Breach of duty in another shall have his remedy by action. If the breach of duty be by an individual there is no question, and why should a corporation, receiving its corporate powers, and obliged by its corporate duties with its own consent, by an exception, when it has or must be supposed to have an equivalent for its consent?
"We distinguish between proper aggregate corporation, and the inhabitants of any district, who are by statue invested with particular powers without their consent; These are in the books sometimes called quasi corporation. Of this description are counties and boundaries in England; and Counties, towns [?] in this state" (?) and countries, & townships in Florida. "Although quasi corporations are liable to information or indictment for a neglect of a public duty imposed there by law; yet it is settled in the case of Rafael et al by inhabitants of the county of D[?]2 D.O.E. 667 that no private action can be maintained against them for a breach of their corporate duty; unless such action be given by statue. And the sound reason is that having no corporate found, and no legal means of obtaining one, each corporation would be liable to satisfy any judgment rendered against the corporation. This furthers the common law will not be imposed by in cases where the statute is an authority. But in regular corporations which have, or are supposed to have a corporate fund, this reason does not apply." And he cites with approbation the case of the mayor of Lynn & Turner Corp: 86 where the principle is established