and property "subject to the same duties and liabilities as the original street railway company;" but it provides that no action shall be wrought against such purchasers "to enforce any liability incurred by said original company, except debts and liabilities owing from said original company to any city or town within which the railway is operated, and taxes and assessments for which said original company is liable under the statutes relating to street railways, which shall be assumed and paid by said new company." The liability for the commutation tax imposed by the sections. above cited upon the original company is, in my opinion, such a liability as the purchasing company is required to assume, and is such a liability incurred by the original company as may be the ground for an action against the new company. Where a town seeks reimbursement under the provision of R. L., c. 85, § 16, that "if a state pauper has a wife who is also a pauper having a legal settlement in the commonwealth, he shall be supported by the place where his wife has her settlement, and the commonwealth upon a written notice to the state board of charity within sixty days after aid is first given to him shall reimburse such place," such town must show that notice was given strictly in accordance with the terms of the provision for reimbursement; and a town is not entitled to be reimbursed for expenses incurred for a period of sixty days prior to the date of notice, when more than sixty days have elapsed since aid was first rendered. intendent of My opinion is requested by you with respect to a claim made To the Superby the overseers of the poor of the town of Easton, under the State Adult following circumstances: On Aug. 12, 1907, the town of Braintree notified the State Board of Charity that an unsettled male pauper was receiving pauper relief; and on Aug. 16, 1907, Braintree notified the town. of Easton that the former was aiding the family, and claimed that the wife of the pauper and his children had settlements in Easton. These settlements apparently are not denied by the Poor. 1908 February 14. town of Easton. Some time subsequent to the latter date the State Board notified the overseers of the poor of Braintree that it considered the case in question closed, for the reason that the wife had a settlement in Easton, and that if any claim is made upon the Commonwealth it should come from that place. On Dec. 3, 1907, the town of Easton notified the State Board, making a claim for the man's share of the aid given, to which the State Board replied that the notice was too late, not coming within sixty days after aid was first rendered to the pauper in question in accordance with the provisions of section 16 of chapter 85 of the Revised Laws. The town of Easton contends that it is entitled to reimbursement for the period of sixty days prior to its notice, irrespective of the time which has elapsed subsequent to the rendering of the first aid. R. L., c. 85, § 16, provides that: If a state pauper has a wife who is also a pauper having a legal settlement in this commonwealth, he shall be supported by the place where his wife has her settlement; but the commonwealth upon written notice to the state board of charity within sixty days after aid is first given to him, shall reimburse such place the cost of such support based upon the expense of supporting him had he been committed to the state hospital. In my opinion, the contention of the State Board of Charity must be sustained. I think the words of the statute are clear and unambiguous, to the effect that the Commonwealth shall only reimburse cities and towns upon written notice within sixty days after aid is first given. I find nothing in the history of this section which tends to put any other interpretation upon the words used. INSURANCE INVESTMENT INVESTMENT OF FUNDS SECURED LOANS MORTGAGES. Under the provisions of St. 1907, c. 576, § 37, that the capital of any domestic insurance company other than life, and three-fourths of the reserve of any domestic stock or mutual life insurance company, shall be invested as therein prescribed, a domestic life insurance company may invest its funds in loans secured by assessable stock of any trust company or bank; or in loans secured by stock, bonds and other collateral, whether or not such collateral is designated in St. 1907, c. 576, § 37, clauses 1 to 5, inclusive; or in loans upon mortgages of real estate to an amount exceeding 60 per cent. of the fair market value of the property mortgaged at the time of such loan. My opinion is requested by you upon the following ques- To the tions: 1. Whether or not it is lawful for a domestic life insurance company to invest any of its funds in loans secured by assessable stock of any trust company or bank as collateral. 2. Whether or not it is lawful for such a company to invest any of its funds in loans secured by stocks, bonds or other collateral not designated in sub-divisions 1 to 5, inclusive, of section 37 of chapter 576 of the Acts of 1907. 