vided, is not displaced by a sale under a pre-existing which a statute provides is exclusive. See PROjudgment or decree. It attaches to the res without regard to individual ownership, and, when enforced by sale pursuant to the statute, the purchaser takes an unimpeachable title.¹ The right to redeem land sold for taxes is commonly reserved, and is favored by the policy of the law.2 Immunity from taxation is a personal privilege, not transferable except under express authority of the legislature; and the exemption does not necessarily attach to the property after it passes from the privileged owner.3 Unless exempted in terms which amount to a contract not to tax, the property, privileges and franchises of a corporation are legitimate subjects.4 Exemption of a corporation extends only to the property necessary for its business; otherwise, it could extend its immunity, and escape the common burden of government. An exemption granted an individual is a franchise which may be lost by acquiescence for a period of years. Property of the United States is exempt by the Constitution from taxation by a State." The necessities of government, the nature of the duties to be performed, and usage, have established a procedure in regard to the levy and collection of taxes which differs from proceedings in courts of justice, but which is still "due process of law." When levied by a city, for a public purpose, by authority of law, though some of the property assessed be farm lands, within the city, the State does not deprive the owner of his property without due process. Where the taking of property is in the enforcement of a tax, the proceeding is necessarily less formal than in other cases, and whether notice is necessary may depend on the character of the tax, and the manner in which its amount is determinable. To sustain an action to recover illegal taxes paid, it is necessary: that authority to levy be wholly wanting; that the money was actually received by the defendant; that payment was made under compulsion, to prevent the immediate seizure of his goods or the arrest of his person.10 The remedy 1 Osterberg v. Union Trust Co., 93 U. S. 428 (1876). Barrett v. Holmes, 102 U. S. 657 (1880), cases. Morgan v. Louisiana, 93 U. S. 222-24 (1876), cases; East Tennessee, &c. R. Co. v. County of Hamblen, 102 id. 274 (1880); Wilson v. Gaines, 103 id. 417 (1880); Memphis R. Co. v. Commissioners, 112 id. 617 (1884), cases. • North Missouri R. Co. v. Maguire, 20 Wall. 61 (1873). • Bank of Commerce v. Tennessee, 104 U. S. 496-97 (1881), cases. • Given v. Wright, 117 U. S. 648, 656 (1886). Van Brocklin v. Tennessee, 117 U. S. 153-80 (1886), cases. e Kelly v. Pittsburgh, 104 U. S. TS (1881), Miller, J. • Hagar v. Reclamation District, 111 U. S. 708 (1884); 18 F. R. 449-50 (1883), cases. 10 Dillon, Munic. Corp. § 940; Lamborn v. Commissioners, 97 U. S. 181 (1877); Union Pacific R. Co. v. Commissioners, 98 id. 541 (1878). TEST, 1. Compounds of tax are: tax-assessor, tax-certificate, tax-deed, tax-fund, tax-levy, tax-lien, tax-payer, tax receipt, tax-receiver, tax-sale, qq. v. Other common words are, taxable, non-taxable, taxables, qq. v. See ASSESS, 1; CHARTER, 2; CIRCULATION; COM MERCE; CORPORATION; DISTRICT, 2; DUTY, 2; ESCAPE, 2; FRANCHISE, 1; IMPAIR; IMPORT; IMPOST; INCOME; LEVY, 3 (1); LIST, 2; MANDAMUS; PRIVILEGE, 1; РвоCESS, 1, Due; RATE, 2; SALE; SCHOOL; SCRIP; SECTARIAN; STOCK, 3 (2); SUFFER; TONNAGE; WORSHIP. Within the meaning of an exemption law, one or more horses, with their harness and the vehicle to which they are customarily attached for use. 3 The animals which a householder or the head of a family uses in the business of providing for his family.4 In a statute allowing damages for injury from the condition of a highway, was held to include a horse driven with other horses unharnessed. Referring to turning out on meeting in a highway, may mean a vehicle, with animals drawing it, and used for loads instead of persons. A statute making a railroad company liable in damages for injuring "live-stock running at large" at a place where it should have fenced its track, was held to include a runaway "team," that is, two or more horses, oxen or other beasts, harnessed together to the same vehicle for driving." Team work. In a statute exempting from execution two horses kept and used for team work, means work done by a team as a substantial part of a man's business.& Teamster. One who drives a team; also, one who habitually drives a team, or is engaged in the business of teaming as a means of earning a livelihood. See CARRIER, Common; ROAD, 1, Law of. 1 Snyder v. Marks, 109 U. S. 189, 193 (1883), cases. See generally 18 F. R. 445-55 (1883), cases. 2 Seymour v. Over-River School District, 53 Conn. 509 (1885). On rights as between teacher and pupil, see 25 Cent. Law J. 339 (1887), cases. • Dains v. Prosser, 32 Barb. 291 (1860), cases; Brown v. Davis, 9 Hun, 44 (1876). • Wilcox v. Hawley, 31 N. Y. 653 (1864); 47 Barb. 497. • Elliott v. Lisbon, 57 N. H. 29-30 (1876), cases. • Hotchkiss v. Hoy, 41 Conn. 577 (1874). Inman v. Chicago, &c. R. Co., 60 Iowa, 462 (1883). Hickock v. Thayer, 49 Vt. 375 (1877). • See Brusie v. Griffith, 34 Cal. 306 (1867); Elder Williams, 16 Nev. 419 (1882); Story, Bailm. § 496.