building Repair Com- 








pany, Inc., 


53 91 


- 


53 91 


Royal Furniture Company, . 


179 64 


1 08 


180 72 


Rubber Fibre Company, 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


S. L. Gabriel Companj^, 


30 54 


- 


30 54 


S. W. Loomis Company, 


252 60 


1 26 


253 86 


Salem Press Company, . 


62 89 


1 14 


64 03 


Sally's Embroidery and Cleansing 








Compan}^, 


33 78 


- 


33 78 


Savory Express Company, . 


260 56 


1 30 


261 86 


Saxwood Manufactming Com- 








pany, 


71 88 


34 


72 22 


Scandinavian Co-operative Gro- 








cery Union, 


71 26 


57 


71 83 


Schipper Brothers Coal Mining 








Company, Inc., .... 


64 08 


38 


64 46 


Scott's Laundry Compan}', . 


172 51 


48 


172 99 


Security Safe Deposit Company, . 


1,437 60 


- 


1,437 60 


Seth W. Fuller Company, 


92 36 


2 68 


95 04 


Shadduck & Normandin Com- 








pany, 


110 40 


73 


111 13 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



215 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






ShawTiiut Waxed Paper Com- 








pam-, 


$57 95 


$0 29 


$58 24 


Sheedy Amusement Company, 


27 00 


- 


27 00 


Sherick & Brash Company, . 


13 47 


38 


13 85 


Sherwin Wood Company, 


44 92 


- 


44 92 


Shultz-Goodwin Company, . 


826 62 


8 68 


835 30 


Silas Pierce & Co., Ltd., 


2,095 89 


6 96 


2,102 85 


Silver Lake Ice Company, 


269 55 


7 83 


277 38 


Small, Maynard & Co., Inc., 


1,123 12 


5 61 


1,128 73 


Smith & Corcoran Company, 


21 77 


- 


21 77 


Smith Dine & Rubin Company, . 


292 55 


88 


293 43 


Smith Hardware Company, . 


301 89 


1 51 


303 40 


Smithmade Suspender Company, 


113 21 


1 69 


114 90 


Somerset Coal Company, 


48 19 


24 


48 43 


South Bay Storage Warehouse 








Company, 


89 85 


54 


90 39 


South End Motor Car Company, 


234 50 


4 70 


239 20 


Southgate Press — T. W. Ripley 








Company, 


539 10 


1 62 


540 72 


Springfield Loan Association, 


10 96 


54 


11 50 


Springfield News Company, . 


307 21 


92 


308 13 


St. Clairs', Inc., .... 


190 03 


95 


190 98 


St. Louis Rubber Company, 


165 32 


83 


166 15 


Stamafix Company, 


8 98 


02 


9 00 


Standard Handle and Lumber 


* 






Company, 


12 60 


- 


12 60 


Standard Lens Company, 


14 80 


- 


14 80 


Standard ^lotor Car Company of 








Massachusetts, .... 


40 97 


20 


41 17 


Standard Pocahontas Coal Com- 








pany, 


89 85 


27 


90 12 


Stearns & Waterman Company, . 


53 91 


- 


53 91 


Stetson Coal Company of Boston, 


777 54 


2 33 


779 87 


Stone & Foster Lumber Com- 








pany, 


862 56 


4 31 


866 87 


Story-Simmons Company, 


88 44 


35 


88 79 


Stratton Automobile Company, . 


17 97 


- 


17 97 


Suffolk Decorating Company, 


8 48 


- 


8 48 


Sullivan & Daly Company, . 


202 16 


1 01 


203 17 


Summit Thread Company, . 


9 00 


03 


9 03 


Sumner Crosby & Son, Inc., 


328 68 


1 15 


329 83 


Sunset Grocery Company. . 


35 94 


20 


36 14 


Swiss Cleansers and Dyers, Inc., . 


8 98 


- 


8 98. 


Sydney K. Cohen Importing Com- 








pany, 


323 46 


1 63 


325 09 


Sylvester Brothers Company, 


8 62 


" 


8 62 


T. H. O'Donnell & Co., Inc., 


161 73 


3 23 


164 96 


Tarbett Machine Company, . 


