ence whether or not it is entered correctly on the record,1 nor whether, in case payment is made to a public officer, the money ever reaches the tax purchaser, or even whether he has notice that the redemption has been effected.2 No notice of an intention to redeem is necessary. But there must be an actual tender or payment. A mere offer to redeem is insufficient. The marking of the land by mistake, as "redeemed," avails nothing to the owner who has not paid or tendered the redemption money.5 b. As AFFECTED BY STATUTES.-The statutes frequently prescribe minutely the steps incident to redemption. The tendency of the courts is to construe such statutes strongly in favor of the former owner, and to regard them, so far as their details are concerned, as declaratory only. These statutes provide often that application for redemption shall be made to some officer, and that payment shall be made to him, a redemption certificate issued, and a record made thereof.8 8. Who May Redeem-a. THE RULE.-The statutes sometimes provide specifically as to who may redeem. Often, on the other hand, mere general terms, such as "owner," or " party in interest," 9 are made use of, while, in a third class of cases, the right is created, but nothing is said as to who may exercise it.10 The terms "owner," person in interest," and like expressions, have received a broad construction.11 may seize and sell the property to satisfy the debt. Montgomery v. Burton, 31 La. Ann. 330. If payment or tender has been made, equity will set aside a tax deed executed thereafter. Wyatt v. Simpson, 8 W. Va. 394. 1. Cooper v. Shepardson, 51 Cal. 298; Soutter v. Miller, 15 Fla. 625; Baker v. Crabb, 73 Iowa 412; Burke v. Cutler, 78 Iowa 299; Fenton v. Way, 40 Iowa 196; Chapin v. Curtenius, 15 Ill. 427; 2 Blackwell on Tax Titles (5th ed.), § 708; Wyatt v. Simpson, 8 W. Va. 394. Failure to file a receipt in the office of the recorder does not prejudice redemptioner's title. Cooper v. Shepardson, 51 Cal. 298. Payment was made to the auditor of the amount necessary to redeem from two sales. It was held that this redeemed from both sales, notwithstanding the auditor failed to issue a certificate showing a redemption from both. Corbin v. Stewart, 44 Iowa 543. 2. Coxe v. Sartwell, 21 Pa. St. 480. 3. Rich v. Palmer, 7 Oregon 133. 4. In Shoemaker v. Porter, 41 Iowa 197, it was held that such an offer would not relieve an owner who was afterwards successful in an action to redeem, from paying the costs of the suit. 5. State v. Com'rs of School, etc., Lands, 13 Wis. 409. 6. See the statutes of the various states. 7. Cooper v. Shepardson, 51 Cal. 298; Byington v. Buckwalter, 7 Iowa 512; 74 Am. Dec. 279. The provision of law that the recorder shall give to the owner a receipt and file a duplicate thereof in his office, is merely directory. Wyatt v. Simpson, 8 W. Va. 394. 8. See for example, the Arkansas statute. See Ellsworth v. Green, 59 Iowa 622. Under the Alabama statute, requiring that the redemptioner must pay the tax for which the land was sold, and also the taxes paid by the purchaser since the sale, he must pay municipal as well as state and county taxes. Turner v. White (Ala. 1892), 12 So. Rep. 601. 9. See the statutes of Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, New Hamp shire, New York, Wisconsin. 10. Maine Rev. Stat. 1883, § 198, p. 164. 11. In Dubois v. Hepburn, 10 Pet. (U. S.) 1, a statute was construed The right of redemption may be perfect or inchoate, in possession or in action,2 legal or equitable ;3 the test is, will the interest in question be affected by the tax conveyance.4 Where the right is given to the "owner," the original owner may exercise it, although there is an outstanding tax title.5 The right cannot be defeated by showing an outstanding paramount title. It is immaterial to whom the lands were assessed." The person redeeming must, however, have some title; a mere stranger cannot redeem. Any payment by an agent or other person occupying a confidential relation to the owner will inure to the benefit of the owner, even though made with the agent's own money. The agent in that case will have a lien on the land for his money.8 b. INSTANCES.