The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1857-04-07
PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, ROwLsoN $780,
Tax Titles.


We cut from the report of the Detroit 7ri-
6une, the following decision of the Supreme
Court, which has an important hearing .pon
several questions connected with the system
of taxation and the validity of tax-titles:
Iweed vs. Metcalf-Case made after judg-
ment-from st. Joseph County. This was
an act of ejectment TO recover certain premi
ses in the town of White Pigeon. Defend
ant claimed title under tax deeds for 1914,
AS, '46, and judgment was rendered in the
court below in his favor. Whercupon coun-
sci made case in the form Of questions, to be
submitted to this Court.
The Court, JOHNSON AFTER some pre-
liminary remarks in regard to the evident
propriety of counsel, in making up cases for
the opinion of this Court confining these
questions to matters having at least some con-
nection with the cause under review, proceed
ed to consider the questions submitted, (some
fifteen in ndmber) seriatim, substantially as
follows:
l. Whether the premises in question were
rightfully assessed as "non-resident," or sho,d
have bedn assessed to the occupant? An
swer-The facts appearing in the record are
not sufficient for a decision upon this point
il the occupant were resident Of the town,
the premises should have been assessed to
him; otherwise, as nonresident.
2. Whether the defendant could rely upon
each Of bis several tax deeds, (for 1914, AS
and '46) or only upon the earliest2 Ans.-
1t has been held BY this court that purchss-
or of land for taxes having perfected his title,
by obtaining deed from the Auditor Gene
raj, and having into possession under it, must
rely upon such title, and cannot strengthen
il by purchasing for taxes subsequently lov-
led. But in this case, defendants title un-
der his first purchase had not become perfect
tied period for redemption not having ex-)
pired) at the time of his purchase at the sub
sequent sales. Hence we think he was enti-
tied to rely upon either or all Of his tax
deeds.
g. Whether the warrant attached to the
assessment roll by the supervisor, should run,
"In the name of the People of the State Of
Michigan" and is void for not so doing. 4.
1t is not necessary that the warrant should
run, "ln the name of the People"
4. Whether the tax should be levied upon
the original or equalized assessment roll. H.
1t is inmaterial which. The result would
be the same. The rolls arc equalized for the
purpose Of determining the proper distribu
tion of. the tax between the several towns
and not individuals of the same town. :.
s. Whether the fact that the record Of the
board of supervisors shows re-assessment
upon raid town, renders the tax for that year
illegal! A.-Not necessarily. 1t would de-
pend upon whether the assessment was
such ms the supervisors are authorized to
make. Whether such were the case in this
particular instance The facts appearing upon
abe record do not enable us to determine.
o. Whether townships hovo power rniso
money for "contingenf expenses, or for de-
stroying Canada thistles, or for highway pur-
poses, without report Of Commissioners. 4.
They have.
T. Whether the Treasurcr's sale book for
1914 does not show the land in question to
have been redeemed? A.-The record does
not enable lis to determine.
8. Whether warrant to Collector for 1914
was not bad, for want of signature of Super
visor? At would have been void if the
signatures were wanting, which the record
does not show TO have been the case.
o. Whether there is any authority for sell
ing lands for delinquent school tax? A.
There is
10. Whether equalization of assessment
roll of White Pigeon, for 1914, was not de-
fective? A.-The facts stated do not show
it to have been SO.
il. Whether the fact that the Collectors
roll did not contain copy of the certificate
Of the assessors and chairman of the board
of supervisors, rendered it void? At did
not. 1t is not necessary that copy of said
certificates shall appear upon the Collectors
roll.
IL. Whether the failure of the collector to
make return to the County Treasurer under
oaths, of the revenue collected, rendered the
sale void. At did not.
Is. Whether, under the laws in force in
1914, AS and '46 the supervisors had author.
ity to reduce the aggregate of assessments
below that of the assessors. A.-They had
IA. Whether taxes should have been lev.
led on crops, upon premises, or upon goods
and chattles Of tenants. A.-They should
not have so levied.
Is. Whether it was not erroneous to sci
the entire property for the tax. At was
not erroneous.
Judgment below affirmed.