59 30 


41 


59 71 


Taunton Evening News, 


161 73 


1 22 


162 95 



216 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



Collected on 

Account 

of Corporation 

Tax for 1912. 



Interest. 



Totals. 



Inc., 



Taxi Motor Cab Company of 

Boston, 

Telepost Company of Massachu- 
setts, .... 
Temple Stuart Company, 
Thomas D. Gard Company 
Thomas J. Grey Company, 
Thomas J. Hind, Inc., . 
Thomas J. Shea Company, 
Thomas 'Connell Manufacturing 

Company, .... 
Tichnor Brothers, Inc., . 
Torre3^-Epstein Company, 
Totem Manufacturing Company, 
Transfer Pharmacy, Inc., 
Traveler Shoe Com-pam^, 
Tremont Investment Company, 
Tremont Securities Company, 
Trombly Jewelry Company, . 
Union Caliper Company, 
Union Desk Companj^, . 
Union Supply Company, 
United Hospital Drug Company 

Inc., 

United States Column Company, 
University Garage, Inc., 
Up-to-Date Manufacturing Com 

pany, 

Uxbridge and Whitinsville Trans- 
cript Publishing Company, 
Van-Car Leather Company, . 
Viscoloid Companj^, 
"W . A. Frederick Company, . 
W. A. Norton Companj^ 
W. & S. Blackinton Company, 
W. Bert Le\vis Shoe Company, 
W. E. Smith Company, . 
W. F. Godber Company, 
W. H. IngaUs Company, 
W. K. Farrington Press, 
W. M. McDonald Company, Inc 
W. 0. Sunmons Company, Inc., 
W. P. Goode Brush Company, 
W. T. Cardy & Sons Company, 
W. T. Shackley & Son Company 
Wachtel-Pickert Company, 
Walbuck-Crayon Company, 
Walworth-English-Flett Company 
Ward, Drouet & Foster, Inc., 
Warren Garage Company, 



$476 20 


$16 66 


17 97 


_ 


76 82 


64 


64 69 


32 


71 88 


20 


17 97 


- 


8 98 


- 


94 34 


47 


260 56 


8 85 


10 78 


- 


265 95 


1 33 


37 73 


13 


48 75 


- 


195 69 


4 83 


18 02 


- 


1,347 75 


30 99 


220 13 


1 77 


14 55 


- 


179 26 


89 


24 74 


_ 


426 50 


1 28 


10 36 


06 


50 31 


18 


8 98 


02 


19 76 


- 


8,203 30 


32 81 


89 45 


3 58 


21 56 


11 


942 90 


4 71 


309 08 


85 


8 98 


- 


71 70 


1 43 


168 91 


1 69 


32 34 


1 61 


244 78 


86 


95 45 


- 


113 21 


56 


71 88 


- 


265 05 


1 71 


145 55 


75 


43 12 


87 


604 63 


3 63 


596 96 


4 97 


41 24 


74 



$492 86 

17 97 
77 46 
65 01 

72 08 

17 97 

8 98 

94 81 
269 41 

10 78 

267 28 

37 86 

48 75 

200 52 

18 02 
1,378 74 

221 90 

14 55 

180 15 

24 74 

427 78 

10 42 

50 49 

9 00 

19 76 
8,236 11 

93 03 

21 67 

947 61 

309 93 

8 98 

73 13 
170 60 

33 95 
245 64 

95 45 
113 77 

71 88 
266 76 
146 30 

43 99 
608 26 
601 93 

41 98 



1914. 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



217 





Collected on 








Account 
of Corporation 


Interest. 


Totals. 




Tax for 1912. 






Washburn Brothers Company, 


$165 03 


$0 69 


$165 72 


AVashburn Realty Trust, Ltd., . 


174 06 


52 


174 58 


Washington Investment and Loan 








Association, 


53 91 


16 


54 07 


Watson Blodd Company, 


54 71 


- 


54 71 


Wellington-Pierce Company, 


448 01 


1 34 


449 35 


Wentworth-Lister Company, 


29 38 


- 


29 38 


West Varnish Company, 


40 43 


80 


41 23 


Whitcomb Jewelry Company, Inc., 


39 08 


21 


39 29 


White Eagle Provision Company, 








Inc., 


21 56 


- 


21 56 


White Star Egg and Fruit Com- 








pany, . . . . 


