Doe ex dem. Mix v. Whitlock
Doe ex dem. Mix v. Whitlock
Opinion of the Court
The paper cannot be admitted in evidencp.' When a title to real estate, is defeated by operation of law, the statute, must be strictly pursued.
The object of the act in directing that the return of the assessment by the selectmen should be made to the Treasurer, is important and obvious. It is to. give notice to non-resident owners of the precise amount of the demand which is made upon their lands for the purposes of government, in order that they might not be divested of their lands through mistake or ignorance: Perhaps no government has been more careful in this respect than that of Vermont. The whole tenor of this act exhibits a marked attention to rights of the land owners.
It levies a tax of one halfpenny per acre on all the lands in the State for a great and beneficial purpose, no less than to raise the sum to be paid to the State of New-York, agreed upon by the several State commissioners for the final adjustment of certain controversies w'hich had unhappily arisen between this and that’ highly respectable State. The act passed November 3d, 1791, but the tax was to be collected and paid into the treasury by the 1st day of January, 1794. The State Treasurer is .directed between the 1st of October and the 1st of November, 1792, to issue his warrant to the first constable of each or
The return was to be made to the Treasurer’s office-, not merely as a direction to that officer in his duty, but the Treasurer’s office was to serve ap a public place of deposit for' the assessments. That" .before the publication in the newspapers, the selectmen’s return of the assessment might be resorted to by the land owners to learn the amount of their several taxes; and it might at all times serve as a check
The Court consider the paper offered in evidence {-0 ]3e defective in substance also. The general terms ” jn which the assessment is made out, does not an- . . ,. . . . , swer the beneficial requirements oi the act, which are to enable every land owner to know the precise sum he has to render to the government, and to enable ^ra to correct the collector in any departure from official duty.
it is therefore the opinion of the Court, that the paper adduced by fhe plaintiff cannot be read to the Jury.
Plaintiff nonsuited.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Doe, ex dem. Samuel Mix, against Joel Whitlock, Tenant
- Status
- Published