pressed in common language; nor are the characters and abbreviations employed such as are used by conveyances in describing real estate; nor do the people generally use such a combination of words, letters and figures in referring to or describing land. A description of real estate is essential to its assessment, and, there being no sufficient description in this case, there is no assessment, and consequently no tax.
2. The county board of the county where the lands are situated did not assemble as a board of equalization in either of the years in question on the day fixed by statute nor on the following day. Held, that the omission to hold a sesfion at the time and place designated by law also operated to defeat the alleged taxes. The board of equalization cannot lawfully assemble at a time and place other than that fixed by statute. The public is not chargeable with notice of any meeting of such board except that designated in the statute. Tax- payers are invited by the law to attend at an appointed session of the board, and present to the board any grievances which they may have on account of assessments made on their property. No other opportunity for a hearing is given, and, if no session is had at the time and place prescribed, there is no chance to be heardatall. Thisisfatal tothe tax in all cases where the law bases the tax upon an official valuation, and in terms gives the taxpayer an opportunity to be heard. Actual injury need not be shown; the law will presume an injury on grounds of public policy. The items paid by defendant at the tax sale and in subsequent years as taxes were not taxes in law, nor within the meaning of § 75, c. 28, Pol. Code (Comp. Laws, § 1640); and hence it was error to require, as the trial court did require, that said sums should be paid by plaintiff to defendant as a condition upon which the worthless tax deed would be vacated as a cloud on plaintiff's title. Bartholomew, J., dissenting.
(Opinion Filed Aug. 1, 1891. Rehearing Denied Aug. 29, 1891.)
APPEAL from district court, Barnes county; Hon. Roverick Rose, Judge.
J. E. Robinson and Chas. A. Pollock, for Appellant. George K. Andrus and Edgar W. Camp, for Respondent.
Action to quiet title. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. Judgment modified.
J. E. Robinson and Charles A. Pollock, for appellant:
The tax sale and tax deed being confessedly void, there is no presumption of the regularity of any anterior proceeding. A tax deed loses its character as evidence when it is shown that in
