vided into two circuits each, and provision made for the election of a circuit judge in each circuit, and by 20 G. A., ch's 19 and 181, the sixth and fourth districts, respectively, are similarly subdivided. By 19 G. A., ch. 56, it is further provided that in judicial circuits wherein a city is situated, containing a population in excess of twenty-two thousand and three hundred, by the U. S. census of 1830, an additional circuit judge shall be elected, and by 20 G. A., ch. 18, a similar provision is made as to the second judicial districs. In other cases, a circuit judge is elected in each judicial district. (See Code, § 586, and above acts in connection therewith, in supplement to page 156.) The new circuits created are constituted as follows: 1ST DISTRICT: 1st Circuit, Lee and Henry counties. 2nd Circuit, Des Moines and Louisa counties. 4TH DISTRICT: 1st Circuit, Lyon, O'Brien, Sioux, Osceola and Plymouth. 2nd Circuit, Woodbury, Monona, Harrison and Cheroke, 5TH DISTRICT: 1st Circuit, Polk and Warren counties. 2nd Circuit, Madison, Adair, Guthrie and Dallas counties. 6TH DISTRICT: 1st Circuit, Poweshiek, Keokuk, Washington and Jef ferson. 2nd Circuit, Jasper, Marion and Mahaska. 7TH DISTRICT: 1st Circuit, Clinton and Jackson counties. 2nd Circuit, Scott and Muscatine counties. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. 19 G. A., ch. 163, divides the state into eleven congressional districts, constituted of counties as follows: 1st. Lee, Des Moines, Henry, Van Buren, Jefferson, Washington and Louisa. 2nd. Jones, Jackson, Clinton, Cedar, Scott and Muscatine. 3rd. Dubuque, Delaware, Buchanan, Black Hawk, Bremer, Butler and Grundy. 4th. Clayton, Fayette, Winneshiek, Allamakee, Howard, Mitchell, Floyd and Chickasaw. 5th. Marshall, Tama, Benton, Linn, Johnson and Iowa. 6th. Jasper, Poweshiek, Mahaska, Monroe, Wapello, Keokuk and Davis. 7th. Guthrie, Dallas, Polk, Adair, Madison, Warren and Marion. 8th. Clark, Lucas, Ringgold, Decatur, Wayne, Appanoose, Union, Adams, Page and Taylor. 9th. Pottawattamie, Cass, Mills, Audubon, Crawford, Montgomery, Shelby, Fremont and Harrison. 10th. Boone, Story, Hardin, Hamilton, Webster, Franklin, Wright, Humboldt, Hancock, Cerro Gordo, Worth, Winnebago and Kossuth. 11th. Lyon, Osceola, Dickinson, Emmet, Sioux, O'Brien, Clay, Palo Alto, Plymouth, Cherokee, Buena Vista, Pocahontas, Woodbury, Ida, Sac, Calhoun, Monroe, [Monona], Carroll and Greene. [Secs. 13 and 14 of the act in relation to election of representatives__in Congress, are inserted in supplement to page 169.] STATE SENATORIAL DISTRICTS. [Nineteenth General Assembly, Chapter 162.] SEC. 1. One senator for forty-six thousand inhabitants is hereby constituted the ratio of apportionment. SEC. 2. Each senatorial district shall be entitled to one senator, and every county and district which shall have a number of inhabitants equal to one-half the ratio fixed in the first section hereof, shall be entitled to one senator. [The act then divides the state into senatorial districts, each entitled to one senator, and gives the counties and number of inhabitants in each, as follows:] 42,395 31st. Boone and Story... 37,744 32nd. Hardin and Grundy.. 30,448 33rd. Buchanan and Dela 34,859 | 30th. Polk.... Union.. 42,700 36th. Clayton... 28,829 7th. Fremont and Page.... 37,3:0 37th. Hamilton, Webster and Wright. 32,264 Ratio. SEC. 53. The change of any district shall not affect any senator during the term of office for which he has been elected. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICTS. [Twentieth General Assembly, Chapter 180.] SECTION 1. One representative for every sixteen thousand eight hundred and fifty inhabitants is hereby constituted the ratio of apportionments and each representative district shall be as hereinafter described. [The act then designates the counties constituting the respective districts, and the number of representatives to which each 18 entitled, as follows:] It is not inconsistent with this sec-ity to the obligation of an oath: tion to provide that the credibility of the evidence of a witness may be affected by the fact as to his sensibil ART. I, SEC. 9. Searcy v. Miller, 57-613, and see notes to § 3636. 1216. The right of trial by jury cannot be waived by the defendant in a criminal prosecution. The court has no jurisdiction without the jury to try such a case: State v. Carman, 18 N. W. Rep., 691. It is herein contemplated that the legislature may provide for trial by jury of less than twelve, in inferior ART. I, SEC. 10. courts, irrespective of the right of appeal to a higher court in which a trial before a jury of twelve may be had. The admission of the state with a constitution containing this provision was an abrogation of the unlimited right of trial by common law jury found in the ordinance of 1787: Higgins v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 60-50. 