Stewart v. Brooks

• Decision Date: 31 January 1859
• Citation: 28 Mo. 62
• Parties: STEWART et al., Defendants in Error, v. BROOKS, Plaintiff in Error.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

28 Mo. 62

STEWART et al., Defendants in Error,

v.BROOKS, Plaintiff in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1859.

1. The provisions of the act of February 13, 1847, (Sess. Acts, 1847, p. 122, § 31, 32, incorporated into the revised code of 1855, R. C. 1855, p. 1360, § 35, 36,) in so far as they regulate the redemption by minors of land sold for taxes, are complete in themselves and do not need the aid of the act of 1845. (R. C. 1845, p. 951, § 14.)

2. To entitle a minor to redeem lands sold for taxes, as provided by sections 31 and 32 of the act of February 13, 1847, and by sections 35 and 36 of the revenue act of December 13, 1855, he must pay to the purchaser at the tax sale double the amount of all the taxes and costs paid by him at the time of his purchase, together with fifteen per cent. per annum upon this amount from the date of the tax deed; he shall also refund to the purchaser the amount of taxes paid by him after the date of his purchase, together with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent. per annum from the times of payment respectively, whether before or after the date of the tax deed.

Error to Moniteau Circuit Court.

On the 1st Monday in October, 1852, the defendant purchased a certain tract of land, at a sale of land for taxes in Moniteau county. The lands were sold for the taxes for the years 1849, 1850 and 1851, assessed against the said tract as the property of W. S. Garner, deceased. The defendant obtained a deed from the register of lands dated May 8, 1855. Both the parties in whose behalf this proceeding is instituted were at the date of the defendant's purchase minors. One attained her majority in the year 1856; the other has not yet attained her majority. The present proceeding was instituted on the 30th of September, 1858, to obtain a redemption of said tract of land. The only matter in contest is the rule to be adopted in ascertaining the amount to be paid or refunded by the plaintiffs to entitle them to redeem. The court directed that the plaintiffs should pay into court double the amount of the taxes and costs paid by defendant up to the date of his tax deed, together with interest at the rate of fifteen per cent. per annum from the date of the deed. The court refused to order the plaintiffs to refund the taxes paid after the date of the tax deed.White, for plaintiff in error.

Parsons, for defendants in error.

I. The act of 1847 intended that the purchaser should receive back from the party entitled to redeem double the amount of taxes, costs, &c., incurred up to the date of the deed and fifteen per cent. on that amount to the date of redemption. The act does not provide for the payment of double the amount of taxes, costs, &c., incurred after the date of the deed, but only for the fifteen per cent. on the amount incurred prior to the date of the deed. This the court allowed, and therefore committed no error in refusing to allow double taxes and costs accruing subsequent to the date of the deed.

SCOTT, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The act of 1847 amendatory of an act entitled “An act to provide for levying, assessing and collecting the revenue,” approved March 27, 1847 (Sess. Acts, 1847, p. 117), repeals all acts and parts of acts inconsistent therewith. The provisions of the act of 1847 in relation to the redemption of lands sold for taxes differ in some respects from those contained in the act of 1845 to provide for levying, assessing and collecting the revenue. (R. C. 1845, p. 947.) Where there is such conflict the prior law must give way. The act of 1847 on the subject of the redemption of lands is complete within itself and does not need the aid of the act of 1845. The expression of one thing is the exclusion of another, and the 31st section of the act of 1847, by prescribing the terms on which minors might redeem their lands when they had been sold for the taxes, necessarily excluded any term or condition not therein contained.

In proceeding on the petition to redeem provided for by the thirty-second section of the act of 1847, the circuit courts are...