People ex rel. McPharlin v. Mahoney

30 Mich. 100, 1874 Mich. LEXIS 143
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided July 22, 1874·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The refusal of payment of the order drawn on respondent by the board of inspectors, though it was slightly in excess of the money in his hands, was a sufficient ground for this application, inasmuch as the respondent made no offer to pay what he had, but refused on an entirely distinct ground to pay any thing; and a receipt on that order would have been a sufficient voucher for him to the extent of the money paid.

Under the statute (Comp. L., §§ 8689, 86^8), the treasurer of the board of school inspectors is the proper custodian of the library moneys of the township. The town treasurer has no right to intermeddle with, or pass judgment upon, the discretion of the board of inspectors in the use of such moneys. It is their right to demand, and his duty to pay over the money when they desire to obtain it; and they are not required to wait until it is needed for specific purposes before demanding it, or to explain to him why or for what purpose they want it. These moneys properly belong with their own treasurer, who is legally responsible, with his sureties, for all such moneys in his hands, and bound to account for and pay over what remains unexpended.

Writ granted for the amount admitted to be in respondent’s hands.

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

People ex rel. McPharlin v. Mahoney, 30 Mich. 100, 1874 Mich. LEXIS 143 (Mich. 1874).

30 Mich. 100 (People ex rel. McPharlin v. Mahoney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Frantz v. County Court of Wyoming Co.
73 S.E. 328 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1911)
Belles v. Burr
43 N.W. 24 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1889)
People ex rel. Burns v. Bender
36 Mich. 195 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1877)