St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-04-08
REAPPORTIONMENT.

Inc reaDpOftlOnm60G Dill ndu IldfQ
struggle to get through the lower
branch of the state legislature, and the
prospect is that it will have an equally
tempestuous voyage OH its way through
the senate. The opposition to it is
based ostensibly on the ground of its
unconstitutionality. but we fear that
the strongest motive to its opposition is
that common weakness in human nature
which prompts the Withholding Of JUS
tice, where to grant it would be dep
riyation of something we now enjoy.
To our mind, at least, the arguments
against the bill are more of selfish
nature than of being based on a sound
constitutional principle.
1t is claimed by the opponents of the
bill that the legislature has no power to
reapportion except at the session next
succeeding the taking of census. This
claim is founded on section %. article
IA, of the state constitution, which
reads as follows: 1.-The legislature
shall provide by law for an enumeration
of the inhabitants of this state in the
year one thousand eight hundred and
SiXty-fve, and every tenth year there
after. AT their first session after each
enumeration so made, and also at their
first session after each enumeration
made by the authority of the United
States, the Legislature shall have the
power to prescribe the bounds of con-
gressional, senatorial, and representa-
tive districts, and to apportion anew the
senators and representatives among the
several districts, according to the pro-
visions of section second of this arti-
cle."
To our mind it is very clear that if
the legislature of 1887, being the first to
assemble after the census of 1885, had
reapportioned the. legislative districts,
then this legislature would not have
had the power to change that appor-
tionment. But as the legislature of
1887 failed to perform its constitutional
duty in this respect. it becomes obliga-
tory upon this legislature to correct the
error of its predecessor, especially in
view of the fact that great injustice
was done to large part Of the state by
the omission of the legislature of 1885
to perform plain duty.
We cOncede that the apportionment
bill that passed the lower house of the
legislature is not absolutely just in it's
provisions; but still, it is such an i'm
provement upon the existing apportion-
ment we are not inclined to bubble or
quarrel over the comparatively few in
equalities of the bill. We also concede
that after the taking of the next federal
census the legislature will be called
upon for another reapportionment. But
that Is no apology for delaying justice
to a large section of the state, nor an
excuse for failure to perform a plain
constitutional duty at this time. Let
this bill be passed now, and if two years
hence any portion of the state has
gained in population sufficiently to de-
mand another apportionment, then let
il he done. The legislature should bear
i'll mind that the fundamental principle
of our American independence was that
taxation and representation should go
hand in hand. Some of the heaviest
taXpaying sections of the state are now
denied their proper representation, and
there can be no constitutional difficulty
in the way of setting things right IN
this particular.