OPINIONS of THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1970 ARTHUR K. BOLTON ATTORNEY GENERAL ATLANTA THE HARRISON COMPANY PUBLISHERS TABLE OF CONTENTS OFFICIAL OPINIONS, 1970 ......................... . POSITION PAPER RELATING TO THE GEORGIA COASTAL MARSHES ................... 279 PREFACE TO UNOFFICIAL OPINIONS .............. 281 DIGESTS OF UNOFFICIAL OPINIONS ............... 282 TABLE OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS CITED ............................................ 361 TABLE OF GEORGIA LAWS CITED .................. 363 TABLE OF GEORGIA CODE ANNOTATED SECTIONS CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 INDEX .............................................. 405 ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF GEORGIA HENRY P. FARRER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1868-1872 N.J. HAMMOND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1872-1877 ROBERT N. ELY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1877-1880 CLIFFORD L. ANDERSON . . . . . . . . . . . . 1880-1890 GEORGE N. LESTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1890-1891 W. A. LITTLE . . . . . . . . . 1891-1892 1. M. TERRELL . . . . . . . . 1892-1902 BOYKIN WRIGHT ............ . 1902-1902 JOHN C. HART . . . . . . . . . . 1902-1910 HEWLETT A. HALL . . . . 1910-1911 THOMAS S. FELDER .. . 1911-1914 WARREN GRICE ......... . 1914-1915 CLIFFORD WALKER ...... . 1915-1920 R. A. DENNY . . . . . . GEORGE M. NAPIER . . . . . . LAWRENCE S. CAMP ... . M. 1. YEOMANS .. ELLIS G. ARNALL . GRADY HEAD ....... . EUGENE COOK .... . ARTHUR K. BOLTON .. 1920-1921 1921-1932 1932-1932 1933-1939 1939-1943 1943-1945 1945-1965 1965- lll ARTHUR K. BOLTON The Attorney General " LEGAL STAFF OF DEPARTMENT OF LAW DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1970 NAME Bolton, Arthur K. Hill, Harold N., Jr. Beasley, Dorothy T. Bomar, Robert S. Brown, William B. Castellani, Robert J. Chambers, Richard L. Childers, William R., Jr. Coleman, J. Robert Crumbley, R. Alex, Jr. Davis, Wiley H. Evans, Alfred L., Jr. Evans, Larry H. Gordon, Marion 0. Harper, William L. Hinchey, John W. Jones, Carl C., III King, David L. G., Jr. Mallard, Wade V., Jr. McDonald, Louis F. Merrill, Charles B., Jr. Michael, H. Perry Napier, Elaine Nardone, A. Joseph, Jr. Odom, Donn L. Perry, James Lee Reeves, Robert S. Robins, Mathew Ruskaup, Larry D. Shell, Robert H. Sligh, John A., Jr. Stanton, Courtney Wilder Stokes, Arch Y. Sweeney, Timothy J. Talley, James B. Tripp, David A. Walden, John C. TITLE Attorney General Executive Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General v FOREWORD It is the duty of the Attorney General, when required to do so by the Governor, to give his opinion in writing on any question oflaw connected with the interest of the State or with the duties of any of its departments. Ga. Code Ann. 40-1602 Par.l. To avoid requiring the Governor to endorse requests for opinions originating with the departments of the State, the Attorney General receives such requests directly from the department heads. Opinions rendered to the Governor and to the heads of departments are classified as "official opinions." In addition to "official opinions," the office of the Attorney General renders "unofficial opinions" to other state officers (e.g. legislators, district attorneys) and to county and municipal attorneys on questions involving the general laws of the State. Each "unofficial opinion" bears the following notation: "The views expressed herein are the completely unofficial views of the writer only, and should be considered as information only." In the interest of economy and in order to avoid confusion, the "Unofficial Opinions" have been digested and separated from the "Official Opinions." These digested opinions follow the "Official Opinions" herein, and are preceded by a Preface to Unofficial Opinions, more fully explaining the treatment of such opinions. The "Official Opinions" are serially numbered "70-1," "70-2," etc. The "Unofficial Opinion" numbers are preceded by the letter "U," Thus, "U70-1," "U70-2," etc., refer to "Unofficial Opinions." Vl OFFICIAL OPINIONS of THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1970 OPINION 70-1 To: Director, Georgia Department of Public Health January 2, 1970 Re: Vital records; newspaper representatives should be allowed access to the Health Department's vital records files. Please refer to your letter of December 4, 1969, wherein you request my official opinion as to whether the Georgia Department of Public Health should allow newspaper representatives access to the Department's vital records files, and, if so, whether a charge could be imposed to cover Departmental costs. As you are probably aware, Ga. Code 88-1723, officially Codified from Ga. Laws 1964, pp. 499, 594, as amended, makes it " . . . unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or disclose information contained in vital records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record except as authorized by regulation or when so ordered by a superior court. ..." Ga. Code 88-1723(d) adds the proviso that " . . . the restrictions in this section shall not prohibit the official organ or newspaper of a county from publishing the names and addresses of births and deaths. . . ." While the above provisions seem to be clear in their intent, this office, after extensive research, questions the constitutionality of this Code Section. Firstly, the Courts, if faced with this question, might well hold that to deny inspection of vital records to everyone except the official organ or newspaper of a county amounts to an arbitrary and unreasonable legislative classification. In the case of The Ledger-Enquirer Company v. Brown, 213 Ga. 538 (1957), an attack was made upon the constitutionality of an act making any corporation engaged in publishing newspapers, magazines or periodicals having circulation in more than one county in this State subject to suit in any county where that newspaper or publication was delivered regularly to fifty or more subscribers, in any action for damages arising in such county. The court in its decision noted that the legislature may, for purposes of legislation, classify and may legislate with respect to each classification. It noted, however, that the classification must be natural, reasonably related to the subject matter of the legislation, and must furnish some legitimate ground of differentiation. Applying these guidelines, the court held that there was obviously no reasonable basis for the classification there made and the act was therefore violative of Art. I, Sec. I, Par. II of the Constitution of Georgia, in that it denied the plaintiff the impartial and complete protection of the law. There have been numerous other cases in which the Georgia Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional 2 arbitrary and unreasonable legislative classifications. See Jenkins v. Manry, et a/., 216 Ga. 538 (1961); McAllister v. State, 220 Ga. 570 (1965); Hughes v. Reynolds, 223 Ga. 727 (1967). Not only is Code Section 88-1723(d) subject to attack as being an arbitrary and unreasonable classification of newspapers, there is a distinct possibility that the entire Section constitutes an abridgment of freedom of speech and press. In the case of Providence Journal Co. v. McCoy, 94 F. Supp. 186 (1950), an ordinance was passed by a city council prohibiting any person from examining city records pertaining to tax cancellations or abatements without the city's express permission. A subsequent resolution, however, allowed one of the local newspapers access to such records. The court held that this action constituted a denial of equal protection and an abridgment of freedom of speech and press. As in the above cited Georgia cases, the court found no reasonable basis for restricting such examination and publication, and felt that the attempt to prohibit publication, especially where another competing newspaper was not prohibited, was unconstitutional and void. Therefore, based upon the above decisions, it is my official opinion that access to the Department's vital records files should not be denied to newspaper representatives. To avoid administrative complications, however, it appears that either a regulation or policy statement should be formulated by the Department to provide for supervised inspections or publication of monthly listings of births and deaths in this State. Turning now to your second question, it is my official opinion that the Department may prescribe fees to cover the cost of supervising such inspections or furnishing such lists. Ga. Code 88-1725 provides that "The Department shall prescribe the fees to be paid for copies and searches of certificates or records and for certified copies of certificates or records . . . ." Furthermore, Ga. Code Ann. 40-2702 provides for the charging of fees for the services of the Deputy who supervises the inspection of public records. OPINION 70-2 To: Joint Secretary, State Examining Boards January 2, 1970 Re: Realtor's contracts; reference in contract to real estate board where realtor is not member of such board. This will acknowledge the recent inquiry from your office wherein a letter from a Macon realtor sought an explanation as to whether or not Rule 520-3-.08 of the Georgia Real Estate Commission precluded the use of the words "Macon Real Estate Board" in his sales contract form 3 where the realtor is not a member of the Macon Real Estate Board and where the reference to the Macon Real Estate Board is only to show that commissions will be paid pursuant to a schedule adopted by the Macon Real Estate Board. Notwithstanding the fact that the realtor is in his first year of business and is thus in a "probationary" year insofar as membership on the Macon Real Estate Board is concerned, he is nevertheless still a licensed real estate broker or salesman and is, thus, bound to adhere to the laws of this state and to the rules and regulations of the Georgia Real Estate Commission. However, the words, "Macon Real Estate Board," as the realtor uses them in his sales contract, in my opinion, do not intimate to the general public that the use of the phrase was to convey that the realtor was a member of the Macon Real Estate Board. Rather, the realtor appears to use the phrase only to show that commissions will be paid pursuant to a schedule adopted by another group, i.e., the Macon Real Estate Board. Accordingly it is my official opinion that the realtor may use the phrase "Macon Real Estate Board" as he now uses it as the phrase does not purport to state that he is, in fact, a member of the Macon Real Estate Board. OPINION 70-3 To: Director, State Highway Department January 6, 1970 Re: Highways; exercise by railroad of rights under agreements with utilities as prerequisite to payment to railroad by State Highway Department. This is in reply to a request from Mr. Roscoe C. Tate, State Highway Utilities Engineer, for a legal opinion as to the Highway Department's obligation to reimburse Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company for work done on a construction project. The Highway Department entered into a force account agreement with Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company on Project SG-2120(1), Columbia County, covering the cost of a new railn>ad highway overhead bridge whereby a grade crossing was eliminated. The agreement covered estimated charges for handling wire line changes by railroad forces, consisting of roadways, labor, assisting Western Union, and communication expenses, consisting of materials, labor, engineering, and contingencies. A controversy arose relative to reimbursement for work to be performed by Western Union in connection with the proposed construction. Western Union billed the Department for work done by 4 their forces ($4, 165.00), but payment was denied pursuant to an official opinion of the Attorney General dated January 16, 1962 [Op. Atty. Gen. 1962, p. 282]. By letter dated January 20, 1969, the Railroad requested payment for their bill submitted May 22, 1967 ($774.85), with the explanation that the billing covered expenses incurred by Western Union on this project and billed to the Railroad. Under these conditions, Mr. Tate asked whether it is legal for the Highway Department to reimburse Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company for the bill submitted May 22, 1967. It appears that Western Union did the relocation work for itself and for the Railroad. Since the force account agreement was executed, the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company have merged under the name of Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company. Paragraph 10 of the force account agreement provides, in essence, that the agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties thereto. Therefore, Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company would be considered as a valid party to the original agreement, and would be bound by all the covenants and conditions contained therein. The original agreement between the Department and the Railroad provides in part: ". . . in the event it shall be necessary in connection with or incident to the work of constructing said bridge structure and approaches thereto, to make any changes in, or to remove or relocate any wire lines, pipelines, poles or other supports therefor, such changes in or removal or relocation of said facilities shall be handled by the Department directly with the owner or owners thereof and the cost of such changes will be included in the total cost of the project as provided in said preliminary estimate." The subject of the agreement pertains to the elimination of a grade crossing with 10 per cent of the cost being borne by the Railroad and 90 per cent by the Federal Government. The preliminary estimate, which is attached to and made a part of the original agreement, contains certain charges for wire line changes by railroad forces assisting Western Union. A report by the auditing section of the Highway Department reveals that such communication lines were owned by the Railroad and were, by joint use agreement, installed on poles owned by Western Union. The bill dated May 22, 1967, includes only costs connected with relocation of the lines, and does not include any costs for pole relocation. The audit further revealed that the bill has been recorded and carried on the books of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company as an account payable to Western Union. 5 Paragraph 5 of the original force account agreement provides, in part, that the bills for the relocation work done by the Railroad are ". . . to be prepared in accordance with the provisions of . . . PPM 30-3." This PPM specifies that the approval given by the Bureau of Public Roads of the agreement between the parties for the payment of the cost of adjusting the Railroad's own facilities is contingent upon the Railroad exercising its rights under its agreement with any utility occupying the right-of-way. An agreement between Western Union Telegraph Company and Atlantic Coast Line Railroad dated July 1, 1932, covers the operations of Western Union on Railroad right-of-way, and sets forth the rights of the parties in detail. Paragraph 18 of the agreement provides: "The Telegraph Company will also furnish at convenient points on the lines of railroad covered by this agreement, as and when necessary, all poles, telegraph crossarms, telegraph wire, insulators, and other telegraph material, and the necessary foremen and skilled labor, for the maintenance, relocation, removal, and reconstruction of all the lines of poles, telegraph crossarms, telegraph wires, conduit lines, and telegraph cable conductors belonging to either party hereto, and covered by this agreement. The Railroad Companies will furnish unskilled labor as defined in paragraphs 24 and 25 for said maintenance, relocation, removal, and reconstruction." Therefore, if the wires and material included in the bill from Seaboard Coast Line Railroad apply only to telegraph crossarms, wires, etc., then the Highway Department should only reimburse the Railroad for the unskilled labor used in the relocation work. However, construing the remaining provisions of the agreement, if the wires and material used apply to wires other than strictly telegraph wires, it is my official opinion that the Highway Department should reimburse the Railroad for the entire amount of the bill submitted May 22, 1967 ($774.85). After reaching the foregoing conclusion, we contacted Mr. Tate and he in turn contacted the Railroad. By letter dated December 29, 1969, the Railroad's attorney, Mr. Schlesinger, has stated in part as follows: "The communication work covered by the bill in question actually was incurred through a subsequent agreement or understanding whereby Western Union prepared a cost estimate for relocating both its and the Railroad's facilities on this project. The pro rata share of relocating the Railroad's four telephone lines and proportionate share of cross-arms is all that this bill represents. 6 The bill in no way represents any expense incurred by Western Union in removing its own facilities. * * * * * "In other words, in my judgment, since were were entitled to reimbursement for relocating our facilities, this reimbursement should not be denied merely because we contracted with Western Union for them to perform our communication relocation in addition to theirs." If your audit confirms that the $774.85 expense was incurred for the relocation of Railroad property (as opposed to Western Union property) then payment would be in order. OPINION 70-4 To: Director, State Highway Department January 7, 1970 Re: Highway contracts; independent contractor may not take advantage of any apparent error or omission in plans or specifications. This is in reply to a recent letter from Mr. C. H. Breedlove, State Highway Construction Engineer, requesting an opinion on whether an independent contractor has, by apparently taking advantage of an error or omission, violated Articles 2.08(C) and 5.05(A) of the State Highway Department of Georgia Standard Specifications. Further if a violation has occurred, does the Highway Department have the right to obtain from the contractor an adjustment in price for the quantity involved in the violation. The letter of Mr. Breedlove reveals that the State Highway Department of Georgia awarded a contract to perform certain highway construction work. Before any work had been performed or any work order issued, it was discovered that only thirty-five per cent (35%) of a bid item quantity was included in the proposal submitted to the Department by the prime contractor. An examination of the bids received for the particular project involved, as well as all other projects involved in the particular letting, revealed that in all probability the first three bidders on this particular project had detected the error and had at least doubled the normal bid price for the bid item in question. The other two bidders on this project reflected a bid price that was below the average bid on the remaining projects, which in most instances was for a lesser quantity. The item in question, Item 312-Bituminous Prime, did 7 not contain Item 216-Graded Aggregate Cement Stabilized Subbase Course, which is normally paid for on a square yard basis. This was an omission in the quantity of prime provided for bid purposes. Normally, all bituminous prime used on the project is lumped into one item of 312-Bituminous Prime, regardless of its use. Mr. Breedlove requests an opinion on whether the Highway Department may: "I. After the award of the contract and issuance of the work order, request from the Prime Contractor a supplemental agreement to reduce the price of the omitted portion of the item to a price that would be in line with the current prices being bid. "2. If not able to enforce (l) on the Contractor, then provide another pay item to be identified by a name other than Bituminous Prime and used only for curing of Graded Aggregate Cement Stabilized Subbase Course. "3. If no agreement can be reached by (I) or (2), instruct the Prime Contractor to perform this work by Force Account Agreement." The particular contract in question was let under the 1966 Standard Specifications of the State Highway Department of Georgia, and, therefore, references to articles of the Standard Specifications in this opinion will refer to the 1966 set of Standard Specifications. Article 2.08(C) concerns the rejection of proposals, if the contractor submits a bid with unit prices which are obviously unbalanced. Considering the facts presented in the letter of Mr. Breedlove, it is apparent that this particular article would not apply to the situation at hand. It deals with the rejection of proposals and would not apply to a contract, such as the instant one, which has been awarded and properly executed by both the Highway Department and the contractor. Therefore, the contractor has not violated Article 2.08(C) of the Standard Specifications. Article 5.05(A) provides as follows: "A. Errors and Omissions: The Contractor shall take no advantage of any apparent error or omission in the plans or specifications; but if such error or omission does occur, the Engineer shall have the authority to make corrections and interpretations deemed necessary to fulfill the intent of the plans and specifications; nor shall such corrections or interpretations, if any, be construed as a waiver of any Contract provision." In writing this opinion, this office makes no determination as to whether or not the contractor has taken advantage of an obvious error or 8 omission in the Plans and Specifications. The State Highway Engineer, pursuant to Article 5.01(A) is apparently the person to make this determination. Article 5.01(A) provides, in part, that: "His [the State Highway Engineer's] decision shall be final on all questions related to the interpretation of the Specifications and the Plans and as to the acceptable fulfillment of the Contract by the Contractor." (Matter in brackets added.) Therefore, it appears that the decision of the State Highway Engineer on all questions relating to the interpretation of the Plans and Specifications would be final. An exception to this construction is where, in a contract between a contractor and the State Highway Department, it is stipulated that a decision of the State Highway Engineer, upon any question connected with the execution of the contract should be final and conclusive, his decision upon any such question should be held binding upon the parties, in the absence of fraud, or such gross mistake as would necessarily imply bad faith, or a failure to exercise an honest judgment. State Highway Dep't v. MacDougald Construction Co., 189 Ga. 490 (1939). Therefore, it is my opinion that if the State Highway Engineer makes a decision, not tainted by fraud or gross mistake as outlined in the McDougald case, that there was an apparent error or omission which was taken advantage of by the contractor in this instance, then the Standard Specifications would allow the State Highway Department to follow any one of the three methods mentioned in Mr. Breedlove's letter to correct and fulfill the intent of the Plans and Specifications. Article 4.03 provides for a supplemental agreement which is acceptable to both parties; provides for authority to make increases, decreases, or alterations in the contract; and, allows the engineer, in the absence of a supplemental agreement acceptable to both parties, to direct that the work be done by force account. OPINION 70-5 To: Director, Georgia Forestry Commission January 7, 1970 Re: Forest fire protection; participation by State in mutual aid programs. This responds to your request for an opinion regarding the authority of the State, as a signatory of the Southeastern Forest Fire Protection Compact, to participate in a mutual aid program between that 9 organization and the Middle Atlantic States Forest Fire Protection Compact Commission. Please be advised that the Regional Forest Fire Protection Compact Act, Ga. Code Ann. Ch. 43-9 (Ga. Laws 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 49), proposes "mutual aid in fighting forest fires among the compacting States of the region and with States which are party to other regional forest fire protection compacts or agreements . . . ." Ga. Code Ann. 43-902. All State officers, bureaus and departments are specifically empowered to perform those functions necessary or incidental to the conduct of mutual aid programs undertaken pursuant to such agreements. See Ga. Code Ann. 43-913. Based on the foregoing, it is my opinion that the State may participate in a mutual aid program as outlined above. OPINION 70-6 To: Director, Georgia Natural Areas Council January 9, 1970 Re: State property; effect of acquisition of land by Georgia Natural Areas Council. This is in response to your letter of recent date wherein you ask whether there are any circumstances under which the Georgia Natural Areas Council can hold the title to land in Georgia. The Georgia Natural Areas Cou cil (formerly the State Council for the Preservation of Natural Areas) was created by Ga. laws 1966, p. 330; (Ga. Code Ann. Ch. 43-12.) The duties, powers and authority given to the Council at its inception do not appear to create in the Council the ability to own land. Neither does the 1969 Amendment (Ga. Laws 1969, p. 750), which changed the Council's name and gave it certain additional powers, purport to allow the Council to hold real property titles. As you are probably aware, a state agency, board, bureau, etc., has only such powers as are expressly or by necessary implication conferred upon it by the legislature. See Bentley v. State Board of Medical Examiners of Georgia, 152 Ga. 836 (1921). Another 1969 Act of the Georgia General Assembly, the Georgia Scenic Rivers Act of 1969, Ga. Laws 1969, p. 933 (Ga. Code Ann. Ch. 17-9), deserves mention at this point. This Act provides in Section 4 that the Council shall "recommend to the Governor and General Assembly rivers or sections of rivers to be considered for designation as Scenic Rivers"; then continues, specifying the necessary elements to be included in a special report of the Council which must accompany each Scenic River recommendation to the General Assembly and Governor. 