Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-05-04


constitutional proprety or validity in any way con-
stuonai question, whether the process which may be
apphed 10 the case be simple or compound process
many processes since, in the end may ALWAYS be seen
whether the result be that which has aimed at
~ The nearest practicable approach precise Justice
and relative equality. The committee indeed are of
opinion, in this case, tina, the simplest and most obvo
way OF proceeding is also The and constitutional way
10 e II appears that, in carrying into effect this part of
the constitution the first thing naturally TO be done is 10
decide ON the whole number of which the House is TO be
conpOSc as when under the clause of the consti-
.nuon TAX TO be apporioned among the States the
amount OF TIC whole eN Is, in the first place. be settled
When the whole number of the proposed House is thus
a>ccrlmned and fixed, becomes the entire
power OF all the people in the Union. II is then very
power each State is entitled 10 by its numbers If for
example The House 10 conton 2i0 mcinberS then the
number 2io expresses the representative power of all the
STATES; and plain calculation readily shows how much
oil this po' er belongs TO each State This portion il is
ule vi" not always, nor often, be expressed in whole
numbers but II may always be precisely exhibited bv
uccH form OF expression. II the potion of any State
DC Seo or never one exact tenth one exact fifteenth
or one exact twentieth, it will still always be cnpobc of
prise ueciinai expression one-tenth and two hun.
dredlhs, one-twelnh aud four hunlrchs one. fifteenth
n" SIX hhIredthS, and so ON and the portion OF
e state being thus decinaliy expressed will always
SHOW, TO mathematical certainly, what integral numbc,
comes nearest TO such exact portion For eXamnle i'm
iiouSe conNiSingo 30 members, the mathematical
proportion To which her numbers entlc the State of New
Nork Is IS 3D. iii certain therefore that IS is ;hc in,c
graz or hoie number nearest TO her proportion of the
representative power OF the Union Nhv then sbouIJ
She Is not quite entitled hirv-nine; that nuIpbcr !,
something more than her right But allowing her thirty.
nc, from hc-necesSiy Ggiyng her whole numbers and
because that is the whole number is not the con.
shtuton fully obcycd when she has received the thirty
@ ine"oeE Is not her proper number Of representa-
hves then npporoned 90 her, as may be? And
not the constitution dSregared when the bill goes fur
ther and gives her iorcth member? For what such
orticth member given? Not for her absolute numbers:
Tor her absolute numbers not cn,ite her 10 hrv;nc
NOT Tor the sake OF apporonng her members TO her num-
ocrs as near as may be, because hirtynnc is nearer
Is gwen say The advocates of The m because the process
"hich has been adopted gives H. The answer is no such
process IS enjolncd by the constitution.
The case Of New York may be compared or contras,ed
with that OF Missouri. The exact proportion of Missouri
IN general representation of 2i0 is two and six enhs
ta Is 10 say II comes to three Than TO tyo
ycit IL confined TO two. But why is not Missouri emf.
cd To that number oil representatives. which comes nearest
10 her proportions Is the constitution fulfilled nc
10 hcr, Willie That number is withheld, and while at tho
same tine ia another State, only that nearest
OCT gwen Du am additional member given also Is
II an answer with which the people of Missouri ouobi IN
DC sCu' "heh II Is said that this Obvious injustice is the
necessary result OF the process adopted by the b Nav
y nor say win propey, that since three is the nearest
M"o'c number 10 ther exact right, 10 that number
they are entitled, and the process which derives them oC
mus, ne wrong process A similar comparison might
be made between New York and Vernon Tho ga,
proportion 10 which Vermont is entitled in renrcscn,a
ton OF 2lO, is 56l6. Her nearest whole number there
ore' would be SIX Now, two things are undeniablv true.
iirS 'hat TO take away the iOreth member from Now
ork, would bring her representation nearer TO her
proportion than 1t stands by leaving her that foroth
IHciluef' second, that giving the member. thus IA
ken from new orE, TO Vermont, would bring her re-
presentation nearer TO her right than iii bv the bill
And both these propositions equally true Of transfer
OF the twenty eighth member assigned nv the bi 10
Pennsylva TO Delaware, and OF the thirteenth Nom
her assigned TO Kentucky, TO Missouri in other words
vermont mas by her numbers, more right TO six members
Than New York has to forty Delaware BY her numbers
has more right to two members, than Pennsylvania has to
twenty eight; and Missouri by her numbers has p,ora
mght 10 three members, than Kentucky has 10 thirteen
without disturbing the proposed number of the House the
mere changing OF these three members from and TO the
SIX States respectively, would bring the representation of
each oil the whole six their due proportion c
cordng To their respective numbers than the bill in lis
present form, makes In the face of this indisputabe
TRUTH now can 1t he said that the bill apporons ese mem
bers among those States according their
bcrs, as near as may be?
Inc principle on which the proposed amendment is
founded Is @n eectual corrective for aud all other
equally great inequalities. 1t may be applied at al times
and IN all cases. and its result will always be the nearest
approach to perfect Justice 1t is equally simple and i'm
para AS rule OF apporionmen il is little other than
transcript of the words of the constitutions and its re-
suits are maihematicay certain The constitution as
the committee understand it, says representatives shall bo
apporoned among the States according TO their rcsnective
numbers oil people, as may be. The rule adopted
ny the committee, says, out OF the whole number of The
house tha number shall be apportioned each State
whG comes nearest to IFS exact right according TO its
number OF people.
Where is the rcpugnancy between the constitution and
the ruIe The arguments against the rule seem TO assume
that there is necessity OF INSULTING some process adon
ting some number the ratio or as that number of peo
pie which each member shall be understood to represents
whatever, than simply the ascertainment of that 1itdn
out OF the whole mass Of the representative power which
each State may claim.
But it is said that, although State mayreccive num-
Der oil representatives. which is something less than its ex
act proportion OF representation, yet that can in no case
consiitu'ionaly receive How is this propo,ition
provcd I!owis il shown that the constitution il less
perfectly fulfilled by allowing State small excess than
by suhccng her TO a large deficiency? What the con-
suton requires is the practicable approach 70
precise Justice The rule is approximations and we ouebt
to approach, therefore, whichever side we can
nearest.
But there is still 4 conclusive answer 10 he oivep
TO this suggestion The whole number of representatives.
OF which the House i be composed is fnecessitv IL
nted. This number, whatever il is, is that which
is TO be apporiioncd, and nothing else can be an
pOrtioncd. This is the whole sum TO he DISTRIBUTED
III therefore, IN making the apporionment some States
receive less than their just share it must necessarily fol-
low that some other States have received more than their
just share lfthere be State in the Union with Ices
than its right, other State has more than lis reb
that the argument, whatever he its force appos t Tho
bill in its present form, strongly can ever apply 10
any bill rig
But The objection most usually urged against tho nri,
cipe oil the proposed amendment is that it provides for
the representation of fractions. Let this objection he ~
amined and considered Let be ascertai1ed i'm the first
place, what these fractions, fractional numbers or resi-
duary numbers really are, which il said will be repre
scented should the amendment prevail.
fraction is the broken part of some INTEGRAL nu,obor
II is therefore, relative dcrvavc idea II imulics
the previous existence of fixed number of which il
is but part remainder. II there be no necessity for
liking establishing such previous number then the ac
ton resulting from it, is itself no matter of necesy bu