of the regularity of the proceedings authorizing it to be collected. School District No. 9 of Midland v. School District No. 5 of Midland, 40 Mich., 551.

154. Where a school-district is parceled out among three other existing districts, the latter cannot be held jointly liable for a debt of the former district; whatever they are bound to pay must be a several, and not a joint obligation. Halbert v. School Dists., etc., 36 Mich., 421.

55. The statute having confided the management of suits brought against a school district to the assessor when no other direction has been given by the voters in district meeting, the moderator and director, though constituting a majority of the district board, have no authority to take the defense of a suit from the assessor; the control of suits is not among the powers or duties confided by the statutes to the district board. School District No. 4 of Rush v. Wing, 30 Mich., 351.

T56. The suggestion that the action of the assessor in this case was such as to be evidence of an adverse interest is disregarded; such a suggestion might be made in any case where the assessor had refused to yield his legal authority to another. Ibid.

57. A judgment for costs against the district on the dismissal of an appeal taken in the name of the district by the director, without the authority or assent of the assessor, on the ground that the district had not appealed is held to be erroneous. Ibid.

58. Costs are not awarded against the school district in this court, on a writ of error brought without authority of the assessor, to review such dismissal. Ibid.

VIII.

TUITION OF NON-RESIDENT PUPILS.

59. Before any action can be maintained under the statutes, for the tuition of non-resident pupils, the district board must first fix and determine the rate of tuition of such pupils; and this should be by resolution of the board, properly recorded by the director in the records of the district; and the fact that such action has been taken, cannot be shown by parol, if objected to. Thompson v. School District No. 6 of Crockery, 25 Mich., 483.

IX.

ADMISSION OF COLORED CHILDREN TO SCHOOL.

160. The amendment to the primary school law of 1867-Laws of 1867, vol. 1, p. 42 [General School Laws of 1881, § 45, p. 19.]-giving equal rights in the schools to all residents, is applicable to the city of Detroit, and precludes the board of education of that city from excluding a child from any public school on the ground of color. People v. Board of Education, 18 Mich., 400.

X.

SCHOOL SITES AND SCHOOL-HOUSES.

61. Notice of a meeting of the board of school inspectors to change a school-house site is necessary. Andress v. School Inspectors of Williamstown, 19 Mich., 332. (Sce T1 preceding.)

162. The board of inspectors have no power to change a school-house site on

a written request of a majority of qualified voters of the district except in cases where the site has been fixed by them because the inhabitants were unable to agree upon a site. Ibid.

T63. The jurisdiction to condemn lands for a school-house site is invoked by presenting to the proper officer a petition designating the site and showing disagreement with the owner as to compensation for it. Smith v. School District No. 2 of Milton, 40 Mich., 143.

¶64. In proceedings to condemn land for a school-house site, the circuit judge is not required to act in preference to a circuit court commissioner. Ibid. ¶65. When the owner of land that is sought for a school-house site is represented at the proceedings to condemn it, he is deemed to waive objection to jurors if he does not challenge them at the time. Ibid.

66. When the petition, notice, venire, finding and commissioner's certificate in proceedings to condemn land for a school-house site are regular on their face, and show full compliance with statutory requirements, the proceedings are presumed regular, and if the parties interested were represented, and omit, on filing the proceedings, to make a sworn showing to the circuit court of any other defects, such as an omission to designate the site to the jury,—they cannot rely on it thereafter. Ibid.

967. A school district contracting for the building of a school-house within a stated time, is bound to furnish a suitable site therefor within such reasonable time that the constructors shall not be delayed on their part. Todd et al. v. School District No. 1 of Greenwood, 40 Mich., 294.

68. Under a contract for the construction of a school building, which provides that the work shall be "executed in the best and most workman-like manner, and agreeably to such directions as may be given from time to time" by the architect or his assistant [the local superintendent of the work, employed by the district], "and to his full and entire satisfaction, without reference thereon to any other person;" that all claims for alterations or extras were to be judged of, determined, and adjusted "solely by the superintendent," and that payment should be made on the certificate of the architect, or superintendent, partly on monthly estimates, from time to time, and the balance on completion of the building; whatever passed under the inspection of the superintendent as the work progressed, and was in good faith approved by him, expressly or by implication, was not open to objection on the part of the district afterwards; and the certificate of the architect was not a condition precedent to the right of the contractor to recover for the work so approved. Wildey v. Fractional School District No. 1 of Paw Paw and Antwerp. 25 Mich., 419.

69. Variances from such a contract which have been treated at the time as immaterial by both parties will not afterwards be held to be departures from the contract; and what was regarded at the time as substantial compliance with its terms, constitutes a performance in law. Ibid.

¶70. Intentional departures from such contract, made without the consent, express or implied, of the district officers, architect, or superintendent, and in disregard of their directions, would not bar a recovery for other portions of the work which were duly approved; but the district would have a right to insist on the proper changes in the work to make it conform to the contract, and to recover any damages sustained by the failure. Ibid.

71. The mere fact of taking possession and occupying the building by the district for their schools, after the time when, by the contract, it was to be

completed, would not, of itself, constitute an acceptance which should bar any claim on the part of the district to insist upon a rectification of any faults, or the payment of any damages they may have suffered by the failure in strict compliance; but the fact of making payments afterward without objection, the manner of taking possession, and whether with or without objection to any variation, would have an important bearing on the question of fact, whether any rights were intentionally waived, or whether there was a purpose to accept the building as completed in substantial compliance with the contract. Ibid.