--One in possession under color of title may redeem. An administrator or executor may redeem the land of the deceased; 10 either a trustee or his cestui que trust that of the trust estate; 11 and a guardian is entitled to redeem land of his which gave the right of redemption to the owner or owners. It was said that "any right, which in law or equity amounts to an ownership in the land; any right of entry upon it, to its possession, or enjoyment, or any part of it, which can be deemed an estate in it, makes the person the owner, so far as it is necessary to give him the right to redeem." This language was adopted in Adams v. Beale, 19 Iowa 61. See generally, OWNER, vol. 17, p. 299. 1. A person holding a deed for an unassigned right of dower in certain real estate, has such an interest as entitles him to redeem the same from a tax sale. Rice v. Nelson, 27 Iowa 48. 2. One may redeem who holds under a title bond of a donation claim. Rich v. Palmer, 7 Oregon 133. 3. Cowdry v. Cuthbert, 71 Iowa 733; Campbell v. Packard, 61 Wis. 88. The beneficiary of a deed of trust executed by way of collateral security may redeem. Elliott v. Shaffer, 30 W. Va. 347. Thus, a bankrupt, under act of Congress, may redeem land which belonged to him before going into bankruptcy, where the right is given to the "owner." Hampton v. Rouse, 22 Wall. (U. S.) 264. 4. Cooley on Taxation (2d ed.), p. 538. 5. Lancaster v. County Auditor, 2 Dill. (U. S.) 478. 6. Jamison v. Thompson, 65 Miss. 516 (under Mississippi Code II 531, giving the right to the " or any person for him "). Owner 7. If the tax is assessed to known," the real owner may redeem. Redemption by Agent.-Houston v. 8. See IMPLIED TRUSTS, vol. 10, p. 9. Foster v. Bowman, 55 Iowa 237; 11. The trustee can redeem, if he acts wards. The holder of the equitable title,2 such as one holding under title bond or agreement to convey, may redeem; 3 so may a judgment or other lien creditor,4. a purchaser at a sheriff's sale,5 or subsequent tax sale; 6 or one holding a power of attorney to sell the land. The lessee, as well as the lessor, may redeem.8 A husband may redeem his interest in land belonging to his wife,9 Corbett v. Nutt, 10 Wall. (U. S.) 464; 18 Gratt. (Va.) 624. Where A verbally admitted that lands held by him by a title apparently absolute were in fact held in trust for B, and A conveyed them to C upon a parol trust in favor of B, it was held that B could redeem. Karr v. Washburn, 56 Wis. 303. 1. Witt v. Mewhirter, 57 Iowa 545. But the production from the possession of the guardian, of an unacknowledged deed of land sold after the tax sale, is not prima facie evidence of ownership in the minor, entitling him to redeem. Walker v. Sargent, 47 Iowa 448. 2. Plumb v. Robinson, 13 Ohio St. 304. See also McKee v. Spiro, 107 Mo. 452. 3. Woodward v. Campbell, 39 Ark. 580; Rogers v. Rutter, 11 Gray (Mass.) 410; Rich v. Palmer, 7 Oregon 133. A vendor who has given a title bond may redeem to protect his interest. He will have a lien on the land for the money thus paid. Braley v. Langley, 28 Kan. 804. 4. Bacon v. Curtiss, 2 Root (Conn.) 39; Basso v. Benker, 33 Lȧ. Ann. 432. Having redeemed, he may recover the amount paid from his debtor. Ward v. Matthews, 80 Cal. 343. A lien creditor is "an owner of the land" within the statute stating who may redeem. Schenck v. Peay, 1 Dill. (U. S.) 267. A judgment creditor cannot redeem by advancing the amount of his judgment upon a purchaser's bid at a tax sale. Russell v. Dodson, 6 Baxt. (Tenn.) 16. Where land upon which several persons have liens is redeemed by one of them, the title to, and liens upon, the land, stand thereafter in the same condition as though no sale for taxes had taken place. Ellsworth V. Low, 62 Iowa 178. Where the holder of a judgment procures a tax title to the land of the debtor, which he agrees shall be subject to redemption on paying the amount of his judgment, other claimants can redeem only on these terms. Jordan v. Brown, 56 Iowa 281. In Louisiana, a creditor, even though not a mortgagee or lien creditor, may redeem. Basso v. Benker, 33 La. Ann. 432. 5. Byington v. Walsh, 11 Iowa 27. In this case it was held that it made no difference whether his purchase was before or after the tax sale. Where property has been sold at a sheriff's sale and the purchaser put in possession, and the alleged debtor surrenders possession and pays rent, he cannot redeem the property. Whitaker v. Ashbey, 43 Là. Ann. 117. A purchaser at a sheriff's sale, of the right of one in possession, may redeem, though he shows no title in the former owner, who has been in possession for many years previous to the sale. Shearer v. Woodburn, 10 Pa. St. 511. If the sheriff's sale is afterwards set aside, the purchaser has a lien upon the land for money which he has paid to redeem it from tax sale. Harlan v. Jones, 104 Ind. 167. 