
    Estes versus School Dist. No. 19, in Bethel and Milton.
    A scliool district lias no authority to raise money for fuel, or to make itself liable for it.
    On Exceptions from the District Court, Cole, J.
    Assumpsit for fuel furnished to the district.
    The plaintiff’s testimony tended to prove that he furnished the fuel, which was used in the district school, and that he was employed by the lawful agent of the district to furnish it at the expense of the district. A nonsuit was moved for, and was ordered, upon the ground that a school district has no authority to create a debt against itself for the fuel used in the schools.
    The plaintiff excepted.
    
      Codman, for the plaintiff.
    
      Raioson, for the defendant.
   Wells, J.

— School districts are corporations of limited powers, and if they exceed those powers their acts are invalid. 3 Fairf. 254. No authority is conferred on them by statute to raise money for the purpose of providing fuel, or to contract for the purchase of it. By the Revised Statutes, chap. 17, sect. 42, school agents are empowered to provide fuel from the money assigned to them by the assessors of their towns. A similar provision is contained in the Act of March 15, 1821, chap. 117, sect. 3, and also in that of March 11, 1834, chap. 651, sect. 3.

As the district could not create any liability upon itself for fuel, the nonsuit was properly ordered.

Nonsuit confirmed.  