Towns—Annexation op Territory—Vote op People—Constitutional Law—Delegation of Legislative Power.—The act of March 19, 1889, providing for the annexation of territory to incorporated towns and cities, does not in its provision for a vote by the people of the town or city, and also of the people of the territory to be annexed, comprise any unwarranted delegation of legislative power.

Id.—Limits op Legislative Power—Change op Municipal Boundaries.—The legislature is limited by the constitution to the enactment of general laws under which municipal corporations may be created or change their boundaries From the nature of things, it cannot by general laws fix the boundaries of municipal corporations. It can only provide by general laws a method whereby such boundaries may be fixed or changed. In the absence of any other constitutional limitation the legislature may adopt any method it sees fit.

Id.—Fixing op Boundaries op Territory to be Annexed—Question op Policy—Conclusive Determination op Legislature.—The fixing of the boundaries of the territory to be annexed is not a “municipal function,” within section 13 of article XI of the constitution. The constitution does not provide that this power can be conferred only on some legislative body, and not upon the electors of the locality to be affected; and, in the absence of such provision, the question whether it shall be given to one or the other is purely one of policy, upon which the determination of the legislature is conclusive.

Id.—Sufficiency op Notice—Vote op People—-Submission to Vote— Determination of Sufficiency op Petition.—The provision of the statute for notice of the election is a sufficient provision of notice. No notice of hearing of the submission to the vote of the people is required; nor is the statute unconstitutional because it does not require notice of the hearing ’of the determination by the council whether the petition is sufficiently signed, or describes the boundaries of the territory to be annexed with sufficient clearness.

Id.—Uninhabited Portions op Territory Annexed.-—The fact that portions of the territory annexed under the act of 1889 were uninhabited does not require that proceedings for such portions should ■ be had under the act of 1899 for the annexation of uninhabited territory, where the land annexed, taken as a whole, may be fairly said to be inhabited, since the act of 1899 expressly provides that “nothing in this act shall be deemed to repeal the provisions of any act now providing for the annexation of inhabited territory.”

In.—Petition por Annexation—Jurisdiction op Board op Trustees— Suppiciency op Signatures.—The duty of the board of trustees to determine whether or not a petition for an annexation election is signed by a sufficient number of electors is entirely implied from the fact that it has no power to order the election except upon a petition signed by that number. The statute does not in terms require such determination or require any record thereof to be made. It is the petition signed by the requisite number that gives the power and creates the duty, and not the determination by the board of the sufficiency ctf the petition.

Id.—-Minute Entry op Board.—The minute entry of the board need not show that the board received sworn evidence as to the genuineness of the signatures, or made any other investigation than such as may reasonably be implied from the words “taken up and discussed.” The statute makes no provision as to the character of the proof essential in such a ease.

Id.—Implied Finding Conclusive in Quo Warranto—Collateral Attack.—An implied fir dng is conclusive in a quo warranto proceeding, or in any case where the order of the board of trustees is collaterally attacked.

Id.—Regular Adjourned Meeting op Board—Action upon Petition— Support op Finding.—Held, that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding of the trial court that the petition of electors for the annexation election was received and acted upon at a regular adjourned meeting of the board of trustees, as shown by the minutes thereof, nothing appearing at the trial to the contrary.

Id.—Suppiciency op Notice op Election.—Where the resolution of the board of trustees provided for an election to be held in accordance with a notice of election which was complete in every respect, and formed part of the resolution, and instructed the clerk to have it printed according to law in certain specified papers, leaving nothing to his discretion, and the notice was given in the manner ordered by the board, and was signed by the acting president of the board, and attested by the town clerk, and published by order of the board and in conformity to the statute, the notice and publication thereof were sufficient to answer every requirement.

Id.—Form op Ballot—Notice—Substantial Compliance with Statute.—Where the statute provided what the notice should contain as to the form of the ballot as being “for annexation” or “against annexation, ” or “ words equivalent thereto, ’ ’ and the notice followed the statute, the fact that the ballots actually used contained the words “For annexation—Yes” and “For annexation— No” could not make them misleading, and the statute was substantially complied with.