XI.

GRADED AND HIGH SCHOOLS.

72. The right of school authorities in union school districts of this State to levy taxes upon the general public for the support of high schools, and by such taxation to make free the instruction of children in other languages than the English, is sustained. Stuart v. School District No. 1 of Kalamazoo, 30 Mich., 69.

73. A school district which has assumed to possess and exercise all the rights and franchises of a regularly organized corporation for thirteen years, with entire acquiescence of everybody, is not liable to have the regularity of its organization, or of the legislation under which it acted, called in question thereafter in a merely private and collateral suit. Ibid.

T74. Whether or not the statute of limitations applies in terms to a case where it is not so much the organization of the school district that is questioned as its authority to establish a high school and levy taxes therefor, it is strictly applicable in principle. Ibid.

175. The organization claimed and asserted by the district being that of a union school district, the presumption of organization arising from its user of corporate powers must be that of such an organization as its user indicates, and whether or not an acquiescence for the statutory period of two years will raise the presumption of regular organization, one of thirteen years certainly will. Ibid.

T76. The State policy of Michigan on the subject of education, and of the territory before the State was organized, beginning in 1817 and continuing down until after the adoption of the present constitution, having been reviewed and considered, the conclusion is reached that there is nothing in our State policy, or in our constitution, or in our laws, restricting the primary school districts of the State in the branches of knowledge which their officers may cause to be taught, or the grade of instruction that may be given, if the voters of the district consent in regular form to bear the expense and raise the taxes for the purpose, or to prevent instruction in the classics and living modern languages in these schools. Ibid.

77. The power to make the appointment of a superintendent of schools in a union school district is one that is incident to the full control which by law the district board has over the schools of the district. Ibid.

T78. The decree below, dismissing the bill filed in this case to restrain the -collection of such portion of the school taxes assessed against the complainants for the year 1872 as have been voted for the support of the high school in the village of Kalamazoo and for the payment of the salary of the superintendent, is affirmed. Ibid. (See 82 following.) ¶82

XII.

LIBRARY MONEYS.

79. The treasurer of the board of school inspectors, and not the township treasurer, is the proper custodian of the township library money; and the latter officer, on proper demand, is bound to pay it over to the former, and is not entitled to withhold it until it is drawn by the inspectors as needed for specific appropriations; and mandamus will lie to enforce the performance of this duty. McPharlin v. Mahoney, 30 Mich., 100.

80. It is a sufficient ground for an application for mandamus to enforce such payment, that the township treasurer, when an order was properly drawn on him by the inspectors for such money, but for an amount slightly in excess of the money in his hands, refused to pay over what he had, not upon the ground that the order was too large a sum, but upon the distinct assertion that he was himself the proper custodian of the funds, and was not bound to pay them over except as they were required by the inspectors for specific purposes. Ibid.

81. Under the constitution and statutes, all moneys which are paid into the office of the county treasurer, on account of fines, penalties, forfeitures and recognizances, are to be credited to the library fund, and apportioned and paid over by the treasurer to the proper local officers, without any deduction for expenses, either attending the collection of the particular sums paid in, or embracing the general criminal expenses of the county. Board of Education of Detroit v. Treasurer of Wayne County, 8 Mich., 392.

XIII.

MISCELLANEOUS.

82. There is no authority by which unorganized territory can be attached to a graded school district. The only way of dealing with unorganized territory is by organizing it into primary school districts. Simkins v. Ward.

83. Statements contained in an affidavit presented to an officer authorized by law to examine and license teachers, for the purpose of preventing a teacher's license being granted to a particular person, charging such person with improper conduct, are privileged and not actionable, unless untrue and maliciously made. Weiman, jr., v. Mabie et al.

184. Failure of a school director, without sufficient cause, to keep the schoolhouse in repair, may be ground for removal from office. Where there is evidence before the township board upon which they have removed a school director, their decision on matters of fact will not be reviewed. Where one of the questions before a town board was the validity of a teacher's contract, and one of the members of the board had a niece who was employed under a similar contract, held, that he was not by reason thereof disqualified to sit. Township Board of Hamtramck v. Holihan.

APPENDIX B.

FORMS FOR PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE SCHOOL LAWS.

NOTE.-The following blank forms do not comprise a full set for all purposes under the school laws. All furnished by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, together with such as may be required in proceedings where the services of attorneys are usually employed, and a few for which those published may be readily adapted, are omittedl Officers are advised when performing any duty to which these forms are applicable, to use them in preference to others, as by this means uniformity of administration is secured, many mistakes will be prevented, and in time that which may now seem complicated and obscure will be more generally understood.

FORM NO. I.

Notice by the Clerk of the Board of Inspectors to a Taxable Inhabitant of a District at the Time of its Formation.

[See Compiler's Sections 9 and 10.]

To A.... B....:

SIR-The board of school inspectors of the township of

have formed

a school district in said township, to be known as district No............, and bounded as follows: Here insert the description.]

The first meeting of said district will be held at....

-----9

on the.... day of 18..., at ..... o'clock. M., and you are instructed to notify every legal voter of said district of the same, at least five days previous to said meeting, either personally, or by leaving a written notice at his place of residence. You will endorse on this notice a return, showing each notification, with the date or dates thereof, and deliver the same to the chairman of said meeting. Dated this...................day of ........

18...

-9

Clerk of the Board of School Inspectors.

FORM NO. 2.

Notice of First Meeting-when made in writing to be left at the house of every legal voter. [See Compiler's Sections 9, 10, and 24.1