The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1883-08-31
A New Proposition to Secure Apportionment,
RESOLUTION OFFERED WHICH PRO-
POSES TO REFER THE MATTER
TO A COMMITTEE OF DisIN-
TEREsTED MEN.


In the house Friday morning the De
mocratic members of the conference
committee of six, appointed to take
charge Of the Jamison bill on legisla-
tive apportionment, made report
through Mr.. Amerman, of Lackawan-
ma, the report being as annexed
We, the undersigned members of
the committee to whom was referred
the house bill No. 12, apportioning
the state into senatorial and legislative
districts, respectfully report that
we met for the purpose Of our
and found our col
leages upon the committee opposed to
the adoption of any amendments to
said bill which would alter it in any
degree from the bill as agreed upon by
the senate that this unwillingness Of
our colleages was not based upon
unfsirness or injustice of our PROPOSE
tions, but because they did not desire
TO place themselves in antagonism to
the decision of their political brethren
of the senate by differing in any par
ticular from the bill agreed upon by
that body. AS they informed us, they
deemed it impracticable to present to
the senate this bill either in its original
or in any amended form, or any other
bill than the bill known as the sentate
ultimatum. ,Zrri TI|H !.
[Signed1 J. Miles JAMIsoN,
t Iir LsMUEL AMERMAN,
w o9 irH8G. M. d. EcKELs,
MORGAN JUsTIFIEs THE REPORT.
At the conclusion Captain Hasson
moved the report be printed and copy
laid on the desks of the members. Such
action Graham, of Allegheny, thought
was an atempt to manufacture political
capital and Colborn, the bald eagle of
Somerset, backed him up by calling it
a fraud, trick and an imposition. Lee
Thompson, for the Republican mem
bers, said that they did not consider
committed to the report.
Mr.. Eckels said the Republicans on the
committee were disposed to be fair, but
that the senate ultimatum prevented
and interfered with free discussion
of the subject of senatorial and repre-
sentative apportionment. Mr.. Hasson
withdrew his motion. Mr.. A. II. Nor
gan, of Philadelphia, one of the Re-
publican members of the committee,
differed somewhat from his collegea-
CUES, however, saying that whilst the
report was only signed by the three
Democratic members the three were
justified in making the representation
made. AT this point Mr.. Amerman Of
fered the following:
A COMMITTEE OF EMINENT MEN.
WHEREAS, Differences exist between the
two houses of the legislature Of this COM
monwealth upon the subject OF apportion-
ing the state representative, senatorial and
congressional districts, ana all parliament
tary methods for reconciling these differ
ences have heretofore failed and
WHEREAS 1t is the duty of the legisla-
ture, under command of the constitution
of the commonwealth and laws of the
United States, to apportion the state into
senatorial, representative and congression-
al districts, and in order that this duty
shall be performed it is incumbent upon
the legislature to use every effort to adjust
the existing differences and rs n resourse
promising dispassionate discussion Of
the disputed question, it is right to resort
to arbitration by submission of the whole
subject to an equal number OF eminent
citizens OF known integrity, fairness and
capacity from both political parties there
fore, be ii
Resolped, Gf the senate concur). That
the matter of the apportionment of the
state into congressional, senatorial and re-
preventative districts be referred to Philip
q. Garrett, Daniel Agnew, James A. Bea-
yer, Galuasha A. Grow, Henry NJ. Hoyt,
Charles r. Buckalew, George A. jerks,
George F. Baer, Hon. A. II. Dill and Levi
Maish, and that they be requested to draft
and submit to this legislature, for its enact
ment, fair, just and equitable apportion-
ment bills under the constitution of this
commonwealth and laws of the United
States.