Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 1).pdf/401

 sections in the Political Code appear in the same connection would strengthen the view that each was designed to supplement the other and to provide a protection in all cases, to the tax-sale purchaser. Section 79 (1643) protects him, where there was a legal tax due upon the land.

Section 78 (1629) seems intended to cover all other cases. Section 79 (1643) providing for all cases where there is a tax due upon the property; § 78 (1629) for all cases where there are no taxes due upon the property. In the one case, the person owing the tax must pay it; in the other, as the county had no claim for any taxes it must refund it, and this is the construction put upon section 78 (1629) by the decisions of all the courts which have passed upon it. Coulter v. Mahaska County, 17 Iowa, 92. Scott v. Chickasaw County, 46 Iowa, 253; Morris v. County of Sioux, 42 Iowa, 416; McCann v. County Commissioners Otoe County,(Neb.) 2N.W. Rep. 707; Roberts v. Adams County, (Neb) 25 N. W. 726; Roberts v. Adams County, (Neb.) 30 N. W. 404.

The state furnishes a public record of “lands liable for taxes” for the guidance of the treasurer in the performance of his duties under the statute. Section 10, chap. 8, Political Code, (77 Comp. Laws.); § 85, chap. 28, Political Code, (1646 Comp. Laws.)

The rule of caveat emptor does not apply as against a positive covenant or a statutory provision. The statute becomes a part of the contract of purchase, upon which respondent may rely.

There is in this no requirement that the purchaser shall make any inquiry with reference to the title or the assessment. City v. Humphrey, 84 Ind. 469; McWhinney v. City, 98 Ind. 183; Packard v. New Limerick, 34 Main. 269.

All cases cited by appellant, in support of its position are cases in which the title of the purchaser failed through some irregularity in the assessment, levy or sale.

The record of the assessment, levy and sale constitutes the muniments of title of the purchaser of tax sale, and the rule, extends no further than to require the purchaser to examine this record, and to know at his peril that each step provided by the statute and essential to a valid assessment, levy and sale has been strictly complied with. He is not bound to go beyond the