character, in the assessment rolls in question, are insufficient and invalid as descriptions of parts of sections of land, viz: NWs; NW4 of NE«; NE SW; W2 SW. Such symbol writing is not English as it is ordinarily used, and is without the sanction of any general usage among the masses of the people. Hence the symbol writing descriptions cannot be upheld as a basis of taxation, or as a means of building up and perpetuating title to real estate under the revenue laws.
Judicial Notice of Custom—Usage of Language.
Courts and judges rest under an official obligation to notice and recognize, without proof, such facts and matters as are so notorious as to be generally known. Among other things, courts must judicially notice. the vernacular language, and such abbreviations and symbols of ideas as have, from immemorial use, been adopted by the people generally, and thereby have become a part of the common usage of the language. When this occurs, i. e. when a given usage of language ceases to be a mere special usage, limited in its sphere, and emerges into general use among the masses of the people, the state, either by its courts or its legislature, will adopt and legalize such usage, and thereby add the same to the body of the common or of the statute law, as the case may be. Thereafter the existence of such general usage of language is not to be left to the hazards of nisi prius trials, to be proved or disproved, as testimouy may preponderate one way or the other. Its existence is evidenced by the statute or by judicial precedents, as the case may be.
Amendment of Answer—New Matter.
The trial court, against objection, allowed defendant to serve an amended answer, embracing among others, the following averments: “That said abbreviations and combinations of letters and figures were in general use in Barnes County, North Dakota, and throughout the State of North Dakota, and throughout those parts of the United States where the government system of survey is used for the descriptions of parts of sections of lands, and were generally understood by the people and taxpayers of said Barnes County and the Stote of North Dakota, and in those portions of the United States where the government system of survey is used.” Held, that the ruling was prejudicial error.
Assessor Responsible for Sufficient Description.
In valuing land for taxation, the assessor may refer to descriptions or lists of land furnished either by the county commissioners under § 1544, Comp. Laws, or by individials under § 1554, Id., but the assessor is officially responsible for the legal sufficiency of the description of all parcels of real estate returned by him.” Upon that official alone devolves the entire responsibility of making out and delivering the roll containing a list of taxable lands. Accordingly, held, where a parcel of land is attempted to be described in the assessor’s return, but such description is inherently and.fatally defective, the same cannot be rendered valid and sufficient by showing that it corresponds to a description furnished the assessor by the owner, or by any one else. The public and bidders at tax sales as well as owners, are interested in the descriptions of real estate in tax records and tax titles. Such descriptions, to be sufficient, must point out parcels of land clearly and distinctly by the use of terms commonly understood.
