Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1872-01-19
The Apportionmcnt Bill.

nafuly tue lalI tuihEt "h" We
FIRE it is passed in the Senate, it VIII DC 50
amended as to give Vermont ana NC"
HAMPSHIRE their old representation, to
which they are certainly as much entitl-
al 10 as the other States. And in con-
pection with this we give below the re-
marks of the Montpelier State Journal
on this subject
The excuse assigned was that the suf-
frage statistics of the census are incor-
rect. Granted: but the population sta
tistics, which form the controlling ele-
ment, with the suffrage statistics, in max
ing a Constitutional apportionment, are
also inaccurate. If, then, Congress is
excusable for ignoring the suffrage sta
tistics, it would be excusable also for ig-
noring the population statistics, and SO
make no apportionment. If it can right
fully ignore the 18th Amendment, it can
also ignore Sec. 2, of Article l. 1t had
no right to do either, and the House bill
is both blunder and crime.
But Vermont is aggrieved by the in
Justice done to her by the bill; so also is
New Hampshire-fo the representation
of these States alone is reduced. We
need not say that the addition of few
members more to the House, to save
these States, weighs nothing compared
with the sacrifice of one-third of the rep
resentative weight Of these States. Yer
mont, however, has the right to insist
that even under the principle of the
House bill, with just Ratio, she is en-
titled to retain her three members.
The bill is based upon the incorrect
rule of the act of 1850, which admits
the populations of four States, which are
not to be apportioned, to operate in the
Ratio by which the population of the
objectionable States is TO be apportion-
ed. The effect is to enlarge the ratio,
and thus count against every one Of the
thirty three States to be apportioned.-
Let the authors of the House bill show,
if they can, any possible relation the
four States, which are represented by
grace of the Constitution, and not by
population, have to the thirty-three
States which are to be apportioned ac
cording to their respective members"
i. e. populations. They will fail in such
an attempt.
But this is not all in addition to The
incorrect ratio, which was governed BY
283 representatives to be apportioned
there is this grievous fact: The bill doe,
not apportion the 283 mem ers to The
States to be apportioned under it. bu
only 279. To make the 2S3, the foul
representatives of States which are no
apportioned at all, are added. In tht
House apportionment these four member
are all charged as Members of Ratio,
which is bold faIsehood. Now come
the grief; the effect of this process is t.
cheat Alabama, Indiana, New York anc
Vermont out of representative each. :
Thus, while the constitution, by its term
gives Representative each to Delewar
Nebraska, Nevada and Oregon, withou
regard to population, this bill forces Al
ALBANIA, Indiana, New York and Ver
mont to furnish those members at thei
expense. This is as unconstitutional a
it is abominably unjust.
We must confess, however, that thi
> wrong is chargeable to the erroneous rul
of the act of 1850. 1t was seen in 1856
when several States were victimized b
it, and relief was given by special act i
S 1862. Vermont and New Hampshir
e can be saved by the same rule now, an
f representative added to seven othe
. States.
OF course the Senate never will cor
t eur in bill SO glaringly unconstitutior
I al, and we count upon thorough work b
S our Senators to secure the equal justic
e Vermont is entitled to when the most e
j act justice is done to all the States whic
:, are to be apportioned.