The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1875-02-09
REDEMPTION OF LANDS.
AN OPINION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
RUSKIRK
AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE LAW.


AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE LAW.
The following was received by Auditor
Henderson yesterday, and explains itself:
The Hon. f. Henderson, Auditor of state:-
DEAR SIR-I have the honor 10 &C.
knowledge the receipt OF your communica-
ton OF the Sd inst, inclosinx a letter OF in
quiry from county auditor in which he re-
quests you 70 obtain my opinion upon the
following points, viz:
L. Whether a purchaser of lands sold for
taxes al private sale under the provisions of
the "act To provide for an uniform assess
ment of property" etc., approved December
Il, 1872, is entitled 10 deed from the county
auohor lor such lands, al the expiration of
TWO years from the date of such private sale.
or at the expiration of two years from the
date they were offered at public sale
Z. when does the time for the redemn
ton OF lands sold at private sale expires
Section 249 OF said act reads as follows.
"All the provisions of laws relativa tn tho
execution of deeds for lands sold at nnbIio
sale shall be applicable TO lands sold az pri-
vate sale pursuant 10 the provisions Of this
act"
Provided, that no deed shall be made until
after the expiration of two years from the
time when such land was or should have
been offered at public sale
Section 208 of said act reads as follows.
Inc owner or occupant OF any land sold for
taxes, or any other person, NAV redeem the
same at any time within two wears
AFTER the last day of such sale, by paying to
the county treasurer, for the use OF tha mr.
chasers his heirs or assigns, the sum mem
TONED In his certificate, and the amount OF
all subsequent taxes paid. with 70 mar
centum on the whole sum, andiuterest from
the date OF purchase or from the time of
payment"
There is an apparent inconsistency between
these two sections
Although section 20S, from the context.
would seem TO relate more particularly IN
public sales, yet am inclined to think that
IL does not do so exclusively; that both sec
lions should De construed together, and that
tnere exists right of REDEMPTION
for two years from the date of
the sale, whether it be nuhlic
or private sale. 1t will be noticed that the
language OF the proviso in section $40 quoted
supra is peculiar. 1t does not say that lands
may not oe redeemed within two years from
Inc date OF sale, nor that deed shall Ia
made two years from the date when the
lands were offered at public sale. hnt
provides that q deed shall not he
executed before that time. If this was the
only section In the act relating to the time
" sucn DEEDS should be made, | think
me proper inference would be that such time
would be two years from the Offering at pub
ic sale. But this is not provided exnressIv
ana other sections of the act, in INV oninio1'
control the construction.
If lands can be redeemed within two
Years from the date of the nri-
7ate sale, of course the deed of the conntv
Iudltor should not be made until Ine eY
'iration of such a time
III is proper TO remark that the act referred
Is very difficult TO construe, owing to con
letting provisions in its various sections
In this opinion l have endeayored to ra
onclle any conflict which exists between
be sections quoted, but must confess that
he question is by no means unembsrrassad
y grave doubts. Very respectfully.
G. A. BUsKIRK, Atty GEM.