Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1848-05-31

j ing representation, the Legislature coule
not divide county, and assign part of o
county 10 one representative district; and
4 part to another? Mr.. G.. said he did anean
4 to be so understood; the Representatives
; must be 'apportioned among the ssvera
counties as counties--entare and uaairi.
ded counties. A county could notJorm
I q part Of taUo Representative districts fo7
representatives, uaaless I'm the case OF a
meao county," ~ -
The question asked by Mr.. Reemelln, il
will be perceived covers the very groune
now in controversy, and the answer is ex.
1 plicit ea,d exaetly y to the epeint n COUNTY
1coEID NoTfFoR MA PARTsoF Twok.REPRR
] RnrAYIyE MS tRIETs EoR gEPREsENTA-
TlvEs." This ARGUMENT receives addition
al weight from the fact, that Mr.. Governs
sound legal and constitutional views Undue
ed his party the very next session of the
Legislature, to make m~President Judge
of his Judicial circuit. ~
Under those arguments, every whig mem
ber Of the House ef Representatives, some
Of whom were members Of the last Legis.
lature, under the solemnity of an oath, yot-
ed to oust the democratic. and give the whig
member his seat, because "a county could
not be diulded and form a part of taoo
representative DISTRICTS" e.s r..
| The democratic members then rs now,
contended that a county could not be divided
in forming legislative district But they al.
SO contended, that q legislative district once
formed, could not be changed, by u subse
quent change Of county lines, until /. the
next enumeration of white male inhabit.
ants. ----s ..-~sE.- -, ~ s..
From the foregoing facts and arguments,
we leave the people OF Ohio to Judge what
honesty OF motive may be attached te dar-
ing inlractions Of the constitution, and up.
on the POLITICAL rights Of the people of ..
hio? =.z -.
Tbs democraie members oi the Senate;
regarding the oath which they had taken to
support the constitution, and 10 prevent q
fraud being perpetrated; which; if consum.
mated, would have subverted the political
rights of the freemen Of Ohio, and have
forever unalterably fixed the Law making
power Of the State in the hands OF. an un-
scrupuious and unprincipled minority, with
drew from their seats in order to save the
constitution and avert The consequences oi
liz
troyed that great principle Of Republican,
ism, the right ofthe minority to rule
The federal leaders being thus Ioiled in
their mad efforts to violate the constitution
and TO subyert the Fundamental principles
of republican government, at once threw
off the mask OF honesty, and entered into q
conspiracy to smuggle into law an uncon-
stitullonal apport onment scheme, SO gross
and fraudulent, that they dared not resort
to constitutional means to effect its passage,
but resorted to trick and s'cunning," that
thereby they might maintain their ill-got-
ten power, and thus trample down the in
herent rights Of the people. ~
/ his brings US to consideration of tho
unconstitutional and fraudulent means by
WHICH the federal leaders attempted to palm
their iniqutous districting scheme upon the
people OF Ohio. -.-
1 he bill first passed the Senate, and in
the House received sundry amendments,
restoring to it the features it had when O.
riginally reported. The vote on the pass
age of the bill in The House was taken on
the 10Th of February, as shown by the
House Journal--page 568. 1t was re-
turned to the Senate with the House amend
men,s, on Friday, February L., (see SEN
ate Journal page 52l J The Senate agreed
to such amendments as related to new
counties, and disagreed to the others, and
returned the bill Ga the same day to the
House, and there it was laid upon the tn-
bic; (see House Journal page 576)
Under date Of Saturday, Feb. II, the fol-
lowing proceeding are recorded (see House
Journal, page 81: s
"On motion of Mr.. Anthony,
"The House took up the bill Is. No. 7O)
to fix and apportion the representation OF the
General Assembly of the State of Ohio.
"The same gentleman moved that the
House reconsider the vote by which it passed
said bill. .... s.s s..-.'- e.
"On motion of the same gentleman,
"Said motion was laid upon the table.
Con motion of the same gentleman,
"Said bill was. recommltted to a select
committee of three-Messrs. Anthony, War
rem and Breck." .....-s
At this point it becomes vastly important
to examine the Journal, and contrast it with
the facts as elected by other evidence.
In the proceedings of that day, as report
ed in the Ohio State Journal, we find the
| following:
con motion of Mr.. nthony, the vote on
the passage of the Apportionment Bill was
yeconsidered and the bill was recommitted
to Messrs. Anthony, Warren and Breck."
In the reported proceedings of the Ohio
Statesman, of'the same day, we find the re-
ports of the State Journal, confirmed, as true,
by the following:
aMr. Anthony moved that the House re-
consider its vote upon the passage of Senate
bill No. 70, to apportion the representation
in the General Assembly, &C., which was
agreed to; and ----
@The bill was then recommitted to Sc
lect committee of three-Messrs. Anthony,
Breck and Warren.
Ina legislative notice of the proceedings
Of the previous week, published on Monday,
Feb. l4th, we find the following in the
sStatesman;"
sThe apportionment bill is now in the
Senate: That body, some days since, disa-
creed to the amendments made to the bill
in the House, and it was sent back. The
I Al