Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1896-02-27


ing declaration: Il am sick and tired
of the bill. While it doesn't suit me. 1
don't want to hear any more about it.
L have thought the whole matter over
and have finally come to the conclusion
that it is the best bill that can he
passed. We talked of breaking county
lines in the committee room and found
that no bill could be drawn on such an
issue. When We talked of breaking
county lines in Rock county plentiful
intercessions We're made to keep "hoIy
Rock" intact. When we came to Grant
county, the plea was not to enter the
enclosure of religious Grant county,
and when we reached Chippewa
the cry was for Gods sake, don't dare
to enter the sacred precincts of Chip
pewa."
Then Assemblyman Mahoney raised
his point of order again. While it was
decided that it was originally we'll
taken, it was held to have been waived
by the action of the committee in going
on with its work Finally Mr.. Hall
withdrew his motion, and then the COM
mittee arose and asked to be allowed to
sit again on the ground that it's work
was uncompleted, after which an ad-
journment was taken until o'clock in
the afternoon
Then came a series of delays. The
attorney generals office said that it
would require days to submit an opin-
ion as to the legality of the bill as a
whole and also that there was grave
doubt that it should be required to do
this for the reason that it pertained to
matters OF fact as well as law, and the
latter points were the only ones which
/ it could decide. Frequent consulta-
/ lions were held between the assistant
attorney general, John l.. Erdall, and
the assemblymen, and the former said
he was willing to answer any specific
questions of law put to him. This was
about O'Clock, and up to that hour
the assembly had been meeting and adj
i journing at stated intervals. while the
/ senate had been playing the same old
waiting game. Finally. the following
! opinion which contains the questions
which by a resolution passed in the af-
/ ternoon and introduced by Assembly
man Hall, the assembly had requested
Mr.. Erdall to answer. was submitted:
This Office has under consideration
! the two questions submitted relating to
the formation of an apportionment bill
at the present session of the legis-
lature:
Il. Can county lines be broken in
the formation of senate districts? 2.
If, in the formation of senate districts,
greater equality of population can be
attained by breaking county lines than
by not breaking such county lines, and
assuming that assembly districts can
be kept intact, and that the senate dis
tricts can also be formed of convenient,
contiguous territory, should not the
/ Legislature break county lines, in order
TO conform to the decisions OF our su-
preme court? Our supreme court has
decided. in the late case of State ex rel
, Lamb VS.. Cunningham that the only
constitutional impediment to the secur-
lty OF equality OF representation in SEN
ate districts is the requirement that
senator's shall be chosen by single dis
tricts Of convenient, contiguous terri
tory, * i = and no assembly district
shall be divided in the formation of a
enate district This seems to us to be
the plain and natural construction to
be placed upon the language contained
in section of article " of the consti-
tuition. Being asked to give an i'm
mediate answer to these questions
without a full statement of the reasons,
we will simply add that in our opinion,
both these questions should be an
swered in the affirmative"
Then the real fight in the assembly
began. After the reading of the opin-
ion Assemblyman Mohr (rep), of Co.
, lumbia, moved that the rules be sus-
pended and the bill be put upon it's
passage. This was carried by vote of
81 to IA, Assemblyman Hall and other
opponents of the bill voting for it on
the ground that it would place the
measure before the assembly. Assem-
blyman Hall then moved to re-commit
the bill to the legislative conference
committee. This motion was lost, 80
to 3d. Assemblyman Ray voting for the
re-cOmmital despite his love for the bill
because, as he said, of the opinion just
rendered by the assistant attorney gen
eral. Mr. Mohr then moved to take up
the bill and place it on it's passage. AS
semblyman Christian (dem) asked for
a call of the house, which was lost AS
semblyman Buckstaff (rep.), of Osh-
kosh, moved to refer the bill to a
special committee to be composed Of
the judiciary committee of the last SEES
sion. This was lost by vote of So to
Is. Mr.. Billiard moved that the bill
should be re-committed for amendment
to a new committee of five none of
whom had been members of the pres
ent conference committee. This mo-
ton was also lost, 40 to 25. Then fol-
lowed another debate which continued
until o'clock. w A Jones said he
would vote against the bill because he
Billiard, of Neenah, said he could not
support the bill, because he believes it
will not stand before the courts. G. E.
YaWkey spoke in favor of the bill, cit
ing comparisons in support of his argu-
meDt. H. G. Sloan, of Superior, said it
was ridiculous to enact a measure
which he considers the attorney general
has virtually pronounced unconstitu-
tlonal. George r. Mahoney said that
as a democrat he believes any bill
passed at the present session will be
unconstitutiO 1al and the contemplated
mn +rsx