The Tipton advertiser. [volume] (Tipton, Cedar Co., Iowa) 1856-1962, 1865-12-21
iowa in the Committees.

Iowa, although,a new State, occupies
positions in the committees of the House
of Representatives which are course of
pride to all her citizens. Our own ex-
celleut member is chairman Of tho CON-
mittec on the Pacific Railroad. When
it is considered that this committee will,
10 great measure, supervise the expen.
diture Of millions of money in the con-
struction of this great National thorough.
fare, as we'll Is its construction, the
appointment is = great compliment to
Mr.. Prices intelligence, integrity and
thorough business qualifications. As far
as expenditures are concerned there is no
committee Of greater Importance.
Mr.. Wilson, of the I'd District, is
chairman of tho judiciary Committee,
which is really the most important com.
\ mittse in the House. Mr.. Kassor, Of
tho 9Th District, is chairman of the
committee on Coinage, Weights aud
Measures and Mr.. Hubbard, of the 9th,
is chairman of the committee on Public
Expenditures. Besides having the chair
man ON these four, Iowa is represented
on several other important committees.
While we are thankful to Mr.. Colfax for
thus remembering Iowa, he is no doubt,
thankful to US for furnishing him such
good material to make committeeman out
Of.
One reason for these appointments is
that Iowa has returned her old members.
Had she sent new men they would have
been put at the tail end of some unim-
portant committee and would have bad
no influence whatever. This illustrates
the system by which the South used TO
control the legislation Of Congress-
While the northern States favored rota.
ton in office, the southern, whenever
they found a good Congressman, re-
elected him till past his prime, and thus
managed to keep controlling influence.
The loyal States are beginning to profit
by their example, aud tho result is now
manifest in both Houses Of Congress.
n@-T the following is a report Of the
proceedings Of District Court at its last
term in criminal cases:
State vs.. schlipp-Defendaut indicted
for assault with intent to infict grea,
bodily ;.j..y. Acquitted on trial
State vs.. Joseph Carringer. Defend
ant is the father and bail of Anthony
) Carripger, who, at previous term, wat
! indicted for larceny, and failed to make
his appearance. His father, Joseph,
against whom judgment was rendered on
the bond, made his appearance, paid part
of the judgment, and acknowledged that
he as we'll as others hsd been deceived
by his son.
State vs.. James Brown. Indictmen It
for assault with intent to inhict great
bodily injury. Cause continued.
State vs. John D. Wheeler. Defend.
, ant bound to court by Justice Of the
Peace. for larceny. Dismissed by Grand
: Jury.
State vs.. George W. Harmon. Defend.
ant was indicted for assault with intcn,
!, to commit rape. On trial he was found
guilty Of assault and battery, and wal
sentenced to DO imprisoned in Jail thirty
days and pay fuo Of 500. On wha
theory the jury arrived at their verdic
no one is able to tell.
:. State vs.. Mckee and Perkins. APP
}. peal from Justice of the Peace. Appea
!. dismissed by District Court. The de
: PENDANTS, who made an attempt to arcs
}, a man found drunk on the streets, wer
. arrested for assault and battery. TIL
Justice found them not guilty, and tax
r ed the costs against the prosecuting wit
. ness. From the decision of the Justice
the prosecuting witness took an appeal
which was disposed Of as above stated.
State vs.. Joseph Templar. Defendant
va. found guilty Of assault and battery
and fined SIS aud costs.
State vs.. Joseph Walters and Frank
t Clark. The Grand Jury asked that th,
: cause be continued and the defendant.
held to bail for their appearance At the
, next sitting of the Grand Jury, for the
reason that they could not get the chief
: witness on account Of his absence having
8 been procured by the friends Of the de-
PENDANTS. It appearing to the court on
the showing Of defendants that the wit
: Dess was not absent or secreted, and that
! the State did not usc diligence, they
: we're discharged from custody on thsi'
q own recognizance.
, State vs. Burr King. Defendant was