1218. The provisions of § 1401 as to method of determining the question of sanity by commissioners are not in violation of this section: County of Blackhawk y. Springer, 58-417. The admission in evidence upon a criminal trial of testimony of wit nesses given in a preliminary examination, which witnesses have since died, is not in violation of the right to be confronted by witnesses under this section: State v. Fitzgerald, 19 N. W. Rep., 202. 1220. ART. I, SEC. 18. Advantages to the land resulting | deterioration in value: Britton v. D. from its better drainage will not be M., O. & S. R. Co., 59-510. taken into account in estimating the ART. I, SEC. 26. 1223. [By the Nineteenth General Assembly (Joint Resolution No. 8) the following proposed amendment was agreed to, as having already been in due form agreed to by the previous general assembly (18 G. A., Joint Resolution, No. 8). By 19 G. A., ch. 172, (in pursuance of a previous statute authorizing submissions of constitutional amendments at special elections, 19 G. A., ch. 7, inserted in supplement to page 1247) this proposed amendment was submitted to the people at a special election to be held June 27, 1882. By proclamation of the governor, dated July 29, 1882, this proposed amendment was declared adopted.] SEC. 26. No person shall manufacture for sale, or sell, or keep for sale, as a beverage any intoxicating liquors whatever, including ale, wine and beer. The general assembly shall by law prescribe regulations for the enforcement of the prohibition herein contained, and shall thereby provide suitable penalties for the violation of the provisions hereof. [y an amendment to the constitution proposed by the Seventeenth General Assembly (Joint Resolution, No. 5), and agreed to by the Eighteenth General Assembly (Joint Resolution, No. 6), and adopted by vote of the electors at the general election in 1880, the words "free white were stricken from the third line of this section.] ART. III, SEC. 29. 1228. For similar provisions as to ordi- | nances of a city, see § 489. ART. III, SEC. 30. A legalizing statute purporting to make valid the act of a city which it had no lawful power to do, held unconstitutional: Ind. School Dist. of Burlington v. City of Burlington, 60-500. As the legislature cannot, in view of this section, pass a special law for the amendment of the charter of a city, it follows that it cannot, after the passage of an ordinance not authorized by such charter, legalize it by special act: Stange v. City of Dubuque, 17 N. W. Rep., 518. A curative act legalizing the action of a county superintendent in attaching territory of one district township to another, without circumstances It is the design and intention of this provision that the proposed amendment should be so entered upon the journals that it can be known from an examination of such journals what it is that has been agreed to by the houses of the General Assembly; and such entry is the highest evidence of what the amendment is which is agreed to by each house. Therefore, where it appeared from the journal of the Senate of one General Assembly that the proposed amendment, as passed by it, was different from the same amendment as concurred in by the subsequent General Assembly, and submitted to and voted upon by the people, held, that it was not legally adopted and did not become a part of the constitution although the joint resolution of the General Assembly first acting upon the amendment, which was signed ART. XI, SEC. 3. by the presiding officers of the two houses and by the governor, and preserved in the office of the secretary of state, showed such amendment to be the same as that subsequently concurred in and submitted; also, held, that the recital in the joint resolution of the General Assembly which submitted said amendment to vote of the people that it had been agreed to by the previous General Assembly was not conclusive upon the court: Koehler v. Hill, 60-543. The provisions as to the amendment of the constitution are not simply directory, and the legislative department is not the sole judge as to whether or not they have been complied with, but the courts have jurisdiction to inquire into the question whether these requirements have been observed, and if not to declare the amendment invalid: Ibid. 1242. Bonds issued in payment of a valid judgment indebtedness which does not exceed the constitutional limitation at the time the judgment was rendered will not be invalid merely by reason of the indebtedness ex ART. XI, SEC. 6. ceeding the limitation at the time they are issued. The issue of such bonds does not increase the indebtedness: City of Sioux City v. Weare, 59-95. 1244. Where there was a failure to elect at which such office should have been a county officer at a general election | filled, and the incumbent held over, |