The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1908-12-11
by statute, none will be implied.
II Two EMO apd oaoao o;ta5

w obehbutC, Will NO lHlDlltu.
IL Cyc, 502 and cases cited.
All persons dealing with counties
are bound to ascertain the limits OF
their authority fixed by statute or or
ganic law, and are chargeable with
knowledge of such limits.
IL Cyc, 46S and cases cited.
This court has held that the doc
trine of implied liability as upon I'M
piled contracts has no application to
cases where the liability can only be
created in a certain way.
McBrian ". Grand Rapids, Sc
Mich. 95, and cases cited and digest
ed.
The conscience of the court Is APP
pealed to in this equitable action,
and 1T ds argued that exact justice de-
mands the return of money to plain
tiff which the county has received.
That the case is a hard one is ap-
parent, but that hard cases make bad
law has become proverb with the
court.
The proposition commended fol
should have, and does have, the
hearty support of the courts, SUBJ
ject to certain limitations or restric-
tons heretofore stated.
The knowledge of plaintiff Of the
custom of twenty years by the ofic-
ers of this county to enter into like
transactions is urged as showing
good faith on his part, as factor
weighing in his favor in this action.
The record shows that other cases
like the one at bar are pending and
that in this irregular way large sums
of money have been received by the
county. The court below finds that
this has been the custom for twenty
years, and we hold that such tram
sactions have all been without author
ity OF law. That "a custom of this ma
ture has existed for twenty years
does not appeal very strongly to the
court as a reason for granting equit-
able relief. There is no proof in the
record that the money in this case
has been used by the county. The
finding of fact to the effect that it
had been used was based as the court
states upon his presumption. We do
not think such presumption was war
ranted. 1t was not supported by the
proofs. AS We view the case, how
ever We think the point not Of ma
terial significance.
The animation is strong from the
pleadings that these loans were not
made for the purposes set forth dn
the resolutions. What this court has
said in a former case relative to the
dangers of holding municipalities
liable, in dealings where the clear
provisions of the law have been ig-
nored, is we'll illustrated in the case
at bar In the reckless conduct of the
officers of the defendant. The court
said:
eve have had occasion several
times to hold that all persons deal
Ing with public corporations are
bound to make their contracts ac-
cording to law, and will not be pro-
tected unless they do so. This case
illustrates the necessity of such a
rule. The doctrine was applied un-
der the statute applying to townships
in Mackenzie v. Treasurer, 80 Mich.
554. 1t had already been held, in
Detroit v. Paving Co., SO Mich. 335,
and in Detroit v. Robinson, 3S Mich.
los. that there could be no liability
against municipality upon con-
tracts not made in conformity with
the statutes. And in Niles Water
Works v. City of Niles, So Mich. 81,
the law was laid down strictly on the
same principles. 1T is the only rule
which can be relied on to prevent
fraud and collision. Contractors
have ample means to protect them
selves, and if township can be held
on implied contract, or estopped by
the acts of it's officers, when there is
no valid contract, lit would enable
these persons to disregard the law
entirely, and collide with their
friends to do indirectly what, if di-
rectly done, would be a plain illeg.
atty"
Mackey v. Township of Columbus,
II Mich. 227.
In cases where equitable reasons
pra urpod FOR tho nurnoca of nIacin o.