
    Hanson v. Haverhill.
    If in any case an action can be maintained against a town to recover back money paid its tax collector to redeem lands sold for the nonpayment of non-resident taxes assessed thereon, it is no ground for such recovery that in the assessment of the taxes the numbers of the lots were by mistake incorrectly stated.
    Assumpsit, to recover money paid for taxes.
    Wentworth, for the plaintiff.
    
      •A. P. Carpenter, for the defendants.
   Clark, J.

The plaintiff seeks to recover back the sum of $136.33 and interest, for money paid for taxes assessed against him in the town of Haverhill in the years 1868 to 1874. The taxes were assessed as non-resident on wild lands of the plaintiff’s; and the only irregularity that appears in the assessment is, that the lots are described as supposed to be Nos. 21, 22, and 28, when they were in fact Nos. 30, 31, and 32. The plaintiff was taxed in the non-resident list as follows : “ Charles Hanson, lots of land supposed to be Nos. 21, 22, and 23, on Benton line, supposed to be owned by Challes Hanson, of Sandwich.” The plaintiff complains that he did not know when he paid the taxes that the lots were described as Nos. 21, 22, and 23, and supposed they were described correctly. If this proceeding was a petition for abatement, the plaintiff shows no cause for an abatement. He has paid no more than his legal taxes. Besides, the description of his land in the assessment was sufficient. G. 8., a. 50, s. 18; Paul v. Linscott, 56 N. H. 347.

Judgment for the defendants.

Foster, J., did not sit: the others concurred.  