Majority
Headnote
This action was brought to recover back moneys alleged to have been fraudulently obtained by defendants, under color of a contract with the State, “ by means of frauds,reads an opinion for affirmance of order of General Term, and for judgment absolute for defendants' holding.
First. That the cause of action stated in the complaint was one in fraud alone, and that the referees did not find that there was fraud in the transaction. In which all concurred except Earl, J., who thought the action might be held as one ex contractu.
Second. That the referees were right, though not in .all details stated by them, in the opinion that the canal com
Third. That there was not a ratification by the Legislature of the unauthorized payments. In this Miller and Earl, JJ., concurred ; Church, Ch. J., Eapallo, Andrews and Daneorth, JJ., did not concur, but on the contrary, held, that there was a ratification by the Legislature.
Order affirmed and judgment absolute for defendants.