New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-08-06
BEAPPORTIONMENT' REFUSED
DECISION or THE SUPREME COURT, GEN
ERAL TERN.
STATUS OF TIE NEWLY ANNEXED TERRITORY

STATUS OF TIE NEWLY ANNENED TERRITORY
u.rcr pArTERsoN's ORDER AFFIRMED.
doc,r,on was given by the General Term Of the
sun-cme Court Yesterday affirming the order o!
1udeo Patterson denying the application which was
made in the name Of Augustus NJ fieid' OF inc
town OF Westcheser for a mandamus TO direet the
Board OF Aldermen TO reconvene ana redPpoit'o"
the Assembly districts OF his county so as to in
clude the newly annexed territory in the XXlst
DIs,r,c, The question OF the constitutionaty
Of tho act of the last Legislature annexng to THIS
comfy a large part OF Westchester County was
raised in the proceeding.
The original application Tor the mandamus was
denied by Judge Patterson. and from his decision
AN appeal was taken to the General Term OF the
court Presiding Justice Van Brunt writes the op''-
ION of the court, which is corcrrred In BY Judges
O'Brien and Sto,er Judge Van Brunt. in his opin-
ION in the concluding sentence says: 1T seems 10
be ma nfest that the claim OF the reator is contrary
not only the spirit but 10 the letter OF tne Con
stitution and that the Board of Aldermen had no
power to include in any Assembly district wi'hih
this county the annexed territory. Ine order Is
affirmed with to the respondents.
The opinion also says:
The only function be performed by the Board o.
Aldermen was TO DIVIDE the Guy s, d'u constitution
into twelve Senate districts in accordance win the ne
Which districts should be wholly. within senate It..
district formed under the apperuonmen' inane
Constitution ana Wnlcn was 49,. -,
therefore under such Senate apportionment tns
territory in dispute was part OF the c'y anu
county OF York IL should have been inciuar,a
within some Assembly district OF that county, ~
is plain that il was not pat OF tnat county uns
such apportIonment for al the time this apport.on-
men was made by the Constitution OF 1884 such TER
| ritory formed a part OF another county 49,, 49,.
The Senate apportionment was coHpete1 VIZ.
this Constitution went into eject wnch Vas az y,
this subject by lis January !. lseo or 49,. IL
| would not have been apport!onment Wlthh tHe
| meaning OF the term used I'm the constitution
The trainers of the Constitution claimed 10 reeos-
| nze equality Of population: with certaIn I,rnIs
exceptIons as the bass OF the apportlonmen ms
ahundanty appears throughout the entire lns.lu .
| ment. When they set apart the county OF WIS,
chester as the XXIId senate District they SCI apa
an integral portion OF the territory OF me sta y
| with well-defned limits containing. ACCORDING -
the last preceding enumeration. population Whicn
under their plan OF apportionment they ~ h.
| TO be entitled Senator With REGARD 70 lne
| future they provided. by section = OF Artic,e, o.
| that the Legislature might. after the enumeration
| IN be made in 1876 and every ten years thereafter
| so alter the bounds Of the Senate districts ina
| each district should contain. as nearly as may pe
| an equal number of inhabitants, ana be IN as coii
| pact a form az practicable. ana 'naat SUI ''s =,
| another enumeration" 1t is contended Dy tns
| couneal for the appellant that while the Legislature
coui1 not after 1905. disregard the principle OF
equality in population or charge ,ne ri co.
| con is assigned for such a discrimination, ana II
seems 10 be at variance with the regulations OF n'
| S'onsfitution covering the apportonment OF rs
| semhlv districts As we have seen. eacn Assembly
S,s'rict must be within a, Senate district formed
| under the same apportionment The Consttuuoi
| Nj formed the senate districts under the presen
nnureration and only left the Legislature the duty
| az apporti oning the AssemDlyneh among me oeh
| within senate ulsu'0' 81" ' - "