The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1892-11-12
BUT CANNOT AFFECT THE PRESI
DENCY.

extensive with the country, has raised
question which, while it cannot affect
the selection of president this year, will no
doubt become an important one before
congress when it assemblies next month.
General Butler maintains that the in
creased representation in congress of
twenty-four members given to eighteen
states under the apportionment act OF
February Z, 1891, is, and has been all
along, ever since the total population of
the United States under the eleventh
| census was officially declared to congress,
entitled to be elected to and seated in the
present or Fifty second congress. He
bases this opinion upon the ground that
the result Of the enumeration under the
| present census was made known to con-
greSs and the country before the close of
| the census year; that from the moment
that result was made known the
states showing the required increase in
population hereunder were and are,
| under the constitution, entitled in this
congress to the increased represo NATION,
| and that any poStponement of that con-
| stitutional right of each state SO entitled,
by the terms of an apportionment law or
otherwise, is in direct conflict with the
provisions of the constitution.
In other words, the enumeration under
the eleventh census law was begun June
l, 1890. The result Of that enumeration
was officially declared to the second ses-
sion of the Fitty-arst congress shortly
after it convened in the December fol-
lowing: This was unprecedented in the
history of our censuseS. Congress,
in framing the last apportionment
bill, seems 10 have lost sight
of this fact. but went ahead copy
ing almost word for word the language
of the apportionment law passed ten
years previously. making only such
changes of dates, ETC.. as would make the
bill, when it became law, conform to
the present census. There would seem
to be no other reason to ascribe for the
apparent error. Ii there be any other
the question might we'll be asked, HAS
congress the power, under the provisions
of the constitution. when it has the fig
ures Of the population in its possession
III ample time, to say when the states
MAJ avail themselves of their rights un-
der census:' In tie present case. con-
gress, under the terms of the apportion-
ment law of Feb. Z, 1891, practically
says in 1891 to the states affected, "We
know you are entitled to these additional
representatives under the eleventh CEN
sus, but you shall not avail yourselves of
that eniitlement until March 4, 1898"
Thus, if it have that power, which Gen
eral Butler denies, prohibiting the states
from their due right OF representa-
ton until certain time - two |
years off-stated by congress, why |
could it not with equal propriety, if a |
political emergency warranted the domi-
nant party in so doing, prohibit the states
from exercising their rights under a CEN
sus for e term of five or ten years-in |
fact, any number Of years they might |
Xix in an apportionment law:
In the absence Of any such emergency |
arising from the contest that has been |
practically settled at the polls, and in view
Of tie assurance the majority party in
the present and next congresses that it |
will continue its lease of power in
definitely, it can afford to take the
question up, discuss it disPassionately
and settle it upon its merits. The party t
will not be the gamer by the admission
of the additional members, even if they
should all be of its political faith.
Neither will i, be loser if the new mem
bers were wholly of the opposite faith,
because its majority is large enough not
to be ENDANGERED thereby.
General Buffers point seems to be
well taken and. as stated in the outset,
it will unqestionably come up before
congress early in the session.
By the Washington Post we see the
question is already being discussed at the
capital. Ex-Secretary Blaine was inter-
viewed upon the question day or two
ago and here is his opinion thereupon:
The subject is curions and interest
ing one. l am surprised that it has re-
ceived so little attention or the attention
it warrants am clearly of the opinion
that The number equivalent TO the num-
Der in the electoral college should be
added to the delegations from the states
affected. do not see any other way. The
constitution is perfectly clear on the
poin,-ihat the total of the electoral col
lege should consist OF an equal number
to that of the total representation from
ell the states in the Tor Fifty-second)
congress- 1t does not refer to some fu-
ture congress.
'In my opinion it unquestionably re-
fers to the present or existing congress.
1t first refers to the congress that counts
the votes, which, of cou. Sc. is the present
congress. / can well see how this may
become very important question with
In the next few days. 1t seems TO me
that the solution of the question IS for
the states given additional congressman
to elect them to this congress before it
expires. / do not see how, supposinG,
after an election. these additional con-
gresham presented themselves, it is
possible to refuse them admission. To
sum it up, il is clear and unquestionable
to my mind that the total in the electoral
college must consist with the total of the
in 'the congress.
a SUCCESS HON FROM JAPAN.