58 22 


1 16 


59 38 


Whitney Law Corporation, . 


220 52 


1 69 


222 21 


Whittier Woodenware Company, 


539 10 


2 79 


541 89 


Whittredge Shoe Company, Inc., 


59 30 


- 


59 30 


Wilkinson Company, Inc., . 


107 82 


2 16 


109 98 


William Allen Sons Company, 


294 70 


1 52 


296 22 


Wilham H. Sherman Company, . 


179 70 


13 77 


193 47 


William J. Bride Company, . 


79 06 


40 


79 46 


Wilham J. Morgan Company, 


31 44 


- 


31 44 


William L. Browne Electric Com- 








pany, 


111 77 


56 


112 33 


William Porter & Son, Inc., . 


561 56 


16 53 


578 09 


Wilhs C. Bates Company, 


105 69 


3 51 


109 20 


Willsite Flooring Company, Inc., 


73 67 


44 


74 11 


Winchester News Company, 


34 50 


15 


34 65 


Wireless Package Carrier Com- 








pany, 


8 08 


32 


8 40 


Woburn Leather Company', . 


26 95 


01 


26 96 


Wollaston Center Garage Com- 








pany, 


179 70 


1 20 


180 90 


Wollaston Coal Company, . 


179 70 


1 20 


180 90 


Woman's Shop, Inc., 


404 32 


2 02 


406 34 


Woodbury & Co., Inc., . 


168 91 


42 


169 33 


Woodman Lumber Company, 


8 98 


08 


9 06 


Woodward-Reopell Company, 


14 55 


- 


14 55 


Worcester Co-operative Market 








Company, 


85 17 


51 


85 68 


Woronoco Heating and Plumb- 








ing Company, .... 


31 05 


27 


31 32 


Wrentham Hat Company, . 


222 46 


1 33 


223 79 


Wright Cutter Companj^, 


309 15 


3 10 


312 25 


Total, 


$167,668 35 


$1,391 22 


$169,059 57 



218 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 







fl 




fl 







a; 


OJ 










a; 


<v 




o 


r^i 




X 


+-> 




W 


4J 




xn 







w 


0) 




>i 


;-i 




^ 


^ 




'TS 


fl 




o; 


a 


„ 


t-i 




§ 


(V 


.2 


HH 




c! 




fl 


fl 


^^ 


a; 




^ 


,0 


^ 


OJ 


X 


W 


> 




W 







o:) 




P^ 


_a 


CO 


Fh 


CO 


T— H 


-^ 


fl 

• r-s 


r— 1 


^ 


B 
2 


^ 


^ 


1— 1 

CO 


P=^ 


en 







a; 






fl 


fcX) 


^ 





fl 


-^ 


72 




;^ 


.2 


a; 


o 




a; 


I— 1 




^ 


EH 


fl 
<1^ 


-t-j 


':r< 


br 


(P 


t^ 




-< 







M 




^ 


BH 


fl 


-M 


M 





fl 


W 




Fi 







-M 






;_, 




p 


a 




a 


Ui 



fl ^ 
fl3 O 



o 
fl 

f-i 

> 

o 

o 





a 


}r form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
'r form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form, 
n proper form. 


Not in prop( 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Not in propc 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 1 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 
Lawful and 1 


•0.2 

if 




s SsSsS e £ 3 "S 3 s £ a a s 


.6 



Escaped prisoner, .... 

Breaking and entering, escaped pris- 
oner. 
Desertion, 

Larceny, 

Larceny, 

Larceny 

Larceny 

Desertion, 

Desertion, 

Nonsupport of wife and minor chil- 
dren. 
Desertion of wife and minor children, 

Nonsupport, 

Larceny, 

Larceny, 


> 

'3) 

3 
fa 

© 

s 


Filio Beaudoin, 

Filio Beaudoin, 

Nathan Sokoloosky, .... 

