Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburgh Railway Company, for permission to make a change in or addition to Bridge No. L-18.07, Indiana Branch, across a branch of Pine Run, about 300 feet from where said branch empties into Pine Run, and about 2 miles north of Home Station, in Rayne Township, Indiana County, Pa.

Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Company, for permission to make a change in or addition to Bridge No. L-19.22, Indiana Branch, across a branch of Pine Run, about 30 feet from where said branch empties into Pine Run, and about 1 mile north of Home Station, in Rayne Township, Indiana County, Pa.

Peterman Heirs, for permission to construct a coal trestle across Crooked Creek, about one-half mile northeast of Chambersville, Rayne Township, Indiana County, Pa.

The Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad Company, for permission to construct an extension to a bridge across an unnamed stream northeasterly from Greenville, Mercer County, Pa.

The Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad Company, for permission to construct an extension to a bridge across an unnamed stream southeasterly from Greenville, Mercer County, Pa.

Meadow Brook Trout Preserve, for permission to construct a dam across Poke Valley Creek, Hamilton Township, Monroe County, Pa.

John Meiser, for permission to make a change in or addition to a dam on Butz Run, Pocono Township, Monroe County, Pa. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, for permission to construct a bridge across the Allegheny River, at Oil City, Venango County, Pa.

The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, for permission to construct a bridge over the Conemaugh River, about 1,600 feet above its junction with the Loyalhanna Creek, in Loyalhanna Township, Westmoreland County, Pa.

York & Gettysburg Turnpike Road Company, for permission to construct a reinforced concrete bridge across Hoke's Run, where said Turnpike crosses Hoke's Run about 1 mile west of York or where Western Maryland Railway crosses turnpike near Toll Gate No. 1, York County, Pa.

Held Under Advisement.

The Pittsburgh Railways Company, for permission to construct a bridge over Streets Run, 2,400 feet above the mouth, Hays Borough, Allegheny County, Pa.

The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, for permission to construct a bridge over Streets Run, 2,750 feet from its mouth, Hays Borough, Allegheny County, Pa.

Pennsylvania Railroad Company, for permission to make a fill and reclaim land in the Allegheny River, on the north side of the river from Oil creek, to a point about 2,000 feet east thereof, in Venango County, Pa.

Keystone Coal Company, for permission to make a fill along the Conemaugh River, on both the Westmoreland and Indiana County sides, approximately 2 miles east of where Loyalhanna Creek empties into said river, in Westmoreland and Indiana Counties, Pa.

Reports Considered and Filed.

F. J. Wagner, protest of, against the dumping of mine waste into Bushy Run Creek, near Manor, Westmoreland County, Pa., by the Pittsburgh & Westmoreland Coal Company.

State Highway Department

BIDS ASKED.

Pennsylvania State Highway Department, Harrisburg. Sealed proposals will be received at said office until 10 a. m., February 19 and 20, 1917, when bids will be publicly opened and scheduled and contract awarded as soon thereafter as possible for furnishing the Department with Crushed Stone and Pea Gravel, Trap Rock, Calcareous Sandstone, Limestone, or Slag Chips, to be used in maintenance work. Bidding blanks, specifications and full particulars on application to F. B. Black, State Highway Commissioner.

Executive Department

APPOINTMENTS.

Justices of the Peace-Harry L. Bail and Dexter W. Spalding, Conneautville, Crawford county; Robert J. Moore, Clinton township, Venango county.

Trustees of the State Asylum for the Chronic Insane of Pennsylvania, South Mountain-Joseph L. Lemberger, Lebanon, for the term of three years, to be computed from June 12, 1915; E. E. Beidleman, Harrisburg, for the term of three years, to be computed from June 12, 1915; J. Howell Cummings, Philadelphia, to serve until June 12, 1918, vice Thomas F. Merritt, deceased.

Attorney General's Department

IN RE ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS.

The return of fines and penalties imposed, which is required by Sec. 22 of the Act of July 7, 1913, P. L. 672, to be made by a Justice of the Peace or other officer, must be sworn to before some other officer than the person making the return.

1917.

Opinion to Hon. Frank B. Black, Highway Commissioner.
WM. H. KELLER, Deputy Attorney General, February 8,

I have your favor of the 25th ult., inquiring whether, under Section 22 of the law relating to motor vehicles, approved July 7, 1913, P. L. 672, which provides that sworn statements of all fines and penalties collected under the provisions of the act for violation of the same shall be made to the State Highway Department by the officer imposing or receiving the same, a Justice of the Peace or other officer making such return can take his own affidavit and swear to the truth of the matters therein contained, or whether such statement should be sworn to by him before some other officer than himself.

While an examination of the decisions in this State fails to discover any ruling of the courts squarely upon the subject, in my judgment, this is due not to any uncertainty as to the law on the question, but rather to the fact that it has heretofore been universally accepted that no officer could legally take his own affidavit.

In the case of King vs. Wallace, 3 Durnford & East, 403, it was held that an affidavit to a petition for an attachment for contempt of court might not be taken before the attorney or agent of the prosecutor.

In many states of this country it has been held that an interest, such as being a partner or attorney for the affiant, or an officer or stockholder of a corporation interested, will disqualify

an officer or magistrate from taking an affidavit. This has been decided not only because of positive statutes forbidding the same, but on the broad ground of public policy.

In the case of Fair vs. Bank, 67 L. R. A., 851, the Supreme Court of Kansas said:

"That one who is of counsel, or is related to either party or is otherwise interested in the event of an action should be barred, even in the absence of our statutory provision, is too evident for discussion."

The following extracts from Ruling Case Law gives the best thought from the reported decisions:

*

*

The proper administration of an oath or affirma-
tion requires concurrent action on the part of the af-
fiant and an authorized officer. Either it must be ad-
ministered by the officer to the affiant, or asservation
must be made to the truth of the matters contained in
the affidavit by the party making it, to the officer with
the latter's consent; otherwise there can be no affida-
vit
To make a valid oath or affirmation
there must be some overt act which shows that there was
an intention to take an oath or affirmation on the one
hand and an intention to administer it on the other; for
even though such intention actually did exist, if it was
not manifested by an unambiguous act, perjury could
not be based thereon, and the affidavit would be insuf-
ficient." (Vol. I, p. 765.)

The law contemplates one person who administers the oath and another person who takes the oath. An oath cannot properly be administered by one man to himself. This position is supported by the fact that it would be impossible to convict a person taking a false oath before himself of perjury, for ordinarily the person administering the oath is the only witness to prove its administration, and he could not be compelled to testify in a