Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-03-15
Practically franchised.

Ii COuucutluS OAI oAC PhoCO oA AoAA
ing the Democratic State Convention
in our issue Of yesterday, a queer
state Of affairs was developed in an
analysis Of the State Representation
in the State Central Committee. 1t
amounts to nothing less than a
practical Acknowledgement Of the
south hall of California. Nor is this
injustice by any means confined to
the Democratic State Central Com
mittee; it runs through the compost
tion Of all representative bodies in the
State and Nation in which we are in
terested. For the sake OF rendering
our views the palmer let US review the
representation of the several sections
Of the State in the Democratic Central
Committee. The City and County of
San Francisco has by the Sena! orial
districting of the State, ten votes in
in the committee. By the Congress
sional districting the Bay City gets
one representative; and among the
DISTRICTS at large, she gets three mem
bers Of the Committee-fifteen in all.
Going above the Sacramento River,
we find there are in the Committee,
representatives of that section amount
ing to twenty-five in number. In the
Bay counties, exclusive of San
Francisco, there are seven repre-
sentatives in the Committee.
San Joaquin County has one, and the
mining counties Of Inyo, Mono and
Alpine have no voice in the delibera-
tions of the Committee. Now, COM
ing to our end of the State, from the
north lines Of Monterey, San Benito
and Merced, we find in all that Sec
ton, the Sixth Congressional District
with Merced County added, only nine
members in the Committee. The
country north Of the Sacramento has
twenty-five. We have much less than
half that. San Francisco City and
County is awarded fifteen members.
We have for all our twelve great
counties only nine. The coun-
ties around the Bay, exclusive
Of San Francisco, have seven; we
have but nine. The Bay counties
in Guiding San Francisco, have twenty
four, we have but nine.
Doubtless readers in the north
whose eyes meet this statement have
been protesting to themselves: 'But
thisis q matter of population, not Of ter
ritory.' We are prepared to take the
question up on that basis too, and to
show that we are most unjustly
treated Let us take the vote OF 1886
by Congressional Districts as the test.
The First and Second Districts COM
prise most of the counties north of
the Sacramento River. The COM
bined vote of the two districts aggre-
gates 68, ,43S. Merced County
is included in the Second District.
The Third District embraces Alameda,
Contra Costa, Marin, Sacramento,
Golano and Yolo counties and polled
total vote Of 29,S10. The Fourth
District covers part of San Francisco,
and cast total vote of 24,531. The
Fifth District embraces the remainder
Of San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa
Clara and Santa Cruz counties. The
vote in this was 33 $50. Now we come
to our Sixth District, embracing the
entire south half Of the State, four
teen Of the fifty two counties
II California. The vote cast in this
District was 38.646. The country
noEth Of the Sacramento has twenty
tRo members in the State Com
mitteo. That Is $50 per cent.
q orr representation. That section
doee not prove 1t has e right to even
twice - large q representation as we
haxo. San Francisco and the other
Dey counties monopolize Is many
1>embefu of The Committee, but their
= doeo not prove their right to 50
& 1asGez : fspssosutatioa than
-. ~ In csetions, e1nbs6cing
1n61Dor