Where no declaration of the election of any person has been made, and no person having received a majority of the votes of the township trustees of the county, and there having been no tie vote, the present incumbant would hold over until, by the act of the majority of the trustees, his successor is

SUPERINTENDENT (COUNTY)-OF NEWTON COUNTY- NO ELECTION-ETC. July 20, 1907. Mr. Fassett A. Cotton, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, City: Dear Sir-You ask me whom you shall recognize as county superintendent of Newton county, no declaration of the election of any person having been made, and no person having received a majority of the votes of the township trustees of that county, and there having been no tie vote, settled by the auditor casting his vote. I am of the opinion that the present incumbent would hold over until, by the act of the majority of the trustees, or a de- cided tie vote, his successor was duly elected, and until that suc- cessor was qualified. Neither election nor qualification, without the other, would be sufficient. Where all the trustees are present and voting the majority to be determined is computed by the number of trustees, and not by the number of votes cast for eligible persons. INSURANCE-CLASS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE. July 22, 1907. Hon. John C. Biliheimer, Auditor of State: Dear Sir-In answer to your inquiry of July 17th, 1907, which reads as follows: "Do retail merchants, engaged specially in the sale of boots and shoes, or jewelry, or groceries, or clothing, or any other line of trade; or engaged in a general line of trade, all come within the meaning of the language used in sec. 4894 I. R. S. 1901 Burns, 'That any number of per- sons not less than nine, who shall be engaged in the same class of manufacture, trade or business,' and form a class of trade or bsiness ?" I beg to advise that the language quoted in the statute referred to authorizes the organization of insurance companies for the in- surance of the property of the different classes of manufactures, trades or business, such as the iron manufacturers, lumber manu- factures, etc., and likewise the hardware trade or business, the drug trade or business, the grocery trade or business, etc. The language of that portion of the section of the statute re- ferred to in your letter, and of section 2 of the same act, which is pertinent, reads as follows: Section 1. "Any number of persons not less than nine who shall be engaged in the same class of manufacture, trade or business may associate themselves together for the purpose of a mutual insurance of their respective classes of property against loss or damage by fire," etc. Sec. 2. "Every company organized under the provi- sions of the preceding section shall indicate in its title or name the trade and class of property which it shall be or- ganized to insure, and no such company shall insure any property of any other trade or class." Then following these provisions of seetion 2, it provides penal- ties for a violation of any of the provisions of the act. . The lan- guage of this section makes it clear that the class of property to be insured is to be considered, and any trade classification-which would include many different classes of property, and, in fact, al- most all classes of property such as the retail trade-would be entirely too general and'beyond the scope of this statute. VETERINARIAN-J. K. HUGHES CASE. July 23, 1907. Dr. C. L. Boor, Secretary Indiana State Board of Veterinary Med- ical Examiners, Muncie, Indiana: Dear Sir-Your favor of July 20th is at hand presenting the following facts, in the matter of the application for a veterinar- ian's license by J. K. Hughes: In June, 1901, J. K. Hughes had in his possession an affidavit, signed and sworn to by five residents of his county, who certified to their personal acquaintance with him, his professional ability in the practice of veterinary medicine and surgery, and that he had practiced the same for five years last preceding the execution of the affidavit. On applying to Hon. Ed V. Fitzpatrick, clerk of Jay county, in June, 1901, for a license, under the act of 1901, page 421, he was informed that the license blanks had not been received, and therefore no license was issued to him at that time. When mak- ing said application Hughes had with him the original affidavit above referred to.