6. A purchaser at a tax sale under the act of Congress for non-payment of a direct tax may redeem a prior sale by a state officer. McBride v. Hoey, 1 P. & W. (Pa.) 54. 7. McCord v. Burgantz, 7 Watts (Pa.) 487; Townshend v. Shaffer, 30 W. Va. 176. 8. The lessee of property sold for taxes is an owner within the meaning of section 505, Iowa Code (1851), and as such is entitled to redeem, though his interest is acquired after the sale, and the redemption is made without the knowledge or authority of the owner of the fee. Byington v. Rider, 9 Iowa 566. 9. Dubois v. Hepburn, 10 Pet. (U. S.) 1. The North Carolina statutes provide that when a person "seised, as tenant by curtesy or dower, as tenant for life, or in right of his wife,” of land which is sold for taxes, shall fail to redeem the same within a year, the land shall be forfeited to the person "next in title in remainder or reversion," who may redeem within a year from such forfeiture. It is held that the homestead allotted to a widow during widowhood" in lieu of dower, and so, on the same principle, a wife may redeem her interest in her husband's land.1 The title of one redeeming need not be perfect; thus, a corporation, holding under irregular condemnation proceedings, may exercise the right.2 The one to whom the land was assessed may redeem, and the purchaser cannot object on the ground that such redemptioner has no interest.3 c. MORTGAGEES.-A mortgagee's title is sufficient to enable him to redeem the mortgaged premises.+ may be redeemed by the person next in title when the widow allows it to be sold for non-payment of taxes. Tucker v. Tucker, 108 N. Car. 235. 1. A wife may redeem her right in a homestead. Adams v. Beale, 19 Iowa 61; Pfiffner v. Krapfel, 28 Iowa 27. A doweress may redeem. Rice v. Nelson, 27 Iowa 148. 2. After land was sold for taxes, a railroad company condemned and took possession of a right of way over it. It was held that the railroad company had a right to redeem from the tax sale, and to personal service of notice to redeem; and this, although the condemnation proceedings were carried on without notice to the purchaser at the tax sale. Garmo v. Sturgion, 65 Iowa 147. 3. Townshend v. Shaffer, 30 W. Va. 176. 4. The mortgagee of record at the time of tender may redeem, though he did not hold the record title at the time of the tax sale. land, 136 Mass. 267. Hawes v. How The right of redemption exists in the mortgagee independent of statute. Lloyd v. Bunce, 41 Iowa 660; Leitzback v. Jackman, 28 Kan. 527; Montgomery v. Burt, 31 La. Ann. 330; Shannon v. Lane, 33 La. Ann. 489; Rondez v. Buras, 34 La. Ann. 1245; Ellsworth v. Low, 62 Iowa 178; Griffith v. Utley, 76 Iowa 292; People v. Edwards, 56 Hun (N. Y.) 377; Šidenberg v. Ely, 90 N. Y. 257; 43 Am. Rep. 163. A mortgagee is an "owner," within the meaning of the term as used in redemption statutes. Alter Shepherd, 27 La. Ann. 207. υ. The purchaser at a sale under a deed of trust given to secure a debt may redeem. Giraldin v. Howard, 103 Mo. 40. A mortgagee may redeem before condition broken. Plumb v. Robinson, 13 Ohio St. 304. One who lends his credit to enable another to redeem, gets no title, although the act acknowledging the loan expressly subrogates him to the owner's rights. Cambon v. Lapene, 40 La. Ann. 557. See generally, MORTGAGES, Vol. 15, p. 819. The holder of a mortgage given to secure from liability as surety, who has received from the mortgagee money to apply on the amount needed to redeem, has sufficient interest to enable him to exercise the right of redemption. Elliott v. Shaffer, 30 W. Va. 347. The heir of a mortgagee may redeem. Burton v. Hintrager, 18 Iowa 348. Redemption by the mortgagee under the charter of Jersey City, inures to the benefit of both mortgagor and mortgagee. Duncan v. Smith, 31 N. J. L. 325. Where the assignee of a mortgage land acquired a tax title to protect his mortgage security, which tax title he assigned, it was held that the assignee was chargeable with notice of the equities of the mortgagor who was in possession of the land, and that the mortgagor was entitled to redeem. Ragor v. Lomax, 22 Ill. App. 628. Land Security for Amount Paid.