The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-04-08
NEW SERIES-NOl27

ours on tho motion Of tho Senator from
Illinois 10 strike out the second section Of
the bill
Mr.. Biggs. suppose the object Of that
motion is 10 allow the State Of Minnesota
throc Representatives In the other HOUSE,
under her constitution. That will be tho
effect Of shrinking out that section and am
therefore opposed 10 Il.
Mr., Mason. propose. IL il bc in order,
to amend the section by stiking out all after
the word Representative" the effect Of
which will be TO u title the State 10 ono 70.
preventative only. may be wrong. because
! have not had sufficient to reflect on H. but
do not ec how the problem can I've worked
out 10 entitlc this State TO more than oGo
represents tatiuc under what Is oontaincd In
tho second section The provision ID, that
the said State shall b. entitled 10 one ~.
preventative, and such additional representa-
tives in Congress az the population Of said
| State, according 10 the census authorized by
the act approved February 2G. 1857 shall
show il to be entitled 10 according 10 tho
present ratio of representation. Tho pres.
cut ratio of representation docs not assign
any number 10 any fraction Of tho unit prc-
scribed by the law. The mode Of ascertain
Ing the apporIionment in the law To which
| have just advrtcd, is by first determining
what shall bc the whole number Of Repre-
senlativcs, which was fixed u, two hundred
and thirty three, mud then Il was .reqairol
that the Secretary Of the Interior, after a..
ccrtaining the entire population to bc repre-
scented, should divide that by the number Of
representatives. The law declares.
"Tha, the product Of such division, rejecting
any traction of unit, II any shall remain, shall
be the ratio or rolo of apPortionment.
And then IL provides further that
"Tbo Secretary Of the Interior shall ascertain
the representative popaaton Of eah stats,
aud divide thn whole representative population
0i each state by the ratio already determined
by him ~ above directed, aud the product of
this last division shall be The number of kopre.
scntatiyca apportioned 10 such State under the
then last enumeration. Provided, That the
ioss In th. number of members, caused by tho
fractions remaining IN the several States on the
division Of the population thereof shall be com.
| pensAted for by as~gning 10 ST. many states hav-
| Ing tho largest fractions one additional member
each for It's fractions M may bo necessary 10
! make the whole number of Representatives two
| hundred and thirty three,
do not iec, therefore how the rule pro-
ylicd for In the sccond section II this bin
can be worked ont, or how il can be compo.
tent for the House Of Representatives, to
whom il wonll be left, to allow, according
Ia the rule prescribed by the existing law,
10 this State more than one Representative
There " none assigned to any particular
fraction. This copJI,on Of thinga IL brought
about by The necessities, suppose, that ARE
imposed on new State where il has not
population which will assign 30 Il under tho
existing law certain number of I.cproapn.
tatiyrs cqual 10 what may have been NJ.
aignod TO the States in the Union at the
time the apporionment was made proper
tioilate 10 i,s population and that we can
only get At the result lcgitimately and con
stitnionnIy, by assigning to this State for
the present but one Representative. ] move,
therefore, 20 strike out the residue Of the wc-
ton.
Mr. Douglas concur with the Senator
from Virginia that under the bin ~ IL now
stands, the House Of Representatives, would
assign but one Representative TO Minnesota.
As stated before. agreed 10 that section
in committee as n matter 0f pecesity, In or
der to get permission 10 report the bill at all.
| desired to give Minnesota the whole three
members she baa rlect9l II I could not
get that, ! desired 20 give her two and
therefore voted for The amendment Of the
senator from North Carolina. My object
in moving 10 strike out the entire section, IL
10 give her three. The Amendment Of the
Senator from Virginia will certainly Gs u
at Que. II Ia unnecessary 10 argueit. The
Senate understands the question.
Mr.. Mason. don't exactly understand
tho Senator from Illinois. As am inform
cd, the population Of this Territory. asccr-
tainol nnA,r the census directed by the law
Of 1857. ~ far ~ IL has been nsccrtained,
would not entitlc her 10 two Representatives,
unless che should have fractional part oi
unit represented. DO understaud the Sen
a,or from Illinois 10 say that bis purpos Is
10 give 10 that State IA larger number OF
Representatives in proportion 10 its popula-
ton than " assigned TO the other States un-
der the constitution; or tha, be would Tx
il at three, regardless Of whe,her, under
the appoftioument which IL fixed by the con
siiiu,iou, she would bc cnii,ied 10 only two,
and thus make distinction Ia favor OF tiH
Slater
Mr.. Douglas. will answer the Senator
very frankly. When J reported The bn
some years ago 10 admit Texas into the
Union, we had no Official evidence which war
ran,ed the belief that sbc had population
enough for more than Obe member of Con.
grsa yet there Was unofficial evi,Ieace such
a. left the impression On Our minds that shs
hal more than that. aud her populatioo IVES
increasing very rapidly. and Coogrss COO
claded % act on the hest information they
had which was satisfactory 10 each member.
though not Official, and we allowed Texas
two members Of C0ngrca 30 10 the case
III n-iiEl.esis Ab. n.GicisI nGtinHna u0uh nQ4