boundaries of.

tricts they shall number, and they may regulate and alter the May alter boundaries of the same as circumstances shall render proper; and each district shall be composed of contiguous territory, and be in as compact a form as may be.

Am. 1901, Act. 37.

On the subject of primary schools, see chapter 116, C. L. 1897. PRIMARY SCHOOL SYSTEM: The whole primary school system was confided by the constitution to the legislature and it cannot be said that the officers of school districts chosen pursuant to the system adopted by the legislature. are constitutional officers.-Belles v. Burr, 76 / 11. The constitution

of 1850 left to the legislature, as did the preceding constitution, the establishment of a system of primary schools, restricting the legislature only by providing that a school shall be kept, without charge for tuition, at least three months in each year, and that all instruction shall be conducted in the English language. All other matters seem to be within the discretion of the legislature.-Perrizo v. Kesler, 93/283; People v. Howlett, 94/168; Pingree v. Board of Education, 99 / 408. Our primary school system is the pride of the state. People v. Howlett, 94 / 169.

FORMATION OF DISTRICTS: The township board of school inspectors is authorized to divide the township into such number of school districts as they may consider necessary from time to time, and may regulate and alter the boundaries of the same as circumstances shall render proper, subject to certain restrictions.-Doxey v. Sch. Inspectors, 67/603; Brody v. Penn. Twp. Board, 32/273; Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 81/343; Simpkins v. Ward, 45/561. See Briggs v. Borden, 71 / 89-90. They may dissolve a school district and annex it to another.-People v. Davidson, 2 Doug. 121: Brewer v. Palmer, 13 / 107. When two districts are annexed without any other change in their boundaries, the mere fact that one number is preferred to another does not change the real character of the annexation. -Brewer v. Palmer, 13/109. When one district is annexed to another, its corporate existence ceases and it cannot be sued for debts; the new district must be held responsible for them.-Id. But when a district is parceled out among several other districts, the latter cannot be held jointly liable for the debts of the former; whatever they are bound to pay is a several and not a joint obligation.-Halbert v. Sch. Dists:, 36 / 421. But the inspectors cannot change a district formed by special act of the legislature.-Sch. Dist. v. Dean, 17/223. The organization of a new township severs its territory from the school district within which it was formerly embraced.-People v. Ryan, 19/203. See Section 4654.

INTEREST OF INSPECTORS: Where the interest of the inspectors in the formation of a school district is no greater than that of other taxpayers and residents, they are not disqualified from acting.-Clement v. Everest, 29 / 19. The interest which disqualifies.-Stockwell v. White Lake Twp. Board, 22 / 341; Peninsular Ry. Co. v. Howard, 20/18.

QUESTIONING REGULARITY: The regularity of the proceedings for the formation of a district and the existence of it cannot be questioned collaterally, but only in direct proceedings.-Clement v. Everest, 29/19. See Sch. Dist. v. Inspectors, 27/3; Stuart v. Sch. Dist., 30/69; Lord v. Every, 38/405; Bird v. Perkins, 33/30; Stockle v. Silsbee. 41 / 621 Keweenaw Ass'n v. Sch. Dist., 98 / 437. The legality of the organization and existence of the district cannot be tested by certiorari.-Jaquith v. Hale, 31 / 430. Certiorari to review the proceedings in organizing a district will not lie after the district is actually organized and has assumed the functions of a corporation; its corporate existence must then be tested by quo warranto.-Sch. Dist. v. Inspectors, 27/3; People v. Gartland, 75 / 143. But there should be some special and extraordinary reason to justify interference by quo warranto with the organization of a school district, as the statutes provide a speedier remedy by an appeal from the district board to the township board.-Lord v. Every, 38/405. And the supreme court will not meddle with the concerns of school districts, on mandamus, except on things of substance.-Sch. Dist. v. Riverside Twp., 67 / 406.

Where a board of school inspectors, by a vote of two for and one against created a new school district, which action is sought to be reviewed on certiorari, the return of the clerk and one inspector that due notice was given, and that proof of posting the notices was on file with the clerk when the action was taken, must be taken as the return of the board, though contradicted by a separate return of the third member.-Smelzer v. Board of School Inspectors of Big Prairie Township, 125 / 666.

The facts in regard to the notices and proof of posting are sufficiently established if set out in the return of the board, though not appearing in the clerk's minutes of the proceedings.-Id.

