It is not a violation of the banking laws for building and loan associations to receive moneys on deposit, and to issue certificates of deposit payable on demand or after notice.

have contsructed two cottages, with connecting covered corridors, for use in connection witfi the hospital, and to defray the ex- penses of such construction out of the specific appropriation of $60,000 made by the last general assembly for "Two cottages and appurtenances." You state that at the time of your report to the legislature, submitted November 22, 1906, it was estimated that $60,000 would cover cost of erection and equipment; but that the lowest bid received for the construction of these buildings is in excess of the estimate made by the management. I am of the opinion that the entire appropriation may, under these circumstances, be expended in the erection of the cottages and corridors. These are clearly included within the terms of the appropriation; and in the absence of any express mention of equipment in the appropriating act, I consider that you would be justified in undertaking the construction as planned; leaving the matter of equipment to be provided for hereafter. BANKING LAWS-CERTAIN ACTS OF BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS. July 13, 1907. Hon. John C. Billheimer, Auditor of State: Dear Sir-In your communication of July 11th you ask: (1) "Is it not a violation of the banking laws of this state for building and loan associations to receive moneys on deposit, and to issue therefor certificates of deposit payable on demand or after notice?" (2) "Is it not in contravention of the banking laws of this state for building and loan associations to receive moneys from investors other than from the sale of stock of such associations ?" Replying to your first inquiry: I do not consider receiving of money deposits and issuance of certificates therefor to be in violation of the banking laws of this state. I find no section of the latter statutes which seems to forbid such action on the part of building and loan associations. However, I am of the opinion that this practice is ultra vires and therefore unauthorized by law. A certificate of depositt is in the nature of a promissory note (Gregg v. Union Bank, 87 Ind. 238, and cases cited, p. 239); and the transaction is tanta- mount to a loan of money from the depositor to the association. There A no express power granted by law to these corporations 243 to engage in such a business; hence, unless it is implied, it does not exist. In an opinion rendered to Hon. W. -. Hart, Auditor of State, by my predecessor, Hon. W. L. Taylor, the view was expressed and reinforced by authorities, that building and loan associations have no power to borrow money for the purpose of re-loaning the same. (See Biennial Report of Attorney-General Taylor, for 1900-1902). In addition to the cases therein cited, holding that no implied power of borrowing exists, see Marion Trust Co. v. Cresent Loan Co., 27 Ind. App. 451, 455, 456; Columbus Bldg. Assn. v. Kriete, 192 Ill. 128, 61 N. E. 510, 513; Towle v. Building Co., 78 Fed. 688; Forwood v. Ewbank, 106 Ky. 291, 295. Upon full examination of the question, I concur with the view of Attorney-General Taylor. However, these institutions have the implied power possessed by all business corporations, to borrow money in aid of the gen- eral purposes of the association (4 Am. & Eng. Encyc. Law, p. 1023; Cook v. Equitable Assoc., 104 Ga. §814, 829; Powell's Ap- peal, 93 Mo. App. 296). According to the view above indicated, the general loaning of money is not one of the statutory purposes of building and loan companies. I am therefore of the opinion that while no section of the banking law is violated by this practice, it is ultra vires. What has been said supra virtually answers your second question. While, under certain circumstances, these associations might borrow money as a temporary expedient, or strictly in aid of their corporate purposes (4 Am. & Eng. Encyc. Law, p. 1022), they can not make it a part of their regular business to receive moneys from investors other than from purchasers of their stock. TAX-MEMBERS OF INDIANA NATIONAL GUARD AND MALE INHABITANTS OVER AGE OF FIFTY YEARS, EXEMPT FROM POLL TAX. July 15, 1907. Hon. John C. Billheimer, Auditor of State: Dear Sir--In answer to your inquiry as to -whether, under Chapter 249, page 505 of the acts of the general assembly of the state of Indiana, session of 1907, members of the Indiana National Guard and male inhabitants over the age of fifty years, are ex- exempt from poll tax, I beg leave to advise that section 1 of said act reads as follows: