New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-10-14
THE APPORTIONMENT VALID.
DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS

THE LAW OF 1892 SUSTAINED BY THE FIVE
DEMOCRATIC JUDGES. AND PRONOUNCED UN-
CONST; TUTIoNAL BY THE TWO RE-
PUBLICANS-JUDGE ANDREw:'S
CONVINCING OPINION
fvRosA srarr CORRESPONDENT p THE rRrsuxE1
Albany Oct. 13.-The Court Of Appeals decided
to-day that the Legislative Re-apportonment act Of
the present year is constitutional enactment
The court TO this decision By vote Of 10
2; the five Democratic judges, Earl, Feckham,
Gray, O'Bren and Maynard, voting that the act
is constitutional: and the two Republican judges,
Andrews and Finch. voting that it Is unconsti-
tutiona. Judge Andrews submitted a strong
dissenting opinion, which was concurred in by
Judge Finch. In this opinion he argues with much
force that the inequality of representation Of the
voters Of the State, provided by the Apportonment
act. renders it unconstitutional This view is con-
trovcrted by Judge Feckham, who, IN majority
opinion expresses the opinion that the inequality
of representation is not great to justify the
court in stepping in and setting aside the act
Judge Cray in a supplemental opinion, upholds
Judge Peckham. The judges concur in the view
that tie all-important question before the court
was whether not equality Of representation had
been provided for the people.
Judge Peckham, In his opinion, sets aside as OF
no force the objection that the AppOrt6nment
act was not passed at the next session. as gem
orally understood. He makes the singular decla-
ration that the Legislature Of 1885 omitted n
perform the duty of directing an enumeration
which cast upon it by the Constitution;
forgetting that the Republican Legislature Of 1888
twice passed such an act, and that II was vetoed
by Governor Hill. Judge Peckham then argues
.l,o bo 70 Of and Cow
ernor Hill to come to an agreement upon an
Enumeration act did not deprive the Legislature
of 1892 of the power to pass one. The objection
that persons Of color not taxed were not taken
into account in making the enumeration Judge
PeclSham also considered Of no weight.
REPUBLICAN COUNSEL SUBMITTED FIGURES.
Then Judge Peckham comes TO the question OF
inequality of representation. He declares fhae
there are no figures upon the record in these
proceedings from which it can he determined
what are the number Of inhabitants in me
different Senate districts in the city Of New
York The Republican counsel did submit sta
tistics showing that the average population
figures in the document prepared by Secretary
Of State Rice for the Legislature concealed gross
inequalities of representation In the Senate
districts of Ncw-York City: but Attorney-Gcn.
cral Rosendae called upon the court to disregard
these figures. and TO take Rice's figures, and
apparentlv the court followed his motion AZ
far as the Assembly districts were concerned,
Judge Peckham declared that. in his opinion, New
York and Brooklyn had not received full rep
rsentation and this seemed to justify IN MS
mind. the depriving Of Monroe and st. Lawrence
counties Of proper representation IN the Assembly
JUDGE ANDREwss coSvINcISG OPINION.
.Judce Andrews, in his opinion. shows moss
convincingly the inequality of representation
granted to the voters Of the State. In this
opinion, he says:
am of the opinion that the Apportionment act OF
s02 Is void the that In apporu9ning mem.
bers Of Assembly AS r a. amos eSay in ebhG by the Con-
stituton It Is the cardinal principle OF free represems
rG w6 ip HSercsIns the suffrage poportonatc
representation sccSns to the except
whpre nv reason OF constitutional arrangements
and compromises. Its full application has ben eI @ oe
stsntIy with our representative system. except under
the express sanction Of the people gwen IN te Ion
stitution necessarily implied from ITS provtsonns
Mental ns1r and S" wsII re"oGnised that the 4
ado% aton OF na II,nO,ls Tonstuon Of New York in pre-
scrg the manner OF CONSTITUTING the ac
cording TO the citizen population. except so far as
il was necessarily modified to accomplish another
he autonomy OF The counes shouh he preserved in
I've formation % Senate districts. and that each county,
should be entitled to at least one member of Assemhy
The Constitution Article l. Section ~ prescribes that
counties shall not he divided in the ,ora,Th ha, hs o.
Senate districts, except whore 4 county shau %.
equitatly entitled To more than one senator, am
article 2. section - that each county except ,nc
County OF Hamilton. shall be entitled to one memoer
OF Assembly: and that when county Is entlied 70
than member II shall be divided mo 1,s %
cts but that no town shall be- divided IN the Tor,
nation or Assembly districts. This scheme of creating
territorial districts for the clsron Of sGraiOrs % o ara
eGualtv But pit modified by these provisions me
Constitution carefully preserves the principle Of repro
Tie intention Of The people to prcserv. and guard
have equal weight and voice In the selection 81 renrs
srntatveS subject ONLY TO the modification referred ~
ihc legislative article The provisions prsscr,n,,ns;
dcccnnial cnumerations Of the state ana decennial
prrpos" Of those provisions was to secure NJ short
which might arise from the growth or shifting Of
population during the dee ennial period Further TO
orcraion Of the fundamental principle Of equal sun'g
The In ns % Proyo qh'S sSnd
he organized and the members of Assembly should BE-
apportionnd as "reary may be . according to the
rumber Of inhabitants.
,rpoRr;oNMFNT AS NEARLY AS NAY BE-.
Tho report then goes on To discuss TIE course
Of the LEGISLATURE in arportioning the 1?s men,
bers OF Assembly :" as nearly may be among
the several counties: and Judge Andrews reaches
the conclusion that the apportionment contem-
plated by the Constitution was not made. since
the eleven unassigned members were not assigned
70 the eleven counties having the largest "a
manders Oascertained by dividing the whole
ropulation of the county by the ratio. lie con-
tinues
question identical in principle was ccnsidered nv
senate in so bv committee OF that body. of which
Nr Webster was chairman relating 10 tho iule which
ought to prevail in the appOrtiOnrent of members n
Congress among the States. The Federal Constitu
tlo provides article !; section - that reprey.nt
tives and direct taxes shall be apporoned among the
several states according their respective numbers"
orc The question considered by the committee
tbo Stitu m I'D ~