Gudio Leoni, alias, .... 

James L. Gates and Clarence W. Clif- 
ford. 
Amelia M. Leonard, alias, 

James P. Bell 

Wallace M. Swift 

Edward Lyons 

Abraham Lincoln Midgett, . 

Max Doodlesac, alias 

Daniel Suckman 

Peter A. Carroll, 

GcorgelM. Fisher .'aKas, 


State or Country 

upon whose Executive 

Requisition was 

made. 






New York, 
New York, 
New York, 
Pennsylvania, . 
New York, 
New York, 
Michigan, . 
New York, 
New York, 
Pennsylvania, . 
Illinois, 

New Hampshire, 
Vermont, . 
New York. 


Ill 


0— >iococo"<j<o<r!oo — — eooo-* 

CO 

"g i i i i i ii44444^ 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



219 



F= 


H 


F 


P' 


n 




P. 


fi 


a 


s 


s 


S 


2 


d 


a 


s 


s 


s 


a 


a 


a 


a 














































o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 






o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 
























































^ 


^ 




^_, 




^ 


;^ 


j^ 


;_ 






fc^ 


u 


fc^ 


u 


(_ 


(^ 


fc< 


ti 


b 


(H 




flj 




o 


<x> 




ID 


0) 


a> 




























n, 


n, 


o, 


n, 


n, 


a 


n, 


ft 


ft 


p. 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 
















ft 


R 


R 


p 


P 


R 


R 


R 


o 


o 


g 


a 


g 


g 


g 


^ 


2 


a 


g 


ii 


o 


2 


p. 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 




ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 








a 


a 


a 


d 


a 


n^ 


a 


a 


a 


a 


.s 


a 


a 


.2 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


Tt 


13 


T) 


13 


13 


^ 


-3 


1-i 


ts 


73 


1-! 


1-) 


13 


TS 


r-J 


13 


TJ 


-d 


-d 


-d 


13 


T3 














n 






c 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


c 




a 


a 


a 


c3 


rt 


rt 


cj 


ft 


rt 


a 


03 


C3 


c3 


CJ 


c3 


03 


c3 


c3 


ca 


a 


CJ 




ci 






























































u 


3 




a 


a 


a 


a 






a 
























































ft 


ft 


% 


ft 


ft 


^ 


ft 


& 


& 


^ 


& 


& 


^ 


it 


It 


is 


^ 


^ 


g 


& 


is 


is 


J 


J 


^ 


J 


^ 


^ 


rt 
hJ 


03 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


J 


^^ 


kJ 


•-:! 


1-:; 


^ 


^ 


3 


3 


^' 












1 


1 




^ 


^"^ 


jbiT 


riiT 


pM 


^' 


,^ 


^* 


X 


^ 


-liS" 


^" 


-y 


^^ 


o 


o 


o 


o 


K 




?i 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


n 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


fr 


fr 


Hi 


HI 


^ 




(H 


ir. 


^ 


ip. 


s« 


to 


to 


sc 


sc 


ic 


13 


^. 


ta 


^ 






1-1 


-^ 


-i 


3 


to 




^ 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 














cc 


cc 


CQ 


oo 


w 




m 


03 


M 


w 


t/j 


CO 


02 


Oi 


OJ 


',4 


w 


M 


m 


OJ 


w 


• 


• 


























M 




o 
















































































































































. 




























a 




5 






















T! 


















(B 




a 












>, 




^ 


1 

ft 


a' 
9 


2 

a 


§ 


a 
o 


a 


a" 
.2 


t^ 


>i 


>^ 


>; 


1 
bO 

a 


a 
o 




a 
.2 


>1 


M 


ft 


1 




? 




