Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-526

Opinion No. 526. Banks and Banking-Deposit of Funds -County Commissioners-County Funds, Security fo,·-Insured Deposits-Cities and Towns -Counties. HELD: County Commissioners may not require a state bank to deposit assets to secure funds of county, city 01' town where such deposit is guaran- teed 01' insured according to law. May 3, 1934. You have submitted the following question: "State banks who have qualified under the U. S. Fedel·al Banking Act of 1933, (known as the Federal De- posit Insurance Act 01' Federal Guar- antee Deposit Act) in which State banks I understand that deposits up to the extent of $2500.00 are now in- sured 01' guaranteed by the I!'ederal Government, to what extent, if any, are these banks exempt from furnish- ing security for county deposits, or are they required to furnish security for county deposits the same as they have done in the past." Section 4767 as amended by Chapter 89, Laws of 1923, Chapter 137, Laws of 1925, Chapter 134, Laws of 1927, Chapter 4H, Laws of 1929. Chapter 23, Laws of 1933-34 Extraordinary Session, provides for the pledging of assets of state banks as security for county and city funds. The only limitation being in the last named chapter which re- cites: "" • .. Provided, however, tha,t said board of county commissioners, city or town council may require se- curity for only such portion of deposits as is not guaranteed or insured accord- ing to law." It is my opinion that this limitation does not give the board of county com- missioners authority to require secur- ity for county, city or town funds which are guaranteed or insured according to law. It is II well-known rule of law that banks ha ve only such powers as are conferred by statute expressly or hy implication. (l\farion v. Sneeden, 201 U. S. 262, 78 L. ed. 787). No fur- ther citation of authorities on this proposition is necessary.