erty stood in the name of the trustees and was taxed to them by the city of Boston, the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company did not include it in its statement of the works, structures, real estate, machinery, underground conduits, wires and pipes owned by it and subject to local taxation as required by section 40 above referred to, and it was not, therefore, deducted from the amount of the franchise tax as authorized by section 41. Upon May 16, 1911, the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth, in the case of Williams v. Johnson, 208 Mass. 544, a proceeding brought by a stockholder of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, handed down a decision holding that the disposition of the Park Square property of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company was ultra vires, that the deed of said company to the trustees was beyond the power of the corporation or the directors to make, and that the trustees took no valid title under it. If the invalidity of the transfer of the title had been known at the time when the tax for the year 1910 was assessed, the company would have been entitled to have the value of the Park Square property deducted from the value of its corporate franchise in determining the amount of franchise tax, and if such invalidity had been discovered within six months after the payment of said tax, the corporation might have secured a proper deduction by a petition to the Supreme Judicial Court, as provided in section 70 of part III. of chapter 490, but since more than six months have elapsed from the date of payment of the tax there is now no legal remedy open to the corporation. Upon these facts, I reply to your specific inquiry as follows:It is well established that the Legislature may appropriate money raised by taxation only for a public purpose. Lowell v. Boston, 111 Mass. 454; Kingman et al., petitioners, 153 Mass. 566; Opinion of the Justices, 186 Mass. 603, 605; Opinion of the Justices, 190 Mass. 611, 613. Among those purposes which are generally recognized as public, and for which money raised by taxation may be expended, is the fulfilment of moral obligations, so-called, resting upon the sovereign, which cannot be enforced or required by any legal procedure; and it has been held that where a claim grows out of general principles of right and justice and is based upon considerations of a moral or merely honorary nature, such as are binding on the conscience or the honor of an individual, it may be fulfilled although the claim could obtain no recognition in a court of law. United States v. Realty Company, 163 U. S. 427, 440. How far the Legislature of this Commonwealth may go in recognizing moral obligations by the appropriation of money raised by taxation has never been determined by the courts, although in Earle v. Commonwealth, 180 Mass. 579, in speaking of such an appropriation to be recovered as damages for a kind of injury for which it was unnecessary to provide compensation, Mr. Justice Holmes observed that "some latitude is allowed to the Legislature. It is not forbidden to be just in some cases where it is not required to be by the letter of paramount law." Such obligations have been very generally recognized in the past by legislative acts appropriating money to compensate individuals for injuries received or property destroyed in the public service (see, for example, Resolves of 1910, c. 102; Resolves of 1909, c. 137; Resolves of 1908, cc. 49, 52, 55, etc.); or to afford compensation for other less definite and certain claims (see Resolves of 1906, c. 61; Resolves of 1905, c. 55; Resolves of 1904, c. 49; Resolves of 1903, cc. 36, 77, 83; Resolves of 1902, cc. 11, 57), and no question appears to have been raised with respect to them. This recognition has been expressly extended to the reimbursement for money paid into the treasury of the Commonwealth under a misapprehension of fact. Thus, Resolves of 1907, c. 19, provides for the payment to the town of Dalton of $2,618.76, said amount "having been paid by the town. .. for the support of a State charge under a misapprehension of facts." And see Resolves of 1904, c. 78. Even more closely in point is Resolves of 1907, c. 36, which provided for reimbursing the Mexican Central Railway for taxes inadvertently assessed, which had been paid into the treasury of the Commonwealth, and for the recovery of one of which a petition had been brought under St. 1903, c. 437, § 84, upon which the court had held the assessment invalid. Mexican Central Railway v. Commonwealth, 192 Mass. 129. Although the court has never precisely defined the limits of the power of the General Court with respect to the recognition of claims such as that presented by the proposed resolve in favor of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, if the Legislature shall determine that the facts submitted in connection with said resolve impose upon the Commonwealth a moral obligation of the character of that recognized in the case of the Mexican Central Railway Company, or in other cases cited where municipalities or individuals have been reimbursed for money paid under a mistake of fact or law, I am of opinion that it may make a sufficient appropriation to discharge said obligation. