New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-04-12

The Democratic party cast 307,s5s votes it
will be in these counties, and through the
iniquitOus apportionment of the Assembly
districts was able TO elect ffty-two AssemDlymen.
The Republican party cast @OlSl2 votes, ana
yet elected only two Asscnblymen. ms roODery
OF the Republican party its disfranchlscmeht IN
the Legislature, is rcbuked in hitting terms Dy
the Court of Appeals in its decision In the hlhss
County case. The decision of the court was
unanimous What Is the more worthy OIL no'e' IL
disacrees with the Special Term and the zen,
eral Term of the Supreme Court, which dccaeu
the case IN favor of the defendant
Board of Supervisors of klnss Noun's'
The lower courts substantially said that however
uniust Board Of Supervisors might be in dividing
81 county into Assembly Districts, it rested in their
discretion TO be unjust, and no court could inter
fere But the Court Of Appeals points to the his
torv of the State AM TO the various changes IN
its Constitution, and shows that it has always
been the policy of the State TO have the legislative
districts rs nearly as may he equal iii populatioh
The leading members of the Legislature are re-
ioiced that the Court OF Appeals haS stepped IN
and put a stop 10 the stealing Of legislatures, by
an equal division Of the voters OF a county among
the new Assembly Districts, and they regard
Judge Pcckhams logic as unanswcrabe when he
saws that if unlimited discretion is granted to
divide such county as Kings, entitled to eighteen
members, in such manner that seventeen oil the
districts should have 10 more than ! 90 voters ana
the other District have all the remaining voters
The apportonmcnt of the Assembly d.str.ct
of New-Ycrk will next be assIicd in the courts.
There are just as gross inequalities in the divl-
sion of voters in NewiorK as In Kings County
In Erie County also there arr inequalities
In one district there are 0,ilo voters, while in
another there H., $751;
The decision of the Court of Appeals does not
invalidate the Appointment act nor the acts
of the present AsSemblymen from Kings County
isut before another election the Board Of Super
visors of Kings County must meet and provide
for greater equality of representation. The de-
cison is in part as follows:
The first question which arises this appsl Is as TO
the proper construction Section Article OF the
Consue where provides for dividing counties b. the
Golrds o: Supervisors into As miy districts In those
cases where county entitled than mem.
or OF Assembly. IT is clear that II the Contributor does
hot term, By necessary imp' alton provide for
onahy equal division ly population near a. may
he subject Of division by the supervisors
long rot divided and the districts ar"
posed convenient and contiguous territory is left wholly
TO their absolute and troel discretion In such
this where the county is en,itl d 10 eighteen
OF Assembly there Is nothing to cont o the dis
erection Of the board even though 1t should so divide The
county that seventeen OF districts should each
ppuation of huude1 les while the balance Of the
Iopu ton should be seated BY one mcInter of Assem-
lily only.
1t is impo to give a cursory reading TO
Constitution 1916 upon tic subject Of senatlon
without seeing that representation Of the people
r!y might DO in equal manner was contemplated
Dad provided for. When Therefore county already
thereafter became cntl d 10 NOR, than one member
and division Assembly districts became
necessary equality Of population would naturally be the
basis upon which The division would BE- made.
1t Is now argued because Of simple omission
Of the aarm,ti,c provision that the Assembly districts
shall contain, nearly may he. an equal number Of
Inhabitants the whole subject within the jurisdiction
Of the supervisors and TINT such boari Is granted abso
lutte uncontrolled and entire discretion over this matter
In this view we find ourselves unable to concur We
can perceive no reason for reversing in the case Of
counties entitled 10 more than one member. the general
principle upon which representation in the Legislature is
governed by the Constitution Of 1916.
The main duty which is imposed upon the DO r1 is 10
make the division equal to population, far as that
Is auainahle. IL the division, with reference TO the
facts OF convenience AMI conguy Of territory the In
divsbllity number Of Inhabitants
the various districts compared with each other do not
lead almost inevitably TO the belief that the DO I'D has
Intentionally di.rcgardcd constitutional provision,
think IN such il, action should b upheld.
We do no, intend by this decision to hold that every
trning deviation from equality Of population would
justify warrant app icatoa 10 cour for redrc~s
II be grave pslpabe and unreasonable deviation
from the standard That when the facts presented,
arguments would b. necessary convince fair
very and wholly inequality had
ntcntlo,ay provided fof. This is exact
definition OF u" meaning OF this section ia this regard
/ am able give. Tiled by the rule Just stated.
we have difficulty In coming Ia the conclusion that
the defendants dividing Kings County Into
Assembly districts cannot be rcgaIied a compliance
with the Constitution.
We hold defendants have failed thus far TO
perform their duty legally divide the County OF Kings
into cirhteea Assembly districts. Tina, duty sall rests
upon them Just IL they had never attempted
its performance What they have done is utterly rC:d
Anfno effna