30 Iowa 355 | Iowa | 1870
I. The defendant, after having received the duplicate tax list of the county treasurer, on the 10th day of May returned it; it was again delivered to him in July and thereupon he seized the property in controversy, for the
It is insisted that under section 8, chapter 137 of Acts 12th General Assembly, it was the duty of the township collector to return the duplicate tax list on the first Monday in May, and that he could acquire no authority to seize property thereon after that day. The evidence shows that the tax list was not returned by the collector with the intention of suspending the discharge of his duties as an officer, or closing them up, but for a different purpose. The plaintiff had claimed that he was not liable for the tax in question, and refused to pay it. Eor the purpose of laying the matter before the supervisors and obtaining their directions, defendant sent the tax list to the treasurer that it could be presented to them when they considered the question relating to the tax in dispute. The tax list was not in fact returned in the sense in which the word is used by appellant’s counsel. It would be quite proper for the collector to suspend his duties and part with the possession of the tax list for the purpose and in the manner shown by the evidence. This of itself would not'deprive him of authority to complete the collection of the delinquent taxes.
It is alleged that a portion of the property assessed consisted of personalty. No objection is raised in the assignment of errors based ' upon this fact. It will not therefore enter into our consideration of the case.
The foregoing notices all the objections covered by the assignment of errors. In our opinion, they are not well taken.
The judgment of the circuit court is
Affirmed.