404 



IOWA. 



ITALY. 



junction, restraining the Attorney - General 

 from prosecuting that company, and the State 

 Treasurer from paying out money for the sup- 

 port of such litigation. The question "brought 

 before Judge Dillon was that of making the 

 injunction perpetual. The ground on which 

 the injunction was asked was, that the company 

 had exclusive power to fix the measure of its 

 own compensation, and that the act of 1874 

 was a violation of its chartered rights. In de- 

 nying the injunction the learned judge said : 



Without further enlarging upon the public nature 

 and uses of railways, or undertaking to review the 

 authorities cited, or examine the positions assumed 

 by counsel, which would necessarily lead through a 

 broad field of discussion, I content niyself, on this 

 branch of the subject, with stating, as my conclusion, 

 that the Legislature has not expressly conferred on 

 railway corporations in this State the exclusive power 

 to fix their own charges ; that such a power cannot 

 be deduced by implication from the constituent act 

 of the corporations, and that whatever powers are 

 conferred in this respect are subject to an implied 

 condition that they shall not be oppressively or un- 

 reasonably exercised, and also subject to the future 

 exercise of the police regulations of the State or any 

 other power possessed by the State, property legisla- 

 tive in its nature, which includes the power to regu- 

 late, consistently with the charter, all of the fran- 

 chises granted, and to prescribe and limit the amount 

 of toll or charges which it shall be lawful to take. 



An appeal was taken from the decision to 

 the Supreme Court of the United States. 



In the case of Isaac Brandt, indicted for em- 

 bezzlement while Deputy State Treasurer, a 

 majority of the judges of the State Supreme 

 Court at the September term sustained a de- 

 murrer to the indictment, and reversed the 

 decision of the Circuit Court. The questions 

 discussed by Chief - Justice Miller, in giving 

 the opinion of the court, were, whether the 

 grand-jury that found the indictment was le- 

 gally constituted, whether the Deputy Treas- 

 urer was an " officer " in the meaning of the 

 law, and whether the indictment was suffi- 

 ciently explicit. The law requires that a list 

 of seventy -five persons to serve as jurors shall 

 be chosen in each county, to be apportioned 

 among the election precincts by the County 

 Auditor, and that, from these lists, the clerk 

 of the District Court and the sheriff of the 

 county shall make the draft of grand-jurors. 

 In 1874, when this indictment was found, no 

 return was made from one township, and the 

 jury-list had but seventy-three names, and in 

 drawing the grand -jury the deputy - sheriff 

 acted instead of the sheriff. The court de- 

 cided that the former defect was not material, 

 but the sheriff not acting, as required by law, 

 was fatal to the legality of the grand-jury. 

 It was also set up that selecting the foreman 

 from talesmen, and not from the regularly 

 drawn jurors, was illegal, but that point was 

 overruled. The claim that the Deputy State 

 Treasurer was not an officer, within the mean- 

 ing of'the law was not sustained, as the Treas- 

 urer was authorized by statute to appoint a 

 deputy who was required to take the regular 

 oath of office. The first count of the indict- 



ment charged that the defendant did " unlaw- 

 fully and feloniously loan without authority 

 of law the sum of two hundred and twenty- 

 nine thousand six hundred and ninety dollars 

 and forty cents" of the public money of the 

 State, which was in his charge for safe keep- 

 ing, etc. This was claimed to be insufficient, 

 as it did not state to whom the money was 

 loaned, or whether to one person, or in differ- 

 ent sums to different persons. The court sus- 

 tained this point as invalidating the indict- 

 ment. The second count charged the defend- 

 ant with converting five thousand dollars of 

 the public money to his own use, without stat- 

 ing how or in what manner it was converted. 

 This was also decided to be insufficient, as it 

 charged " a legal conclusion rather than a fact." 

 And finally, it was decided that the indictment 

 failed to charge the crime of embezzlement, 

 "for that it does not charge that any of the 

 public money, with the safe keeping of which 

 the defendant was charged, has been lost to 

 the State or unaccounted for." The opinion 

 of the Chief-Justice, in which these conclu- 

 sions were set forth, was fully concurred in by 

 Judge Cole. Judge Day concurred, except on 

 the points deciding the first and second counts 

 of the indictment insufficient in not giving par- 

 ticular circumstances. As to these he agreed 

 with Judge Beck, who submitted a dissenting 

 opinion, disagreeing altogether with the con- 

 clusions of Chief- Justice Miller. A motion 

 was made for a rehearing on the appeal in De- 

 cember, but was denied, Judge Cole giving the 

 opinion, which agreed substantially with that 

 formerly pronounced by Miller, and Judge 

 Beck submitting a dissenting opinion again. 

 The result was a complete failure of the prose- 

 cution of Brandt for embezzling the funds of 

 the State, under the indictment found in 1874. 



Judge 0. C. Cole of the Supreme Court ten- 

 dered his resignation on the 17th of Novem- 

 ber, to take effect January 17, 1876, giving as 

 his reason the inadequacy of the salary, four 

 thousand dollars a year, to the support of his 

 family. For ten years he had added to his 

 income by acting as Professor of Law, editing 

 the Western Jurist and a series of Iowa re- 

 ports, and by other labors, but the business of 

 the court had so increased as to leave him no 

 time for these pursuits, and he felt compelled 

 to resign. 



ITALY, a kingdom of Southern Europe. 

 King, Victor Emmanuel II., born March 14, 

 1820 ; succeeded to the throne of Sardinia, on 

 the abdication of his father, March 23, 1849; 

 proclaimed King of Italy by vote of an Italian 

 Parliament, March 17, 1861 ; married, April 12, 

 1842, to the Archduchess Adelaide of Austria; 

 widower January 20, 1855. Children of the 

 King: 1. Heir-apparent, Humbert, Prince of 

 Piedmont, born March 14, 1844 ; married, April 

 22, 1868, to Princess Margaretta of Genoa; 

 offspring of the union is a son, Victor Em- 

 manuel, Prince of Naples, born November 11, 

 1869. 2. Amadeo, Duke of Aosta, born May 



