People ex rel. Board of Education v. Dakin

New York Supreme Court

People ex rel. Board of Education v. Dakin

50 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 382, 6 N.Y. St. Rep. 328

DecidedFebruary 15, 1887

StatusPublished

This text of 50 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 382 (People ex rel. Board of Education v. Dakin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Board of Education v. Dakin, 50 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 382, 6 N.Y. St. Rep. 328 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Landon, J.:

The amount the common council could lawfully borrow could not exceed $25,000. The amount the board of education could lawfully certify could not exceed the sum the common council could lawfully borrow, and was, therefore, limited to $25,000. The common council was empowered to secure the sum thus borrowed by issuing the bonds of the city bearing interest at the rate of not more than five per centum per annum. Bonds to the amount of $25,000, of principal bearing five per cent interest, were issued and sold, and a premium of $2,802.50 was realized over the principal sum. The [385]*385act provides that. “ the moneys so borrowed on the sale of said bonds shall be paid to the city treasurer, and by him placed to the credit of the board of education,” etc. The certificate of the board of education called for the entire proceeds of the bonds.

Now “ the moneys so borrowed on the sale of said bonds ” was only the principal sum of $25,000. The city offered for sale $25,000 of bonds, bearing five per cent interest. The buyers bought them at such lower rate of interest as required them to pay to the city the sum of $2,802.50, to make good to the city the difference between the two rates. Because of its good credit the city has had this amount of interest which it has agreed to pay already returned to it. It is not money borrowed to build a school-house, but the excess of interest promised over and above the interest required. This construction makes the entire loan a lawful one; if not adopted, it would be difficult to justify the city in not stopping the sale of its bonds when the total of $25,000 was reached. The premium thus becomes the property of the city, as the incident or profit of a lawful transaction. (People v. Ingersoll, 58 N. Y., 1.) The certificate of the board of education could have no force except within the terms of the power to make it.

The order awarding the mandamus must be reversed, but without costs.

Learned, P. J., and Mayuam, J., concurred.

Order reversed and motion denied, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Landon, J.:

The amount the common council could lawfully borrow could not exceed $25,000. The amount the board of education could lawfully certify could not exceed the sum the common council could lawfully borrow, and was, therefore, limited to $25,000. The common council was empowered to secure the sum thus borrowed by issuing the bonds of the city bearing interest at the rate of not more than five per centum per annum. Bonds to the amount of $25,000, of principal bearing five per cent interest, were issued and sold, and a premium of $2,802.50 was realized over the principal sum. The [385]*385act provides that. “ the moneys so borrowed on the sale of said bonds shall be paid to the city treasurer, and by him placed to the credit of the board of education,” etc. The certificate of the board of education called for the entire proceeds of the bonds.

Now “ the moneys so borrowed on the sale of said bonds ” was only the principal sum of $25,000. The city offered for sale $25,000 of bonds, bearing five per cent interest. The buyers bought them at such lower rate of interest as required them to pay to the city the sum of $2,802.50, to make good to the city the difference between the two rates. Because of its good credit the city has had this amount of interest which it has agreed to pay already returned to it. It is not money borrowed to build a school-house, but the excess of interest promised over and above the interest required. This construction makes the entire loan a lawful one; if not adopted, it would be difficult to justify the city in not stopping the sale of its bonds when the total of $25,000 was reached. The premium thus becomes the property of the city, as the incident or profit of a lawful transaction. (People v. Ingersoll, 58 N. Y., 1.) The certificate of the board of education could have no force except within the terms of the power to make it.

The order awarding the mandamus must be reversed, but without costs.

Learned, P. J., and Mayuam, J., concurred.

Order reversed and motion denied, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 382, 6 N.Y. St. Rep. 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-board-of-education-v-dakin-nysupct-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack