Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 3).pdf/99

 July, and this, as we have seen, was strictly regular, under the statute. There was a quorum present ‘at the first meeting, and hence the adjournment until 10 a. M. the next day was also strictly regular. But the successive adjournments from day to day, which were made by only two members,—less than a quorum,— are challenged as illegal and void. If such adjournments had no validity, it follows, logically and legally, that the board was not lawfully assembled when it did actually meet and discharge its functions on Tuesday and Wednesday, July 13th and 14th, and. hence, on this supposition, there was no session of “not less than two days” that year, as the statute required. Comp. Laws, § 1584.

We have been unable to find a decided case in point upon the question presented, #. ¢., as to the validity of no quorum adjournments when such adjournments are made from day to day as a means of preserving the life of meetings required by law to be held by the governing officials of public corporations. But this court will take notice judicially that the practice of making such adjournments extensively pervades in the United States, and that it is not limited to such bodies as congress and state legislatures, where it has the express sanction of organic law. but obtains in city councils and in town, county, and school district boards, where there is no express provision of law authorizing it. Cush. Leg. Law & Pr. Assem. (2d Ed.) § § 254, 255. We think so valuable a rule, as applied to public corporations, at least should be preserved, particularly as its denial would operate disastrously to the public interests in many cases, as would be true with respect to meetings of the only board before which the taxpayer can be heard upon the matter of the valuation of his property for taxation. Our conclusion is that the board met at the proper time, and held a session of not less than two days in the year 1886.

This brings us to another question. The statute in force, (Comp. Laws, § 1582,) required the assessors to return their assessment rolls to the county clerks on or before the first Monday of July of each year. In 1886 the return was not