-If the mortgagee redeems, he can add the amount to the mortgage debt, both being equally secured by the land. Burr v. Veeder, 3 Wend. (N. Y.) 412; Eagle F. Ins. Co. v. Pell, 2 Edw. Ch. (N. Y.) 631; Marshall v. Davies, 78 N. Y. 414; Sidenberg v. Ely, 90 N. Y. 257. Effect of Tender by Mortgagee. If the mortgagee makes tender, but the purchaser refuses the money, the former may enforce the mortgage. Montgomery v. Burton, 31 La. Ann. 330. Mortgagee's Successors in Interest.If the mortgagee is dead, his administrator may redeem the land, Ellsworth 7. Low, 62 Iowa 178; and so may his heir, Burton v. Hintrager, 18 Iowa 348. And where he assigns the mortgage, without having had notice of the sale, the assignee may redeem. Faxon v. Wallace, 98 Mass. 44. Guardian as Mortgagor.-Where a d. PAYMENT BY STRANGER.-A person having neither right nor interest in the land cannot redeem.1 While there is a conflict in the decisions, the more generally accepted rule is that tender or payment by a stranger to a public official, does not inure to the benefit of the true owner, but that such payment or tender has no effect upon the title.2 If, however, the purchaser himself accepts the money, he cannot afterwards set up his title, but the redemption is complete and operative, and an assignment by the purchaser afterwards passes nothing.3 In case a payment inures to the owner's benefit, the one making it cannot withdraw the money after the time for redemption has passed, and thus defeat the owner's right.4 e. PART OWNERS.-As redemption does not create a new title, but merely cuts off the right of the purchaser, it follows that any redemption operates in favor of all the former owners.5 The owner of a portion of the land sold may redeem, but he must redeem the whole, if it was properly included in one sale, guardian holds a mortgage upon lands in trust for his ward, the ward has such an interest therein as will entitle him, or the guardian in his behalf, to redeem the land from the tax sale. Wilt υ. Newhirter, 57 Iowa 545. 1. Byington v. Buckwalter, 7 Iowa 512; 74 Am. Dec. 279; Penn v. Clemans, 19 Iowa 372; Lynn v. Morse, 76 Iowa 665; Wood v. Welpton, 29 Fed. Rep. 405; Rutledge v. Price County, 66 Wis. 35. And see Whitaker Ashley, 43 La. Ann. 117; Eaton v. North, 25 Wis. 514; Cousins v. Allen, 28 Wis. 232. The words "or other v. person in a statute enumerating those who may redeem, do not include those having no interest. Rutledge v. Price County, 66 Wis. 35. A person claiming under a tax sale, which is void, cannot redeem from a prior sale. McBride v. Hoey, 2 Watts (Pa.) 436; Byington v. Buckwalter, 7 Iowa 512; 74 Am. Dec. 279; Penn v. Clemans, 19 Iowa 372; Staples v. Mayer, 44 La. Ann. 628; McBride v. Hoey, 2 Watts (Pa.) 436; Trego v. Huzzard, 19 Pa. St. 441; Huzzard v. Trego, 35 Pa. St. 9. By means of forgery, one procured an assignment of tax certificates to himself. It was held that he could not found a right of redemption on this. Wood v. Welpton, 29 Fed. Rep. 405. 2. A son-in-law of the owner of the land is not entitled to redeem for his own benefit, but a redemption by him will inure to the benefit of the owner. Dixon v. Hockady, 36 S. Car. 60. If one not the owner redeems, the redemption inures to the benefit of the owner, even though the redemptioner intended to act for himself upon an adverse claim of title. Jamison v. Thompson, 65 Miss. 516. See also Greene v. Williams, 58 Miss. 752. 3. 2 Desty on Taxation, p. 880; Cooley on Taxation (2d ed.), p. 540; Burroughs on Taxation, § 125; Orr v. Cunningham, 4 W. & S. (Pa.) 294. The purchaser need not receive the money; if he does so, he is estopped from setting up his title. Coxe v. Sartwell, 21 Pa. St. 480. Land was assessed as a whole tract, but before sale it was subdivided into lots. One of the lots was owned by one person in severalty before the assessment, but was not assessed separately to the owner. The owner of the remaining lots redeemed the whole. It was held that such redemption inured to the benefit of the owner of the single lot. Alexander v. Ellis, 123 Pa. St. 81. 4. Levick v. Brotherline, 74 Pa. St. 149. 5. People v. McEwen, 23 Cal. 54; Busch v. Huston, 75 Ill. 343; Burnes v. Byrne, 45 Iowa 285; Ellsworth v. Low, 62 Iowa 178; Hurley v. Hurley, 148 Mass. 444; Maul v. Řider, 51 Pa. St. 377. Where the whole tract of unseated land is assessed in a body, and sold for taxes, the payment of the redemption money by one who owns a large share of the tract, divests the title of the purchaser to the whole. Alexander v. Ellis, 123 Pa. St. 81. After a co-tenant has redeemed, a |