10 However, the focal point of this opinion is provided by Section 5 of the Act (Ga. Code Ann. 17-905), which contains the following introductory clause: "After designation of any river or section of a river as a Scenic River by the General Assembly pursuant to section 3 hereof:" (Section 3 provides for the designation of a Georgia Scenic River System). It may be helpful at this juncture to break down Section 5(b) of the Act (Ga. Code Ann. 17-905(b) in endeavoring to determine what the General Assembly meant, remembering that to attempt to ascertain the true intention of the legislature in the passage of a law is the cardinal rule of statutory construction. (See Gazan v. Henry, 183 Ga. 30 (1936).) Thus, we have the following: "(b) The Council may acquire by purchase, gift, grant, bequest, devise, lease or otherwise fee title or any lesser interest in the land ...." Applying two additonal rules of statutory construction-(!) that the ordinary signification be applied to all words except in certain instances inapplicable here (see Ga. Code Ann. 102-102(1)); and (2) that all the words of a statute are to be given due weight and meaning (see Falligant v. Barrow, 133 Ga. 87 (1909))-it is apparent that this portion of Section 5(b) gives the Council the ability to acquire title to land. ". . . lying within the authorized boundary of such river or section of river hereafter so designated as a Scenic River . . . ." Again applying the above-mentioned rules of statutory construction, it seems that the ability of the Council to acquire title to land is limited by: (1) area-land lying within a certain authorized boundary of the designated Scenic River; and (2) time-only after the river has been designated by the General Assembly as Scenic. Since there is no statutory definition of authorized boundary, I am assuming the legislature intends to specify the authorized boundaries of a Scenic River for purposes of acquisition of scenic easements and delineation of the area within which the Council may strive toward the ends of preservation and perpetuity envisioned by the Scenic Rivers Act for each Scenic River. " . . Any interest in land acquired by the Council pursuant to this Section shall be transferred to such governmental agency as the General Assembly may by Act direct." (Emphasis added.) 11 Again, giving each word in the Statute its due weight and meaning and ascribing to it its ordinary signification, as required by law, it appears that although the Council may acquire the title to land, it may not retain it. Without deciding whether the Council is such an Agency as contemplated by this portion of the Act in its reference to "governmental agency," it is clear that the words "shall be transferred" would not allow property titles to remain in the Council but rather, indicate that the title to land should pass through the Council and to some other state agency designated by the General Assembly. The Council would be merely a conduit through which the title passed. Therefore, it is my official opinion that the Georgia Natural Areas Council may acquire the title to land lying within the authorized boundaries of a river or section of river previously designated by the General Assembly as a Scenic River pursuant to Ga. Laws 1969, p. 933, but upon acquisition, the title must be transferred to another State agency designated by the General Assembly. Of course, as you know, this law could be amended by the General Assembly so as to provide for the retention of title to property by the Council. If the Council is at present desirous of this ability, the Georgia General Assembly would be the proper authority to approach with this request. Assuming the acquisition is authorized by the General Assembly it would, of course, be subject to the State Properties Acquisition Law and would have to be acquired through the State Properties Acquisition Commission. See e.g., Ga. Laws 1965, pp. 396, 398 (Ga. Code Ann. 36-l04a(c)). OPINION 70-7 To: Executive Secretary, Regents of the University System of Georgia January 12, 1970 Re: Drugs; Federal agency as dealer. This is in response to your request for an opinion in which you ask whether a professor at the Pharmacy School at the University of Georgia may lawfully obtain narcotic drugs for research purposes from the National Institute of Mental Health. This Department is informed that the professor in question has been designated by the Dean of the School of Pharmacy as the individual in charge of a particular laboratory at that school. This Department is further informed that the Georgia State Board of Pharmacy has approved the laboratory in question as a proper repository for narcotic drugs. 12 The matter of narcotic drugs is governed by Ga. Laws, 1967, p. 296, officially codified by the legislature as Ga. Code Title 79A. A drug wholesaler may lawfully sell narcotic drugs "to a person in charge of a laboratory, but only for use in that laboratory for scientific and medical purposes." Ga. Code Ann. 79A-806(1)(d). The term "laboratory" includes "a laboratory approved by the State Board of Pharmacy as proper to be entrusted with the custody of narcotic drugs and the use of narcotic drugs for scientific and medical purposes and for the purposes of instruction." Ga. Code Ann. 79A-802(9). The word "sale" encompasses "barter, exchange, or gift." Ga. Code Ann. 79A802(10). The National Institute of Mental Health is a part of the Public Health Service. An examination of the relevant statutes reveals that the Surgeon General is authorized to make grants to individuals such as the professor who has been designated as the person in charge of the laboratory in question. Moreover, the Surgeon General is authorized to make research facilities of the Public Health Service available to individuals such as the professor whose conduct precipitated your inquiry. 42 U.S.C.A. 241, 242, 242(a). In distributing narcotic drugs in Georgia, the National Institute of Mental Health engages in that activity as a drug wholesaler, as the term "wholesaler" includes "a person who supplies narcotic drugs that he himself has not produced nor prepared". Ga. Code Ann. 79A-802(6). A drug wholesaler must be licensed by the Georgia State Board of Pharmacy prior to engaging in the business of selling drugs. Ga. Code Ann. 79A-804. The National Institute of Mental Health does not possess a wholesaler's license. Thus, you desire to know whether the professor may lawfully obtain narcotic drugs from the National Institute of Mental Health. Federal statutes relating to the Public Health Service and to the Surgeon General appear to authorize the distribution of narcotic drugs for research purposes. The United States Department of Justice has represented to you, in a letter dated December 3, 1969, that the National Institute of Mental Health "is the federal entity entrusted with the responsibility of furnishing marihuana to qualified researchers." A state may not require an employee of the United States Government to obtain a license to engage in an activity which is embraced within the scope of his employment. Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. 51,65 L.Ed 126 (1920). It appears that all of the requisites for the lawful possession of narcotic drugs by the professor involved in this matter have been met, with the exception of obtaining the same from a licensed wholesaler. It is my opinion that the State of Georgia may not require the National Institute of Mental Health to obtain a license from the Georgia State Board of Pharmacy prior to engaging in the business of a drug wholesaler in Georgia. Therefore, it is my opinion that the professor may obtain 13 narcotic drugs for research purposes from the National Institute of Mental Health, notwithstanding the fact that the Institute is unlicensed to engage in the business of a drug wholesaler in Georgia. OPINION 70-8 To: Director, Georgia Science and Technology Commission January 12, 1970 Re: State contracts in excess of one year not enforceable. This is in reply to your request for my opinion as to the liability of the Georgia Science and Technology Commission for rent and penalty payments under a certain lease of office space. I understand the factual situation to be as follows. Effective May 1, 1966, your predecessor in office enteied into a lease agreement for a term of one year pertaining to office space to be utilized by the Commission. Paragraph 32 of the lease agreement provided that the lessee should have an option for an additional term offour years at the same monthly rental rate, provided that the option was exercised in writing at least sixty days prior to the expiration of the original term. The lease provided that upon exercise of the option the lessee would have the right to terminate the lease at the end of any ensuing year by giving sixty days notice in writing and by paying a "termination rental payment," in addition to the regular rental payment, which "termination" payment was to be in a lesser amount at the end of each year the lease continued. On January 13, 1967, the option was exercised by the Commission. Thereafter, the Commission remained in possession of the premises and paid all rent due until October 31, 1969, when the premises were vacated. On August 21, 1969, the lessor had been notified in writing that Stateowned office space had become available to the Commission, and the Commission was preparing to vacate the leased premises. I understand that you have now received a statement from the lessor for rent covering a period subsequent to your vacation of the premises, together with a demand for payment of the "penalty payment" provided in the lease. In Op. Atty. Gen. 1963-1965, p. 221, my predecessor, Honorable Eugene Cook, held that the State could not enter into a contract for a term of years with a public utility for the furnishing of micro-wave service. The contract concerned in that opinion also contained a reducing termination clause whereby in the event that the contract should be terminated prior to its expiration date, the State would be required to pay an amount which was to be determined by the number of years unfulfilled on the contract. 14 It was held in the opinion that the contract would constitute a debt of the State and would be void as being violative of Art. VII, Sec. Ill, Par. I of the Constitution of the State of Georgia (Ga. Code Ann. 2-5601 ), which declares all the purposes for which debts may be assumed by or on behalf of the State and prohibits the State from assuming any other debts. It is my opinion that the four-year lease purportedly created by the exercise of the option in the present matter is also in excess of the debt authority under the Constitution and is therefore void. Thus, no liability on the part of the Commission could arise under the terms of the lease agreement itself. Following the expiration of the original one-year term the relationship between the Commission and the lessor became that of a tenancy at will. Appropriate notice of termination was given by the Commission, and all rent due for the actual period of occupancy has been paid. The "termination rental payment" provided for in the lease was clearly not intended to constitute any portion of the rental rate, since upon expiration of the stated lease term no "termination rental payment" would have been due. This "termination" payment was actually in the nature of a penalty or liquidated damages specified in the event of premature termination of the agreement. But since the lease agreement was of no force or effect, the penalty provision is also unenforceable. Therefore, it is my official opinion that the Commission is not liable for, and is not authorized to pay, the lessor's claim for the "termination rental payment" or for rental charges claimed to have accrued after October 31, 1969. OPINION 70-9 To: Commissioner of Agriculture, State of Georgia January 12, 1970 Re: Agricultural commodity commissions; election of officers as matter "pertaining to organization." This is in reply to your letter dated December 19, 1969, in which you requested my official opinion as to the construction of Section lO(h) of the Georgia Agricultural Commodities Promotion Act (Ga. Laws 1969, p. 763 with regard to the authority of the Attorney General and the State Auditor to vote upon the election of officers. The section in question, Ga. Code Ann. 5-2909(h), provides as follows: "The Attorney General and the State Auditor as ex officio 15 members of each commission shall be entitled to vote on matters pertaining to the organization of each such commission and upon the selection and nomination of the appointive members of each commission. The two such ex officio members shall not be entitled to vote upon any matter pertaining to the policy provisions of the agricultural commodity nor shall they be entitled to vote upon the expenditure of any funds of the commission." (Emphasis added.) In the construction of statutes the ordinary signification shall be applied to all words, except words of art, or words connected with a -particular trade or subject matter, when they shall have the signification attached to them by experts in such trade, or with reference to such subject matter. Ga. Code Ann. 102-102(1). The word "organization" is not defined in the Act, nor do Ifind it to be a word of art or one connected with a particular trade or subject matter. Therefore, the ordinary signification of the word must be applied within the context of the Act. Although the words "organize" and "organization" when used in reference to corporations generally have reference to the steps required to legally create such corporations, I do not believe that meaning is applicable within the context of the Act in question. In statutory construction it is necessary to look diligently for the intent of the General Assembly. I find that in the title of he Act, and again in Section 8 of said Act, Ga. Laws 1969, pp. 763, 769, the words "establishment" and "established" are employed with reference to the initial creation of Commodity Commissions. The word "organization" is not employed in the Act with reference to the creation of commodity commissions, but is used in Section 10(h) of the Act to designate one area of voting authority possessed by the Attorney General and the State Auditor as ex officio members of each commission. In contradistinction to this grant of authority, the section specifically provides that these ex officio members shall not be entitled to vote upon matters pertaining to the policy provisions of the agricultural commodity nor shall they be entitled to vote upon the expenditure of any funds of such commission. Taken as a whole, the section clearly contemplates continuing voting authority and participation by these ex officio members during the life of each commission, but within a limited area. The word "organization" is defined, inter alia, by Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition, as: "State or manner of being organized; organic structure; purposive systematic arrangement; constitution. * * * "The executive structure of a business; the personnel of 16 management, with its several duties and places in administration; the various persons who conduct a business, considered as a unit." I believe the above definition to be applicable to the word "organization" as used in the Act. I conclude that the intent of the limitation provided in Section lO(h) of the Act upon the voting authority of the Attorney General and the State Auditor was to insure that decisions as to policy concerning the affected commodity, and the expenditure of funds to implement such policy, would be determined by the vote of those members of the commission whose training and experience furnish them with a special expertise in that area. Matters pertaining to the executive structure of such commissions are not such as require special expertise concerning the affected commodity and are within the scope of "organization" of such commissions. It is my official opinion that the election of officers is a matter "pertaining to the organization" of commodity commissions within the meaning of Section lO(h) of the Agricultural Commodities Promotion Act, and that the Attorney General and the State Auditor, as ex officio members of such commissions, are entitled to vote therein. OPINION 70-10 To: Director, State Highway Department January 13, 1970 Re: State publications; second class mailing privileges. This is in reply to a letter of recent date from Mr. Emory C. Parrish, Executive Assistant Director of the State Highway Department, requesting my opinion on whether The Survey, the official monthly publication of the State Highway Department, is entitled to second class mailing privileges. As I understand the factual situation involved, The Survey is published monthly by the State Highway Department for distribution to its employees, certain State Officials and other members of the general public. There is no list of subscribers to this publication as such; and it is sent free of cost to certain persons designated to receive it. Under these circumstances, it is my opinion that this publication would not be entitled to second class mailing privileges. Chapter 63 of Title 39, U .S.C.A., is the legislative enactment of what constitutes second class mail. Specifically, Section 4354 of Title 39, U.S.C.A., provides that a mailable periodical publication is entitled to be entered and mailed as second class mail if it, among other things, has 17 a legitimate list of subscribers. This phrase was construed in Myrick vs. United States, 319 F. 1, 4 (1st Cir. 1915), as follows: "The phrase 'a legitimate list of subscribers' evidently means a list of subscriptions taken at more than a nominal price, and the price must have been paid, or the subscriber, or someone in his behalf, be under obligation to pay the agreed price; and that subscriptions taken at a nominal price, or without price, do not answer the requirements of the statute in this particular and cannot be counted in making up a legitimate list." Furthermore, 39 U.S.C.A. Section 4354(c) further provides that: "A periodical publication designed primarily for advertising purposes or for free circulation or for circulation at nominal rates is not entitled to be admitted as second class mail under this section." This provision would seem to be conclusive upon your publication since there is no charge to the recipient of The Survey. In reviewing the further provisions of Chapter 63 of Title 39, U.S.C.A., I find no statutory provision that would allow your publication to be entitled to the second class mailing privileges. Please bear in mind that this opinion is rendered on the basis of the factual circumstances surrounding the publication of The Survey and it is to be strictly limited to this publication only. This opinion in no way reflects upon any other publication of the State Highway Department or of any other State agency. OPINION 70-ll To: Director, Merit System of Personnel Administration January 19, 1970 Re: State employees; annual and sick leave. This will acknowledge and thank you for your letter of recent date with which you enclosed memorandums #34 and #42 of the State Merit System, with a request that this office determine whether or not they are in conflict. After careful examination of these memorandums, it is my belief that they are not conflicting. Memorandum #34 refers to an unofficial 18 opinion of Attorney General Eugene Cook rendered in 1964 which advises that: " . . . a holiday established by statute should be recognized and not charged against annual leave even though the same is not proclaimed by the Governor, nor observed by the employees of the State at the request of the Governor while the General Assembly is in session." Memorandum # 42 refers to my official opinion to you of May, 1969, stating, in essence: ". . . that a salaried employee of the State of Georgia, classified under the State Merit System, who has worked during a legal and public holiday and is separated or resigns before the Executive authorizes a compensatory nonwork day, is not entitled to an extra day's pay." At first glance it would appear that the before-quoted portions of these two opinions may be at variance. It seems so because in one case a State employee appears to be "penalized" by working as directed on a statutorily designated but unproclaimed holiday (Memorandum #42) while in the other case (Memorandum #34) the employee ostensibly receives "credit" for the statutorily designated btit officially unproclaimed and unobserved holiday because it is not charged against him in the computation of his annual leave upon the termination of his employment. However, I do not feel there is any real conflict between the two. The laws of Georgia designating public and legal holidays are contained in Ga. Laws 1943, pp. 331, 332; Ga. Laws 1945, pp. 123, 124; Ga. Laws 1968, p. 986. (See also Ga. Code Ann. 14-1809). While these statutes specify the legal and public holidays for the State of Georgia, I know of no authority providing that they must be followed and actually observed. With this in mind, it would be in order to turn to the rule in Paragraph B.206, Rules and Regulations of the State Personnel Board, the pertinent part of which states: "Employees are charged with annual leave for absence only on days upon which they would otherwise work and receive pay. No charge is made against annual leave for absences on Sunday, Holidays, and non-work days established by State statute or by executive order or administrative order . . . . " (The rule in Paragraph B.308 is exactly the same as above except that the word "sick" is found in place of "annual" before the word "leave".) 