1 












































































1 


1 


1 


a 


1 


a 


1 


1 


2 
^ 


1 


6 
3 


bO 

1 


e3 


1 


< 


Q 


Si 


4^ 


a 

1 


a 

1 




• 




e 




.s 

1 


• 






• 


• 


1 






8 


• 






• 


• 


-0 




1 


•i 

d 


1 


1 


1 


1 

.2 

0) 


s 


1 

ft 


-1 






.2 


>1 

'a 
> 


1 

a 


1 

> 

03 

o 
<i 
•a 
P5 


03 


a 
a 

1 


•1 

i 

a 
b 


i 
> 

03 

J 


1 

a 

CO 

CO 


1 


s 


& 


1 


1 
1 


<3 

3 


^ 


3 




1 


1 


1 


1 


o 

»-5 


o 


-0 


a 

1 


1 


a 

1 


. 
















. 








. 


C3 
^3 






. 






























































































































u 


















• 


^ 




c? 




.2 
a 


a' 


^'' 


^" 


Tf 






c3 




■i 








-€ 


^' 


^^ 


















o 


o 


C 






j3 


















i 


1-5 


^ 


« 


^ 


a 


>* 


t>l 


^ 


>^ 


>^ 


o 


.3 


>^ 


>^ 


>^ 


>^ 


>H 


>^ 


>^ 


>^ 


sr 


•c 




a 


a 

(2 


H 


ft 




ft 


rt 




a 


ft 


it 


^ 


^ 


& 


& 


& 


& 


^ 






a 






9> 












o 








« 




0) 






:z; 


S 


S 


^ 


^ 


iz: 


§ 


Iz: 


^ 


O 


Q 


^ 


^ 


;z: 


^ 


iz; 


,4 


^ 


^ 


m 


f 


^ 


o 


^ 


1 


^ 


CO 


^ 


»c 


t- 


05 


<N 


o> 


^ 


CO 


o> 


o 


00 


00 


o 


ec 


'^ 


-^ 


^ 








'^ 




(M 








'"' 




•M 


c^ 
































>> 


>. 


>> 


>. 


>> 


>. 


>. 


a 

•-5 


§ 

a 

►-3 


a 

»-5 


a> 


® 


«J 


a 
S 


03 




03 


ft 
<3 


ft 
< 


ft 

< 


ft 
< 


ft 


s 


§ 


S 


§ 


s 


^ 


^ 


a 


3 


3 

)T5 



220 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 





S 


q 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


3 


P 


a 


g 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a" 


a 












t^ 


u 


iH 


1- 


ti 










^ 


u 


c 










.2 


>2 


£ 


^ 


^ 


£ 


£ 


o 


o 


o 


o 


3 


o 


o 


O 


^ 


.2 


^ 


o 


















eu 


























!- 


1- 


«- 


^ 


Ih 


tH 


tl 


t< 


fc. 


(^ 


tj 


(h 


(^ 


tn 


t^ 


ti 


ii 


;^ 


u 




Cj 


o 


01 


<0 


OJ 




a> 


ffi) 


a> 


« 


<D 


aj 


a> 


0) 


« 


<0 


a 


4) 


o 




S" 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


^ 


g 


S 


2 


2 


2 


o 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


2 


o 


o 


o 


2 




2 


2 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 




a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


01 


.2 


_fl 


.2 


3 


.2 


^3 


a 


_3 


a 


_B 


_B 


_a 


3 


_a 


a 


.2 


a 


3 


_3 


Pi 


T3 


-0 


TS 


-d 


-d 


T3 


T5 


-d 


-d 


-d 


73 


-d 


-d 


•d 


-d 


"d 


73 


73 


"'d 




fl 


c 


a 


3 


c 


3 


3 


e 


3 


3 


a 


a 


3 


a 





3 


3 


3 






e3 


c3 


ci 


c3 


es 


03 


c3 


03 


03 


cS 


c3 


04 


cS 


c3 


S 


S 


03 


S3 


o3 




9 


3 


9 


3 


"3 


3 


3 


"3 


3 


3 


3 


"2 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 
















«« 




























& 


& 


^ 


^ 


& 


^ 


^ 


'^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


& 


% 


"i 


"^ 


"i 


'B 


*& 




S3 


e8 


eS 


s 


(^ 


J 


c3 


s 


c3 


e3 


c3 


5 


5 


5 


S 


5 


o3 


c3 


o3 




H^ 


H^ 


.:; 


kJ 


^ 


h:i 


V-; 


hJ 


hJ 


^ 


.:] 


yA 


h3 


3 


^ 


J 


►3 


rl 


cs" 


















