Who may be registered as an optometrist in the State of Indiana.

made in connection therewith are first approved by the auditor of state. It is my understanding of the law that you may also use for these purposes, any unexpended balance of the labor fund, to procure the necdssary labor incident to the drilling, constructing and equipping of such well. OPTOMETRY-WHO MAY BE REGISTERED; PEDDLERS, ETC. June 24, 1907. ion. John H. Ellis, Secretary South Bend, Indiana: Dear Sir-Your communication of June 22 received in which you request my opinion: First. Whether an individual can canvass for the sale of spectacles from house 'to house and town to town, and be con- sidered as practicing optometry in the meaning of the optometry act. Second. Can a man devote eight or ten hours a day soliciting patronage from town to town and from house to house, and claim that he maintains a permanent office in his residence, and where he has no apartment arranged so as to represent a public office ? Third. Can a man register under the exemption clause of the act, who accepts a position in a music store in another state? Can he be considered to be in the actual and continuous practice of optometry in the meaning of the act? Section 4 of the act approved March 9, 1907, (Acts 1907, p. 311) defines the practice of optometry and is as follows: "That the practice of optometry be defined as follows: The employment of mechanical means for testing and meas- uring the refractive and accommodative conditions of the eye, without the employment of drugs or medicine, and the measuring and grinding of lenses, the fitting, bend- ing and adjusting of spectacles and eye glasses with lenses for the betterment of vision. Provided, That the fitting or peddling of spectacles and eye glasses by itinerant opti- cians prior to this act shall not be construed to mean the practice of optometry in the meaning of this act." Section 3 of the act in question provides: "Every person before beginning the practice of op- tometry in this state, after the passage of this act, shall pass an examination before the state board of examiners." 228 And section 7 of the act provides a means by which persons of experience may be registered without examination. It reads as follows: "Every person who has been engaged in the actual and continuous practice of optometry as defined by section 4, in the state of Indiana, for three (3) years immediately prior to the passage of this act shall within ninety (90) days thereafter file affidavit in satisfactory proof thereof with said board, which shall make and keep a record of such persons, and shall in the consideration in (of) the sum of five ($5.00) dollars issue to him a certificate of registration." The proviso to section 4 provides that the mere fitting or peddling of spectacles and eye glasses by itinerant opticians, prior to the enactment of the law should not be construed to mean the practice of optometry, but that provision does not mean that the fact that a person has fitted and peddled spectacles in connection with the real practice of optometry will necessarily exclude him from the class of practitioners who, under the provisions of sec- tions 4 and 7, are entitled to register without examination. It does mean, however, that the mere fitting or peddling of spec- tacles and eye glasses alone by itinerants shall not entitle them to register without first passing the examination. It is my opinion that if a person has practiced optometry continuously for three years in Indiana before the passage of the act in question and has employed "mechanical means for testing and measuring the re- fractive and accommodative conditions of the eye without the employment of drugs or medicine, and the measuring and grind- ing of lenses, the fitting, bending and adjusting of spectacles and eye glasses with lenses for the betterment of vision," he is en- titted to registration 'without examination, even though he has also sometimes traveled about fitting spectacles and eye glasses and selling them. It is a question of fact and not of law as to whether in a given case an applicant is entitled to registration without examination, and your board must decide each case as it may arise, in view of the particular facts and circumstances met with. A person might practice optometry and'at the same time hold a position in a music store. The fact of whether he was practic- ing optometry at the same time, or whether he had continuously practiced it for three years in Indiana, is one of fact for your determination. A person might practice optometry within the meaning of this act and yet sell spectacles from house to house and from town to town, provided he was doing the things described in section four of the act, a question of fact for you to determine. I think the legislature intended by the proviso to section 4 that one who had been traveling about fitting and peddling spec- tacles, e., and who had not been employing mechanical means for testing and measuring the refractive and accommodative con- ditions of the eye, etc., should not be entitled to registration without examination; that body was not seeking to deprive men from peddling glasses, but rather to protect the public against incompetent opticians, and if a person who had been fitting and peddling spectacles, and at the same time was practicing op- tometry as. defined in section 4, and had continued to do so for three years in Indiana, such a person notwithstanding he had fitted and peddled, would be entitled to registration without ex- amination. LABOR COMMISSIONER-RESIDENCE AND TRAVELING EXPENSES. June 26, 1907. Hon. G. W. Purcell, Labor Commissioner, State House, City: Dear Sir-Answering your recent favor requiring my opinion as to whether it is necessary, under the law, to make your home in Indianapolis, and as to whether the law entitles you to your expenses while attending to your official duties in Indianapolis while living in Terre Haute, I beg to advise you: It is my opinion that so long as you hold the office of labor commissioner your official domicile will be in the city of Indianap- olis, regardless of Where you actually live; that you may live any where in the state so long as you can satisfactorily attend to your duties, and that, under the statute, you would be entitled to your traveling expenses in traveling to and from Indianapolis. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the law does not entitle you to any expenses while attending to your official duties at the seat of government.