Tisdale v. President of Minonk

Citations

• 46 Ill. 9

Syllabus

<p>1. Municipal Corporations—cannot be questioned collaterally. The doctrine is well established that a municipal corporation cannot be questioned collaterally concerning its legal organization.</p> <p>2. Former Decisions. President and Trustees of Mendota v. Thompson, 20 Ill. 197; Clark v. The People, 15 ib. 213; The same v. Ridgeley, 21 ib. 65.</p> <p>3. Jurisdiction—when and, where it must be questioned. In a proceeding commenced before a justice of the peace, for a violation of a town ordinance, if it be sought to question the justice’s jurisdiction because there was no complaint in writing, signed and sworn to, and no warrant issued thereunder, the objection should be made at the earliest moment in the justice’s court—it comes too late if made for the first time in the circuit court, on appeal</p> <p>4. Municipal Corporations—extent of power in a given case. Under the charter of the town of Minonk, the power is conferred upon the corporate authorities to declare by ordinance, that making loud and unusual noises to the disturbance of the quiet and peace of the town, and threatening or traducing, or challenging to fight, shall-constitute an offense, punishable by fine.</p> <p>5. Same—concerning the 'publication of ordinances- It is no objection, that the paper in which the ordinances of a town were published, was printed in another town, the proof showing that they were published the prescribed number of weeks required by law, and that such paper was the one of general circulation in the town enacting them,</p>