: 






aT 












": 


3 u 


o 






































a « 

QJ TO 


-E 


.isT 


j«r 


^ 


^ 


3 
O 


o 


-id" 


^" 


-i? 


j<r 


^ 


3 


j^* 




j^ 


JaJ" 


^ 


^ 






















^ 










3 




> s 


s 


^ 


o 


O 


"o 


a 


13 


'o 


"o 


3 


3 


3 


3 




3 


3 


3 


Ph 


se 


ta 


iC 


!C 


_>> 


T3 


fc: 


iC 


ta 


iC 


ta 


ta 


ta 


iC 


"t< 


53 


3 


3 


3 


3 


i 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


^ 


3 


r°S 


3 


3 


1 


3 




02 


CO 


M 


M 


s 


OQ 


J» 


OQ 


m 


CO 


m 


M 


w 


CO 


CO 


CO 








• 


























a" 






• 
































.2 




. 








































b£ 




c3 
































3 




a 




® 






. 






















. 


. 






1 

a 


















"S 






3 










.... 




a> 




O 


' 










tf 




JO 






J 










a 

o 




73 

a 


. 






C 

_o 






_ 


a 


s" 


a 

c3 


b" 




a 






a 


a' 


Ii 


a" 


si 
bll 

a 






>> 




>, 


5^ 


>> 


a 


o 




.2 


t^ 


"d 


>> 


^ 


.2 


.2 


-d 


.2 


^ 




a 


o 


u 




c 


g 








3 




c 


c 












3 




« 


3 






0) 






3 








<D 


a) 










15 


aj 






2 


o 


o 


03 


§ 


1 


CO 


1 


a 


i 


2 


3 


3 


1 


i 


1 


03 


s 




p-^ 


<ii 


t^ 


fe 


^ 


Iz; 


Q 


<J 


Q 


J 


w 


hJ 


•-! 


Q 


Q 


w 


Q 


P5 


_] 
























.2 

J3 






■9 


































a 






.2 


































e^ 






U) 




■ 






























-d 






-g 




. 








aj 






















3 






o 












> 






















s3 






a 








































ri 












'3) 












* 


■ 








o; 






.2 




■ 








fe 


» 




















3. 

a 
>> 






•^ 


:= 






g 




"o 


:B 


73 










3 

a 




i 








3 


c3 
t 

« 

8 

a 
2 
1 






a 




1 


I 

1 


c 

1 
1 


2 

3 
O 

O 


a 

a 

0) 


"3 

1 

=3 


1 
Q 


•;3 
1 

1 


2 

3 

1 


.1 
> 

_a 


1.1 


1 
1 

a 

o 


i 

a 


>> 

1 

a 


a 

a 

03 
o3 


3 

3 

w 

1 

c3 


8 
o 

.•3 




tf 


-< 


d 


■^ 


03 

•-5 


-5J 


»2 


^ 


Oh 


►? 


<J 


;s 


o 


J 


^ 


o 


Pi 


^ 








































o" 


fl g & 









































ate or Cou 
whose Ex 
equisition 
made. 






































c 


^" 


J« 


M 




^^ 


.d" 


44 


^^ 


*^ 


:■■ _ 


^ 




^" 


j^" 


^ 


^" 


^" 


^* 


s 

o 
3 


ii 


b 


^ 




(H 


> 


ii 








bi 




1-1 


^ 






u 




o 


o 


O 




o 




o 


o 






o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


s|« 












1 
1 






.2 
o 

3 


1 


>* 

> 


IT* 

2 














a 

a 


3 


s 


5 


s 


a> 


5 


5 


<u 


•S 




« 




5 


5 


a) 


a> 


a> 


© 


o 




^ 


^ 


z 


^ 


^ 


^ 


;z; 


33 


s 


^ 


S 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


iz; 


Z 


Q 


^ o . 


