The Portland daily press., 1892-10-15
THE NEW YORK AppoRT1oNMENT.

THE NEW YORK APPORTIONMENT,
A majority of the New York court of
of appeals has decided that the appor-
tionment of senatorial and assembly dis
tricts made by the last Legislature is
constitutional. Frou this decision two
of the judges dissented. There were
several objections raised to the ap-
portionment, but the one which was re-
lied upon and which was most seriously
argued, was that the senatorial districts,
as constituted, did not contain an equal
number of inhabitants as near as may be
as the constitution commands. 1t was
on this point that the judges disagreed.
The majority speaking through Judge
Peckham, said on this point:
We think that the courts have no power in
such case to review the exercise OF a discretion
entrusted to the legislature by the constitution
unless it is plainly and grossly abused. The ex-
preston, AS nearly as !may be-, when used n
the constitution with reference to this subject,
does not mean as nearly as mathematical pro-
cess can be followed II is direction addressed
to the legislature in theway of a general state
.mentof the principles upon when the appor-
tionnlent shall be made.
We are of the opinion that the legislature by
the alteration OF the senate districts unter the
act of 1892 has not violated the legitimate and
necessary discretion entrusted to it by the con-
stitutien.
Judge Peckham's statement leaves
much to be desired. He tells what as
linear as may be" does not mean but ne
elects to tell what it does mean. Ordi-
narily 'sas near as may be- would be in
terpreted to mean as near as possible I'M
der the circumstances, and the language
of the statutes is to be interpreted &C
cording to its ordinary meaning. The
New York legislature then is directed by
the constitution of the state to
construct senatorial districts which shall
contain as near as possible under the cir
cumstances an equal number of people.
Or to use the language of Judge Peck
ham the provision of the constitution on
this subject 'sis direction addressed to
the legislature in the way of a general
statement of the principles upon which
the apportionment shall be made"
There is only one principle stated in this
provision and that is the principle of
equality, or the principle that every voter
shall have as much influence as every
other voter. The legislature being
directed to apportion the state &C
cording to this principle, as Judge Peck
ham says, it is difficult to under
stand. where it gets its authority to de-
part from adherence to it further than
circumstances compel. There is no
question that the. New York legislature
might have constructed senatorial
districts containing more nearly an equal
number than is contained in those which
they did construct. A nearer approach to
equality was possible. The court of
appeals admit that, but it says,
or majority says, that the
legislatures departure was not
beyond its discretion. 70 the layman it
looks as if any departure from the prin-
ciple of equality laid down by the con-
stitution, except what the circumstances
actually compelled, was beyond the pow
er of the Legislature, especially if that
departure was deliberate and intentional,
as it was in this case. Judge Peck
ham intimates very plainly that if such a
departure was gross it would be VIOLA
ton of the constitution, and that the
courts would have the power to correct
it. But little departure in Judge Peck
hams opinion is permissible, even when
it is intentional.
1t looks very much as if the court was
exceedingly anxious to sustain this APP
portionment and had to resort to very
C11e ctiouah1a 1opic To do il