The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-01-19
THE ApPoRrIoNMENr BILL.

body is that the numbe of voters in
all the districts shall be as nearly
equal as possible. and that the districts.
contiguous, not only in the sense that
the counties join each other, but that
they shall not be composed of a string
of counties. so that the extremes will
be remote and have no common inter-
ests. The next essential is that dis
tricts shall not be -gerrymanders in
the sense that one political party is
given a much larger representation in
the aggregate than it's vote fairly enti-
ties it. Considering the bill presented
by Senator W~ishard-which is based on
the enumeration of voters made in 1889
as required by the Constitution-for
the senatorial apportionment, does
it comply with the requirements
above laid Town as necessary to
secure fair representation? This
question can only be answered by a
careful comparison of the number of
voters in the respective districts and
the political representation which the
two leading political parties obtain COM
0AS "tS 099ANooN
The unit for a Senator is II, 020 voters.
If absolute equality could be secured
there would be 11,02O voters in each
senatorial district. But the Constitution
prohibits the division of a county in
appointments, so there must be some
districts having a less and others a
greater number than the average or
unit. The a-pportionment, to be fair.
must be so made that he number of
voters in districts above or, below the
average shall be as small as possible.
is 2,297, in Vigo county, or a little over
one-ifth of the number necessary for
a district. Vigo is a large county and
is so located with reference to other
counties that it seems literally impossi-
BILE to make the excess a part of an
other district without destroying the
equilibrium in a number of contiguous
districts. The next largest excess over
the unit is that in Vanderburg county
1857 voters. which could not be utilized
without the same complications as have
been noted in the case of Vigo. The
largest deficit in any district is in that
composed of Johnson and Morgan
ties-l,489 voters. or one-seventh of the
number necessary for a district.
The next important consideration is
that of the representation of the two
political parties which control the dis
tricts-is there a fair division? All,
and certainly Democrats. will admit
that the vote of 1892. when Mr.. Cleve-
1ondsc n1.rroJifxy u,oC G 400 iC a foir vote
upon which to make the estimates of
the party strength in the respective dis
tricts. Below is the vote for President
in 1892 in twenty districts, the first thir-
teen named in the Wishard bill, and
seven other consecutive districts begin
ming with Cass and Pulaski:
Posey and Gibson-,S15 Republican, 5,130
Democratic; Democratic plurality, 315.
V~anderburg-6,175 Republican, 6,166 Demo-
cratic; Republican plurality, 8.
Warrick and Spencer-4.496 Republican,
Pike and KnoxA,ss1 Republican. 5.s4
Democratic; Democratic plurality, 675.
Dubois, Crawford and Perry4,M Repub-
I.25.
Daviess. Martin and Orange|5,515 Repub-
lican, 5.517 Democratic; Democratic plur-
Harrison and Floyd 02 Republican, 6.665
Democratic; Democratic plurality, l,563.
Clark ana WaShfngtOn-5,ll RepuDNc1n,
6,335 Democratic; Democratic plurality, 1,222.
Scott, Jennings and Decatur|5,031 Repub-
licar, ATT Democratic; Republican plural
Jefferson, Switzerland and Ohio-5,2S4 Re-
publican, 4,7A Democratic; Republican plur-
ality, $40.
$3.50 Democratic; Democratic plurality, 1,315.
Franklin, Fayette and Union-3,4 400 Repub-
lican, 5,163 Democratic; Democratic plurality,
L754-
Rush and ~Shelby-5.216 Republican, $500
Democratic; Democratic plurality, SS4. -
Cass and PulaskiA.4s 9 Republican, 5,saS
Democratic; Democratic plurality, 1863.
Miami, Wabash and Huntington 1.-TWO Sem
ators)-9,97O Republican, 10,3o6 Democratic;
Democratic plurality p, for each 10 Senator Pann, iSs,
1880 Democratic; Republican plurality, 1,1S9.
Jay and Adams-3.661 Republican, 5,3O4
peRaib and steubenA,5a Republican A.
Lagrange and Noblel5,s6 Republican. L.
81 Democratic; Republican plurality. 1859.
Here are twenty districts which. I'M
der the Wishard apportionment on the
vote of 1892. would elect fourteen Demo-
Gratis and six Republicans, the popular
vote being 1O7. S64 Democratic and 9S, 306
Republican. These, it is repeated. are
not selected districts, but thirteen are
taken c~onsecutively in one part of the
bill and seven in another. These
groups, selected at random, are strongly
Democratic. but they show that what
Mr.. Wishard has said, namely, that the
party which shall carry Indiana by
5000 plurality would, under this appor-
tionment. have a majority in the Sen
ate, which proves that it is not a gerry
mander