19 Herein lies what I sense is the crux of our problem-the second sentence of these rules has generated the present slightly misleading aspects of the referenced memorandums when jointly considered. If one carried the second sentence of either to its logical, literal conclusion, it would appear to say that a state employee who chose to stay away from work or was sick on a statutorily designated holiday, upon which state employees were asked to work by the Governor, could not have this day charged against his annual or sick leave. Additionally, I am informed that certain state employees regularly work on Sunday with their "weekend" being composed of days ordinarily considered week days-e.g., Monday-Tuesday or Thursday- Friday. According to the considered portions of Rules B.206 and B.308, if one of these employees missed a Sunday (one of his regular work days), it could not be charted against his leave. I feel I can speak with accuracy in saying that neither of the foregoing hypotheticals was intended by the Board when it promulgated these Rules. Therefore, to avoid confusion in these areas, it is my suggestion that the State Personnel Board drop this second sentence from Rule B.206 and Rule B.308 and allow the first portion of each to read as follows: "Employees are charged with annual (or sick) leave for absence only on days upon which they would otherwise work and receive pay . . . ." This would, I think, facilitate administration of this Rule and leave the charging of annual and sick leave to administrative decision and discretion bounded by a very simple yet adequate rule. Therefore, it is my official opinion that while the subject memorandums are not conflicting, for the sake of clarity it would be advisable for your to offer to the State Personnel Board a change in Rules B.206 and B.308 deleting the second sentence in both. OPINION 70-12 To: Commissioner of Labor January 19, 1970 Re: Right-to-Work Law: The Georgia Right-to-Work Law does not protect employees covered by the federal Railway Labor Act. You have forwarded with your request for my opinion a communication from employees of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad. Based on this correspondence and the document attached thereto it is my understanding that the Railroad entered into a collective-bargaining agreement with the Transportation-Communication Employees Union, 20 the first section of which sets forth a traditional union-shop provision. The employees have inquired of you, and you of me, whether such a provision is enforceable in the State of Georgia in light of Ga. Laws 1947, pp. 616-19 (Ga. Code Ann. 54-901 to 54-908). The Railroad in question is a carrier as the same is defined by section 1 of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. 151 (1965 Ed.). See Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. v. Railway Employees' Dep't. AFL, 93 F.2d 340 (6th Cir. 1938), cert. denied 303 U.S. 649 (1939). In 1951 the Railway Labor Act was amended to incorporate what is presently codified as 45 U.S.C. 152, Eleventh (1965 Ed.). The effect of that amendment was to authorize union-shop agreements notwithstanding any State right-towork law. California v. Taylor, 353 U.S. 553 (1957). It is therefore my opinion that the union-shop agreement between the Railroad and the Union is enforceable within the State of Georgia. OPINION 70-13 To: Director, State Board of Corrections January 23, 1970 Re: Extradition; duty of demanding state to pay expenses. By letter you advise me that you caused to be apprehended in the State of Florida an escaped fugitive from the Laurens County Public Works Camp. You further advise that this apprehension took place on August 26, 1969. While in the custody of the Florida officials and before extradition could be completed, the fugitive became ill and required hospitalization. When you realized the fugitive's severe medical involvement, your office decided against proceeding further with the extradition and an order for the release of the individual was sent to the Florida officials. In the interim, substantial expenses for physicians, hospitalization and special security guards were incurred. Prior to August 26, 1969, the Laurens County Public Works Camp had been disestablished. You inquire as to whether it is the responsibility of the State Board of Corrections to pay the various expenses incurred by the Florida officials as a result of the fugitive's hospitalization. As you are aware, the interstate rendition of fugitives is largely a matter of federal law. North Carolina v. Bailey, 289 U.S. 412 (1943); Kuney v. State, (Fla.) 102 So. 547 (1924); Loper v. Dees, (Miss.) 49 So.2d 718 (1951). The federal constitutional provision compelling the interstate rendition of fugitives is enforced by 28 U.S.C. 3182, 18 U.S.C.A. 3182 (1969 Rev.). The appropriate demainding authority is by that section defined as "the executive authority of any State . . . ." and related, connected sections of federal statute provide that "all costs or expenses incurred in any 21 extradition proceeding in apprehending, securing, and transmitting a fugitive shall be paid by the demanding authority." It is my opinion that the expenses involved and incurred by the subdivvision of the State of Florida were expenses attending the arrest anq delivery of the fugitive and are therefore payable by the demanding authority, i.e., the executive authority of this State. As noted above, the fugitive in question was an escapee from a county work camp. The law of this State provides that: "It shall be the responsibility of the governmental unit, subdivision or agency having the physical custody of a prisoner to maintain such prisoner, furnish him food, clothing, and any needed medical and hospital attention therefore, . . . and bearing all expenses relative to any escape and rec,apture, including the expenses of extradition." (Ga. Laws 1956, pp. 161, 171, Ga. Code Ann. 77309(e). It is therefore my opinion that the ultimate responsibility for bearing the expenses incurred in the asylum state attending upon the arrest and delivery of the escaped fugitive rests with Laurens County. At the same time, the federal law makes no provision for treating a political subdivision of a State as a "demanding authority." Therefore, as a matter of controlling federal law, it is my opinion that there is an initial responsibility for the payment of the expenses incurred by the Florida subdivision on the executive authority of this State. Since your Department was the agency within the executive authority of this State initiating the extradition proceedings, it is my opinion that the expenses incurred are properly a charge against the State Board of Corrections. At the same time, it is my opinion tl:fat the Board is under an obligation to secure the indemnification of the funds which it was obligated to expend relative to the escape of a prisoner from the county having physical custody of the prisoner at the time of the escape. This, however, is an intrastate matter which does not affect the obligation of this State's executive authority to defray the political subdivision of the State of Florida for the expenses which were incurred by it attending upon the arrest and delivery of the escaped fugitive. OPINION 70-14 To: Director, State Highway Department of Georgia January 27, 1970 Re: Express dedication; effect of exception in deed. This is in reply to your request by the letter of Mr. J. E. Brown, Right 22 of Way Engineer, for my official opinion on whether there has been an express dedication of an additional 25 feet to the Highway Department when a landowner excepts 75 feet for the existing right-of-way in his later deed of conveyance and prior to this conveyance the State Highway Department had owned only 50 feet for right-of-way purposes. It is my official opinion that the extra 25 feet become the property of the State Highway Department by express dedication. The factual situation out of which this question arose is as follows. In 1937, the State Highway Department obtained certain right-of-way deeds from owners of land bordering a road in a metropolitan county. Each of these right-of-way deeds conveyed to the State 100 feet of rightof-way measuring 50 feet on each side of the survey center line. Also, there was provided in each of these deeds a conveyance of an additional 25 feet on each side, totalling 50 feet, in the form of an easement for the purpose of landscaping, sloping, grading, smoothing, sodding and planting. Said easement contained the right to maintain, re-plant, rearrange and keep up such improvements. Thus, in essence the State Highway Department was granted a total of 150 feet to use for various purposes. Subsequent to these deeds, the original grantors conveyed away their property and either by an express provision in the chains of title there was excepted 150 feet for the right-of-way for the State Highway Department, or by a plat recorded as part of the chains of title, there was provided 150 feet for the right-of-way. In order to more fully understand this situation, two of the separate chains of title will be traced in this opinion. The first deed was from A.M.S. to the State Highway Department, dated June 4, 1937, in which A.M.S. conveyed to the State Highway Department a 100 feet in width right-of-way in a certain described area. Also, the above-referred to 25 feet on each side were granted as an easement for the above-described purposes. Subsequently, on December 12, 1941, A.M.S. conveyed the remainder of the land to W.M.S. with the following description: "Commencing on the northwest side of the right of way of [name of street omitted] Drive at the northeast corner of the tract of land this day conveyed to his daughter, Mrs. M.S., and running thence in a northeasterly direction along the right of way of __ Drive 100 feet, thence running in a northwesterls direction. . . ." On October 13, 1964, W.M.S. conveyed to L.E.B. and I.A.T. the same land with the description of this land as follows: ''Beginning at an iron pin found on the northwest side of [name of street omitted] Drive [the same having a right of way of 150 feet in 23 width] at a point located 664.4 feet northeasterly from a point where the northwest side of [the same street] intersects the northerly side of . . . ." On June I, 1967, L.E.B. conveyed his interest in the above land to his co-tenant I.A.T., using the same description as used in the October 13, 1964 deed. On June 18, 1968, Mrs. I.A.T. conveyed to H.J.P. and S.E.S. the same land, using the same description as used in the deed dated October 13, 1964. On June 18, 1968, H.J.P. and S.E.S. conveyed to B.C.S. Inc. the same land, using the same description as was used in the October 13, 1964 deed. The above-traced chain of title is an abstract of that property which is designated in your right-of-way files as Parcel 96. The abstract and chain of title for the parcel designated in your files as Parcel 113 is as follows: On June 3, 1937, G.W.H. conveyed a strip of land 100 feet in width, measuring 50 feet on each side, to the State Highway Department for right-of-way purposes. Also, this deed provided for the additional 25 feet on either side as an easement for the above-described improvements. On March 25, 1955, E.I.H. and S.H.J., as Executrices of the Will of G.W.H., conveyed to C.A.A., T.D.D. and W.O.D. the remainder of their father's land which property is described as running along the right-of-way of the above-referred to road which was constructed pursuant to the previous grant. Also, there is a plat referred to in this deed but this plat is unrecorded. On August 29, 1956, C.A.A., T.D.D. and W.O.D. conveyed to G.O. Corp. the parcel of land in question. This deed refers for its description to a plat which is recorded in the land records of the county in question at Plat Book 25, page 124. This plat indicates that for this highway there is a right-of-way of 75 feet, measured from the survey center line. "A dedication to public use is when one being the owner of land consents, either expressly or by his actions, that it may be used by the public for a particular purpose." 8 E.G.L., Dedication, 2, p. 450; see also, Hames v. City of Marietta, 212 Ga. 331 (1956)...A dedication to public use is, however, not complete until two things appear; that is., an intention on the part of the owner to dedicate his property to the public use, and an acceptance on the part of the public of the property for such use . . . ."Atlantic Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Sweatman, 81 Ga. App. 269, 273 (1950); see also, Mayor & Council of Madison v. Booth, 53 Ga. 609 (1875); Parsons v. Trustees, 44 Ga. 529 (1871); Georgia R.R. & Banking Co. v. City ofAtlanta, 118 Ga. 486 (1903). A dedication of land is either express or implied. See Harris v. Powell, 177 Ga. 15 (1933); Lowry v. Rosenfeld, 213 Ga. 60 (1957)...... There is no partiCular form of making a dedication. It may be done in writing, or by parol; or it may be inferred from acts, or implied in certain cases, 24 from long usage. A grant is not necessary to create it . . . ." See 8 E.G.L., Dedication, 8, p. 455; see also, Haslerig v. Watson, 205 Ga. 668, 679 (1949); Chatham Motorcycle Club v. Blount, 214 Ga. 770 (1959). A succinct definition of express dedication is found in 26 C.J.S., Dedication, 14, which provides: "A dedication is expressed where there is an express manifestation on the part of the owner of his purpose to devote the land to a particular public use, as, for instance, where the intent to dedicate is manifested by a deed, or by explicit, oral, or written declaration of the owner, manifesting the purpose to devote land to a public use." It is my official opinion that, pursuant to the facts of the case at hand, there was an express dedication of the extra 25 feet to the State Highway Department when the original landowner conveyed his property and excepted 75 feet for the existing right-of~way. This conclusion is reached by a comparison of the facts at hand to the factual situation in three various cases which presented the same legal question to the Supreme Court of Georgia. In the case of Atlanta & West Point R.R. Co. v. City of Atlanta, 156 Ga. 251 (1923), the court held that where a railroad company had agreed with the landowner to maintain a bridge over its right-of-way for street purposes whenever the city should extend the street, the city thereby acquired an easement for its street across the railroad right-of-way. The court held in this same case that where a dedication is made by a deed, the grantor, the grantee, and the public are parties to the transaction. Thus, the title to the land dedicated vests in the public for the uses named and on the conditions stated in the deed. Atlanta & West Point R.R. Co. v. City of Atlanta, supra, at p. 255. Also, in the case of the Savannah, Albany & Gulf R.R. Co. v. Shields, 33 Ga. 601 (1863), the court held that where a developer of unimproved land lays out and dedicates a portion of this land as a street and lays off lots on said street with the express stipulation that the street on which the lots abutted "shall be kept open to its full dimensions for all time", then this was a dedication of the street to the city if the city government accepted the dedication. Finally, in a case where an auctioneer at the sale of town lots declared that "certain lots would not be sold, but held as a public preserve" and these declarations were assented to by a committee of the City Council appointed to superintend thesale, the Supreme Court has held that this was a dedication when these statements were subsequently ratified by the Council. See Mayor & Council of Macon v. Franklin, 12 Ga. 239 (1852). Analogizing the factual situation in the above question to the three 25 cases cited herein, and ap}'lying the principle as set forth in the Atlanta & West Po"int R.R. Co. case, supra, that where a dedication is made by deed the grantor, the grantee, and the public are parties to the transaction, it is concluded that there is an express dedication of the land in question. Of course, the Department owns the 25-foot grading and landscaping easement whether or not there has been a dedication of the right-of-way. This opinion is applicable to each of the parcels of land which you have described in your letter. Furthermore, this opinion abrogates the unofficial opinion to your office, dated September 20, 1968, which dealt with a parcel of property involved in this project, since at that time this office did not have the information that is now before it. In effect, at that time there was no indication that the original grantors of this 75 feet had subsequently conveyed away this property and had excepted the entire 75 feet and acknowledged it as right-of-way. Also, there was no mention that the subsequent grantors, either by plats or by description in their own deeds, had excepted this 75 feet measured from the survey center line and had acknowledged it as the property of the State Highway Department. OPINION 70-15 To: Director, State Highway Department of Georgia January 30, 1970 Re: State property: Land acquired by sheriffs sale may be transferred to State Highway Department by executive order. This is in reply to your request for my official opinion by your letter dated November 24, 1969, in which you inquired whether it would be necessary to request the Governor to execute a deed to the Highway Department for certain property which was purchased by the State Highway Department through a sheriffs sale, and the deed was made to the Governor of the State of Georgia and his successors in office. It is my official opinion that it will not be necessary for your Department to request that the Governor prepare a deed conveying this property to your Department. However, it will be necessary for your Department to request the Governor to execute an executive order transferring the use of this property to your Department. I have taken the liberty of preparing a proposed executive order to be executed by the Governor and a letter from your office to the Govenor requesting his assistance in this matter. It is my understanding that the factual situation out of which this request arose is as follows: This property was obtained as the result of a 26 sheriffs sale by virtue of an execution issued by the Superior Court of a certain county in favor of the State Highway Department. It is my understanding that the State Highway Department purchased this property at the sheriffs sale and that the sheriffs deed was made to Lester G. Maddox, Governor of the State of Georgia, and his successors in office. Your Department now desires to use this property in conjunction with adjacent property as a rest area. The provisions of Ga. Code Ann. 91-501 authorize the Governor to buy property at all sheriffs sales when an execution is carried as a result of a levy on a fi.fa. held by the State or the Governor. The only limitation on this power is that the State's bids cannot be for more than the amount due the State upon such fi.fa. Furthermore, Ga. Code Ann. 91-502 requires that the property so purchased shall be for the use of the State and the title thereto shall be made to the Governor and his successors in office. As you indicated in your request, your Department bid upon this property in contemplation of its use for rest area construction and re-vegetation projects. From the factual situation set forth above, it is my opinion that this purchase was in conformance with the provisions of the above-referred to Code sections. It is also my opinion that, in order for your Department to proceed with the use of this property, it will now be necessary for the Governor to execute an executive order transferring the use of this property to your Department. This would not necessitate a formal deed to the State Highway Department since the Governor's executive order would be sufficient to authorize your Department to make use of this property. OPINION 70-16 To: State Superintendent of Schools January 30, 1970 Re: Education; the student honors program is limited to certain pupils in the public high schools of this State. This responds to your letter of January 23, 1970, requesting my official opinion as to whether or not the "Governor's Honors Program" administered by the State Board of Education pursuant to Ga. Laws 1964, pp. 3, 45 (Ga. Code Ann. 32-651) may be opened to students attending private schools. My answer must be in the negative. The powers of public officers and boards are limited to those defined by law. Ga. Code Ann. 89-903. Before a public officer can be required to pay out or be justified in paying out public funds, there must be ~ provision of law expressly providing or very clearly implying his right to do so. Freeney v. 27 Geoghegan, 177 Ga. 142(1) (1933). The statutory authorization for the student honors program expressly limits the participants to those pupils attending the "public high schools of this State". (Emphasis added). Hence, it necessarily follows that the program may not be extended to include students attending private schools. OPINION 70-17 To: Information Officer, Department of Revenue February 2, 1970 Re: Taxation of consular officials. This is in reply to your request of January 28, 1970 concerning exemptions for the benefit of Consular officers from Panama. The laws of Georgia provide no exemptions from State taxation for the benefit of Consular officers or other foreign nationals. They are entitled to the same exemptions afforded any other nonresident of this State. See Op. Atty. Gen. 1962, p. 514. The United States has in some cases granted exemptions fro taxation for Consular officers by Treaty. The United States has not, however, entered into such a Consular Convention with Panama; therefore, no special tax exemptions are available which would inure to the benefit of Panamanian Consular officials. OPINION 70-18 To: Director, Surface Mined Land Use Board February 5, 1970 Re: Surface mining; what securities meet bonding requirements; blanket bonding discussed. By various letters you have requested my official opinions as to various aspects of the bonding provisions established by section 6(c) of the Georgia Surface Mining Act of 1968, Ga. Laws 1968, p. 9, 17; Ga. Code Ann. 43-1406(c). In the interests of economy, particularly with respect to promulgation and publication, I have combined my answers to these requests into one opinion. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that "operators shall have the option of posting bond, government securities, cash or any combination thereof, on each mined area." Id. It is my understanding that an operator has attempted to post with you a United States coupon bond in 28 order to comply with the bonding prerequisite to licensing. You further indicate that at the same time the operator has requested that the interest coupons presently attached to the bond be returned. It is my opinion that a coupon bond issued over the signature of the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States and representing an obligation of the United States of America is a government security within the meaning of the Act. Such bonds are always issued in bearer form. 31 CFR 306.2(b) (1969 Rev.). As bearer securities they are either payable on their face at maturity or call for redemption before maturity in accordance with their terms to "bearer," or both. 31 CFit 306.2(b)(j)(m) (1969 Rev.). Your attention is called to the fact that such securities are payable on their face value only on the date of maturity. (Certain issues of treasury bonds are redeemable at par value plus accrued interest upon the happening of certain events which appear to be outside the framework of the Board's business.) Otherwise, the value to which the operator's performance is secured is limited to the market value of the security at any particular time. In accepting such a security, the Board will be under an obligation to discount the face value of the bond with relation to the date of maturity sufficiently to justify as a matter of business judgment full-value coverage of the maximum liability thereby secured. It is my opinion that all interest coupons due and payable on or before the date of licensing may be detached and returned to the operator. At the same time, the detaching of unmatured coupons as per your request would represent an impairment of the maturity redemption value of the security since, if any coupons are missing, the security will not be redeemed unless accompanied by a remittance in an amount equal to the face value of the missing coupons. 