Shipman

Action to foreclose a street assessment in San Francisco.

The plaintiff offered in evidence the original assessment, diagram, warrant, and affidavit of demand and non-payment, to which defendants objected upon the ground that the warrant was not dated. The warrant is in the following form: —

The court excluded the evidence, and rendered judgment for the defendants, and this ruling is now assigned as error. •

Section 10 of the act of 1872 (Stats. 1872, p. 813), under which the proceedings were had, directs the superintendent of public streets, highways, and squares to attach to the assessment a warrant, which shall be signed *574 by him. and countersigned by the auditor, and prescribes the form of the warrant. In this form, after giving the body of the warrant, its date and authentication are prescribed as follows:—•

The warrant issued in the present case follows the prescribed form, except in the matter of its date.

The words, “ San Francisco, 1885,” cannot be considered as a compliance with the statutory requirement that the warrant be dated. Other portions of the statute show that the “ date ” which the warrant is to contain includes the month and the day of the month, as…