Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 1).pdf/402

 record, relating to assessment for, levy ‘of, and sale under, the particular tax for which the land is sold. Hamilton v. Valiant, 30 Md. 140; Blackwell on Tax Titles, pp. 66, 67.

Respondent's right of action accrued upon the payment of the money to the treasurer. The wronfulwrongful [sic] act which gave this right of action was the sale of the land by the treasurer to respondent and the receipt by the treasurer of the purchase money, and the treasurer deriving his authority to sell, solely from the statute, the wrongs or mistakes of the other officers of the county, can` in no manner affect his liability, or the liability of the county, under this statute.

The treasurer does not derive his authority to sell, from the warrant, but solely from the statute, and the warrant is in no manner material to the sale; it is immaterial whether the treasurer has any warrant whatever, so far as the sale of real estate is concerned.

If the treasurer derives no authority to sell real estate from his warrant, it affords him no protection in such sale.

Even in the case of personal property, the warrant is no protection in cases where there is no jurisdiction. Waters v. Danies 4 Vt. 601; Henry v. Sargent, 13 N. H. 321; State v. Shacklett, 37 Mo. 280; St. Louis Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Charles, 47 Mo. 462; St. Louis Building & Saving Association v. Leighton, 47 Mo. 393; Rice v. Wadsworth, 27 N. H. 104; Kelley v. Noyes, 43 N. H. 209; Cunningham v. Mitchell, 67 Pa. St. 82; Walden v. Dudley, 49 Mo. 420.

The respondent is further entitled to recover under § 84, of an act approved March 11, 1890. The section cited, so far a applicable, is identical with § 97, chapter 11, General Statutes of Minnesota, and in adopting it, the State of North Dakota adopted the construction put upon it by the courts of Minnesota. McDonald v. Hovey, 110 U.S. 619; Metropolitan R R. Co. v. Moore, 121 U. S. 558.

The provisions of this section apply as well to void sales made before the passage of the act as to those made after its passage. State v. Cronkite, 28 Minn. 197.

And in answer to Mr. Frye’s brief they said, among other things: The argument of counsel proceeds upon the false pre-