31 CFR 306.18 (1969 Rev.). Any coupons returned prior to maturity date would have to be deducted from the face value before discounting the value of the bond for the purpose of determining bonding coverage. The administrative complexities of the desired procedure should be obvious. In another inquiry you inform me that various operators have indicated to you a desire to purchase and post certain time certificates issued by a national bank doing business in Georgia. It is my opinion that such certificates do not constitute an acceptable alternative under the bonding requirement of the Act since, as obligations of a banking corporation they are neither cash nor government securities. The fact that deposits of the issuing bank are covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation does not operate to convert the bank's obligations into obligations of the United States. For much the same reasons, a cashier's check does not satisfy the requirements of section 6(c) of the Act iq that a cashier's check is a primary obligation of the bank upon which it is drawn. Bank ofStatham 29 v. Nat'/. Bank ofAthens, 143 Ga. 293 (1915); Wright v. Trust Company of Georgia, 108 Ga. App. 783 (1963). Being an obligation of the bank, it does not fall within the definition of "cash", which has been judicially determined to be "money or its equivalent usually ready money." Kerlin v. Young, 129 Ga. 95 (1924). "Money" is defined as lawful currency of the United States. Blount v. State, 76 Ga. 17 (1885). In a further inquiry, you have requested that I advise you as to the "specific government securities which would be acceptable" under the Act. Unfortunately, there is no pat, all-inclusive/exclusive definition of the term "government securities." The inquiry is further complicated extensively by the vast number and variety of governmental agencies, both within and without the United States, issuing obligations of a security nature. These securities are issued both in registered and in bearer form, and registered securities are frequently subject to restraints on transferability. It is my opinion that any attempt to specify with particularity the types of securities which would meet the definition set out in the Act would be premature. The resolution of this issue is best left to a step-by-step development, since each attempt to post a security of a form not previously posted is going to require some analysis as to liquidity, validity and interest accumulation. At another point, you have inquired whether the various provisions of the Surface Mining Act would be fulfilled if an operator posted a "blanket bond" satisfactory to the Board and adequate to reclaim affected lands, provided the bonds posted remained within the limitations specified by the Act. It is my opinion that there is nothing in the Act prohibiting a "blanket bond." At the same time, the purely administrative provisions relating to blanket bonding would have to be clearly and unambiguously enumerated by rules and regulations of the Board. Prior to enacting such rules and regulations, consideration must be given to the administrative burden that will be imposed on the Board by "blanket bonding." The potential for quasi-judicial contested cases over the issuance of licenses will be considerably enhanced by problems inherent in "blanket bonding." The Board will have to make a factual determination as to the amount of land, or percentage of land, reclaimed under an existing bond for the preceding licensing period prior to the issuance of a license for a new parcel of land to be affected. In addition to the administrative burden which the proposed blanketbonding procedure will impose upon the licensing function, parties allegedly aggrieved by determinations of bonding coverage requiring additional bonding could conceivably have access to review the administrative action taken by the Board via the procedures set forth in the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act. Because of the foregoing, as your attorney, we could not recommend blanket bonds, but this determination is a policy matter within the discretion of the Board. 30 OPINION 70-19 To: State Revenue Commissioner February 5, 1970 Re: Taxation of national banks by State. This is in reply to your letter dated January 13, 1970, regarding the effect of P. L. 91-156, 83 Stat. 434, approved December 24, 1969, on state taxation of national banks. As background, it should be remembered that state taxation of na tionaI banks has been governed by Section 5219 of the Revised Statutes for many years. Immediately prior to the enactment of P. L. 91156, Section 5219 permitted the states to tax the real property of national banks. In addition, it permitted the states to choose one of four other methods of taxation. They could tax a bank's shares; they could include the dividends from such shares in the income of the shareholders; they could tax the bank's net income; or they could impose a tax measured by net income. Against this backdrop, Congress adopted P. L. 91-156, providing in Section 2 thereof that, effective January 1, 1972, Section 5219 shall be completely replaced by a new Section 5219 stating, in substance, that for purposes of any state or federal tax law, a national bank shall be treated as a bank organized and existing under the laws of the state or other jurisdiction within which its principal office is located. This is meant to be a permanent amendment to Section 5219. Section 1, on the other hand, is intended as a temporary amendment, applying only to the period from December 24, 1969, to January 1, 1972. It adds two new subparagraphs, 5(a) and 5(b), to the present provisions of Section 5219. Subparagraph 5(a) relates to the taxation of national banks whose principal office is located in the taxing state, and subparagraph 5(b) relates to the taxation of national banks whose principal office is located outside the taxing state. A bank having its principal office in the taxing state may be subjected to any tax which is imposed generally on a nondiscriminatory basis throughout that state (other than a tax on intangible personal property) in the same manner and to the same extent as a bank organized and existing under the laws of such state is subjected to such tax. A bank not having its principal office in the taxing state may only be subjected to the following specified taxes, if they are imposed generally throughout the taxing state on a nondiscriminatory basis: (1) Sales taxes and use taxes complementary thereto upon purchases, sales, and use within the taxing state. (2) Taxes on real property or on the occupancy of real property located within the taxing state. 31 (3) Taxes (including documentary stamp taxes) on the execution, delivery, or recordation of documents within the taxing state. (4) Taxes on tangible personal property (not including cash or currency) located within the taxing state. (5) License, registration, transfer, excise, or other fees or taxes imposed on the ownership, use, or transfer of tangible personal property located within the taxing state. Section 3(a) provides that, except as provided in Section 3(b), prior to January 1, 1972, no tax may be imposed on any class of banks under the authority of any state legislation in effect prior to the enactment of P. L. 91-156 unless (1) the tax was imposed on that class of banks prior to the enactment of P. L. 91-156, or (2) imposition of the tax is authorized by affirmative action of the state legislature after enactment of P. L. 91156. However, according to Sectign 3(b), the prohibition of Section 3(a) shall not apply to (1) any sales or use tax, (2) any tax (including a documentary stamp tax) on the execution, delivery or recordation of documents, or (3) any tax on tangible personal property (not including cash or currency) or for any license, registration, transfer, excise or other fee or tax imposed on the ownership, use or transfer of tangible personal property, imposed by a state which does not impose a tax, or an increased rate of tax, in lieu thereof. Section 4, the concluding section of P. L. 91-156, requires that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System make a study of the probable impact of the permanent amendment on the banking systems and the economy of the country and then report the result to Congress before December 31, 1970, together with the Board's recommendations, if any, for additional legislation that may be needed to reconcile the promotion of the economic efficiency of the banking systems of the country with the achievement of effectiveness and local autonomy in meeting the fiscal needs of the states and their political subdivisions. From this, I am of the opinion that P. L. 91-156 reflects a basic change in Congressional policy with respect to the taxation of national banks brought about by the change in the nature and function of such banks since the adoption, in 1864, of the National Bank Act, 13 Stat. 111, from which R. S. 5219 was derived. Under its permanent provisions, national banks will be subject to being taxed by the states as any private corporation organized for the pecuniary gain of its shareholder~, providing state banks are taxed in a like manner. While the permanent provisions do not become effective until January 1, 1972, I am of the opinion that the temporary provisions, which became effective December 24, 1969, made national banks liable for Georgia sales and use taxes as of the latter date. 32 OPINION 70-20 To: Comptroller General and Insurance Commissioner February 9, 1970 Re: Interest on insurance premiums. Certain insurance agents desire to establish a billing program whereby they could charge late fees to an insured who has failed to pay his premium within thirty (30) days of its due date. Also, certain agents desire to charge service fees to an insured when the agent has allowed the insured to pay the premium in installments and where the usual interest payments have been charged over a short period of time, e.g., equal payments every two weeks for a two month period. You wish to know: 1. May an insurance agency charge an insured a late payment fee for a premium not paid when due? 2. May an insurance agency charge an insured service expenses for the type of installment program previously outlined? 3. Is there any limitation under the usury statutes, rating statutes or any other statutes of Georgia, on the amount of such charge? All three of your questions can be answered at the same time. From the brief statement of facts you gave me, set out above, it appears that the "late payment fee" in question one and the ''service expenses" in question two are merely substitutes for interest charges. At the outset we must understand that there is no absolute right to interest independent of contract or statute. Best v. Maddox, 185 Ga. 78, 82 (1937); City of Atlanta v. Lunsford, 105 Ga. App. 247 (1962). Therefore, the Georgia law establishing the right to interest and its limits will determine the answers to your questions. Where a rate of interest is not specified in writing, the legal rate is seven per cent (7%) per year. Ga. Code Ann. 57-101. On accounts where the sum to be paid is fixed or certain, interest starts from the time the party is bound and liable to pay. Ga. Code Ann. 57-110; Guy v. Riley, 51 Ga. App. 404 (1935). I assume both of your examples fall in this category. Unless these transactions fall within one of the numerous exceptions allowed by Georgia law, one may not charge any rate of interest greater than eight per cent (8%) per year by any contract, contrivance or device whatever. Ga. Code Ann. 57-101. I do not have sufficient information to determine whether these transactions would fit any of the 33 exceptions, but it is incumbent upon the party charging the interest to be sure he does not run afoul of the Georgia usury statutes. OPINION 70-21 To: Director, State Highway Department of Georgia February 16, 1970 Re: Highways; reimbursement not allowed to privately owned utilities for adjusting their facilities. This is in reply to your letter of January 9, 1970, wherein your request an official opinion on the following question: "Does the State highway department have authority to reimburse privately owned utilities whose facilities were installed prior to March 7, 1955, for the cost of adjusting their facilities within or from the rights-of-way of existing streets and roads necessitated by the construction of Interstate and limited-access expressway projects which cross such existing streets and roads?" It is my understanding that the Department does not, and my opinion that the Department cannot legally, reimburse privately owned utilities for the cost of adjusting their facilities within or from public rights-ofway necessitated by projects other than interstate and limited-access expressways. The official opinion dated January 23, 1967 (Op. Atty. Gen. 1967, p. 26) provided, inter alia, that the State Highway Department could not reimburse utilities for adjusting their facilities installed after March 7, 1955, on streets or roads crossed by interstate and limited-access highways. Since the opinion did not make an affirmative statement concerning the State's authority to reimburse privately-owned utilities whose facilities were installed on public rights-of-way prior to March 7, 1955, apparently further clarification is needed. The reasoning used in my official opinion of January 23, 1967, is equally valid to the question at hand; that is, that the removal and relocation of such utility facilities is not necessary or usual to the construction of highways. Utility facilities are placed on the public highways purely for the convenience of the utility companies and serve no useful or desirable purpose for the highway itself, Mulkey v. Quillian, 213 Ga. 507, 510 (1957), particularly when the utility companies place their facilities on or within the rights-of-way of public highways and streets without any expense for the purchase of an easement, City of Macon v. Southern Bell T. & T. Co., 89 Ga. App. 252 (1953). 34 Therefore, It IS my official opm10n that the State Highway Department does not have the authority, and cannot reimburse privately owned utilities whose facilities were installed on public rights-of-way prior to or after March 7, 1955, for the cost of adjusting their facilities within or from the rights-of-way of existing streets and roads. In order to clarify certain questions raised by this opinion, and previous opinions on this subject, the following determinations are made in order to help your Department in carrying out its operations: (a) Where all relocation work under an agreement between the Highway Department and the utility was fully performed by the utility and paid for by the Highway Department prior to the date of the official opinion of January 23, 1967, the utility may retain such payment whether or not a portion or all of the adjusted utilities were installed on a public right-of-way. (See unofficial (Op. Att'y. Gen. 69-12) opinion dated January 7, 1969). (b) Where a portion of the relocation work under an agreement between the Highway Department and the utility was performed by the utility and paid for by the Highway Department prior to the date of January 23, 1967, the utility may retain such payment whether or not a portion or all of the adjusted utilities were installed on a public right-of-way. (See unofficial opinion dated January 27, 1969.)* In agreements where costs are difficult to separate, the Department should make an engineering determination for the appropriate charge to the project cost to be paid after January 23, 1967. (c) On the other hand, relocation work, whenever completed and whenever billed (insofar as it consisted of utilities installed on a public right-of-way), if not actually paid for prior to the opinion of January 23, 1967, cannot now legally be paid. (d) If any payments have been made after January 23, 1967, contrary to the opinions of January 23, 1967, September 22, 1967, and this opinion, action should be taken by the Department to recover these funds. The foregoing interpretation should not be construed to affect the reimbursement for the cost of relocation of facilities owned by political subdivisions, authorities, etc., which are covered under the 1961 Act of the General Assembly of Georgia, as amended in 1968 (Ga. L. 1961, p. 453; 1968, p. 345; Ga. Code Ann. 95-1509 through 95-1512). * The original Opinion referred to January 27, 1969. This apparently was a stenographic error and should have referred to Unofficial Opinion 69-12, dated January 7, 1969. 35 OPINION 70-22 To: Secretary of State February 17, 1970 Re: securities; variable annuity contracts provided for by Ga. Code Ann. 56-1038 are exempt from the Georgia Securities Act. You have requested my official opinion on whether variable annuity contracts provided for by the Georgia Insurance Code, Section 56-1038, as well as the agents selling these contracts, are exempt from the Georgia Securities Act. In 1966, the Georgia Insurance Code was amended to authorize life insurance companies to establish separate investment accounts for the funding of pension, retirement and profit sharing plans providing benefits in fixed or variable dollar amounts if certain requirements were met. See Ga. Code Ann. 56-1038, added by Ga. Laws 1966, p. 57. For the purposes of this opinion, these agreements will be termed "group variable annuity contracts." At the 1969 Session of the General Assembly, the Georgia Insurance Code was again amended to authorize another type of variable annuity contract, one which did not contain the funding limitations of the 1966 contract. See Ga. Code Ann. 56-1040, added by Ga. Laws 1969, p. 723. In 1969, the General Assembly also redefined the term "security" as used in the Georgia Securities Act to exempt " ... any variable annuitycontract as provided for and regulated under the Georgia Insurance Code and issued by a life insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Georgia." (Emphasis supplied.) Ga. Laws 1969, p. 722 (Ga. Code Ann. 97102(i)). Unquestionably, the group variable annuity contracts are "provided for" under the Georgia Insurance Code. Ga. Code Ann. 56-1038. I am advised that up to the present time the Insurance Commissioner has not adopted any regulations under the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act concerning these group contracts. The issue to decide is whether the words "regulated under" in the Securities Act mean supervision, control and actual regulation of these contracts without the necessity of adopting regulations or whether the Securities Act requires the adoption of regulations before a variable annuity contract will be exempt. To regulate is to govern or direct or bring under the control of law. Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1961). There is no doubt that these group contracts are subject to the control and direction of the 36 Insurance Commissioner and he in fact is regulating them according to the quite strict standards set out in the Insurance Code. In my opinion, the words "regulated under" do not necessarily require the formal adoption of regulations under the Georgia Administrative Prucedure Act so long as the contracts are in fact being regulated under the Georgia Insurance Code. Finally, I note that these group contracts must be issued by a life insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Georgia (Ga. Code Ann. 56-1038(g), 56-302), thus fulfilling the final requirement of the Georgia Securities Act. It is therefor my opinion that the group variable annuity contracts provided for by Ga. Code 56-1038 fall within that class of variable annuity contracts exempted from the Georgia Securities Act by the 1969 amendment noted above and your question is answered in the affirmative. OPINION 70-23 To: Director, State Highway Department of Georgia February 20, 1970 Re: Highways; State Highway Department authorized to make payments required by Federal-aid Highway Act of 1968; retroactive payments. This letter is written to you in response to your letter of February 3, 1970, requesting my opinion as to whether the Highway Relocation Assistance Act (Ga. Laws 1969, p. 495; Ga. Code Ann. 95-1514, et seq.), effective July 1, 1969, will permit retroactive relocation payments to August 23, 1968. It is my official opinion that the question you have posed should be answered in the affirmative. The Highway Relocation Assistance Act provides in Section 3: "The State Highway Department of Georgia is hereby designated the State agency authorized to make or approve the payments required by Chapter 5, Title 23, United States Code. . . ." In an earlier opinion to Mr. J. E. Brown, Right of Way Engineer, dated July 11, 1969, we discussed thoroughly the provisions of both the State and Federal Acts pertaining to relocation assistance. In that opinion, it was noted that: "Congress, in establishing this program of Highway Relocation Assistance, intended for all persons displaced after August 23, 37 1968, as a result of the construction of Federal-aid highways to receive the benefits of Chapter 5, Title 23, United States Code. It is also evident from a study of the Highway Relocation Assistance Act that the Georgia Legislature intended to comply with the requirements of Chapter 5, Title 23, United States Code." Based upon the manifestations of the legislative intent, both State and Congressional, as noted more fully in the earlier opinion to Mr. Brown, it is my official opinion that the State Highway Department is authorized to make the payments required by Chapter 5, Title 23, United States Code, retroactive to the effective date of the Federal Act (August 23, 1968). OPINION 70-24 To: Director, Department of Public Health March 2, 1970 Re: Mentally ill persons; hospitalization procedure; pre-1970 adjudications of insanity to become void; restoration to sanity. This will acknowledge your letter of January 9, 1970 whereby you requested an opinion on the following questions: (1) Does an ordinary of a judicial admission county have jurisdiction under Ga. Code 88-506.4 of the new mental health law to conduct a hearing on the issue of an alleged patient's need for hospitalization? (2) Is there any pr~cedure under the new law whereby a superintendent of a facility located in a judicial admission county can initiate proceedings for involuntary hospitalization of a voluntary patient? (3) Will Ga. Code 88-508.7 in effect nullify all previous adjudications of insanity as of January 1, 1971? (4) Under present law, can a person, formerly adjudged incompetent, bring any type of action for judicial restoration to sanity? It will be noted that Ga. Code Ch. 88-5 was officially codified from Ga. Laws 1969, p. 505. As to question (1): Under the medical admission provisions of Ga. Code 88-506.3, prior to transfer from an Evaluating Facility to a Treatment Facility an alleged patient has the right to file a petition 38 requesting a hearing on the issue of thepatient's