The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-01-31

ment. as follows:
Sec. 5. The number of Senators and
following each period of making such emu
meration, be fixed by law and apportioned
among the several counties. according TO
years OF age in each. Provided, That the
first and second elections of members OF the
General Assembly. under this Constitution,
snail be according to the appOrtiOnment
last made by the General Assembly before
the adoption of this Constitution
O. senatorial or representative
constitute district, shall be composed of
contiguous countless; and no county, for
vided.'
1T Is clear from these selections, that,
In providing for an apportionment OF MEM
Ders of the General Assembly, two main
objects were kept in view by the trainers
of the Constitution; one being local county
representation; the other, proportionate rep
reservation of all the people. The counties
as governmental subdivisions of the State;
and the inhabitants, according to their
number in each county, were to be repre-
language of the Constitution is: The num-
Der of Senator'S and Representatives shall
be fixed by law. and apportioned
the number OF male inhabitants above
twenty-one years of age in EACH
Either of these objects, county repre-
Sentation, or proportionate popular repre-
sentatlon might be attained in perfection,
were 1t not for the necessity of also at
tending to the other object; but the design
was that neither be neglected or sacrificed
for the other The most exact proportion
ate representation would be secured by
making a single district of the State, and
electing all the members by the people at
large. Each voter would thus have his
absolute and equal weight with every other
erai Assembly. But. besides resulting in
the admitted evil of making the General
Assembly solidly of one political party, at
least so far as elected at the same time,
n
minority; this exactness of proportionate
representation would also be attained at
sentation. On the other hand, If county
representation only should be considered,
then proportionate representation of popula-
ton in large and in small counties would
ITO secure the fullest possible local coun-
ty representation, with the nearest proper
each county, is the approximate result to
be reached from these two requirements
OF the Constitution. The working out of
to be left to the patriotism and good judg
ment OF the Legislature; and hence not
renewable by the courts. except for gross
abuse or discretion, and provided only, that
both objects contemplated in the Consti-
tuition be kept in view in the law enacted
by the General Assembly. People VS..
thompson, supra.
AS TO FAIRNESS OF 1895 ACT.
by Section 8. of Article 4. of the Consti-
tuition. 1t is provided that Senators shall
be elected for term of four years, and
Representatives for a term OF two years,
from the day next after their general cleo
ton. And, in Section 3, of Article 10, it is
declared that whenever. either in the Con-
stitution or in any law Hereunder, it is
provided that any officer. other than a
member of the General Assembly shall
hold his office for any given term the
same shall be construed to mean that such
officer shall hold his office for such term
and until his successor shall have been
elected and qualified
Constituting these two provisions of the
Constitution together, ii is apparent that
the members of the General Assembly
remain in office only during the terms for
which they were elected. Senators can.
under no circumstances hold office after
four years, nor Representatives after two
years, from the next day after their gem
eral election So jealous were the people,
in framing the Constitution, of the pos
the Legislature that they thus expressly
excepted members of the General Assem-
bly, from that provision according to which
all other officers are authorized to hold
their offices until their successors are elect
ed and qualified
but while the General Assembly is thus
prevented from any attempt at perpetual
ing its existence by extending the terms
of office of its members, yet there would
be but little thus gained or saved to the
people If the Legislature might, through
an unequal apportionment, perpetuate its
power by insuring the reelection of its
members, or the election of new members
who were engaged in usurping and per-
petuating power against the will of the
majority of the people.
the principle OF proportionate representa-
ton has always obtained in Indiana, even
from a time preceding the formation of
the Constitution of the United States. From
sne passage Of b the FOR tine g@y
July Il, 1877, out Of which Territory our
Commonwealth was afterwards formed,
this principle of proportionate representa-
ton has been of the very essence of our
local self-government. The ordinance of
1857 names proportionate representation in
the same category with the writ of habeas
corpus, trial by jury, and due process of
law, as fundamental rights to which the
people of this territory shall always be en-
titled. On the formation of our State gov
eminent in 1916, the Constitution then
adopted retained, in Article 3, the same
principle of proportionate representation,
based upon an enumeration of the inhab-
itants every five years Finally, on the
adoption of the present Constitution, in
1851, the principle still continued. So
that. for over. one hundred years. the I'M
varying law of this Territory and State mas
been, as affirmed by the fathers of 1887,
The inhabitants of said Territory shall
always be entitled to the benefit of
prOportionate representation of the peO-
Pile in the legislature
1T is true that the ordinance of 1887. and
the Constitution of 1916, are no longer in
lOTce, OIliy III 50 idI as PROVISIONS OF those
instruments have been retained in
present Constitution. The principle of pro-
portionate representation In the Legsla-
ture mas, however. been so retained, and
consequently, has been the law here during
the whole period covered by those three
charters Of free government in Indiana.
1T is provided in the second section of
Article of the Constitution OF the United
States that The number of Representa-
tives shall not exceed one for every thirty
thousand, but each State shall have al
least one Representative Under the first
census Congress, in obedience to this pro-
vision of the Constitution, fixed the number
of Representatives at 120. BY this appor-
tionment Massachusetts was entitled to
fifteen Representatives. with an excess OF
25,327, for which an additional Represen-
tative was given. Other States. also hav-
ing large fractions of population left after
supplying their respective quotas OF Rep
resentatives. based on the given ratio. were
each awarded an additional Representa-
tive; while States having but small ex-
cess were each denied an additional Rep
resentative. President Washington. with
the advice of jefferson, Madison and otn-
erS, vetoed the bill, as in violation OF the
constitutional provision, above set OUT,
that the number of Representatives shall
not exceed one FOR every thirty thousand.
The exact mathematical rule of apportion-
proved unsatisfactory, inasmuch as IT re-
suited in leaving number or Representa-.
tiyes unassigned, owing TO the fractions or
poDulation left unrepreSented after nlllng
the quota to which the several states
were entitled by reason of their full ratios
of Representatives. The question contln-
ned TO trouble Congress until 1882. when the
rule adopted was that after each state
was given one Representative. and also the
full number to which il should be entitled