, 1870-06-30
TIE REAPP0RTIoNMENT BILL.

The Madison Wis. journal opposes the
proposition that The Western States shall
elect, next fall The additional number Of
Representatives in Congress to which they
are entitled under the census Of 1870, on
the ground that to do SO "woula be an as
sault upon the Constitution Of the United
States" Congress having refused to maka
provision for the proper apportionuaent Of
Representatives under the new census, We
nroposed that the Western States should
taRe independent action, and suggested the
following plan. ...... -...-.
let thc Governors Of those States order the
provisional election Of the nunber Of additional
members to which the States are entitled: lef the
people ot each sate ~ TSss & ioF la' pn fsn IL
the members so elected present themselves, and
demand admittazce q right Belonging T. their
can unite nponNs policy botto1ned upon demo
cratic equality and 1mgntable tlatEe Having
declared, the next Congress will be obliged to,
dare to refuse admittance to the members elected
There is nothing in the plan We have
suggested which is either revolutionary OF
unprecedented. Whit is there in the consd-
tuition to prohibit tie people Of Illinois
electing the additional number Of Repre-
sentatiyes to which the State may be en-
titled under the census of 1870? Can Con-
gress, by refusing to passan apportonment
act, defeat the constitutional right of rep
resentation? The people Of Illinois have
us uuch.right to be represented in the
Congress which commences in 1871, accord
| ing to the enumeration under the censaB OF
June, 1870, as they will have three, five,
or ten years lence- So with all other
Stercs. They hare ali'the right to repre-
| sentatiou according to population, and
when Congress refuses to recognize that
ri1;lt, it is tie privilege aud the duty Of the
people to assert it.
The objection that these new members
must be elected by districts is absurd. Iii
nois las had Representative elected By the
people at large since 1862. There is moth
ing in the constitution which requires the
election of members of Congress by dis
t1cts, or Tint prohibits their election by
general ticket. In the earlier days OF the
Union the general ticket plan was common.
In 1912, the Whig Congress passed an act
requiring ali Representatives to be elected
! from separate districts. Preriors to TINT
time, New York elected Representatives from
districts. some districts elec.ing ons mem
be-, others two, and one district e'ectiag
-four members. The act OF 1912 was not
obeyetl In the very next Congress New
Hampshire, Georgia, Mississippi, and Mis-
souri, were represented by members
elected on general ticket. There was
an attempt BY the Wing party to exclude
the,u, but it YVES q complete tallore.
severnl Of those States continued to elect
tle;r Representatives by general ticket for
several years. In 1850, California elected
txo Representatives to Congress in advance
Of any a. portion1nent, and, though hcr
population did not entitle her to but one
both were admitted. Congress- has, by q
trick which :smoro dishonozable than the OF
/ dinary disreputable practices of factionsmi-
norities, denied tothe people ofthe Western
stntes the represent. ton 10 which they are
entitled under the constitution, and theonly
proper way to meet that aaront, and to
vindicate their rights, is Tor the conron.
tions Of both political parties, in all these
States, to nominate, in addition to the
present number of Representatives., such
other number as the State may. be entitled