Case ID: iowa_32/html/0594-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Beck, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of the annexation of Kingston to the city of Cedar Rapids.
    
      Appeal from, Linn Gi/rcuit Gov/rt
    Saturday, June 10.
    Certain voters of the town of Kingston filed their petition in the circuit court, asking that a specified portion of the township he annexed to the city of Cedar Rapids. May 12, 1869, the order of annexation as prayed for was made. In J une following, forty-four petitioners remonstrated by petition against annexation, and, by their attorneys, in January, 1870, moved the court to dismiss the proceedings on the grounds that no notice containing the substance of the petition had been published in any newspaper of general circulation, in Linn county or elsewhere, and because it is not shown that a majority of the electors had petitioned or voted for annexation. This motion was overruled and judgment accordingly rendered in the proceedings. The parties remonstrating appeal.
    
      Thompson & Damis for the appellants-
    
    -N. M. Subbard for the appellee.
   Beck, J.

The order of the court overruling appellant’s motion to dismiss, and the judgment granting the prayer of the petition for annexation, are assigned as errors. It is'. Insisted that the notice required by law in such cases does not appear to have been given, and that it is not shown that a majority of the electors consented, either by a vote or petition, to the annexation. But the abstract before us fails to disclose these alleged defects. Errors, as well as want of jurisdiction in the court, if either exist, must be made to appear affirmatively to authorize a reversal of the judgment of the court below. This is not done. The judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.