^ 


t- 


J^ 


05 


^ 


<r> 


^ 


CO 


O 


«o 


(M 


eo 


>o 


o> 


o 


"5 


tn 


lO 


o 










<M 


<M 


















(M 


-M 


OJ 


IM 


(M 


Ml 


i_^ 


>. 


>. 


>> 


_>, 


_>, 


U) 


bb 


bb 


bb 


^^ 


bb 


^ 


bb 


bb 


bb 


bb 


bb 


bb 


"o 


3 


3 


3 


—1 

3 


•-5 


3 

1-5 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


a 


<< 


<^ 


<t5 


<; 


<3 


-Jj 


< 


<3 


< 


< 


<J 


<1 


<^ 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



221 



s 


d 


fi 


S 


a 


g 


£ 


g 


g 


a 


a 


a 


fi 


fi 


fi 


fi 


f 


F^" 




p 


a 










































o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 




n 


n 




^ 










































(-> 




bl 


(I 


^ 


u 






u 


t- 


u 




bl 




b 


;_ 






















































a 




a 


a 


a 


a 






a 






a 


a 


a 


a 


n, 


a 


n, 


n, 





a 


^ 


2 


H 


H 


2 


H 


y 


^ 


2 


<J 


JJ 


B 


2 


S 


S 


f^ 


P 


P 


P 


P 


P 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


CI 


a 


.a 


d 


C3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


a 


3 


3 


3 


3 


a 


a 


-d 


73 


T3 


•« 


T) 


-d 


-o 


T3 


T! 


T3 


73 


-d 


TJ 


-d 


-d 


"d 


nn 










CI 


a 


a 


CI 


13 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 




3 


a 


3 


3 










03 


C3 


C3 


03 


OS 


cS 


«i 


c3 




C3 


03 




03 


03 


c3 


03 


o3 


CS 


03 


03 


o3 














































3 


3 


3 


3 






3 






3 






3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


















































& 


& 


is 


^ 


^ 


& 


^ 


& 


^ 


& 


^ 


^ 


& 


^ 


& 


^ 


fe 


f6 


ft 


r« 


^ 






c3 






c3 


c3 


c3 




03 


03 






c3 


03 








eS 


o3 


I 


h-1 


h:i 


kJ 


h:; 


h:i 


J 


h-1 


hJ 


»_I 


^ 


^ 


h-1 


^ 


h-1 




h^ 


^ 


hJ 


a 


^ 












3 


-3" 






























^ 


^■■ 


rid 


^ 


^* 




3 


^ 




-S 




^'■ 


^ 


^ 


^" 


-« 


^ 


^^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 
















i 




g 


















.P 










o 


o 


i 






o 












o 


O 


o 




to 


ta 


id 


iCI 


to 


to 


1 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


to 


tl 


to 


3 


3 


s 


3 


3 


3 


73 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


-) 


^ 




cc 


02 


02 


02 


02 


Hi 


OQ 


w 


w 


02 


O) 


O} 


02 


M 


m 


02 


02 


02 




















• 


















a 




a 


• 












13 






i 

1 
3 










1' 

1 
3 








■J 

1 
a 




c3 
>> 














IS 






U3 










.2 








^ 




2 


. 




. 








a 


M 
3 

a3 




1 
> 










.2 
> 






. 


a 




1 

m 


. 


^- 










o 


3 
T5 
3 




1 










1 








^ 




3 

6^ 


>! 


a 


>; 


>. 


1 


i^ 


a 

a 


3 

.2 


3 


t^ 


§ 


3 

.2 


§ 


3 

03 


>^ 


a 
.2 


3 

.2 


a 
3 














3 
3 

1 




















1 


a 

1 


1 


1 




3 

1 


1 




73 

1 


aj 


1 


1 


1 


1 


J 




1 


1 


M 


1 


i 

1 


1 
1 

a 

1 


1 
1 

< 
1 


1 

G 

& 


3 


"3 

1 


CO 

a 

1 


1 

3 

1 


60 

e 

1 
1 

o 


1 

1 

1 

< 


1 
1 


1 

a 

1 


a" 
a 

1 

a 

a 
d 


1 
1 

<i 
a 
•1 


_a 
la 

PL, 


_a" 

1 


S 

la 


02 
1 


s" 

> 

02 

1 


a' 

a 
< 


















, 


















, 


^: 




, 






































,(^ 






' 


' 




' 










' 


-d 




■ 














3 

o 




' 


^ 

& 


e3 


o 


a 


i 


a* 

1 


1 


1 


<3 

1 


1 




§ 


1 


f2 


1 


3 
p3 

! 