The action of school inspectors in detaching territory from two school districts and forming a new district by one and the same motion, after parties interested have had ample opportunity to be heard on both questions, is valid. Id.

Township deliver notice

clerk to

(25.) § 4647. SEC. 2. Whenever the board of school in spectors of any township shall form a school district therein, it shall be the duty of the clerk of such board to deliver to a to inhabitants.

of formation

Inhabitant to

serve notice of

first meeting.

Return of notice.

Notice and return to be recorded.

Proceedings in case of failure to organize district.

Formation of fractional districts.

To whom director of such district shall report.

When district deemed organized.

Presumption

of legal organization.

taxable inhabitant of such district a notice in writing of the formation of such district, describing its boundaries, and specifying the time and place of the first meeting, which notice with the fact of such delivery, shall be entered upon record by the clerk. The said notice shall also direct such inhabitant to notify every qualified voter of such district, either personally or by leaving a written notice at his place of residence, of the time and place of said meeting, at least five days before the time appointed therefor; and it shall be the duty of such inhabitant to notify the qualified voters of said district accordingly, and said inhabitant, when he shall have notified the qualified voters as required in such notice, shall endorse thereon a return, showing such notification with the date or dates thereof, and deliver such notice and return to the chairman of the meeting, to be by him delivered to the director chosen at such meeting, and by said director recorded at length as a part of the records of such district.

NOTICE: The board of school inspectors may, under one notice, at one meeting, by separate action, detach lands from separate school districts and attach them to one district.-Doxey v. School Inspectors, 67/601. Irregularity in notice.-Parman v. Inspectors, 49 / 63. See Roeser v. Gartland, 75 / 144. RECORDS: Importance of.-Sch. Dist. v. Snell, 24 / 352.

(26.) § 4648. SEC. 3. In case the inhabitants of any district shall fail to organize the same in pursuance of such notice as aforesaid, the said clerk shall give a new notice in the manner herein before provided, and the same proceedings shall be had thereon as if no previous notice had been delivered.

(27.) § 4649. SEC. 4. Whenever it shall be necessary or convenient to form a district from two or more adjoining townships, the inspectors, or a majority of them, of each of such adjoining townships, may form such district, to be designated as a fractional district, and direct which township clerk shall make and deliver the notice of the formation of the same to a taxable inhabitant thereof, and may regulate and alter such district as circumstances may render necessary in the same manner that other districts are altered. The annual reports of the director of such district shall be made to the inspectors of the township in which the schoolhouse may be situated, and the inspectors of such township shall number said district. Saginaw Twp. v. Sch. Dist., 9/544; Brewer v. Palmer, 13 / 109.

(28.) § 4650. SEC. 5. Every such school district shall be deemed duly organized when any two of the officers elected at the first meeting shall have filed their acceptances in writing with the director, and the same shall have been recorded in the minutes of such first meeting. Every school district shall, in all cases, be presumed to have been legally organized when it shall have exercised the franchises and privileges of a district for the term of two years; and such school district and its officers shall be entitled to all the rights, privileges, and

immunities, and be subject to all the duties and liabilities conferred upon school districts by law.

PRESUMPTION OF LEGAL ORGANIZATION: When a district has exercised the franchises and privileges of a school district for over two years, it is too late to question the legality of its organization.-Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 63/56; Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 81/343. The same rule which recognizes the right of officers de facto recognizes corporations de facto.Clement v. Everest, 29 / 23. In public affairs, when the people have organized themselves under color of law into the ordinary municipal bodies, and have gone on year after year raising taxes, making improvements and exercising their usual franchises, their rights are properly regarded as depending quite as much on the acquiescence as on the regularity of their origin, and no ex post facto inquiry can be permitted to undo their corporate existence.-People v. Maynard, 15 / 470. As to questioning the regularity of organization, etc., see note to Section 24.

meeting to be

(29.) § 4651. SEC. 6. The record of the first meeting Directors' made by the directors shall be prima facie evidence of the facts record of first therein set forth, and of the legality of all proceedings in the evidence. organization of the district prior to the first district meeting; but nothing in this section contained shall be so construed as to impair the effect of the record kept by the school inspectors, as evidence.