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-ELECTIONS-VOTING MACHINES, BAL- A provision in a proposed act relating to the use of voting machines, that "the State Ballot Law Commission shall also constitute the State Board of Voting Machine Examiners, and shall at such times, under such conditions and after such public notice as they shall determine, examine voting machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus, and they shall make and file with the Secretary of the Commonwealth their report on such machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus as in their judgment conform to the requirements of law, together with such written or printed descriptions and such drawings, specifications and photographs as shall clearly identify such machines," does not vest in or impose upon the State Ballot Law Commission any powers and duties which involve a delegation of legislative authority which would be objectionable upon constitutional grounds. The provision above quoted does not directly require the State Ballot Law Commission to approve only such machines as fulfill the requirements of the primary law, but indirectly requires such approval, since they are required to make and file their report only on such machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus as in their judgment conform to such requirements. mittee on Election Laws. By a vote, the Committee on Election Laws has submitted To the Comto me certain specific inquiries with relation to the draft of an act now pending before said committee, entitled "An Act March 13. 1912 relative to the examination and use of voting machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus." Section 1 of the proposed draft amends section 186 of chapter 560 of the Acts of the year 1907 by striking out the whole of said section and inserting in its place the following: No member of said commission (the state ballot law commission) shall hold any public office except that of justice of the peace or notary public, or be a candidate for public office, or member or employee of any political committee, or have any pecuniary interest, directly or indirectly, in any voting machine, ballot box or counting apparatus. If any member of the commission shall be nominated as a candidate for public office and shall not in writing decline said nomination within three days, he shall be deemed to have vacated his office as a member of said commission. The state ballot law commission shall also constitute the state board of voting machine examiners and shall, at such times, under such conditions, and after such public notice as they shall determine, examine voting machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus, and they shall make and file with the secretary of the commonwealth their report on such machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus as in their judgment conform to the requirements of law, together with such written or printed descriptions, and such drawings, specifications and photographs as shall clearly identify such machines, and the secretary of the commonwealth shall send a copy of each report on voting machines to every city and town clerk. For the purpose of such examination the said board may employ not more than three expert machinists at a cost not exceeding ten dollars each for each day employed, to be paid from the appropriation for the expenses of the commission. Section 2 provides as follows: Voting machines shall furnish convenient, simple and satisfactory means of voting and of ascertaining and recording the true result thereof with facility and accuracy, special regard being given to the prevention and detection of double voting; but no machine shall be approved which does not secure to the voter as much secrecy in voting as is afforded by the use of the official ballot. Ballot boxes shall have sufficient locks and keys or seal fastenings, and shall contain mechanical devices for receiving, registering and cancelling every ballot deposited thereon; but no such box shall record any distinguishing number or mark upon a ballot. No machine, ballot box or counting apparatus, except such as is approved in accordance with the provisions of this section, shall be used at any election, primary or caucus in this commonwealth; nor shall any such machines, ballot boxes or counting apparatus be used except in accordance with the provisions of this act. The questions submitted for my consideration are First. - As to the constitutionality of the provision delegating the power to specify or to determine the requirements of voting machines, especially as to whether the machines would fulfill the requirements of our laws relating to primaries and elections. Second. Does the bill herewith submitted fully authorize and compel the commissioners named in the bill to approve only such machines as fulfill the requirements of our primary and election laws? and you further state that If the bill does not, in your opinion, either in form or in substance fully cover the question that may arise, we should be very glad to have you make suggestions and draft of a bill that would fully cover the subject matter. The purpose of the proposed bill is to vest in the State Ballot Law Commission the power to examine voting machines, ballot boxes and counting apparatus for the purpose of determining whether or not such appliances conform to the requirements of law which are substantially stated in section 2; and if the commission determine that such appliances do conform to the requirements of law, it is made their duty to file with the Secretary of the Commonwealth their approval in writing thereof, together with a sufficient description to identify the particular kind of voting machine, ballot box or counting apparatus approved. Subject to the limitation that the qualifications which entitle any person to vote in this Commonwealth and the right to elect and to be elected to public office which is consequent upon the possession of such qualifications, may not be altered or restricted, the Legislature may adopt any reasonable and uniform regulations in regard to the time and manner of exercising the right of voting, which are designed to secure and facilitate the exercise of such right in a prompt, orderly and convenient man |