Cited by

In Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201, 203 , , we held that: “* * * The obligation of the county to repay does not depend upon the authority of the county board to collect the money, but arises from the moral obligation, resting upon every person, natural or artificial, to make restitution where they have received without consideration t

7 I. L. Corse & Co. v. Minnesota Grain Co. 94 Minn. 331 , ; cf. Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , .

The general rule is well stated by Mr. Justice Mitchell in Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201, 203 , , 338: “* * * The obligation * * * to repay * * * arises from the moral obligation, resting upon every person, natural or artificial, to make restitution where they have received without consideration the money of another, which they have no right to retain.” The money was plaintiffs’; they had exe

P. Land Co. 40 Minn. 512 , , , affirmed, 159 U. S. 526 , 16 S. Ct. 83 , 40 L. ed. 247 (liability to pay taxes on land omitted during certain years, where there was no default); Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , (money held under mistake of fact- — -no liability for interest prior to a demand) ; Ratner v. Hill, 270 Mass. 249 , 170 N. E. 69 .

The reasoning employed in Sibley v. *54 County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201, 203 , , seems appropriate here: “The obligation of the county to repay does not depend upon the authority of the county board to collect the money, but arises from the moral obligation, resting upon every person, natural or artificial, to make restitution where they have received without considerati

In support he cites the cases of Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ; Parks v. Fogleman, 97 Minn. 157 , , 4 L.R.A.(N.S.)

Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ; Todd v. Bettingen, 109 Minn. 493 , ; Grand Lodge A. O. U. W. v. Towne, 136 Minn. 72 , , L.R.A.

When the fact is proved that he has the money, if he cannot show a legal or equitable ground for retaining it, the law creates the privity and the promise.” As expressed by Justice Mitchell in Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , , there is a “moral obligation, resting upon every person, natural or artificial, to make restitution where they have received without consideration the money of another which they have no right to retain.” Other cases which have announced and applied the rule are B

Brand v. Williams, 29 Minn. 238 , , Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , .

Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ; I. L. Corse & Co. v. Minnesota Grain Co., 94 Minn. 331 , .

Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ; Atlantic v. Harris, 118 Mass. 147 ; Manufacturers v. Perry, 144 Mass. 313 , 11 N. E. 81 .

“The general rule is that, in all cases where the money of another is received or acquired by mistake merely, without fraud, interest does not run upon it until the party in whose possession it is, is put in default by a demand by the party to whom it is justly due.” Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , .

This conclusion is not in conflict with the decision in Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Brand v. Williams, 29 Minn. 238 ; Borough of Henderson v. County of Sibley, 28 Minn. 515 ; Sibley v. County of Pine, 31 Minn. 201 ; Bradford v. City of Chicago, 25 Ill.