REVENUE AND TAXES. 2593

court, out of which the purchaser shall be repaid the purchase money paid
by him to the collector on said rejected sale, and all taxes assessed on said
real estate and paid by the purchaser since said sale and all costs and
expenses properly incurred in said court, with interest on all such sums
from the time of payment; and if the purchaser has not paid the purchase
money or the subsequent taxes said proceeds shall be applied to the payment
of the taxes for which said real property may have been sold, and all
subsequent taxes thereon then in arrear with interest on the same according
to law and the cost of the proceedings; but such sale shall not be set aside
if the provisions of law shall appear to have been substantially complied
with; and the burden of proof shall be on the exceptant to show the same
to be invalid. The aforegoing provisions of this section shall not apply
to Garrett and Talbot Counties.

Where property is erroneously sold for taxes in any of the counties of
the State of Maryland through an error in description, or for any other
reason, the parties purchasing said property at tax sales shall be entitled
to the same rate of interest as if the sale was made in due and proper form,
and whenever an error is discovered at any tax sale, as aforesaid, the
county treasurer or the commissioners of any county in which there is no
treasurer shall make payment to the purchaser of the property sold at said
tax sale upon his transferring to them his certificate of purchase at such
sale from any funds in their hands.

The effect of an order of ratification by circuit court is to relieve purchaser from
onus of proving in first instance regularity of proceedings, that is, to establish
for him a prima facie case. Guisebert v. Etchison, 51 Md. 488; McMahon v. Crean,
109 Md. 665; Richardson v. Simpson, 82 Md. 159; Baumgardner v. Fowler, 82 Md.
638; Cooper v. Holmes, 71 Md. 26; Stewart v. Meyer, 54 Md. 466.

No appeal being provided by this section from action of circuit court, no appeal
lies. Hull v. Southern Development Co., 89 Md. 11; Magraff v. Cunningham, 57
Md. 589; Meyer v. Steuart, 48 Md. 425.

Although judge makes a preliminary examination to ascertain whether collector's
proceedings have been regular, yet order for publication is not final and all questions
touching validity of sale properly arise upon final hearing for ratification. Prince
George's County v. Clarke, 36 Md. 222.

A tax sale and proceedings under which it took place, held to be governed by the
local law applicable to Baltimore city, but report of sale and proceedings thereafter,
to be governed by sec. 63 of art. 81 of the Code of 1860. If judge finds upon pre-
liminary examination that proceedings are not regular, he may set the sale aside
without the notice by advertisement. Ex parte Tax Sale of Lot 172, 42 Md. 198.

A sale will be set aside if the collector sells more land than is reasonably sufficient
to pay taxes and charges thereon, where a division is practicable without injury.
Magraff v. Cunningham, 57 Md. 587. And see Dyer v. Boswell, 39 Md. 471.

For a sale set aside because description of property in advertisement was mis-
leading and insufficient, see Richardson v. Simpson, 82 Md. 159. And see Baum-
gardner v. Fowler, 82 Md. 631. Cf. Cooper v. Holmes, 71 Md. 29.

For a case involving the relief in equity granted the owner in case of an invalid
tax sale, and conditions imposed upon such owner, see Steuart v. Meyer, 54 Md. 467.

Neither under this section nor under sec. 59 is the collector required to pay out
proceeds of sale (over and above taxes), under an audit of court, and hence it
does not appear that court has any power to state an audit. Suit on collector's bond;
variance. State v. Wilson, 107 Md. 134.

See notes to secs. 58 and 59.