they should be required to show that it is money which they have a right to claim by virtue of a substantial compliance on their part with the law. School Directors v. School Trustees, 61A-89.

8. The collector, if he has not paid the money to the parties entitled, is still responsible to them. His action in paying to a wrong treasurer amounts to no payment so far as the proper claimant is concerned. He is responsible still to the proper claimant, and to him only should that claimant look. There is no privity between the district directors and the township trustees. Ibid.

§ 12. It is hereby made the duty of the proper officers in preparing blank books and notices for the use of assessors to provide columns and blanks for the use of assessors, so that they may designate the number of the school district, as provided for in section six (6) of this act.

§ 13. A failure by the directors to file their certificates, or of the township treasurer to return the same to the county clerk in the time required by this act, shall not vitiate the assessment, but the same shall be as legal and valid as if completed in the time required by law.

1. A failure of the school directors to make return of the amount to be levied within the time required, does not invalidate the tax; a failure to comply with the statute in this regard is a mere irregularity. Buck v. The People, 78-560; Moore v. Fessenbeck, 88-422.

8. The statute provides that no error or informality in the proceedings of any of the officers connected with the assessment, levying or collecting of the taxes, not affecting the substantial justice of the tax itself, shall vitiate or in any manner affect the tax or the assessment thereof. This statute has been liberally construed and repeatedly enforced by the decisions of the Supreme Court in upholding irregular assessments and levies of taxes. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company v. The People, 155–276.

ARTICLE IX.

BONDS.

SECTION 1. For the purpose of building school houses or purchasing school sites, or for repairing and improving the same, the directors of any school district, when authorized by a majority of all the votes cast at an election called for that purpose, may borrow money, issuing bonds signed by not less than two members of said board of directors, in sums of not less than $100.00, and bearing interest at a rate not exceeding 7 per centum, per annum: Provided, that the sum borrowed in any one year shall not exceed 5 per cent (including existing indebtedness) of the taxable property of the district, to be ascertained by the last assessment for State and county taxes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness. (As amended by an act approved April 24, 1899.)

1. The power given by the general school law to borrow money for the purpose of building school houses or purchasing school sites, embraces, no doubt, the power to purchase a school site having already a school house thereon. People v. Sisson, 98–335.

2. The power to borrow money for the purpose of building school houses or purchasing school sites, admits the giving of these bonds in exchange for the school property. The end accomplished is the same, whether the bonds be first sold and their proceeds be paid for the property, or the bonds themselves be given directly for it. Ibid.

3. Under this statute the school directors, in the absence of a vote of the people authorizing it, have no authority whatever to borrow money or issue bonds. The power to do this is granted only when the popular vote authorizes it. If a bond is issued without such a vote, it is a case, not of the defective execution of a power, but an entire absence of it. Board of Education v. Taft, 7A-571.

4. The recitals of the officers who are invested with the ministerial duty of issuing municipal bonds as to the legality of the election, authorizing their issue, and the existence of the facts necessary to their validity, will not render such bonds, when issued without authority of law, valid in the hands of even a bona fide holder, so as to estop the municipality from calling in question the authority of the officers to issue them. Ibid.

5. When the bonds of a school district, negotiated in the market to raise money to build a school house, recite that they have been issued in pursuance of a vote of the district legally had, and they are in the hands of innocent holders, it must be presumed that they are legal, and that their issue was authorized by a legal vote, until the contrary is shown by clear and satisfactory evidence. Accordingly, in a suit to enjoin the collection of a tax to pay such bonds, in the hands of innocent purchasers, the burden of proof is on the district to overcome the presumption of the legality of the bonds. Ibid; Bolton v. Board of Education, 1A-193, overruled.

6. Where a note is executed by school directors in their individual names for school purposes, a remedy exists at law against them as individuals. As against the district, the complainant is without remedy. School Directors v. Miller, 54-338.

7. Where promissory notes are issued by school directors for the purchase of a site, without a vote authorizing the same, as against the district, the holder of such notes is without remedy. But the notes being signed in the individual names of the directors, a remedy exists at law against them as individuals, and a complainant should resort to that mode for redress. It may be the school district would be liable over to the persons who signed the notes, on their showing that the avails were appropriated to the legitimate school purposes of the district. Ibid.

8. In an action against school directors in their corporate capacity, brought on a promissory note or a bond executed by them, the declaration should show an indebtedness contracted in the manner and for the purpose authorized by the statute, and on trial proof should be made of these facts. The note or bond would be admissible in evidence as tending to show the amount of money loaned, but either does not, of itself, prove a liability. School Directors v. Sippy, 54-287; School Directors v. Taylor, 54–289.

