Page:Chestnut v. Harris.pdf/2

Rh northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of section 24 in township 13 south and in range 7 west, containing forty acres. He claimed by virtue of a sale thereof by a collector of revenue for the taxes assessed against the same for the year 1891. Appellees disputed the validity of the sale on two grounds: (1) Because the description of the land in the assessment and in the notice of sale is insufficient, and (2) because it was sold for too much cost.

The issues in the case were tried upon an agreed statement of facts. It was admitted that the land was described in the assessment list as follows:

and in the notice of the sale of delinquent lands as follows:

It was also admitted that it was sold for the taxes of 1891 and penalty, and for sixty cents costs, which included a fee of ten cents of the county clerk for attending the sale and five cents for furnishing the printer with a description of it in the list of delinquent lands advertised for sale.

Upon this statement of facts the court held that the sale was void because the description of the land in the assessment and in the notice of sale was insufficient; and rendered judgment in favor of the appellee. Did the court err?

The statutes of this state provide that each tract or lot of real property shall be so described in the assessment thereof for taxation as to identify and distinguish it from any other tracts or parts of tracts; and the same shall be described, if practicable, according to section, or subdivisions thereof, and congressional townships. They recognize the survey of the United States, and the division of lands, according thereto, into townships and ranges, and sections and parts of sections, and that a description according to such survey will be good and