Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1892-08-12
Fuller Details of the Famous Gerry
mander Decision iii the EN-
pire State.
Inequalities of Population Dwelt on at
Length by the
Court.
Amazing Discrepancies Shown to Elk
ist Between the Various Sena-
t0rial Districts.

The decision of the gerrymander case In
New York state is Of the widest interest in
W Wisconsin, where one act has been de-
c|ared void and where an attempt will be
made to have another treated likewise.
The decision in New York covered sew
eral points not generally understood IN
the west Judge Rumsey, who decided
the New York law Invalid, presidss over a
court similar to our circuit court, and an
appeal from his decision lies to the general
term from which it may be taken to
the court of appeals. The decision was
given at Bath, and was a denial OF the
motion Of City AttorL ey G. D. Kiebei for
writ of mandamus requiring the Monroe
county board of supervisors to show cause
why it should not obey the requirements
of the apportionment act.
In some quarters it was expected that
the Judge would hold the law uncon-
stitutional on the ground of the second OBJ
lection of counsel for the board of super
visors, namely, that the act was passed at
an extraordinary session of the legislature.
This objection was, however, overruled-
The decision was based rather on the third
and f urth objections, that the senate ap-
portionnent is void because persons of
color not taxed are included, and that the
act is void because the districts, both SEN
ate and assembly, are grossly unequal.
The last objection is of particular inter
est in Wisconsin, insofar as the pending
suit here is based on inequalities Of popu
ation. On this point Judge Rumsey says:
'fThe next objection taken to the act is
that it violates that injunction Of the con-
stitu;ion that the senate districts shall
contain as nearly as may be an equal
number Of inhabitants, and that the as
semblymen shall be apportioned among
the several counties as nearly as may be
according to the lumber of their respect
i've inhabitants. The constitution pro
hibits the division of a county in the
formation of senate district unless such
county shall equitably be entitled to two
or more senator's, and requires that each
county, however small its population,
shall have at least one member of the
assembly, Fulton and Hamilton being
rated as one county for that purpose.
ga statement Of the inequalities will
show how far they are due to compIi-
ance with these provisions, which must
necessarily prevent exact equality of popu-
lation in the several districts. The
unnecessary inequality of much Of this
apportionment is quite manifest. For
instance, if New York had been divided
into eight districts, each would have had
we have seen, an average population of
much nearer the true ratio than its dis
tricts now have. Albany, united with
either Greere, Schcharie or Schenectady,
would have been quite near the true num-
Der. These suggestions are made simply
to show that some OF the Inequalities of
the senate districts are clearly unnecessary
and that the districts do not contnin as
nearly as may be an equal number of
Inhabitants.
"With regard to the apportionment of
assemblymen among the counties men,
toned above the unnecessary inequality is
clearly apparent. 1t needs no argument to
show that the constitution means what it
says when it requires that each district
shall contain as nearly as may be an equal
number of inhabitants, and that the |
members OF assembly shall be apportioned
among the counties as nearly as may be
according to the number of inhabitants.
Such provisions, or equivalent ones, are
In the constitution of major
lty of the states and of the United
States.
1T is the intention of the people that
each person shall have as nearly az posi-