3 


1 


^ 
^ 




3 
03 
> 


;2 


^ 

z 


1 


& 

^ 


43 

1 


1 


1 


1 

^ 


a 

3 


1 


^ 




^ 
^ 


1 


1 


& 

^ 


Q 


3 
3 


1 


00 


o> 


(M 


00 


=^ 


<M 


o 


o 








^ 






->*< 










j^ 


j^ 






" 


^ 




CS 


c^ 
















^ 










•^ 


(M 


1 


a 
eg 


a 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


> 

1 


1 


i 


1 


1 


Q 


Q 


Q 




1 



222 



ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. 



[Jan. 



C) 


1 




o 


aJ 




-M 


f3 




3 


a 




•f— 9 


ctf 




<v 






-M 


o 




a 


S+H 




o 


CO 




^ 


o 




r/; 






<V 






> 


•^ 










+J 


ro 










br 


, 




3 


o 




eH-( 


QJ 




e^-H 


Q 




o 


&r 




(^ 


fl 




0; 






"O 


"O 







fl 




a; 


a; 




^ 






^H 


t-i 




rs 


03 




r/^ 


o; 




a; 


>s 




,j:5 


0) 




-M 






t-t 


-M 




4^ 


&0 

fl 




o 


•c 




£ 


T? 




<V 


-M 




O 

O 


a 




^ 


1^ 




+j 


^ 




>^ 


a> 




o 


T3 




fl 

OJ 


CO 






P^ 




0) 


-M 




X! 


3 




rn 


a 










ffi 


^ 
>* 




^ 


^ 




a. "d 




3 


t!^ 




rn 


(^ 




§ 






-M 


^ 


1 


CO 


fi 


1 


3 

9" 




o 


<l) 




<1^ 


;-! 


a; 


L 


biO 


> 




U 




+J 








^ 


C/3 


o 


O 




o 


^ 


a; 




C/2 


t-( 


cu 


;-i 


T? 


H-i 


<D 


a 


H 


^ 

-M 


05 




o 






e^-i 


o 




O 


4J 







ssssssss 

p o p o o o o o 



s s s s 



a a a a 

o o o o 

a a a a 

a a a a 



-c 


-d 


TS 


-d 


T3 


Ti 


TJ 


T3 


^3 


T! 


-r! 


"T! 


t; 




c 


a 


a 


fl 




a 


C! 




a 








c3 


03 


cS 


rt 


CS 




<s 


c3 


« 


ca 


cd 


C3 


CS 


3 


3 


d 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 




























^ 


& 


is 


^ 


& 


^ 


i$ 


& 


ft 


^ 


fe 


ti 


fs 


cS 


as 


cS 




cl 


ci 






ri 










1-5 


i-J 


H-1 


hJ 


^ 


H-1 


kJ 


i-J 


h-1 


h^i 


hJ 


h^ 


t-5 






il . 



2. 2: 



^ I "^ 



M S 






^ S fe 






O > S S 



^ o 






? a 5 3 
« -^ 13 ;3 

;2; s o s 



CQ Cl IM M 



n t, ti (m >i >> 

-fli, a a a ^ =3 
Ek <; <jj <5 S S 



1914.1 



PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 



223 



ass 
s o s 



a 2 

a a 

a a 



s s 



Q 6 



^- e 






o ci^ ^ <: o 



o! g s 2 K^ 3 

'« -S 1 '§ I i 

S ^ S K 12; § 



I cS Q P ;a 



224 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 



EULES OF PEACTICE 

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. 

(&) 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. 



1914.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 12. 225 

(h) The nature of the crime charged, with a reference, when 
practicable, to the particular statute defining and punishing the 
same. 

(t) 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. 



226 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. [Jan. 1914. 

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.