The Republican journal., 1881-09-22
Belfast National Bank vs.. Inhs of Stockton
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT, WALDO COUNTY, 1881.
OPINION OF THE COURT SYMoNDS, j.

less such ohcers were authorized oy vote OF the
town at legal meeting to effect the loan. "Ihefe
can pe no such thlhg as q general ana unlimited
authority IN muhlclpal oncerS TO Dorro" money
on the crealt OF the Town by Whlch theE were
electeq' without regard 70 me purposes 10 Whlcl
II Is devoted; 10 snow money had ana received
10 the use OF lhe piainul by town, IL vii! not
sulhce merely 10 snow money lent py the p1alhtlh
upon lhe representation OF lts olcers lhat IL was
required Tor 1egltltnale expenditures But When
the lender proceeds against the town upon TINS
gFouuu we 'hlnA ne IS pound I'D ofder 10 recover
70 snow Tie appropriation OF the money 10 the
leSitmate expenses OF the town bessey " nl,y'
y" Me, 'f- farsons V, Mohmouth' ~ NC, -oi
III IS strongly implied III the Two cases last clteu
ihat the money mus advanced ana SHOWN 10 nave
neGu actuaiiy aPPIoPIla'eu 70 tile ol eSai
"oili'ieS VI tuo to"n "ouiu oo he4u " po 4oe"il9
fecoVera9le III an actioh lor money hau ana re-
ceiVeo against the town. w see no good reason
ior excuslhg me town from felunulng ", When IL
/, mas oeen actuany mus appropriated IL Is
the payment Oh tne la"lut aeDts ol the to"1 ny
IT'S own agents WIN the pialnIn money Wilch
constitutes the cause OF acton BILLINGS v Mon
lottA' Me'
me opliioll " tne couIt IlcH Y NH.GA III !Ist *
uao' ls taAeu SGelus W uoVellhiHe tle Id" Vi tno
prese1t case, ana 70 render unnecessary any Iur
llel utscGSslon oi ~ IeRal pIlne!pleS lhNoNto'
winch a9 peen elaooialely argue" III thls case DC
ula' a. y 10 o5 Ipon
.Ie slouu eln 't''e'- 'A"' uc pio'l''no eai1
prior authority for procuring the loan from the
bank we do not understand the opinion IN Bill
mugs V. MonuhoulH 10 We ihtenutu 10 cohtIaNttl9
the maxim that no one can make himself the
CteuI'ol Vi du"'Hei o9 'He unsocl't" pay lLleIt vi
MS 'epts VI 10 hoiu the laGt Ih"[ 'uo ueieluducS
without their OVID act or will have had the benefit
vi 'io p"iH'etS ~ po lne SSte GU Suil1o
eLt GIonnu pl Hapil'ty TI AeaMau' Nat pauA v
oouth na''ey' - Mass, 20, ~ otuer 50 y
io ','o ~, @ VI elo
stated must have been By some persons who stood
in such relation to the town as to render the act
of itself effective and between the town and Its
creditor to discharge the iebt to which they were
applied, or there must have been ratification or
acceptance OF such payment on the part OF the
town. Without corporate act or assent, or the
agency OF a person exercising some authority,
there can be no such thing in legal sense as the
payment OF debt OF town II person having
no authority assumed 10 pay municipal debt, the
payment is a nulity, at the will OF the town, lis
relations to a creditor cannot be effected by a
stranger against us Will and the act of the credit
or alone while It may destroy the evidence OF
debt, and deprive him OF remedy, cannot lat least
theoretically If 1t may practically eXtnEulsh the
legal obligation at the contract against tho vii! q
the other party, nor can any arrangement between
the creditor and stranger to TINS elect De en-
forced upon the acceptance OF the debtor.
The language Of the court III the opinion cited,
refers to case where there was IN fact and Ill law
d pay iAeHI vi WY ucpt ~ to"A ~ NY "9o ~
moneys nred without authority where the deot
vas discharged not only IN form out ID eHect.
" me vital question oil lact u ISSl%ted IS "hetn,
er the pIant1l money mas actually neen applied
py lhe to"u onlecrs 70 lho eAthgUlshmcut ol ie9al
clalihs against tne to"n IL one "llhout "Hthoii
ty assumes to pay munlclpaI ueot, a town may
ob]ecl or may assent ~ may, upon discovery OF
the Iact defeat tAc attempted uiSchaTSe OF ttS
debts IN that way But neither by corporate ac
ton, nor By corporate inacton, can it knowingly
retain the benefit OF payments SO made by It's
agents with moneys llred \ its name without au'
thony and thereby give effect 50 Tar as TO release
itself from the old deot to the acts OF ITS oihcers
assuming more than their lega powers and at the
same time withdraw ltselttrom Liability for moneys
so hired and used This would be for the town
tacly to hold all that was favorable TO itseli IN
single transaction, and openly to reject all that
was not Deneuclal, although 1t was only precise
equivalent tor the advantage gained Inc act OF
the agent IN procuring the loan and pay!nS the
debt is thing to be accepted OF rejected as d
whole
The corporation owes either the OLD debt or The
new, and talure to act 10 attempt even the expires
sion of dissent at legal meetings held after official
reuorts have advised them that such loan has been