
    Inhabitants of Spencer vs. Phineas Jones.
    A sale "by a town to the lowest bidder of the right of collecting taxes, without any provision as to his qualifications for the office of collector of taxes, or any other election, is void; and the town cannot maintain an action against him for the amount bid, although he acts as collector for the year.
    Action of contract to recover the sum of $47.50 which the defendant promised to pay the plaintiffs for the privilege of being their collector of taxes for the year 1854. The parties submitted the case to the decision of the court upon the following statement of facts :
    “ On the first Monday of March 1854 the plaintiffs held their annual town meeting for the choice of town officers for the year ensuing; and the warrant by which said meeting was called contained the following article: ‘Article 15th. To see in what method the collectors of taxes shall be chosen.’ The town record of the proceedings under said article is in the following words: ‘Art. 15th. Voted, that the taxes be collected by the lowest bidder. They were struck off to Phineas Jones, who gives a bonus of forty seven dollars and fifty cents for the privilege of being collector; who was immediately sworn to the faithful discharge of his duties.’ Besides which there is no further or other record of any choice of the defendant to said office of collector of taxes, nor was any other method of choosing him used. After it was voted that the taxes be collected by the lowest bidder, the moderator of said meeting immediately put said office up at auction. No provision with regard to the fitness or qualifications of those who might bid for the office was expressly stipulated. The defendant entered upon the duties of said office, and collected the taxes of the town for said year.”
    
      P. E. Aldrich, (P. C. Bacon with him,) for the plaintiffs.
    The contract between the parties was a legal contract. It was not a sale of a public office, and therefore not in contravention of the law against such sales. Alvord v. Collin, 20 Pick. 428-The consideration for the defendant’s promise was the privilege of being collector, and the right to use the money between the time of collecting it and the time when he was required by law to pay it over. Notwithstanding there was no express stipulation respecting the qualifications of the person who might be the lowest bidder, yet it must be supposed' “ that the auction proceeded on the terms, that the lowest bidder should be appointed, provided that he was a suitable person to perform the duty.” 20 Pick. 429. The mode of electing collectors of taxes may be determined by the meeting at which they are chosen. Rev. Sts. c. 15, § 34. It was not therefore necessary, after the defendant had bid off the collection of taxes, to elect him by ballot, or in any other manner.
    
      W. T. Harlow, for the defendant.
   Thomas, J.

The office of collector is charged with important duties, not confined to the collection of taxes ; as the returning the lists of persons who have paid taxes, to the selectmen, to enable them to make out the list of voters; the giving to the voter the receipt of his payment of the necessary tax—a receipt which is made by law presumptive evidence of payment, wherever presented. Rev. Sts. c. 3, §§ 2, 3. In the collection of taxes he is invested with large powers—to seize not only the property, but the persons of the citizens; to follow one taxed throughout the Commonwealth, and commit him to prison in whatever count^Mj^^ÉjadÉtound; to bring suits for the collection of taxes in ; to sell the real estate necessary for the payment if, in the opinion of the collector, it cannot be conveniermyT^Jded, to sell the whole parcel taxed. Rev. Sts. c. 8, §§ 3-19. Sts. 1842, c. 34; 1848, c. 166. The faithful execution of these duties requires vigilance and sound judgment, familiarity with the laws regulating the assessment and collection of taxes, and strict integrity. Few of our town officers have more important duties to perform, or are entrusted with the exercise of larger dot

This office was by the plajle and conecto- at auction, and sold without qualification to thelffice at vendr ider. The defendant agreed to buy it for $47.50, act. ^*7 action is brought for the price. There was no agreement to elect, and no. election. The action then is for the price of an office of importance and trust, sold at auction. It arises directly between the parties to the sale. It cannot be maintained.

Such a bargain is void, upon the most obvious principles oí public policy. There are no reasons which would justify the giving this office to the lowest bidder, which would not apply to that of assessor or treasurer.

The promise is also without consideration; for the collector has no right to any beneficial use of the money collected for the town. Such use is a breach of his trust. Once, indeed, in two months he is, if required, to exhibit to the selectmen a true account of all moneys received on taxes committed to him, and produce the treasurer’s receipts for all money paid into the treasury by him. Rev. Sts. c. 8, § 45.

In Alvord v. Collin, 20 Pick. 418, the action was between third parties. In that case, there is a strong intimation by the court, that if the condition of the arrangement was that the person who would collect the taxes for the lowest sum should, at all events, without regard to fitness or qualification, receive the appointment, it would be illegal and void. Precisely the' case supposed has arisen. Judgment for the defendant. 
      
      
         The record of the proceedings of the was thus:
      “ Chose Capt. Absalom Deming constab^^^^^^^^RT Capt. Doming was appointed collector by bidding off said ; for which the town voted in favor, for which he was to collePH^MSes of said town for five per cent., and to procure bonds for his faithful performance to the satisfaction, and sworn.”
     