need for hospitalization in the court of ordinary in the county of residence of the patient. Ga. Code 88-506.4 provides for such a hearing and states that if found to be mentally ill " . . . the Court shall order the patient to be transported, . . . to a Treatment Facility where he shall be admitted for care and treatment ...." However, since Ga. Code 88-508.9 provides that the provisions of Ga. Code 88-507.2 - 88-507.3 shall constitute the sole method of hospitalization in judicial admission counties, the question arises as to whether an ordinary in a judicial admission county has jurisdiction to conduct a hearing under the medical admission provisions of Ga. Code 88-506.4. While a cursory examination of Ga. Code 88508.9 and Ga. Code 88-506.3-88-506.4 might appear to show conflicting sections of the Act, if at all possible, these ostensibly conflicting sections must be reconciled. In the case of Williams v. Bear's Den, Inc., 214 Ga. 240 (1958) the Court there said: "Where there is an apparent conflict between different sections of the same Statute, the duty of the Court is to reconcile them if possible, so as to make them consistent and harmonious with one another." Furthermore, the cardinal rule in the construction of legislaive enactments is to ascertain the true intention of the General Assembly in the passage of the law. It would certainly appear to have been the intention of the Legislature to guarantee every alleged patient the right to petition the court of ordinary in the county of his residence under Ga. Code 88-506.3- 88-506.4. Therefore, bearing in mind the above stated principles of law, it is apparent that Ga. Code 88-508.9 and Ga. Code 88-506.3-88506.4 can be reconciled. Although the ordinary under Ga. Code 88506.4 will formulate the order directing the patient to be transported to a treatment facility, the method of hospitalization will necessarily be initiated in a medical admission county. The ordinary is acting onlyin a "quasi-appellate" capacity under Ga. Code 88-506.4. In effect, then, an order from an ordinary in a judicial admission county under Ga. Code 88-506.4 would not appear to amount to the hospitalization of the patient in that county. The county of hospitalization would be the county in which the action was iniated. Therefore, it is my official opinion that an ordinary from a judicial admission county has jurisdiction under Ga. Code 88-506.4 to conduct a hearing on the issue of the patient's need for hospitalization. As to question (2): Ga. Code section 88-503.3 authorizes a superintendent of a Treatment Facility to initiate proceedings for 39 involuntary hospitalization of a voluntary patient under Ga. Code 88-506.3. However, since Ga. Code 88-506.3 constitutes a portion of the medical admission provisions of the new law, the question arises as to how a superintendent of a facility located in a judicial admission county can initiate such proceedings. From the above discussion, it is apparent that the superintendent of a facility located in a judicial admission county cannot initiate proceedings for involuntary hospitalization in that county under the medical admission provisions of Ga. Code 88-506.3. However, it appears that a superintendent can, prior to the time that the involuntary patient is discharged, file a petition in the court of ordinary asking for involuntary hospitalization of the patient under Ga. Code 88507.1- 88-507.3 (judicial hospitalization). Ga. Code 88-507.3(d) gives the ordinary authority at any time during the proceedings to order the sheriff to take the patient into custody, if deemed necessary for the protection of the patient, or others. Therefore, based upon the above, it is my official opinion that a superintendent of a facility located in a judicial admission county can initiate proceedings for involuntary hospitalization of a voluntary patient under the judicial admission provisions of the new mental health law. As to question (3): Ga. Code section 88-508.7 declares that all orders of hospitalization entered by the courts of ordinary prior to January 1, 1970, " . . . shall be null and void and of no effect" on and after January 1, 1971. Based upon the rule of statutory construction that a statute couched in plain, unambiguous and explicit language needs no interpretation, (See Central of Georgia Railroad Company v. Tucker, 99 Ga. App. 52 (1959)), it is my official opinion that all pre-1970 adjudications of insanity relating to hospitalization are null and void and of no effect after January l, 1971. As to question (4): Presently there appears to be no statutory procedure for judicially restoring to sanity those persons without guardians who have been medically restored to mental health. Former Ga. Code 88-522, 88-523 dealing with said judicial restoration were repealed by the present Ga. Code Ch. 88-5. Therefore, in the absence of any such statutory law, the question arises as to whether any court has inherent power to order a person restored to sanity. Although the jurisdiction to determine the question of restoration to sanity is usually governed by statute, (See 32 C.J., Insane Persons, (1923)), it has been held that a court of equity independent of statute has inherent power to determine whether or not a person has been restored to sanity. See Pfeiffer v. Pfeiffer, 118 P.2d 158 (1941); Contra, Bradford v. Ragsdale, eta!., 126 S.W.2d 327 (1939). While not directly on point, the Georgia Supreme Court has held that the jurisdiction of equity extends 40 to property rights of persons non compos mentis or lunatics and that such jurisdiction is broad and plenary. See Sangster v. Toledo Manufacturing Co., et a/., 193 Ga. 685 (1942); Dooley, et a/. v. Scoggins, 208 Ga. 200 (1951). Therefore, based upon the above, it is my official opinion that in the absence of statute, a court of equitymight entertain a petition for judicial restoration to sanity. OPINION 70-25 To: Director, Surface Mined Land Use Board March 5, 1970 Re: Surface mining; mining of materials covered by natural surface waters. By letter you have requested my opinion as to the applicability of the Surface Mining Act of 1968 to the mining of phosphates in the coastal areas, specifically the marshes and territorial waters, of this State. Section 3(a) of the Surface Mining Act of 1968 defines surface mining to encompass mining "by removing the overburden lying above natural ileposits . . . and mining directly from the natural deposits thereby exposed . . . . " Ga. Laws 1968, pp. 9, 11; Ga. Code Ann. 431403(a). Section 3(d) of the Act defines overburden to include "all of the earth and other materials which lie above natural deposits . . . ."While there are other increments to both definitions, it is my understanding that the mechanics of such mining make the aforestated portions both material and controlling of the question posed. It is my opinion that surface mining as defined by the relevant portions of the Act occurs where mining involves the removal of the earth and other materials lying above natural deposits so as to mine directly from the natural deposits thereby exposed. In other words the mining must be directly from exposed natural deposits and not indirectly through another medium. Therefore, the dredging or ocean mining of materials normally covered by natural surface water without diking and pumping so as to expose the natural deposits to direct removal cannot constitute surface mining as presently defined. The law is less clear where an area normally covered by natural surface waters is diked and pumped so as to permit mining directly from exposed deposits. In such a case the question is whether the surface waters. are "other materials" so as to fall within the statutory definition of overburden. In the absence of controlling authority I must necessarily revert to the basic tool of construction that remedial legislative acts, such as the Surface Mining Act, should be liberally construed to advance 41 their protective purposes. Since such a liberal construction must necessarily favor the wider regulatory scope, it is my opinion that such surface waters can constitute overburden so as to bring the operation within the Act's coverage. Nothing in this opinion should be taken to mean that the collection in a pit of subsurface waters or undrained rainfall will operate to remove such pit operations from coverage under the Act. OPINION 70-26 To: Chairman, State Board of Pardons and Paroles March 5, 1970 Re: Destruction of records by State Board of Pardons and Paroles. This will acknowledge receipt of your letter in which you ask whether the Board's closed individual case files would ever be subject to being subpoenaed, and whether, if so, there is a statute of limitations on the initiation of actions against the Board. I understand that your inquiry is necessitated by the belief that the Board is not authorized to destroy its case files. By statute, the Board is required to "preserve on file all documents on which it has acted in the granting of clemency, reprieve, pardon or parole. . . ." Ga. Laws 1943, pp. 185, 193, Ga. Code Ann. 77-522. This statute prohibits the Board, by implication, from ever destroying those documents on which it has acted in granting relief. However, there also exists a statute which allows the Board to procure the destruction of its records, through the ultimate agency of the Governor, if prescribed conditions are met. This is Ga. Laws 1943, p. 468 (Ga. Code Ann. 40-809, 40-810). Ga. Code Ann. 40-809 gives the Governor discretionary power "to order the destruction of records of any department of State", provided that "the officer charged by law with the custody of the same shall list and describe the said record and shall certify to the Secretary of State that the records sought to be destroyed are without historic value, are obsolete, are expensive to store and will serve no further useful purpose", and provided further that the Secretary of State and the Director of the Department of Archives and History concur with the Director of the subject department. Ga. Code Ann. 40-810 authorizes the Secretary of State and the Director of the Department of Archives and History to condition their certification with the requirement that microfilms be made of the records prior to their destruction. I am enclosing a copy of these code sections for your further reference. It is my opinion that the Board may avail itself of the procedure 42 described in Ga. Code Ann. 40-809 and 40-810. This procedure is applicable to the records of "any department of State" and therefore is applicable to the records of the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Such a construction does not, however, dispense with the requirement of Ga. Code Ann. 77-522 that the Board preserve records of those cases in which it has granted relief. The two statutes are not in conflict and must be regarded as having concurrent validity. Section 77-522, by implication, prohibits the Board from destroying these documents. Sections 40-809 and 40-810 do not remove this prohibition; rather, they simply authorize the Board to request the Governor to destroy them. Until such time as the Governor does order their destruction the Board is under a continuing obligation to preserve them. This construction of the operation of these statutes is demanded by both the language employed and the accepted rule of statutory construction that two statutes dealing with the same general subject matter should, where possible, be construed so as to give them concurrent efficacy. Erwin v. Moore, 15 Ga. 361 (1854); Lewis v. City ofSmyrna, 214 Ga. 323 (1958). I call to your attention the fact that all information received by the Board, with certain stated exceptions, is to be regarded as a confidential State secret under Ga. Laws 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., pp. 210, 211 (Ga. Code Ann. 77-533), the divulgence of which constitutes a misdemeanor (Ga. Code Ann. 77-9911). It is therefore my further opinion that the Board must declassify, by a resolution passed at a duly-constituted session of the Board, all records which it seeks to have destroyed and which are not included in one of the statutory exceptions relating to records of the Board which are public documents. Ga. Code Ann. 77-533(b). The procedure set forth in Ga. Code Ann. 40-809 and 40-810 would appear to provide a convenient method for disposing of the Board's dosed files. For this reason I have not responded directly to the two questions which you have posed. OPINION 70-27 To: Chancellor, Regents of the University System of Georgia March 5, 1970 Re: Education; sales by facility of University of Georgia to federal and State installations. This is in response to your request for my opinion concerning whether the University Central Research Stores of the University of Georgia may sell supplies to the Southeast Water Laboratory of the Department of the Interior and the Southeastern Agricultural Research Laboratory 43 of the Department of Agriculture. In addition to these two Federal installations, the University Central Research Stores contemplates the sale of supplies to the Athens Area Vocational Technical School. It is my understanding that the Central Research Stores sells technical and scientific research materials and supplies such as test tubes and chemicals to the various departments of the University and not directly to students. Central Research Stores is an activity of the University, and the purpose of the facility is to centralize the acquisition of technical and scientific supplies and to obviate the necessity of each department procuring supplies from various suppliers. Under the proposed plan to sell supplies to the Federal and State installations mentioned above, only items customarily kept in stock would be sold and the arrangment would be purely secondary and incidental to the primary purpose of the Central Research Stores-to provide materials vital to the function of several departments within the University. The question of whether a State supported university may engage in enterprises which are partially commercial in nature generally depends on the facts of each case, with a strong consideration being whether the undertaking in question is within the scope of the powers granted to the university, either expressly or impliedly. 15 Am. Jur. 2d, Colleges and Universities, 9, pp. 593, 594. Regents of the University System of Georgia is a public corporation which is empowered "to exercise any power usually granted to such corporation, necessary to its usefulness, which is not in conflict with the Constitution and laws of this State." Ga. Code Ann. 32-121(4) (Ga. Laws 1931, pp. 7, 24). Under this grant of authority, it has been held that the University Corporation may exercise any power necessary to its usefulness in the absence of a specific restraint imposed by law. State of Georgia v. Regents of the University System, 179 Ga. 210 (1934). Under the very broad powers which have enured to the University Corporation through statute and judicial pronouncement, it has been established that Regents of the University System of Georgia can legally operate incidental businesses, such. as a laundry and dry cleaning service at reduced prices for the benefit of students, faculty members, and other persons connected with the institution. Villyard v. Regents of the University System, 204 Ga. 517 (1948). In addition, Regents can delegate its authority to run a laundry service to a private, non-profit corporation. Westbrook v. University of Georgia Athletic Association, 206 Ga. 667 (1950). The fact that an authorized incidental business operated by a State supported college or university may also incidentally serve persons not connected with the institution has not been regarded as making the enterprise legally objectionable from the stanepoint of creating unfair competition. Fanning. et al. v. University of Minnesota, et al., 183 44 Minn. 222,236 N.W. 217 (1931); Batchel/or, eta/. v. Commonwealth ex rei. Rector and Visitors of University of Virginia, 176 Va. 109, 10 S.E.2d 529 (1940); Villyard v. Regents of the University System, supra. In light of the foregoing authorities, it seems well settled that units in the University System of Georgia may operate incidental businesses, and it would appear that this authority extends to such incidental enterprises being patronized by persons other than students and faculty members of the institution. The Villyard case and the Westbrook case do not deal specifically with the selling of supplies or services to other governmental units, either State or Federal. But it is reasonable to assume, and it is my opinion, that the courts of this State would not find objectionable the University Central Research Stores' selling supplies to Federal and State installations so long as the primary purpose and justification for the enterprise is related to the operation of the University. OPINION 70-28 To: Executive Director, Department of Industry and Trade March 6, 1970 Re: Expenses of State departments; departments of State must not pay Georgia sales tax; reasonable tipping for services as permissible. This responds to your request for an opinion regarding the utilization of credit cards by the Department of Industry and Trade. You advise that the Department has had credit cards issued to its name and distributed to certain employees, who then charge meals and accommodations while traveling directly to the Department. In connection with the use of these cards, you have asked: 1. May the Department pay sales tax charged by hotels, rental car agencies or restaurants? 2. May the Department pay tips for service in connection with the purchase of meals by employees? 3. Does the constitutional amendment permitting the Department to pay for "business meals and incidental expenses of bona fide industrial prospects" authorize the Department to pay for sales tax and service charges incurred in connection therewith? In answer to your first question, Section 3(c)(2)(d) of the Georgia Retailers' and Consumers' Sales and Use Tax Act, Ga. Laws 1951, p. 360, as amended, Ga. Code Ann. 92-3403a(c)(2)(d), exempts sales to 45 the State of Georgia from the payment of the Georgia sales tax. Therefore, a sale made directly to the Department is immune, and the Department may not pay Georgia sales tax which has been erroneously imposed, see Freeney v. Geoghegan, 177 Ga. 142(1) (1933). The foregoing pertains only to sales made in Georgia. Sales occurring in other states would, of course, be subject to foreign statutes which may or may not exempt sales made to sister states. Absent such statutory exemption, the Department, in my opinion, would be liable for payment of sales taxes imposed by other states. Responding to your second question, I find that tips for service are invariably subject to taxation as income to the recipient. 10 ALR 2d 192. Conversely, reasonable tips for services in connection with meals while away from home in pursuit of business are deductible as travel expenses. IRS Pub. No. 17 (1969) p. 43. See generally Charles G. Gustafson, 3 T.C. 998 (1944) and IT 3728, 1945-46 Cum. Bull. p. 78. Deductions are not allowed for those amounts "which are lavish or extravagant under the circumstances". Int. Rev. Code of 1954, 162(a)(2). In my opinion the payment of reasonable tips for services by the Department would not offend Art. VII, Sec. I, Par. II of the Georgia Constitution (Ga. Code Ann. 2-5402), which forbids the grant of a donation or a gratuity. Tipping lacks the essential element of a gift, which is the free bestowing of a gratuity without consideration. Roberts v. Commissioner, 176 F.2d 221 (9th Cir. 1949). In tipping, the financial advantage is conferred on the basis of a consideration which is related to service. Id. p. 225. It is, therefore, my opinion that reasonable tips for services are not gratuities and may be borne by the Department. OPINION 70-29 To: Director, Surface Mined Land Use Board March 9, 1970 Re: Surface mining; retention of funds by Surface Land Use Board without payment into State Treasury. By letter you request my opinion as to the effect of section 5(h) of the Surface Mining Act of 1968, Ga. Laws 1968, pp. 9, 15, Ga. Code Ann. 43-1405(h). A pertinent portion of this section provides that "the Surface Mined Land Use Board shall have the power and duty both to accept monies that are available from government units and private organizations ...." Ibid. Also enumerated among the Board's powers and duties is the "conduct [of] research studies on mined land uses." (Ga. Laws 1968, pp. 9, 15, Ga. Code Ann. 43-l405(j). 46 You were wondering whether if a mining company should desire to make available funds to the Board for specific research such funds would have to be turned into the State Treasury to be appropriated therefrom as provided by law. Article VII, Section II, Paragraph III of the Constitution of 1945, Ga. Code Ann. 2-5503, provides that: "All money collected from taxes, fees and assessments . . . shall be paid into the General Fund of the Statute Treasury. . . " Since the monies involved in your inquiry do not constitute money collected froin taxes, fees and assessments under the authority of revenue statutes of this State, it is my opinion that they need not be paid into the General Fund of the State Treasury. OPINION 70-30 To: Director, Surface Mined Land Use Board March 9, 1970 Re: Surface mining; effect of Surface Mining Act upon lands mined prior to effective date. You have requested that I reconsider my opinion of July 8, 1969 in which I held that lands previously affected by surface-mining operations prior to the effective date of the Surface Mining Act of 1968, Ga. Laws 1968, p. 9, Ga. Code Ann. 43-1401 et seq., which are subjected to additional excavation of minerals or deposition of spoilage are "affected lands" within the definition of section 3(c) of the Act. Ga. Laws 1968, pp. 9, 12 Ga. Code Ann .. 43-1403(c). I have carefully reviewed this opinion in the light of the Board's comments and it is my opinion that the interpretation as set forth was, and is, completely correct. I cannot agree that the Act vests in your Board administrative power to flexibly define the term "affected lands" in given situations. I do not regard the word "or" appeari'ng in the definitive portion of the statute as vesting in the Board a right to select among the various clauses thereby connected. As I view the statute, it says that "affected land" is to be defined to include each clause separately within the definition and not any one of them at the discretion of the Board. There is no ambiguity in the definition which might give rise to an interpretive selectivity. The definition clearly and simply says that the concept of "affected land" shall include all of the situations enumerated in the definition. Your attention is called to the fact that. the term "affected land" as utilized in the Act is a technical concept. Therefore, land which might be 47 commonly termed affected in the everyday sense of the word only falls within the technical concept if the affecting operations took place after the effective date of the Act. In other words, the Act was necessarily written upon a clean slate. The Act attempted to impose no obligation upon operators for lands affected in the everyday sense prior to the effective date of the Act. At the same time, this concept operates both ways, and the operator may not take advantage of prior, unregulated mining operations for which no liability accrues under the Act to escape a quantity of obligation imposed by the Act. OPINION 70-31 To: Director, Surface Mined Land Use Board March 9, 1970 Re: Surface mining; owner of land may not prevent reclamation by lessee-operator. By letter you have requested my opinion in the case of a landowner who is insisting that the lessee-operator not reclaim lands affected and covered by the latter's mined-land use plan. It is my understanding that the lease between the landowner and the operator is silent as to reclamation; however, the operator is required by section 6(b) of the Surface Mining Act of 1968, Ga. Laws 1968, pp. 9, 16, Ga. Code Ann. 43-1406(b), to provide for reclamation of the leased affected land. The Act has been reviewed in its entirety, and it is my opinion based upon this review that a lessor has no more right to dispense with the reclamation positively required by the Act than the lessee-operator. The Act constitutes a reasonable restriction upon the basic right to own and manage property as one may see fit interposed for the general welfare. The Act simply doeepartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Toll bridge with Alabama .................................... 