The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1890-07-03
THE FACTS ARE As FoLLoWs !:

TdE FACIS AXE AS fOILON6:
The General Statutes of the State con,
tanned and now contains the general
provisions for taking the census. About
two or three days before the close Of the
session of 1884 bill came over from the
House to The Senate, amending In certain
particulars the general law, on the sub.
ject of the census principally as to the
rate per capita to be paid, and in other
minor points. While, however, it left the
duty on the Governor of having an emu
meration made, neither this bill nor the
general law appropriated any money to
enable him to have the work done. The
bill, therefore, as it passed the House,
was incomplete, and would have effected
no result.
On inquiry it was ascertained that the
probable expense OF 8 State census would
amount to some $780, 900 or $4,000. This
was the estimate made by careful men
who were supposed to be In a position to
know.
The majority of the Senators nearly all
of whose counties were unaffected by the
result did not feel justified in putting up.
on the people this heavy expense. And,
as the House, which was the body whose
membership was in question, had not
deemed it proper to take the responsible.
ity of making the appropriation necessary
for the work, these Senators, acting on
the bill sent them by the House, rejected
it.
The counties whose representation
would be affected by the census were
about equally divided. The very large
majority of the Senators we're entirely
disinterested, as it did not affect their
counties in any way. A majority of these
disinterested Senators voted against the
bill, and by their votes it was defeated.
In 1886 the amendment to the Consti-
tuition vas proposed allowing reapportion.
ment on the basis of the United States
census of 1890 and thereafter. This was
adopted by the vote of every Senator
present except one, Mr.. Reynolds, of
Beaufort. It was proposed and passed as
ful6llment of the requirement of the
Constitution providing for reapportion.
ment, but as saving the taxpapers of the
State the heavy expense of taking the
census by the State.
At the same session, 1855, the House
again sent over bill for taking the cen.
aus by the State authorities. But as the
amendment 10 the Constitution had been
passed providing the other method for re-.
apportionment, as measure of economy
to the State, the Senate did not feel called
on to pass this bill.
There was another serious objection, to
wit: "Whether an extra session of the
Legislature could legally be called to re-
apportion in time for the election in the
fall of 1886. This had due consideration.
But that which determined the matter
was that another method for reapportion-
ment had been provided, by which the
taxpayers we're saved some $780, 900 or
100000.
The matter then came before the peo-
pie of the State at the general election
in 1886, when this amendment was sub.
mitted for their decision. 1t was adopted
BY an overwhelming popular vote. The
people of the State thereby ratified and
approved the action of the Legislature in
substituting this means of reapportion-
ment, and saving them the heavy tax and
expense of taking the census by the State
And the people themselves having thus
acted on the question, it was settled final.
ly.
During the session of 1886 the bill te
ratify this constitutional amendment came
before the Senate. It was passed by the
vote of every Senator except one.
In 1887 and again in 1888 bills were
introduced into the Senate to reapportion
on the basis of the census in 1880. These
were opposed as not being within the
scope of the amendment, which provided
that the first reapportionment should be
made under the census of 1850. There
were also practical difficulties, as for in
starce with Charleston County, which
had been divided since that census into
Charleston aud Berkeley. This prevent
ed any accurate or proper reapportion-
ment on the basis of the census of 1880
The Senate, therefore, by q decided ma
| iority, rejected the bills.
This is q simple statement of the case
We do not propose to indulge in intem-
perate language or to be drawn into vitu
peration or recrimination. We desire
solely to give the reasons which governed
the Senate in it's action.
AUGUSTINE T. SMYTuE,
GEO. LAMB BUST,
Senators from Charleston County.
= WORTH KNowING:-Hughes' Ton