9. The assessment to be resorted to in ascertaining the extent to which a school district may lawfully become indebted is the last preceding assessment which has been completed by the final action of the State Board of Equalization. Wabash Railroad Company ▼. The People, 202–9.

10. An indebtedness created by a contract for a school house is valid to the amount within the constitutional limit, even though the directors have attempted by the contract to create an indebtedness greater than the district could lawfully incur. Ibid.

11. School directors having money in the treasury of their district which may be lawfully applied to the matter of building a school house, may devote such money to that purpose, and the district may, in addition thereto, become lawfully bound to pay an additional sum if the indebtedness of the district is not, by the agreement to pay such additional sum, increased to an amount exceeding 5 per centum of the valuation of the taxable property of the district.

Ibid.

12. School directors, when authorized by a vote of the people of the district, have power to borrow money for certain enumerated purposes, and to issue bonds to secure the same; but the sum borrowed in any one year shall not exceed 5 per centum of the taxable property of the district, including existing indebtedness, to be ascertained by the last assessment previous to incurring

such indebtedness. This is all the authority given directors in the matter of borrowing money, and it would appear to be a limitation upon their action in issuing bonds to sums of money actually received. No authority is given to issue bonds and place them on the market to be sold for what they may bring, or for anything less than their par value. Adams v. State of Illinois,

82-132.

13. Power to borrow money carries with it, at common law, the power to give evidence of the loan. But mere power to borrow money does not carry with it as an incident the power to execute a bond, or an instrument under seal. These words, therefor, authorizing the school directors to execute bonds for borrowed money, instead of being used as a limitation of the power and a declaration that they were incapable of borrowing money unless a bond be given, when properly construed are an enlargement of the power, authorizing the directors, not only to give those assurances which are necessarily incident to the power of borrowing money, but to go further and execute a higher grade of securities, to execute bonds under seal by which the directors might be bound. Folsom v. School Directors, 91-402.

§ 2. All bonds authorized to be issued by virtue of the foregoing section before being so issued, negotiated and sold, shall be registered, numbered and countersigned by the school treasurer of the township wherein the school house of such district is, or is to be located. Such registration shall be made in a "bond register" book to be kept for that purpose; and in this register shall first be entered the record of the election authorizing the directors to borrow money, and then a description of the bonds issued by virtue of such authority as to number, date, to whom issued, amount, rate of interest and when due.

§ 3. All moneys borrowed under the authority granted by this article of this act, shall be paid into the school treasury of the township wherein the bonds issued therefor are required to be registered; and, upon receiving such moneys, the treasurer shall deliver the bond or bonds issued therefor to the parties entitled to receive the same; and shall credit the funds received to the district issuing the bonds. The treasurer of said township shall enter in the said "bond register" the exact amount received for each and every bond issued. And when any such bonds are paid, the said township treasurer shall cancel the same and shall enter in the said "bond register," against the record of such bonds, the words "paid and cancelled the... day of...... filling the blanks with the day, month and year corresponding with the date of such payment. 1. The duties of school directors are derived exclusively from the statute, are specifically defined, and if they exercise powers and functions not conferred upon them, the statute has made them responsible for all losses that may ensue. They may borrow money for enumerated purposes, on terms prescribed, and when obtained, it is their duty to pay it over to the treasurer, who is the only proper custodian. Should they place it in the hands of any else, it is at their own risk. Adams v. State of Illinois, 82-132.

A. D......

2. A bond issued for an unauthorized purpose is void. A person taking bonds of a school district has access to the records of the board governing the same, and it is his duty to see that such instruments are issued in pursuance of authority, and when issued without power, they must be held void in whosesoever hands they may be found. Hewett v. Normal School District, 94-528.

3. Bonds made payable to one of the members of the board having charge and management of a school district are void. Such members are virtually trustees of the fund, and as such, are incapable of dealing with the fund as purchasers or donees. Ibid.

4. Where bonds are issued by a board of education, and a portion of them sold to members of the board, such portion is void, and a tax cannot be legally levied to pay interest thereon; neither can any interest be due on such bonds in the hands of such holders. A member of a board of education has no power to purchase such bonds for himself or for the board of which he is a member, and a tax levied to meet the interest thereon may be enjoined. Ibid. 5. Bonds given by the board of education of a school district to obtain money which was not borrowed or used for any purpose for which the board was authorized, by its charter, to borrow money or issue bonds, are void. Board of Education v. Blodgett, 155-441.

6. The fact that bonds are made payable at a bank in Chicago, does not invalidate them. The agreement to pay at that place is void, but the balance of the coupons and bonds are not rendered invalid for that reason. In paying interest the treasurer should not obey that agreement in the bond, but pay it at the treasury. Sherlock v. Village of Winetka, 68-530.