216 BROKERS. "Finder," mortgage brokerage firm acting as .................... 319 Real estate, licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Signing real estate sales contracts, delegation of duty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 BUDGET BUREAU. Collection of information required from budget unit heads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 Transfer of funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 BUILDINGS. Substandard, abatement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS. Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS. Confidential communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 CHARITIES. Taxation. exemption from . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292, 338 CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER. Ownership of soil beneath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 INDEX 409 CHILDREN AND YOUTH, DIVISION OF. PAGE Application for grants for Georgia Youth Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 Contract with county for temporary care facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Day care center unlicensed operation, seeking injunction against . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Medical treatment for children in custody, parental consent prior to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Prisoners, custody of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 89, 121 Purchase of land from Fulton County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Realty, acquisition of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 CHURCHES. Ad valorem tax exemptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 Taxation exemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 CIGARETTE VENDING MACHINES. Notices attached stating that minors are forbidden to purchase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 CITY COURTS. Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 CITY MANAGERS. Officers or employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 CIVIC CENTER. Taxation exemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 CIVIL PRACTICE ACT. Answer, time for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Dismissal, automatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 CLINICAL LABORATORIES. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 COASTAL MARSHES. Position paper relating to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 COASTAL MARSHLANDS PROTECTION ACT. Construction of terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 COFFEE COUNTY. Tax commissioner, compensation .............................. 355 CONCENTRATED COMMERCIAL FEEDING STUFFS. Labels .................................................... 207 CONDEMNATION. District attorney serving as special master . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 Highway Department, by, for scenic purposes .................... 209 Hospital authorities ......................................... 313 CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS. Certified public accountants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 410 INDEX CONFLICT OF INTERESTS. PAGE Public officers .................................... 315, 321, 334 CONSOLIDATION. See Merger. Political subdivisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286, 320 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Amendments- Advertising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 Effective date, prospective interpretation ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Methods ................................................ 348 Amendments to Constitution, effective date, prospective interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Sex, proposed federal constitutional amendment as to discrimination on account of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 CONSULAR OFFICIALS. Tax exemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 Taxation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 CONTESTS. Magazine advertising contests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 CONTRACT MOTOR CARRIERS. Co-op messenger service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 CONTRACTS. County health boards ........................................ 347 Public officers contracting with public entity .................................. 315, 321, 334 Real estate sales, delegation of duty of signing contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Realtors .................................................... 2 State, by, in excess of one year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 CONVICTION OF CRIME. Boxing right denied for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Former, conduct of recidivist trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 CO-OP MESSENGER SERVICE. Contract motor carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 CORONERS. Death under suspicious circumstances, duties where . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 Jurisdiction as to automobile accidents involving servicemen ............................................ 313 Pronouncing a subject dead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 CORPORATIONS. Dentistry, practice of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 Foreign professional corporations, not entitled to transact business in Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 INDEX 411 CORPORATIONS-Cont'd. PAGE Liquidated, distribution of assets 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Podiatrists 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Political campaign contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 183 Surface mining, criminal prosecutions 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CORRECTIONS, STATE BOARD OF. Escapees, costs of trying 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Juvenile prisoners, custody of 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contracts- Disbursement with county 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permission to private corporation to publicize work done for 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COSMETOLOGY. 276 Board's authority where rules disobeyed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 COSTS. Insolvent cost list 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Misdemeanor cases 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 335 3 11 COUNTIES. Bridge given to State Parks Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delinquent taxpayers, publication of list of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Employees also employed by State 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Home rule 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Indebtedness 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sanitary landfill, residents of city using 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tax districts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Treasurer, abolition of office 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Water and sewerage authorities, contracts with 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. 311 343 312 323 342 332 283 348 351 District attorney's accounts, auditing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Qualification for specific posts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Granting permit to private corporation to construct sewer 327 353 311 across street dedicated to county 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COURTS. Name changed, effect as to qualifying of candidates 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 310 CREDIT CARDS. State department, use by 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CREDIT UNIONS. Election of officers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 CRIMES AND PUNiSHMENT. Surface mining corporations, criminal prosecutions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 412 INDEX CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. PAGE See Prisons and Prisoners. Bail, see Bail. F. B.l. identification records, admissibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334 Incarceration of persons awaiting trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Municipal officers, criminal jurisdiction of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Prior convictions, conduct of recidivist trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 Recidivist trials, conduct of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 Records to indigent prisoners, federal holdings relative to furnishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 Separate determinations of guilt and imposition of sentence . . . . . . . . 324 Transcripts in misdemeanor cases ............................. 301 DAY CARE CENTERS. Unlicensed operation of .................. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 DEAD BODIES. Suspicious circumstances, death under, duties of medical examiner, peace officer and coroner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 DEATH. Coroner pronouncing subject as dead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 DECEASED PERSONS. Motor vehicle title transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 DEEDS. Highway Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 DEKALB COUNTY. Regional Hospital at Atlanta as not subject to taxation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 School system, effect of proposed "City-County of DeKalb" as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 DELINQUENT TAXPAYERS. Publication of list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 DENTISTS. Corporate practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 DEPOSITIONS. Record, status as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES. Motor vehicle purchase by .................................... 339 DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONS. Area planning and development commissions, purchasing procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission as not . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 INDEX 413 DISABLED VETERANS. PAGE Surface mining license 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISMISSAL. 175 Automatic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISTRESS WARRANTS. Limitation of actions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS. Accounts of, county commissioners auditing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Assistant district attorneys, eligibility for 291 334 327 State employees health insurance 141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fees where placed on salary 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Motor vehicles, purchasing 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Special master in condemnation case, serving as 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 293 DOCUMENTARY TAX. Banks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 DOMICILE. School purposes, for 284 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DRIVERS' LICENSES. Nonresident students 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Temporary permits to drive during suspension of, no authority to issue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DRUG ABUSE. Inspecting authority, delegation of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127 198 DRUG INSPECTORS. Seizure of prescriptions by law enforcement officers for use as evidence 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 DRUGGISTS. See Pharmacists. DRUGS. University system 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 DRUNKEN DRIVING. Implied consent law 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EDUCATION. See Schools, Public. Honors program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 Medical scholarship loan 104, 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EDUCATION, COUNTY BOARDS OF. Defending actions against school officials and employees 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interest charged to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Member also on Federal Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Committee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 344 308 176 414 INDEX EDUCATION, COUNTY BOARDS OF-Cont'd. PAGE Planning commission member also on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 Removal of member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 Tape recordings of meeting ................................... 191 EGGS. Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 ELECTIONS. Absentee ballots, procedure as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327, 332 Agricultural Commodities Commission officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Ballots- Absentee, procedure as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327, 332 Party affiliation designation on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 Separate for each party in primary ........................... 310 Campaign contributions- Banks .................................................. 187 Corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Candidates- Designating specific office sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 Withdrawing prior to primary but after qualifying deadline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322 County commissioners ...................................... 353 Effective date of measure subject to referendum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Incumbents designated on primary ballots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Intoxicating beverages sold on election days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 Judges, of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 Liquor, signature to petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Listing of candidates in special and general elections on same ballot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Local law conflicting with Election Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Mentally ill persons- Voters, as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Voting by ............................................... 336 Municipal, residence requirements ............................. 337 Party affiliation designated on ballot only when candidate nominated in primary or within statutory exceptions .......... 316 Political party, what constitutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Primaries- Party, separate ballot for each .............................. 310 Special primary called by ordinary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 Registration, change of names or addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Qualification of candidates- Effect of change of name of court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 INDEX 415 ELECTIONS-Cont'd. PAGE Governor, for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Specific posts, for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Qualifying fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Running for remaining part of unexpired term, where ............ 303 Registration of voters, eligibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Residence requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 EMERITUS POSITIONS. Superior court judges ........................................ 248 Widows benefifs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 EMINENT DOMAIN. Automatic dismissal of proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Dateoftakingasdateofaward ................................ 152 District attorney serving as special master . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 Escheat of funds paid into court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 Hospital authorities ....................................... :. 313 EMPLOYEES OF STATE. Infectious hepatitis, contracting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 Political activities restricted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 Sales to State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM. Contingent beneficiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Court reporter, contributions by ............................... 307 ESCAPE. Bail in escape cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 Cost of trying escapee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 ESCHEAT. Eminent domain cases, money paid into court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 Generally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 ESTATE TAXES. Interest on delinquent payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 EVICTION. Tenant holding over ......................................... 340 EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Deployment of Georgia Bureau of Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 EXTRADITION. Expenses, duty of demanding State to pay ........................ 20 FAMILY AND CHILDREN SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF. Adoption order, forwarding final order to Department ............ 242 Agencies of the State, as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Contracts- Disbursements of funds in advance of anticipated expenses, for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 416 INDEX FAMILY AND CHILDREN SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF- Cont'd. Contracts-Coot' d. PAGE Private institutions, with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION. Identification records, admissibility in criminal cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334 FEDERAL FOOD STAMPS. County-wide buying club redeeming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 FEEDS. Concentrated commercial feeding stuffs, labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 FEMALES. Peace officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 FINES. Collection of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 Use of funds ............................................... 341 FIREARMS. Machine guns, possession .................................... 296 Shotguns, carrying unloaded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Special deputy sheriff carrying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND. Ineligible applicant, return of contributions and interest received from . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Return of contributions upon death of late-applicant member ............................................... 110 FIRES. Forest, mutual aid programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 FISHING DERBIES. Lotteries, as not . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 FOLKSTON, CITY OF. Chicken raising, tax on business of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 FOOD. Beer, wine and distilled spirits as within definition of ............... 81 Eggs, classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Inspection of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 FOOD STAMPS, FEDERAL. County-wide buying club redeeming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 FOREIGN CORPORATIONS. Stock in, intangibles taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 FOREIGN INSURERS. Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 FORESTRY COMMISSION, GEORGIA. Fire protection, mutual aid programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 INDEX 417 FORESTRY COMMISSION, STATE. PAGE Gasoline purchases as exempt from federal Airport and Airway Revenue Act taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 FORFEITURES. Use of .................................................... 341 FRANCHISES. System utilizing joint-adventure approach ....................... 289 Television antenna system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 GAMBLING DEVICES. Electronic games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 GAME AND FISH COMMISSION, STATE. Motor vehicles, impounding of illegally parked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 GARBAGE. Collection fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 GARNISHMENT. Justice courts, procedure in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 Necessity of proceedings for deductions from wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 State employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 GAS. Municipal taxation of facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 GENERAL ASSEMBLY. Fiscal affairs subcommittees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 GEORGIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION. Deployment of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 GLUE SNIFFING. Municipal ordinance as to .................................... 299 GOVERNOR. Budget object transfers, recommending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Emergency funds- Allocation directly to political subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Family and Children Services, Department of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Health Department funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 South Fulton Single Municipality Study Committee as recipient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Housing, Committee on, reimbursement of citizens on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Qualification as candidate for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 GRANTS. State to municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 GROVELAND LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Employees health insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 Motor vehicle purchase ...................................... 339 HEALTH, COUNTY BOARDS OF. Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 418 INDEX HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC. PAGE Governor's emergency fund, administration of sums from . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Vital records, newspaper representative allowed access to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 HEPATITIS. State employee contracting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT, STATE. Airport facilities of, permits orleases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Airspace above and below Federal-aid highway rights-of-way, control, etc. of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262 Clearing and grubbing, increase in compensation for ............... 66 Contracts, error or omission in plans or specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Deeds, effect of exception in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Director, election, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Expenditure of State funds on project where right-of-way dedicated to public . