amended by chapter 374, Laws of 1910. Referring to a license issued to a chauffeur, this subdivision provides as follows: "Such license shall be renewed annually upon the payment of the same fee as provided in this section for the original license, such renewal to take effect on the first day of February of each year." The original license can be granted the chauffeur only after an examination conducted as required by the previous provisions of the same section. It seems to me unreasonable to suppose that if a chauffeur delayed his application until the second day of February, 1911, having been granted a certificate in the year of 1910, or perhaps even in the month of January, 1911, he should be required to be re-examined. I believe that the section, properly construed, will permit a renewal at any time during the year. Until the renewal certificate is issued, of course, the chauffeur has no right to pursue his vocation. The full fee of $5 is chargeable notwithstanding the time of the year at which the renewal license is applied for, and the license terminates on the 31st day of the ensuing January. The issuing of a renewal certificate subsequent to the first day of February could, of course, have no retroactive effect to protect a chauffeur who pursued his vocation subsequently to the expiration of his original certificate and prior to the issue of his renewal certificate. The license must be renewed annually, and failure to renew in any one year, I believe, would subject the chauffeur to a loss of right of renewal and the necessity of reexamination in case he should apply for a new certificate. You are therefore advised that in order to renew a license to a chauffeur, it is not necessary that he should make application for the same prior to the first day of February, 1911, but that the same may be renewed upon his application, without re-examination, at any time prior to February 1, 1912. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS CARMODY, MORTGAGE TAX LAW. SECTION 264 - - FEES - COUNTY CLERKS County Clerks or recording officers entitled to no fee for making endorsements on bonds required by section 264, but should be reimbursed for necessary clerk hire in connection therewith. Law does not require seal, but where demanded County Clerk entitled to fee of twelve cents under provisions of section 3304, Code of Civil Procedure (See Sec. 67, Public Officers' Law). ALBANY, January 7, 1911. Hon. EGBURT E. WOODBURY, Chairman, State Board of Tax Commissioners, Albany: DEAR SIR.- I have received your favor of the 6th instant stating that the State Board of Tax Commissioners has been asked to make a ruling in regard to the demand of recording officers that they be paid a fee for making the endorsements on bonds required by section 264 of the Tax Law, and requesting my opinion and advice in relation thereto. The section to which you refer provides for the payment of a mortgage recording tax upon bonds secured by prior advance mortgages. Its provisions, so far as it is pertinent to your inquiry, is as follows: "In case said mortgage was given to secure the payment of a series of bonds, the mortgagor may, at the time of paying such tax, present to the recording officer, the bonds representing the portion of the principal indebtedness secured by said mortgage upon which the tax is to be paid, and also file with said recording officer a statement verified by the mortgagor or an officer or duly authorized agent or attorney of the mortgagor specifying that said bonds, so presented, are the bonds representing that portion of the principal indebtedness secured by said mortgage upon which the tax is to be paid and that said bonds are secured by a mortgage recorded in said office stating the date of said mortgage and the liber and page of the record of the same. It shall be the duty of such recording officer to indorse upon each of said bonds, so presented to him, a statement signed by him to the effect that the tax imposed by this article on that portion of the principal indebtedness secured by said mortgage represented by said bonds has been paid, and said statement shall be conclusive proof of such payment." Section 262 of the same law provides as follows: Expenses of officers.- Recording officers and county treasurers and the chamberlain of the city of New York, shall severally be entitled to receive all their necessary expenses for the purposes of this article, including printing, hire of clerks and assistants, being first approved and allowed by the state board of tax commissioners, which shall be retained by them out of the moneys coming into their hands." Under this latter provision you advise me that your board approves of a monthly allowance to the respective recording officers of the State for the hire of clerks and assistants, and the payment to them of other expenses incurred in the performance of the duties required by this statute. Beyond this allowance for expenses incurred, I find no provision in the statute for any allowance to county clerks for fees or services. In the absence of express provision of law authorizing the same a public officer has no right to make a charge for any service. Section 67 of the Public Officers' Law provides in its first subdivision as follows: "Fees of public officers. 1. Each public officer upon whom a duty is expressly imposed by law, must execute the same without fee or reward, except where a fee or other compensation therefor is expressely allowed by law." Furthermore, I find no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure, or elsewhere, authorizing any charge or fee to the county clerk for the rendition of the services in question. The statement referred to in the statute is not, in my opinion, a certificate. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the county clerk is entitled to receive no compensation for the discharge of the services referred to in the article known as the Mortgage Tax Law, but that he is entitled to be fully reimbursed for all necessary disbursements made by him for clerk hire or otherwise. But, I observe from your letter that a form has been prescribed requiring the 'impress of the seal of the county clerk, as indicated in the exhibit accompanying your favor. The law does not seem to require a seal. It requires merely a statement signed by the recording office, as stated above. If a seal upon the statement be required by any person or official, the county clerk would be entitled to the fee provided by section 3304 of the Code of Civil Procedure "For sealing any paper when required, twelve cents." Respectfully submitted, THOMAS CARMODY, Attorney-General. -- BANKING LAW GENERAL CORPORATIONS LAW - SECTIONS 38, 39. When corporate existence of State Bank has expired, it cannot revive its charter but should reincorporate. No provision in section 38, General Corporations Law, applies to banks. ALBANY, January 7, 1911. Hon. GEORGE I. SKINNER, First Deputy Superintendent, Banking Department, Albany: Dear Sir. Your favor of the 6th inst., following the inquiry made to my predecessor in office by Mr. O. H. Cheney, Superintendent of Banks, under date of December 21, is at hand. The inquiry is as follows: "Will you kindly advise me of the proper procedure required to revive a State bank charter which has expired by limitation through the neglect of its officers to secure an extension thereof ?" I have examined the statutes governing this situation and also the correspondence submitted to you by various attorneys and others interested in the several banks in question whose charters have been permitted to expire without renewal. The only pro vision of law to which my attention has been called, permitting the revival of the corporate existence of a corporation whose term of existence has expired is § 38 of the General Corporation Law, which is, in part, as follows: 66 If the term of existence of any domestic corporation shall have expired and it shall be made satisfactorily to appear to the supreme court that such corporation was legally organized pursuant to any law of this state, and that it shall have issued its bonds payable at a date beyond the date fixed in its charter or certificate of incorporation for the expiration of its corporate existence, and such bonds shall be unmatured and unpaid, the supreme court may, upon the application of any person interested and upon such notice to such other parties as the court may require, by order, authorize the filing and recording of a certificate reviving the existence of such corporation, upon such conditions and with such limitations as such order shall specify, and extending such corporate existence for a term not exceeding the term for which it was originally incorporated." This provision authorizing the revival of corporate existence in certain cases, clearly does not apply to banks. It is limited to such corporations as shall have issued its bonds payable beyond the date fixed by its charter or certificate of incorporation. The banks in question, therefore, are not within this provision of law and there is no other provision of law, of which I am aware, which can authorize the revival of their charters. It has been urged, I observe, by some, that the following section (39) has some bearing upon the question by reason of its first clause, reading as follows: "In the case of a corporation formed under or subject to the banking law, no certificate of extension or revival shall be filed or recorded unless it shall have endorsed thereon the written approval of the superintendent of banks;" It has been urged that, by inference, inasmuch as the approval of the Superintendent of Banks is required for the revival of the corporate existence of a corporation formed under or subject to the Banking Law, that therefore banks which are formed under |