7.

Where bonds are issued, negotiated in the market and recite among other things, that they were issued in pursuance of, and under the sanction of a vote at an election legally held, and the bonds coming into the hands of innocent holders, the presumption must be indulged that they are legal, until that presumption is overcome by clear and satisfactory evidence. In such a case the burthen of proof is on the school district to overcome that presumption. Lemont v. Singer & Talcot Stone Company, 98-94.

8. That authority was voted to issue bonds may be shown by oral testimony. It would be wholly unreasonable and unjust to permit the people of a school district to vote to borrow money, issue bonds and obtain the money used in the erection of a school building, which is used and enjoyed by the people of the district, and then permit them to escape its payment, simply by the destruction of the records kept by their officers, either by accident or design. Ibid.

§ 4. Whenever it is desired to hold an election for the purpose of borrowing money, as provided for in this article of this act, the directors of the district in which such election is to be held shall give at least ten days' notice of the holding of such election, by posting notices in at least three of the most public places in such district. Such notices shall specify the place where such election is to be held, the time of opening and closing the polls, and the question or proposition to be voted upon, which notice may be substantially in the following form, viz:

NOTICE OF ELECTION.

.day of....

Public notice is hereby given that on.
A. D..... ...an election will be held at.

No.

in..

..school district

in township No......, range No......of the.... principal meridian ....county, Illinois, for the purpose of voting "For" or "Against" the proposition to issue the bonds of said school district No....... to the amount of.. ..dollars due (here insert the times

of payment, giving the amount falling due in each year, if the bonds mature at different days), which bonds are to bear interest at the rate of....per cent per annum, payable......annually.

The polls of said election will be opened at.....o'clock.....m., and will re main open until..... .o'clock.......m.

Dated this..

..day of..

A..

C.

E.

.A. D....

1. Too great precision ought not to be required in notices for elections of this character, where school officers are not supposed to be learned in the law nor versed in legal technicalities. If the notice is reasonably sufficient to inform the voter as to the purposes of the election and the matters to be voted on, the election should not be invalidated for want of absolute definiteness. Shires v. Irwin, 87A-111.

2. No more technical rules should be applied to such an election than an ordinary election. The general rule must prevail that if the intention of the voter can be fairly ascertained from his ballot, thongh not in strict conformity to the law, effect will be given to that intention. Ibid.

3.

Where a levy is made for building purposes, a special election having been held purporting to authorize the issuing of bonds for such purposes, and the notice of such election did not contain any statement or information that the question of issuing bonds for building a school house, or for any purpose, would be voted on at such election, such levy based on such pretended election would be void, and all orders drawn on the township treasurer in payment for building the same would be void even in the hands of assignees. Thatcher v. The People, 93-240.

4. Where the notices of an election under which bonds were issued did not, as required by statute, specify the questions upon which the voters of the district were required to vote, the election, and all proceedings under it, are void. A notice specifying a time and place of meeting, stating the object of it to be the establishment of a school in the district, and to provide means to pay for the same, but containing nothing relating to issuing bonds, is not in compliance with the statute. Thatcher v. The People, 98-632.

5. Where one was present and participated in the proceedings of a meeting or election held pursuant to improper notices, and which authorized the raising of money for which bonds were issued, the money having been thus obtained, in part, through his own instrumentality, and the district to which he belonged having had the benefit of it, under these circumstances he is estopped from questioning the regularity or validity of what was done under the authority of those proceedings. Ibid.

§ 5. At such election two of the directors of such district shall act as judges and one of said directors shall act as clerk. In case either or any of said directors shall fail, from any cause, to be present or to act at such election, at the time of opening the polls thereof, the legal voters assembled shall choose, from their number, persons to act as such two judges, and a clerk of said election. The said judges and the said clerk shall take and subscribe the oath required of judges and clerks of an election held for State and county officers, and such oath may be administered in the same manner as is or may be provided by law for administering the oath to judges and clerks at a State or county election. At such election all votes shall be by ballot. In districts which have adopted the provisions of "An act regulating the holding of elections, and declaring the result thereof in cities, villages and incorporated towns in this State," approved June 19, 1885, the said election shall be held under the provisions of said act.

1. From the provisions of the statute it is apparent for what purpose the directors of a school district may issue bonds, borrow money and incur a valid liability against the district they represent. It is only for the specified objects of building school houses or purchasing school sites, or repairing or or improving the same, that this power can be exercised at all, and then only by the consent and direction of the legal voters, formerly expresed, at an election for that purpose, called and conducted by the directors, as required by the statute. Bolton v. Board of Education, 1A-193.