Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1892-08-12


as any other person, so that the repre-
sentation o. the constitution shall be of
all the people equally. In the constitu-
ten of TIT it was required that if upon
the census it shall appear that TIE num-
Der OF representatives in the assembly
from the counties is not justly propor
toned to the number OF electors in said
counties respectively that the legislature
do adjust and apportion the same by that
rule. In that constitution. us in each
subsequent one, it was recognized that it
was necessary that there should be IL fair
and Just representation in the legislature
/ of all thos entitled to be represented
there at all
81 shall take no time to establish what
must be and is conceded that the people
intend that representation In the senate
and assembly shall be as near:y equal as
possible, Ia the year 1885 an enumera
ton act was passed 10y the legislature but
, vetoed by the governor. Since that time
| there have been constant complaints that
the representatlonaain either house of the
| legislature was not just or equal and a
continual demand that it be adjusted.
These very complaints show the under.
stat ding of the people that The representa-
ton in the Legislature should be proper
toned to mum bers They show also that
the apporf comment demanded is an equal
and just one, based as the constitution re
uaires upon the number Ct inhabitants so
far as may be and not an arbitrary and
unequal distribution.
"But il is said that this matter is left
the discretion of the legislature and
that that discretion cannot be reviewed by
the courts. That some discretion in thai
regard is vested in the Legislature Ca. mot
be denied . it must have been left in the
nature of things. But it is Just as clear
that the discreet ion is not absolute, because
it is expressly directed that the apportion-
ionment should be equal AS near as may
be-.
There is a vide difference between
such limited discretion and the absolute
power in the Legislature to do as it
pleases. 1t must be remembered that the
making of an apportionment is not like
the passage of law, a matter which is to
be done or not, as the legislature sees fit.
1t is an absolute duty impo eed oy the peo-
pie, without caution it is true, but none
the less a duty.
cit is we'll known that since Is .
only in the state but throughout the c3un-
Try, the tendency of the people has been to
limit and con6ne the power and authority
of the legislature. Whether this arises
from dis!rust which the people have for
members of their legislatures, as Mr..
Bryce asserts, or from the jealousy of
power which seems to be inherent in the
people, it is not necessary to inquire.
Every one recognizes tendency in all
legislatures to evade constitutional re-
strictions in every possible way. 1t is
fair to suppose that the people meant these
restrictions to be etfectuai to control the
acts of their lawmakers and it can impose
no punishment for their violation. There
is no other sanction than for the court to
insist to the fullest reasonable extent of
their undoubted power to apply to every
law the cons ttutional test and insist that
the instrument shall be oheyed.
eth is case seems to me to be one
those where that power of the court should
be exercised. The conclusion | have
reached, that the action of the legislature
in apportioning the senate districts and
assemblymen is subject to review by the
courts, is sustained by many adjudged
cases of high authority. In the first two
cases last cited the fagrant and unneces-
sary inequalities of the apportlonment
were cancelled and the serious question
presented in each was whether the limited
discretion reposed in the legislature was
the subject of review in the courts. In
each of these cases the decision of the
court was unanimous, and the court de-
clared the apportionment void for the sole |
eason that it was ed |
iessly unfair and unequal. The constitu |
tional provisions on the subject are in
each of these states substantially the same
as in New York, and the decisions are
expressed authority upon the point. The
length of this opinion, however, prevents
extended quotations from them.
There can be no doubt that the appor-
tionn ent Of several senate districts is 20
raanifestly and fagrantly unequal as to
amount to clear violation of the con-
stitutional requirements, as is also the
disparity between the number
Of inhabitants in the country as distin-
guished from the city districts. It is clear,
.0o that kho oovek;fr,<;ov, ~uoa ~,~o,oI., IL 1