After careful consideration of all contentions I reached the conclusion which I have already stated herein, and notified the offices of both counsel for the complainant and for the alleged fugitives of my decision. In reply to the further inquiry whether, if Your Excellency should honor the requisition of the Governor of Connecticut, "the petitioners will still have ample opportunity of applying to the courts of this Commonwealth for such protection as they may be legally entitled to under the laws of Massachusetts," I advise you that Revised Laws of Massachusetts, chapter 217, section 14, provides that A person who is arrested upon such a warrant shall not be delivered to such agent of a state or territory until he has been notified of the demand for his surrender and has had an opportunity to apply for a writ of habeas corpus, if he claims such right of the officer who makes the arrest. If, therefore, Your Excellency honors the requisition by issuing the executive warrant, the alleged fugitives, under this provision of the statutes, are entitled to be given the opportunity to petition for a writ of habeas corpus, if they claim the right to so apply. In such a proceeding the lawfulness of the extradition would be passed upon by the court, but the warrant of Your Excellency would, according to the language of the Supreme Court in Davis' Case, 122 Mass. 324, be held to be "prima facie evidence, at least, that all necessary legal prerequisites have been complied with, and, if the previous proceedings appear to be regular, is conclusive evidence of the right to remove him (the prisoner) to the state from which he fled." GOVERNOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR STATE COMMISSIONS, DE- TO INVESTIGATE STATEMENTS AND ESTIMATES COMPENSATION. CONTRACT Under the provisions of St. 1911, c. 82, that "the governor is hereby authorized to Executive On behalf of the committee on finance, accounts and war- To the rants of the Council you request my opinion upon the following Secretary. questions: 1. Has the Governor, acting independently of the Council, the power to determine conclusively, by contract or otherwise, the rate of compensation to be paid to the persons employed by him under the provisions of chapter 82 of the Acts of the year 1911? 2. Can the Governor and Council legally allow such persons compensation, to be paid from the treasury of the Commonwealth, 1st, for time spent in appearing before the joint committee on ways and means of the General Court to explain their reports or be questioned in regard to them; 2d, for time spent in explaining their charges for services to the Council or its committees; 3d, for any services performed since the prorogation of the General Court of the present year; and if so, for what services? 1911 September 27. St. 1911, c. 82, is as follows: The governor is hereby authorized to employ such persons as he may deem proper to make such investigation of any of the commissions, departments or institutions of the commonwealth as he believes is necessary to enable him to carry out the provisions of chapter two hundred and twenty of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and ten. Such persons shall report in writing to the governor, and copies of every report shall, at the same time, be sent by said persons to the governor's council and to the joint committee on ways and means of the general court. For this purpose the governor may expend such. sums out of the amount authorized by chapter five hundred and forty-nine of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and eight as may be approved by the governor and council. In my opinion the first question must be answered in the negative. The act provides specifically that "the governor may expend such sums as may be approved by the gov ernor and council." While the person may be designated and employed by the Governor, the compensation is to be fixed by the Governor and Council. The second question concerns the basis for the allowance of compensation. It requires consideration of the duties and powers provided by law, as set forth in St. 1910, c. 220, and St. 1911, c. 82. The effect of St. 1910, c. 220, has been judicially determined by the Supreme Judicial Court in an Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, dated April 7, 1911, which in part is as follows: The St. of 1910, c. 220, has made but a very small change in the law of the Commonwealth. The only new provision in this particular is the requirement that it (estimates and statements) shall be submitted "to the governor and council for examination, and the governor shall transmit the same to the General Court, with such recommendations, if any, as he may deem proper." . . . Under this statute, after the document has been printed, it is to be formally submitted to the governor and council for examination, as well as distributed to the members of the General Court, while under the former statute the governor was left to obtain a copy as he might. Under the present statute he is to transmit it to the General Court, so that they may know that he has had an opportunity to examine it, and The only he may make recommendations or not, as he chooses. material effect of this statute is to give a legislative invitation to the governor to examine the documents prepared by the auditor and to make recommendations upon the subjects contained in them if he chooses, and also to give him an implied assurance that his recommendations as to the amount of the appropriations will receive respectful consideration. The effect of both statutes was passed upon in an opinion of the Attorney-General to the Treasurer and Receiver General, dated May 11, 1911, which in part is as follows: The duty and power of the Governor in the premises, therefore, being aonfined to the transmission of the statements of estimates for appropriations submitted to the Auditor by the various State officers, boards and commissions and transmitted by the Auditor to the Governor, to be accompanied by a recommendation or not, as he sees fit, it follows that his power to investigate any officer, department or institution must be predicated upon the existence of a statement of proposed expenditures and of other matters required by St. 1910, c. 220, which may be transmitted by him to the Legislature. The employment of agents, investigators and "experts" is only such as the Governor believes is necessary to enable him to carry out the provisions of said St. 1910, c. 220. If there are no such estimates for the current year before him for transmission, and upon which before transmission he seeks further information, it follows that there is no authority or occasion for any investigation under said St. 1910, c. 220, or St. 1911, c. 82. Answering, first, the third subdivision of the second question submitted, the Governor and Council may not legally allow persons employed under authority of St. 1911, c. 82, compensation for any investigation or report thereon made since the prorogation of the General Court. As to the other subdivisions of the second question submitted, it is to be observed that the services for which payment may be made under St. 1911, c. 82, are the making of investigations and the making of reports in writing upon such investigations. There is no express provision for payment of compensation for the explanation of such reports to the ways and means committee, nor is there any implication that such reports shall require oral explanation. In my opinion it cannot fairly be implied that the persons employed under said statute were to have compensation for oral explanations of their written reports. The examination of such persons before the ways and means committee upon the subjects of their reports appears to be of the same kind as the examination of any persons appearing before such committee as witnesses. Their right to compensation would be the right which witnesses ordinarily have to compensation for appearance before such committees. See R. L., c. 6, § 51; R. L., c. 204, § 21. As to the second subdivision of the second question submitted, I am of opinion that the explanation to the Council of charges for services is not a service performed for the Commonwealth but by the persons interested, in their own behalf, for which they are not entitled to extra compensation. So far as appears in your communication they appeared voluntarily before the Council. If, however, they do not so appear, but are summoned, their standing is only that of witnesses. In that case they would be entitled only to the witness fees provided by law. See R. L., c. 175, § 7; R. L., c. 204, § 2. To the Civil Service 1911 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - PUBLIC OFFICE - TRUANT OFFICER Under existing statutes a woman may not be appointed to or exercise the duties The Civil Service Commission desires my opinion upon the question whether or not a woman may be appointed to the September 28. position of truant officer, an office which is included within the classified civil service by Civil Service Rule 7, clause 19. Truant officers, under the provisions of section 12 of chapter 46 of the Revised Laws, are appointed by the school committees of the several cities and towns, and the duties to be performed by such officers are to be found in section 13 of the same chapter, which is as follows: Truant officers shall inquire into all cases arising under the provisions of sections one and six of chapter forty-four and sections three, four and |