Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/434

 422 FEDKKAIi BBPOBTEB. �by the aasessors showing the names of ail the stockholders of the complainant, (including the one assessed for $5,000,) the number of shares held by each stockholder, and the as- sessable value of his shares. This list was prepared for the use of the assessorj by the officers of the complainant. It further appears that after the five days had expired for the review of assessments the roll was copied into a book, and the names of the shareholders of the complainant were tran- Bcribed from this list and inserted in the first column, with the assessable value of their shares opposite, in the fourth column. During the five days some of the shareholders of the complainant treated the list as an assessment, and had their assessments reduced by deductions on account of debts, etc., and among them was one of the officers of the com- plainant. It is fair to infer, from the facts stated in the defendant's af&davits, that the board of assessors regarded the list thus kept by them as part of the assessment roll, although it was not physically annexed to the roll, and sup- posed it was a substantial compliance with the law, and would afford to the shareholders of the complainant notice of an assessment, and an opportunity for review and correction. It is also fair to infer from the facts exhibited, and in the absence of any allegations to the contrary on the part of the complainant, that the oJB&cers of the complainant and its sev- eral shareholders understood that this list was kept by the assessors, and regarded by them as part of the assessment roll, for the purposes of an assessment against the sharehold- ers. It was not a literal nor a substantial compliance with the statute. Undoubtedly those requirements in statutes regulating assessment and taxation, which are designed to afford tax payers an opportunity for the examination and revision of their assessments, should not be deemed directory merely, but essential, The tax payer is not to be condemned without a hearing, and the precautions prescribed to give him &n effectuai opportunity to be heard should receive strict con- struction in his favor. These are matters which are of the substance of the procedure. A substantial compliance with such statutes, in ail matters which are designed for the pro- ��� �