CORPORATE POWERS OF DISTRICTS.

to be body

(30.) § 4652. SEC. 7. Every school district organized in School district pursuance of this chapter, or which has been organized and corporate. continued under any previous law of the state or territory of Michigan, shall be a body corporate, and shall possess the usual powers of a corporation for public purposes, by the Name and name and style of "school district number (such num- style. ber as shall be designated in the formation thereof by the inspectors), of" (the name of the township or townships in which the district is situated), and in that name shall be Powers of. capable of suing and being sued, of contracting and being contracted with, and of holding such real and personal estate as is authorized to be purchased by the provisions of law, and of selling the same.

CORPORATE POWERS: The school district, under our statutes, is a corporation, and, as such corporation, is represented by three officers; a moderator, director and assessor. The affairs of the district are managed and controlled by them, under certain restrictions.-Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 63 / 57. A school district can take and hold bequests of money for the maintenance of a public library for the use and benefit of the residents of the districts.-Maynard v. Woodward, 36 / 423. School districts, like townships and counties, are subdivisions of the state. This section gives them the capacity to sue and be sued.-Van Wert v. Sch. Dist., 100/333. School districts are municipal corporations.-Seeley v. Board of Ed., 39/486; Sch. Dist. v. Gage, 39/484; Belles v. Burr, 76/1. And cannot be garnisheed even by its own consent, unless the debtor also consents.-Id. They preceded the constitution (Stuart v. Sch. Dist., 30/69), and were recognized by that instrument.— Belles v. Burr, 76 / 11.

ALTERATION OF DISTRICTS.

boundaries of

(31.) § 4653: SEC. 8. Whenever the board of school in- Alterations of spectors shall contemplate an alteration of the boundaries of districts by a district, the township clerk (and for meetings of boards to inspectors. act in relation to fractional districts, clerks of the several townships interested) shall give at least ten days' notice of

Powers of inspectors to

the time and place of the meeting of the inspectors, and the alteration proposed, by posting such notice in three public places in the township or townships, one of which notices shall be in each of the districts that may be affected by such alteration. Whenever the boards of school inspectors of more than one township meet, they shall elect one of their number chairman, and another clerk thereof.

NOTICE: The notice required is jurisdictional and indispensable.-Coulter v. Inspectors, 59/391; Sch. Dist. v. Inspectors, 63 / 611; Gentle v. Inspectors, 73/40; Graves v. Inspectors, 102/635; Passage v. Inspectors, 19/330; Andress v. Inspectors, 19 / 332. Proof of the posting of such notice should be filed with the clerk of the board, before any action is taken.-Coulter v. Inspectors, 59/391; Sch. Dist. v. Inspectors, 63/611; Graves v. Inspectors, 102 / 635. Where notice is not given the filing of the consent of a majority of the resident taxpayers of the districts affected will not validate the action. -Gentle v. Inspectors, 73 / 40. Notices must be posted in each township affected by the alteration.- Sch. Dist. v. Metcalf, 93/499. The object of the notice is to enable parties interested to be heard before any action is taken.— Gentle v. Inspectors, 73/45; Sch. Dist. v. Metcalf, 93 / 499. As to the provision in the former law, see Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 63 / 51.

FRACTIONAL DISTRICTS: The action of the joint boards is required in case of fractional districts.- -Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 81 / 343.

NOTICE: Notice of posting notices in three public places is jurisdictional. Affidavit must show that the notices were so posted. Certiorari will lie to test validity of proceedings where petitioner moves promptly.-Huyser v. Board of School Inspectors, 131 / 568.

(32.) § 4654. SEC. 9. The inspectors may, in their disalter districts. cretion, detach the property of any person or persons from one district and attach it to another; except that no land which has been taxed for building a schoolhouse shall be set off into another school district for the period of three years thereWhen consent after, except by the consent of the owner thereof; and no disof taxpayers trict shall be divided into two or more districts without the consent of a majority of the resident taxpayers of said district, and no two or more districts be consolidated without the consent of a majority of the resident taxpayers of each district.

to be obtained.

Persons out of district may be attached thereto in

certain cases.

People v. Davidson, 2 Doug. 121; Brewer v. Palmer, 13/104.
Dist. v. Dean, 17 / 223. Gentle v. Sch. Inspectors, 73 / 45.

See Sch.