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Flashing signals at grade crossings owned by United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Loan of vehicles to Georgia Tech for research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Mailing privileges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Outdoor advertisement signs on property to be purchased, purchase or condemnation of ............................. 276 Recreational and park facilities, expenditure of funds for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Relocation assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Scenic purposes, condemnation for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Sheriffs sale, lands acquired by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Surplus property, disposal of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Testing program, rewrite of specifications dealing with ................................................... 69 HIGHWAYS. Air space over, use of... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 National Highway Safety Act of 1966, grants under .............. 208 Reimbursement to utilities adjusting facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Rest areas, operation of mobile vending trucks at . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 State Toll Bridge Authority contract with Alabama Toll Bridge Authority for construction of toll bridge .............. 216 Trains blocking ............................................. 79 HOME RULE. Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 INDEX 419 HOME RULE-Cont'd. PAGE Taxation by county, effect as to ........................... 282, 283 HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS. Generally . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 Personal property, application to .............................. 282 Second house, application to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL SERVICE NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS. Rate revision without approval of Insurance Commissioner ......................................... 213 HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES. Eminent domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Membership, change in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348 Private ambulance service, employment of ...................... 257 HOUSING, GOVEROR'S COMMITTEE ON. Reimbursement of citizens on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 ILLEGITIMATE CHILREN. Support of dependents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 IMMUNITIES. Waiver of sovereign immunity ................................ 325 IMPLIED CONSENT. Drunken driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 INCOME TAXES. Campaign contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Resident of another State performing services in Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 Retirement payments as not exempt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 INDICTMENTS. Lost, procedure to establish copy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. Taxation for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 INDUSTRY AND TRADE, DEPARTMENT OF. Credit cards, use of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Tourist attraction discount coupons, distribution of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 INFANTS. Cigarette vending machines having notices stating minors are forbidden to purchase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 Prisons, custody of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 89, 121 INFECTIOUS HEPATITIS. State employee contacting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 INSANE PERSONS. See Mentally Ill Persons. 420 INDEX INSOLVENT COST LIST. PAGE Generally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 INSPECTIONS. Drug abuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 Food, of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 INSURANCE. Exclusion not set forth as required by Code construed as provided in Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Injury as including both fatal and nonfatal injuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Premiums, interest on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 University System, liability insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 INSURANCE COMMISSIONER. Hospital and medical service nonprofit corporation revision of rates without approval of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 INSURERS. Investments, foreign insurers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 INTANGIBLE TAXES. Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Basis upon long term note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 Demand notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 Long term notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297, 299 Stocks in foreign corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 INTEREST. Ad valorem taxes, unpaid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133, 322 Estate taxes, delinquent payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Insurance premiums, on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 School bonds .............................................. 161 INTERROGATORIES. Record, status as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. Election day, sold on ........................................ 309 Election, signatures to petition for ............................. 219 Food, as within definition of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 More than two, person having . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288, 295 Retailer, for ............................................. 666 Revocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 Malt beverages, taxation ................................ 317, 329 Mixed drink sales ........................................... 326 Sale or free distribution of trade novelties for advertising or promotional purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 INDEX 421 INTOXICATION. PAGE Driving under influence, implied consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 INVESTMENTS. Insurers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Retirement funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 IRWIN COUNTY. Tax collector, compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 JOINT ADVENTURES. Franchise system utilizing joint-adventure approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 JUDGES. Election of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. Bail procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 District, required to hold county and maintain office within his district . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Garnishment procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 Peace warrants, procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 Traffic violations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 Warrants for arrest ......................................... 344 Witness fees ............................................... 354 JURISDICTION. City courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 LABELS. Concentrated commercial feeding stuff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 LABOR. Minimum Wage Law, applicability ............................ 318 Right-to-work law, as not protecting employees covered by Federal Railway Labor Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 LABOR, COMMISSIONER OF. Minimum Wage Law, enforcement of .......................... 236 LANDLORD AND TENANT. Holding over, proceedings against tenants ....................... 340 Tenancy at will, termination of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 LICENSES AND LICENSE TAXES. See Particular subject of licenses. Auctioneers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Billiard rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Clinical laboratories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 Intoxicating liquors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 More than two licenses, having . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288, 295 422 INDEX LICENSES AND LICENSE TAXES-Cont'd. Intoxicating liquors-Cont'do PAGE Revocation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liquor retailers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Occupations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 296 347 302 Plumbers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 197, 244 Practical nurses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 286 Professional activities 301 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Professions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Real estate brokers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 302 285 LIENS. Ad valorem taxes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 345 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. Distress warrants ... 334 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM SAFETY ACT. Municipal corporation complying with 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOCAL LAWS. Election Code, conflicting with . 331 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOST PAPERS. Indictments, procedure to establish copy .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 LOTTERIES. Fishing derby 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 296 Magazine advertising contests 317 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LUNANCY COMMISSIONS. Certifying physician sitting on 320 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MACHINE GUNS. Possession 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MACON-BIBB COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 296 Air pollution regulations, enforcement of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 237 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING CONTESTS. Lotteries . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 317 MAIL. Prescriptions delivered by 271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 State of Georgia publications 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MALT BEVERAGES. Taxation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 317, 329 MARRIAGE. Age of male applicants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Witnesses to ceremony 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 312 325 MARSHES. Coastal marshes, position paper relating to ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 279 MEDICAL EDUCATION LOANS. Osteopathy students 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INDEX 423 MEDICAL EXAMINERS. PAGE Death under suspicious circumstances, duties where . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 MENTALLY ILL PERSONS. Certifying physician on lunacy commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 Commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 Convalescent status, termination of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 Elections, voting in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Hospitalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337, 339 Hospitalization procedure ..................................... 37 Ordinary's powers as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288, 292 Voting by ................................................. 336 MERGER. School systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 See Consolidation. MERIT SYSTEM. Accumulated leave, transfer of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Annual and sick leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 MERIT SYSTEM OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION. Premarital syphilis examinations, employees conducting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 MESSENGER SERVICE. Contract motor carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 MILITARY SERVICE. Ad valorem tax on mobile homes owned by nonresident servicemen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 Coroners' jurisdiction as to automobile accidents involving servicemen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 MINES AND MINING. See Surface Mining. Ownership of minerals in place, obtaining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 MINES, MINING AND GEOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF. Director, appointment, merit system, etc........................ 272 MINIMUM WAGE LAW. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Enforcement of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 MISDEMEANORS. Costs in cases before ordinaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Jurisdiction over misdmeanants in county jails, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 Transcripts in misdemeanor cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 I MOBILE HOMES. Ad valorem taxes where owned by nonresident servicemen . . . . . . . . . . 284 424 INDEX MONROE, CITY OF. Mayor and councilmen, issuance of search PAGE warrants by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 MORTGAGE BROKERAGE FIRM. "Finder," acting as ......................................... 319 MOTOR CARRIERS. Jurisdiction of Public Service Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 MOTOR FUEL TAX. Refund, claim for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 MOTOR VEHICLE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE ACT. Stolen vehicle, effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. Property bond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 MOTOR VEHICLES. Ad valorem taxes, see Ad Valorem Taxes; Taxation, County. Antique automobiles, taxation by county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Development authority, purchase by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 District attorney purchasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Game and Fish Commission impounding illegally parked .......... 204 Inspect certificate expired, criminal proceedings where . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 License tags- Compensation of local tag agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Five-year tags except where in excess of certain weight . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Use of old tag ............................................ 301 State officer, purchase of automobile by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Stolen, effect of certificate of title issued upon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Tags, nonresident students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Title where owner deceased . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 Width of load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. Amusement parks, liability for operation, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Charter as not terminated by nonuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 County sanitary landfill, residents of city using . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 Criminal jurisdiction of mayors and recorders ................... 318 Elections, residence requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 Franchise to television antenna system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 Garbage collection fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 Gas facilities, taxation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Glue sniffing, adopting ordinance as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Liquefied Petroleum Safety Act, compliance with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Manager as officer or employee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 INDEX 425 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Cont'd. PAGE Mayors, criminal jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Officers increasing own compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Political subdivisions of State, as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 Public Service Commission jurisdiction over municipally- owned utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 Recorders, criminal jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Retirement system set up without amending charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 State funds, distribution of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 State grants to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84, 217 Traffic control beyond corporate limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 NARCOTICS. University system ............... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 NATIONAL GUARD. State immunity for tort claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 NATURAL AREAS COUNCIL. Property, effect of acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 NAVIGABLE WATERS. Chattahoochee River, ownership of soil beneath .................. 288 NONRESIDENTS. Foreign professional corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Students, motor vehicle tags and drivers' licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 NORTH GEORGIA MOUNTAIN BOYS. Trust for education of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 NORTH GEORGIA MOUNTAINS AUTHORITY. Recreation experiment stations, conduct of persons using ................................................. 324 NOTARIES PUBLIC. Witnessing spouse's signature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 NOTES. Intangible taxes ................................... 284, 297, 299 NOTICE. Taxation, change in valuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322, 323 NUISANCES. Substandard buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 NURSES. Practical nurses- Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Training requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 OATHS. Tax returns ................................................ 315 OCCUPATIONS. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 426 INDEX OCEAN SCIENCE CENTER OF THE ATLANTIC. Funds transfer to Skidaway Institute of PAGE Oceanography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, PUBLIC. City managers, officers or employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Compensation changed during term of office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 Conflict of interests ................................ 315, 321, 334 Contracts by officers with public entity ................ 315, 321, 334 Extra compensation for, computation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Holding more than one office .................... 299, 306, 307, 319 Political party committeeman, officer also serving as .............. 314 ORDINARIES. Costs in misdemeanor cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Mentally ill persons, powers as to ......................... 288, 292 Special primaries, calling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 OSTEOPATHY STUDENTS. Scholarships to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 OUTDOOR ADVERTISEMENT SIGNS. Property to be purchased by Highway Department, on, condemnation or purchase ................................ 276 Simultaneous employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 State and county, employment by both . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 PARDONS AND PAROLES, STATE BOARD OF. Orders, captions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 Records, destruction of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Two-way radio for use in privately-owned automobile, purchase of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 PARENT AND CHILD. Adoption proceedings, forwarding of final order to Department of Family and Children Services ................ 242 Consent for medical treatment for children in custody of Division for Children and Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 PARKS. Highway funds expended for facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 PAROLE. Probation, similarities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 PAUPERS. Prisoners, furnishing records to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 PEACE BONDS. Relief of bondsman's obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 INDEX ~7 PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING ACT. PAGE Certification of persons employed as peace officers on effective date 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Deputized persons 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 269 229 Female officers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interpretation of law 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 195 Interrupted service, status of persons with 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 PEACE OFFICERS. Death under suspicious circumstances, duties where 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 356 PEACE WARRANTS. Justice courts, issuance in 336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEANUTS. Agricultural Commodity Commission for Peanuts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 PERCOLATING WATERS. Use 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184 PERMITS. Tear-gas device 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 291 PERSONAL PROPERTY. Advertising signs 210 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Homestead exemption applied to 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PETITIONS. Liquor election 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 219 PETROLEUM. Municipal corporation complying with Liquefied Petroleum Safety Act 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHARMACIES. Apothecary, use of name in business 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) PHARMACISTS. Prescriptions received by telephone 271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. Abortions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 299 Gratuitious practice at charitable institutions by physicians licensed elsewhere 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Licenses by reciprocity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 357 240 Medical scholarship loan- Credit on 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 Liability of estate for 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sterilization of persons 299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONS, AREA. Purchasing procedure 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 428 INDEX PLANNING COMMISSIONS. PAGE Atlanta Regional Metropolitan Planning Commission is not a development commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Education board, member also on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 PLUMBERS. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197, 244 Extension of time for obtaining license without examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 PODIATRISTS. Practice under Professional Corporation Act .................... 141 Advertisements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 POLICE OFFICERS. Deputy sheriff also serving as policeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 16 POLITICAL ACTIVITIES. State employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 POLITICAL PARTIES. Ballots, separate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Committeeman also serving as public officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 What constitutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF STATE. Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Governments, of .......................................... 320 Municipal corporations as .................................... 222 POLYGRAPH EXAMINERS. Display of licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Examination and license fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 PRACTICAL NURSES. