Abbott v. Doling

• Decision Date: 31 January 1872
• Citation: 49 Mo. 302
• Parties: JOEL ABBOTT, Appellant, v. J. M. DOLING, Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

49 Mo. 302

JOEL ABBOTT, Appellant,

v.J. M. DOLING, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1872.

Appeal from Greene Circuit Court.

H. J. Lindenbower, for appellant.

The tax deed was prima facie evidence of title. No essential prerequisite to the valid exercise of the taxing power was shown to have been omitted.

C. B. McAfee, for respondent.

ADAMS, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was ejectment for the north half of lot 24 in block 6, as laid down on the original plat of the town of Springfield, in Greene county. The judgment of the Circuit Court was for the defendant.

The plaintiff's title is a tax deed. If this is not good he has no title to stand on. The tax deed was made by the collector of Greene county, on a sale of this lot in October, 1869, as having been forfeited to the State. After reciting the forfeiture, etc., and that it had remained unredeemed for two years, the deed proceeds thus: “And whereas, on the first Monday in October, 1869, the land aforesaid, forfeited to the State as aforesaid, remained unredeemed, and the taxes, penalties and costs remained wholly unpaid; and whereas, on the day last aforesaid, under and by virtue of the authority in me vested by law, I did expose the said real estate aforesaid, assessed as aforesaid, for sale for the taxes, interest and costs thereon, before the court-house door of said county; and thereupon, on the day last aforesaid, Joel Abbott became the purchaser for the taxes, interest and costs, and all subsequent taxes assessed against said land, he being the highest bidder, for the sum of $102 due from said John Butterfield for the taxes on said land for the years 1865 and 1866 and the interest and penalties thereon, and also the subsequent taxes for 1867 and interest and costs thereon. Now, therefore, I, Thomas A. Reed, as collector of revenue of the county of Greene and State of Missouri, in consideration of the premises and the sum aforesaid, and in pursuance and by authority of an act of the general assembly of said State in that case made and provided, have granted, bargained and sold,” etc.

I have quoted the language of the tax deed, and it will be seen that there is no recital that any notice whatever was given of the sale in October, 1869, and yet the statutes (Gen. Stat. 1865, p. 129, § 119; Wagn. Stat. 1206, § 119) expressly require that the collector “shall first give four weeks' public notice by publication in a newspaper published in his county having the greatest circulation; or, if there be no newspaper published in his county, then by publication in the nearest newspaper published to said county, and by posting up at least twenty written or printed handbills in twenty public places in said county, setting forth that all lands and town lots forfeited to the State for...