McQueen v. Bush

Citations

• 76 Miss. 283

Syllabus

<p>1. Tax Title. 'Description. Surplusage.</p> <p>If land be described in a tax deed as “ 90 by 225 feet on the west side of Warrenton road, in section 34, township 16 north, range 3 east, in Warren county, Mississippi, assessed to John Parkhurst,” the reference to the section is as essential a part of the description as any other part, and cannot be treated as mere surplusag-e.</p> <p>2. Same. Name of person to whom assessed. Clrue.</p> <p>If, in such ease, the reference to the section be treated as surplusage, the description would be void, for the name of the person to whom the land is assessed is not descriptive of the land, and it would not furnish a clue which, if followed, would identify the tract. Bowers v. Andrews, 52 Miss., 596; Dodds v. Marks, 63 Miss., 443.</p> <p>3. Same. Code 1892, 3775, 3776. Parof evidence.</p> <p>Code 1892, §$ 3775, 3776, authorizing the introduction of parol evidence to identify land sold for taxes in case of defective descriptions, requires the clue to be found in the assessment roll; and it cannot be furnished by the pleading of the party who asserts the tax title.</p> <p>4. Same. Reformation.</p> <p>A court of equity will not reform a tax title.</p> <p>5. Same. Assessment. Intention of assessor.</p> <p>There cannot be an assessment of lands, within constitutional requirements, which rests only in the memory and purpose of the assessor. There must be official action, evidenced by the roll he is required to make. Sims v. Wu/rren, 68 Miss., 447.</p>