
    County of Herkimer, Appellant, v. Village of Herkimer et al., Respondents.
    Argued December 7, 1938;
    decided January 17, 1939.
    
      
      Chester J. Winslow, County Attorney {Warwick J. Kernan of counsel), for appellant.
    Property, title to which is acquired by a county pursuant to statute as the result of a tax sale, is held for a public use within the meaning of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60). (Bush Terminal Co. v. City of New York, 152 Misc. Rep. 144; Williams v. Lash, 8 Minn. 496.)
    
      Francis J. Moore for respondents.
    The property sought to be assessed and taxed by the village of Herkimer is not being held for public use. (People ex rel. Gould v. Barker, 150 N. Y. 52; Board of Education v. Baker, 241 App. Div. 574; 266 N. Y. 636; People ex rel. Mizpah Lodge v. Burke, 228 N. Y. 245; People ex rel. Savings Bank v. Coleman, 135 N. Y. 231; People ex rel. Delta Kappa Epsilon Society v. Lawler, 74 App. Div. 553; 179 N. Y. 535; People ex rel. Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Davenport, 91 N. Y. 574; Lloyd v. Mayor, 5 N. Y. 369; Bailey v. Mayor, 3 Hill, 531; Town of Huntington v. Bradford, 273 N. Y. 603; Clark v. Sprague, 113 App. Div. 645; Village of Watkins Glen v. Hager, 140 Misc. Rep. 816; 234 App. Div. 904; Pickell v. City of Utica, 161 App. Div. 1; 216 N. Y. 740; Common School District No. 3 v. County of Chemung, 160 Misc. Rep. 477; Y. W. C. A. v. City of New York, 217 App. Div. 406; 245 N. Y. 562; People ex rel. Y. M. Assn. v. Sayles, 32 App. Div. 197; 157 N. Y. 677; Matter of Niagara Falls & Whirlpool Ry. Co., 108 N. Y. 375; Brown v. Gerald, 100 Me. 351.)
   Per Curiam.

Property purchased by a county at a tax sale held pursuant to the provisions of articles 6 and 7 of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60) is not property held for a public use ” within the meaning of section 4 (subd. 3) of the Tax Law. Section 50, subdivision 2, of the Tax Law, by its terms, applies only to the assessment rolls of tax districts.” As defined by the statute, tax districts ” do not include incorporated villages. We read the statute as it is written.

The judgment should be affirmed, without costs.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ., concur; O’Brien, J., taking no part.

Judgment affirmed.  