3. Whether or not it is lawful for such a company to invest any of its funds in loans upon mortgages of real estate to an amount exceeding 60 per cent. of the fair market value of the property at the time of such loan. In my opinion, all of these inquiries must be answered in the affirmative. St. 1907, c. 576, § 37, provides: The capital of any domestic insurance company other than life, and three fourths of the reserve of any domestic stock or mutual life insurance company, shall be invested only as follows: 4. In loans upon improved and unencumbered real property in any state of the United States, provided that no loan on such real property shall exceed sixty per cent of the fair market value thereof at the time of such loan, . . 7. In loans secured by collateral security consisting of any of the above. The word "above" here refers to the earlier clauses providing for investment in United States or State bonds, municipal bonds, Insurance school and water district bonds, railroad or street railway bonds and notes. 8. No domestic life insurance company shall invest any of its funds in any unincorporated business or enterprise, nor in the stocks or evidence of indebtedness of any corporation, the owners or holders of which stock or evidence of indebtedness may in any event be or become liable on account thereof to any assessment except for taxes, nor shall such life insurance company invest any of its funds in its own stock or in the stock of any other insurance company. No such company shall invest in, acquire or hold directly or indirectly more than ten per cent of the capital stock of any corporation, nor shall more than ten per cent of its capital and surplus be invested in the stock of any one corporation. nor shall any such company enter into any agreement to withhold from sale any of its property, but the disposition of its property shall be at all times within the control of its board of directors. 9. Nothing herein shall prevent such company from investing or loaning any funds not required to be invested as provided in sub-divisions one to seven, inclusive, of this section in any manner that the directors of such life insurance company may determine: provided, however, that such funds shall not be invested in the purchase of stocks or evidence of indebtedness prohibited by sub-division eight of this section, and provided that no loan of such funds shall be made to an individual or firm unless it is secured by collateral security. It is clear that the capital and one-fourth of the reserve of a domestic life insurance company is limited only as to investments by clauses 8 and 9. The prohibited investment under section 8 means the purchase and ownership by a domestic life insurance company of stock or evidence of indebtedness of a company liable to assessments other than taxes. That prohibition does not extend to loans made by a domestic company, which are limited only by the proviso of clause 9, to the effect that no loan shall be made unless it is secured by collateral security. In my opinion, the whole of the capital stock and one-fourth of the reserve of a domestic life insurance company may be invested in loans to individuals or firms secured by stock of a trust company or bank which is assessable otherwise than for taxes. The same reasoning applies to the second question. In my opinion, there is no limitation upon the class or nature of the collateral security required under the above quoted proviso of clause 9. Consequently, the whole of the capital and one-fourth of the reserve of such a company may be invested in loans secured by stocks, bonds or other collateral not designated in clauses 1 to 5, inclusive. As to the third inquiry, I do not think that mortgages of real estate are controlled by clause 9, and, except as otherwise expressly provided by clause 4 of this section, a company may invest any of its funds in loans upon mortgages of real estate to such an amount as it sees fit, and is not limited to 60 per cent. of the fair market value. SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH— HISTORY OF UNIT OF St. 1893, c. 413, § 1, as amended by St. 1899, c. 388, authorizing the purchase by Executive 1908 I have your inquiry of February 20 respecting the authority To the of certain late officers of the Eighth Massachusetts Infantry, Secretary. United States Volunteers, to approve, under the provisions of February 25. St. 1893, c. 413, § 1, the publication of a history of such regiment during the Spanish war, entitled "Twelve Months with the Eighth Massachusetts Infantry in the Service of the United States." Section 1 of the statute above cited is as follows: Whenever, after the passage of this act, any regiment or battery, or other unit of military organization of Massachusetts volunteers, shall publish or shall have prepared for publication a history of such organization, under the sanction and authority of its proper veteran association, which history shall be shown to the satisfaction of the governor and |