DISSOLVING DISTRICT: The school inspectors have power to alter boundaries of districts, and attach or detach persons, to or from any district; but no power is anywhere granted to them to disband, dissolve or destroy a district, save as restricted under this section.-Briggs v. Borden, 71 / 90. As intimated in Doxey v. Inspectors, 67/604, the school inspectors have no authority to divide up a district and destroy it without the consent of a majority of the resident taxpayers; nor can they destroy it by cutting it up into pieces and attaching all the territory to other districts without such consent.-Id. The terms "dissolve" and "disband" are of similar import and a vote taken to "disband" is supported by notice of a meeting to vote upon a proposition to "dissolve."-Id.

CONSENT OF OWNER: Lands taxed within three years for building a schoolhouse, not to be set off into another district without the consent of the owner. Coulter v. Inspectors, 59 / 391.

CONSOLIDATION: The right of inspectors to consolidate districts depends upon consent of majority of resident taxpayers. Where a school district de facto formed by consolidation of other districts has been in existence two years or more the court will not set aside action of inspectors.-Howell v. Shannon, 130 / 556.

POWER OF LEGISLATURE: The legislature may change the boundaries of district.-Att'y Gen'l. ex rel. Kies v. Lowrey, 131/639.

(33.) § 4655. SEC. 10. The inspectors may attach to a school district any person residing in a township, and not in any organized district, at his request; and for all district purposes except raising a tax for building a schoolhouse, such person shall be considered as residing in such district; but

when set off to a new district, no sum shall be raised for such person as his proportion to the district property.

in districts.

(34.) § 4656. SEC. 11. In all cases where an alteration Township of the boundaries of a school district shall be made, the town- notice of clerk to give ship clerk shall, within ten days, deliver to the director of alteration each district affected by the alteration a notice in writing, setting forth the action of the inspectors and defining the alterations that have been made.

DIVISION OF PROPERTY.

is divided,

(35.) § 4657. SEC. 12. When a new district is formed, when district in whole or in part, from one or more districts pos- property to be sessed of a school-house, or entitled to other property, the in- apportioned. spectors, at the time of forming such new district, or as soon thereafter as may be, shall ascertain and determine the amount justly due to such new district from any district out of which it may have been in whole or in part formed, as the proportion of such new district, of the value of the schoolhouse and other property belonging to the former district, at the time of such division; and whenever by the division of any district, the when schoolschoolhouse or site thereof shall no longer be conveniently house or site is located for school purposes, and shall not be desired for use may be sold. by the new district in which it may be situated, the school inspectors of the township in which such schoolhouse and site shall be located, may advertise and sell the same, and appor- Proceeds of tion the proceeds of such sale, and also any moneys belonging apportioned. to the district thus divided, among the several districts erected in whole or in part from the divided district.

Saginaw Twp. v. Sch. Dist., 9/541; People v. Ryan, 19/203; Ramsey v. Everett Twp. Clerk, 52/344; Sch. Dist. v. Riverside Twp., 67 / 404.

NEW DISTRICT: The township board has jurisdiction of appeals from decisions of the board of school inspectors fixing the amount to be paid by an old school district to a new one, where the latter comprises part of the same territory and the former retains the school property.-Pine Sch. Dist. v. WilCox, 48/404. See Section 4743 as to appeals. Bill to prevent the consummation of a void apportionment.-Sch. Dist. v. Sch. Dist., 63/58. Bill to restrain the sale of the school-house.-Briggs v. Borden, 71/87. Upon the formation of a new district by the union of two or more, the new district succeeds to the credits and property and is liable for the debts of the old ones.-Brewer v. Palmer, 13/104; Halbert v. Districts, 36 / 421.

not needed,

sale to be

tion to be

(36.) § 4658. SEC. 13. Such proportion shall be ascer- How proportained and determined according to the value of the taxable ascertained. property of the respective parts of such former district at the time of the division, by the best evidence in the power of the inspectors; and such amount of any debt due from the former district, which would have been a charge upon the new, had it remained in the former district, shall be deducted from such proportion: Provided, That no real estate thus set off, and Proviso. which shall not have been taxed for the purchase or building of such schoolhouse, shall be entitled to any portion thereof, nor be taken into account in such division of district property.

DEBTS OF OLD DISTRICTS: Where the territory of a school district is absorbed by other districts, the statute contemplates that the township board