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Training requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE. Answer, time for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Dismissal, automatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Mail, delivered by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 Telephone receipt by druggists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 PRISON INDUSTRIES ADMINISTRATION. Sale of equipment manufactured by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 PRISONS AND PRISONERS. Actions by and against . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 Computation of felony sentence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Conditional release . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Industrial type programs, development of ....................... 203 INDEX 429 PRISONS AND PRISONERS-Cont'd. PAGE Jurisdiction over misdemeanants in county jails, etc.................................................... 320 Juveniles, custody of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50, 89, 121 Mental hospitals, courts committing to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Parole and probation, similarities between . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Persons awaiting trial, incarceration of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Records furnished to indigent prisoners, federal holdings as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 Sentences, see Sentence. Sue and be sued, capacity to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 Two-way communication system to monitor prisoners as not depriving prisoner of constitutional rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 PROBATION. Parole, similarities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 PROFESSIONS. Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 PROPERTIES CONTROL COMMISSION. Transfer of funds within . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 PROPERTY, PUBLIC. Revocable license to United States to erect radio tower on State lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 PROPERTY, STATE. Abandoned property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 State employee wrongfully withholding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Vessels, sunken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 PSYCHOLOGISTS. Board of Examiners, qualifications of members of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 PUBLIC OFFICES. Abolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. Motor carriers, jurisdiction of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 Municipally-owned utilities, jurisdiction over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 PURCHASES, STATE SUPERVISOR OF. District attorney purchasing vehicle through office of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 RAILROADS. Collision involving only property damage, train crews not required to remain at scene of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Crossings owned by United States, State Highway Department installing and maintaining flashing signals at . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 430 INDEX RAILROADS-Cont'd. PAGE Highways, trains blocking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Rights-of-way, agreements with utility companies .................. 3 RAILWAY LABOR ACT. Right-to-work law as not protecting employees covered by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 REAL ESTATE BROKERS. "Exclusive" sign not removed after expiration of listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Mortgage brokerage firm acting as "finder" .................... 319 Signing sales contracts, delegation of duty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 REAL PROPERTY. Advertising signs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Percolating waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 REALTORS. Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 RECIDIVIST TRIALS. Conduct of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 RECIPROCAL ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ACT, UNIFORM. Illegitimate children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 RECIPROCITY. Physicians and surgeons, licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 RECORDERS. Criminal jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 RECORDS. Depositions and interrogatories, status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 Education boards, tape recordings of meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 F.B.I., of, in criminal cases ................................... 334 Indigent prisoners, furnishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 Lack of statutory definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274 RECREATION EXPERIMENT STATION. Restriction or ban of users where rules violated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. Highway funds expended for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 REFUNDS. Motor fuel taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 REGISTRATION. Securities, exemptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 RESIDENCE. School purposes, for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 INDEX 431 REST AREAS. PAGE, Highways, on, operation of mobile vending trucks ................................................ 352 RETIREMENT. Income tax, payments as not exempt from . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 RETIREMENT FUNDS. Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 RETIREMENT SYSTEMS. Funds, control of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 RETURNS. Taxation, failure to make . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 RIGHT-TO-WORK. Law as not protecting employees covered by Federal Railway Labor Act ...................................... 19 SAFETY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC. Identification records, as parte court order to purge as invalid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Traffic convictions reported to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 SALES. Mixed drinks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 Public officers contracting with public entity ........................................ 315, 321, 334 SALES AND USE TAXES. Automobile sold in Georgia to nonresident . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Computation where article sold has been previously taxed ........................................ 355 Exemption of industrial materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 Rental charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 SALES TAX. State departments as not paying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Transportation costs as includable in sales price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 When sale consummated ..................................... 128 SAVANNAH. Judges of city court and municipal court, elections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 SCENIC PURPOSES. Highway Department condemning for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 SCHOOLS, PUBLIC. Bonds, disposal of interest earned on proceeds pending construction .................................... 161 Chartered prior to 1877 ...................................... 330 432 INDEX SCHOOLS, PUBLIC-Cont'd. PAGE Defending actions against school officials and employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 Domicile of child ........................................... 284 Honors program ............................................ 26 Merger of systems .......................................... 333 Minimum Foundation Program, adjustments to teacher allotments under . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Radio stations charged fees for broadcasting athletic events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536 Taxes for, maximum millage .................................. 325 Transfer of funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COMMISSION, GEORGIA. Contracts in excess of one year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. Warrants, facts to show probable cause for issuance to be in affidavit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Warrants issued by mayor and councilmen ...................... 297 SECURITIES. Dealers, generally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Exemptions from registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 Franchise system utilizing joint-adventure approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Registration where no sale or offer to sell within Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 Variable annuity contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 SENTENCE. Altering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Computation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 Computation of felony sentence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Credit for time awaiting trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112, 165 Entered before remittitur of appellate court has been made judgment of trial court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Presumption of correctness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Resentencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Separate determinations of guilt and imposition of sentence ............................................... 324 Writing, reducing to ......................................... 306 SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES. Counties, contracts with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 SEWERS. Permit to private corporation to construction across street dedicated to county . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 INDEX 433 SEWERS-Cont'd. PAGE Water Quality Control Board, regulation ....................... 298 SEX. Proposed federal constitutional amendment as to dis- crimination on account of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 SHERIFFS. Compensation of deputies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Deputies, firearms carried by special deputies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 Fees- Advance where service in suit filed in another county .............................. . . . . . . . . . 293 Serving justice of peace suit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312, 314 Policeman, deputy also serving as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 Retirement fund- Control of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 Secretaries for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 SHERIFF'S SALES. Highway Department, lands to ................................. 25 SHOTGUNS. Carrying unloaded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 SIGNATURES. Liquor election, to petition for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 SKIDAWAY INSTITUTE OF OCEANOGRAPHY. Funds transfer from Ocean Science Center of the Atlantic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 SOFT DRINKS. Tax on .................................................... 284 SOUTH FULTON SINGLE MUNICIPALITY STUDY COMMITTEE. Governor's Emergency Fund, as recipient of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. Waiver .................................................... 325 SPECIAL MASTERS. District attorneys serving as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 STATE OF GEORGIA. Abandoned property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 Contracts by, in excess of one year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Employees- Annual and sick leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 County, also employed by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 Females enlisting in Army, reinstatement to employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 4~ INDEX STATE OF GEORGIA-Cont'd. PAGE Employees-Cont 'd. Garnishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 Health insurance plan, Groveland Lake Development Authority employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 Merit system, see Merit System. Property of State, wrongfully withholding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Simultaneous workmen's compensation and retirement benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Expenses of State departments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Immunity for tort claims arising from Air National Guard activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 Infectious hepatitis, employees, contracting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 Motor vehicle purchase by State officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Municipalities, grants to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 Officers, see Officets and Employees, Public. Political activities of employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 Property- Loan for research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Revocable license to United States to erect radio tower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Sale to federal and State installations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Publications, mailing privileges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Sales tax as not payed by State departments ...................... 44 Sales to State by employees of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 Surplus property, disposal of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Vessels, sunken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 STATUTES. Effective date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 Local laws on subjects already covered by ....................... 299 STERILIZATION. Persons, of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 STOLEN MOTOR VEHICLES. Certificate of title, effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 SUPERIOR COURT CLERKS. Fees ............................... 319, 333, 335, 342, 347, 353 Microfilming ofrecords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Vacancies, filJing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 SUPERIOR COURTS. Judges, emeritus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Widows benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 SUPPORT. Illegitimate children ........................................ . 302 INDEX 435 SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS REPORTER. PAGE Retirement system, contributions to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 SURFACE MINING. Bonding requirements, what securities meet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Borrow pit, operation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Criminal prosecutions of corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Disable veteran's license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Dredging of on-site fill materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Effect of law upon lands mined prior to effective date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Funds retained by Surface Land Use Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Injunction where adequate remedy at law, no power in Board to seek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Owner of land not to prevent reclamation by lessee-operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Performance security, time for holding .......................... 60 Waters, mining of materials covered by natural surface ................................................. 40 TAPE RECORDINGS. Education board meetings .................................... 191 TAX COLLECTORS. Commissioners of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Co.mpensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 TAX COMMISSIONERS. Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 Compensation changed during term of office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 TAX DIGESTS. Invalidity of, effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 TAX RECEIVERS. Commissions of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 TAX RETURNS. Oath of taxpayer ........................................... 315 TAXATION. See Income Taxes; Intangible Taxes; Sales and Use Taxes. Arbitration of assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346 Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 70 Belgian consular officials, exemption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 Consular officials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Gas facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Interest on unpaid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Long term notes ............................................. 75 Malt beverages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317, 329 436 INDEX TAXATION-Cont'd. PAGE Motor fuel tax, claim for refund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 Returns- Effect of invalidity of tax digest as to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 Failure to make . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 TAXATION, COUNTY. See Ad Valorem Taxes. Antique automobiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Change in property valuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322, 323 Civic center, exemption ...................................... 292 Delinquent taxpayers, publicaton of list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 Districts, county tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Home Rule Amendment, effect of ......................... 282, 283 Industrial development, for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Regional Hospital at Atlanta as not subject to DeKalb County property taxation ......................... 264 Soft drinks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 'Valuation change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322, 323 Valuation, uniformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 Wild land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 TAXATION, MUNICIPAL. Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Charter, provided by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 Situs, time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM. Contributions by local boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Private school teachers, eligibility of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Withdrawal of contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 TEAR-GAS DEVICE. Permit for ................................................. 291 TELEPHONE. Prescriptions received by druggists over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANIES. State-owned stream beds, use of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 TELEVISION ANTENNA SYSTEM. Municipal franchise ......................................... 339 TIME. Legislation effective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 TOLL BRIDGE AUTHORITY, STATE. Contract with Alabama Toll Bridge Authority for construction of toll bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 TORTS. State immunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 INDEX 437 TOURIST ATTRACTION DISCOUNT COUPONS. PAGE Distribution of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 TRAFFIC CONTROL. Municipal corporations, by, beyond corporate limits ................................................. 353 TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES. Effect of ................................................... 74 "Heavy Vehicle Prohibited" sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 TRAFFIC REGULATIONS. Local ordinances similar to State law ........................... 294 TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS. Justices of the peace, authority of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 Reports of convictions to Department of Public Safety ................................................ 341 TRAINS. Highways, blocking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 TREASURERS, COUNTY. Abolition of office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348 TRUST COMPANIES. Foreign branch offices ........................................ 80 UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA. Branches, legal status of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 Criminal law enforcement on property of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Drugs, Federal agency as dealer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Liability insurance, purchase of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 National Highway Safety Act of 1966, grants under .............. 208 Property sold to federal and State installations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Surplus property, disposal of .................................. 94 Testamentary funds, use of............................... 107, 136 Trust for education of North Georgia mountain boys ............. 220 UPSON COUNTY. Candidate for county commission, residence of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 UTILITIES. Municipally-owned, Public Service Commission jurisdiction over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 Reimbursement to utilities adjusting facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 UTILITIES, PUBLIC. Taxes, payment of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 VENDING MACHINES. Cigarettes, notices attached stating minors are forbidden to purchase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 438 INDEX VESSELS. PAGE Sunken ................................................... 328 VETERANS. Surface mining license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 VITAL RECORDS. Newspaper representative allowed access to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 WAGES. Deductions from . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Minimum Wage Law- Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Enforcement of ........................................... 236 WAIVER. Sovereign immunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 WARE COUNTY. Sheriff or deputies as members of police department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 WARRANTS. Arrest, justices of the peace issuing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 Peace, see Peace Warrants. Search, facts to show probable cause for issuance to be in affidavit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 WATER AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES. Counties, contracts with . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD. Sewage and wastewater systems, regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 WATERS AND WATERCOURSES. Chattahoochee River, ownership of soil beneath .................. 288 Percolating waters, use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 WEAPONS. Machine guns, possesson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296 Shotguns, carrying unloaded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Special deputy sheriff carrying firearms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 Tear-gas device, permit for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 WILDLAND. Taxation of ................................................ 302 WITNESSES. Fees, criminal cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Justice courts, fees in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 Marriage ceremony, necessity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. Board members, compensation, qualifications, practice of law .......................................... 62 Simultaneous retirement benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 INDEX 439 YOUTH COUNCIL, GEORGIA. PAGE Application for grants for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132