The Ohio Democrat. [volume] (Canal Dover, Ohio) 1840-1900, 1844-02-15

atsio fnlllle Il to one Senator & two Representatives
bul ubrc than enough 70 enlle ii to one Senator and
one Representative have two or more such dis
ics You are fixing the representation for four years
M you giveo Of these districts two Representatives
his year and bul one nexycu give the other one Re-
pfesehlaiiri this year andtwo next Thus, in the four
yca taken together you allow each its full share OF
representation, and i is all the way can be done with
od division Of counties This too, has been prcnoun
eea unconstitutional fits great many members
ufhe whg party have violated the Constitution for it
heen shown from the laws read by the Senator from
Hamilton Mr Disney that ever since the number of
Senators and Representatives fixed at the constiti
tonal limits, there have been floating members BY
elaws Of 1924 Of 1923, Of 1892 1886, and 1910
i was So The law Of 1882 was passed when the po-
1ical friends of these gentlemen had majority m both
branches oflhe General Assembly. The law Of 1886
was passed in the House of Representatives by vote
5 50yeas to 10 nays and among those who voted in the
Affirmative were many shining lights in the gcntleinans
party. II the "noating system Is unconstitutional
ahen did their friends violate the Constitution in 3S and
in 36 and the Senator from Lake violated II on last
night when he voted for the substitute offered BY the
Senator from Carroll for it provides for thirteen float
ug members for each Of the four years Such are some
6l The beauties ofthe gentemans consistency Hevo-
Ted 10 strike out the bill under consideration because
cousanedhireen iAoats" and to substitute the amend
ment the Senator from Carroll which contained thir-
teen aAoalsp twas unconstitutional TO vote for bill
presented by democrat containing "aoats" but was
constitutional to vote for a bill presented by whig
'whichcontained the same number of "floats" There
ls something mysterious about this but by examination
It can be explained The two bills contain the same
number Of floats but the one the gentleman wished to
srke out gave the whgs for the present year, seven
while It reserved to the democrats six; &he one he wish
iosnbsiiue, gaveo tie wings for this year. ten while
Il allowed the democrats three This is great differ
snce and materially changes the provisions of the Con-
stiiutionl
Much has been said by gentlemen onthe otherside
about e political effects Of this bill and we are charged
with design ofso shaping it as to perpetuate democrat
lc ascendency in the Legislature Let US look at the
facts. The Senator from Muskingum seems to have
but one idea, but one aim and that istc gethe ascen
dcncy in this branch of the General Assembly. He
saws they have majority in the State, and therefore
are entitled toa mority in the Senate To prove that
his party has majority he refers usto the vote Of 1910
As he has appealed to that vote, let Us try the bill
under consideration by it By the vote Of lS4O thsbil
gives the gentleman twenyone senators, while tgives
us fifeen-a clear majority Of six. BY his own test,
his party would not be entitled to majority Of two
The most Justice could claim for bin would be nine
teen 10 our seventeen. All he would have right to
claim in the House would be a majority Of four, and
This bin giues Kim ten Here by his own test We al
low him six in the House. and four in the Senate more
than the vote Of 1910 would entie him to. May not
adopt his own language, and inquire Tin Gods name
ls that not enough2 Sir is enough and more than
nough. He is constantly pratng about their majority
in the State, and their right to majority here; and
when asked for an evidence of their majority he points
rs 1910. Now, that election was either fair, or il
wasfrauduiem. If it was fair and honest this bill
gives them both branches whenever they chose to exer-
else their power and iii was fraudulent they are the
minority in the State and not entitled TO majority
here. Here, then Is dilemma, the gentleman may Sc
lee. the horn which he prefers The very fact that he is
dissatisfied with this bill convnees me that he vel
knows that the election of 1910 was fraud, and tha
they have not now, ever have had majorityo the
lcgal voters IN the State
He tells us that by former appointments we have
had majority in the Legislature, while they have rol
Rd majority Of votes When was this2 When did
they poll majority Of votesl Did former apportion
men bills effect the election of Govemorl That is no
pretended Stil in 1888, we elected democratic Gov
enor and majority in the Legislature. In ls40 they
elected or professed to elect Governor and did they
not also elect majority in the Legislature? Sir, ou
ears were stunned in no. by their peous cries of auc
in dstrictng the State white that very law gave then
anadvahage taking four years together and under II
in 1910, they elected fifty out of seveny-two member
o.the House, and would have had majority in thi
branch but for the members that held over from 1899
lflhey have not had majority SINCE is not becaus
ihe law is against them but because the people con
demnedtheir reckless and their reckless
That isno fault Of ours The people alwayshave, an
always will condemn their measures and their acts.
Blu. the Senator from muskingum, (Mr. Chambers
gays lhain 1912 our majority not large-ha il hi
abolition brethren had not deserted them, they woul
have had as many votes ior Governor as had the demo
crais This may be true; but II they by their dupcity
BY the violation Of pledges and want Of good ah drov
he abolitionfsts from tem and compelled them to re
sontc separate organization, they have no right I
complain OF usnor have they any more right to clair
the aboionists ihan have the aboliiioniss to clair
.hsin In 1912, thedenocrats electeia Governor an
amaority IN the Legislature, which is nothing more
less than they have done for years Except 4O and wi
continue to do fof years to come.
They talk to us about fair and honest bill, but
-