The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-05-03


Justices Wilkin and Car
Mill make q minority re-
Tn OF Justice Cartwright
+ on the constitutionality
1 sums up the matter, to
hable benefit OF the DEM
lite, as follows:
an apportionment act Is
legislative power, and IL
her provisions relating 10
bn the general Legislative
ID by section |, the legis-
>portion the State at its
me. There is no express
stitution Of the right 10
Ter whenever the legisla-
Ind 1t Is therefore argued
that It may be exercised
that the legislature may
tionment whenever II
YES not follow, however,
initial. In order that the
operate as a prohibition.
|ain a specific provision
It's shall not be made
Eording TO its provisions
fovisions inserted by the
lime when a power shall
be is at least a strong
hey design 1t should be
line only.
during the thirty years
lion of 1878 had been in
ing frequent apportion-
may always look to as.
tended to bs remedied,
could not have been
which did not exist. and
leem that the object was
mite periods for reappor.
~ the legislature Of 1893
nment of that year the
(which authorized the 81.
yer. and the legislative
ercised, based upon the
1890, a division of the
F.one, and the resulting
Hratio OF representation.
4 Secretion, when fully eN-
tausted, and the power
Sc until the conditions
constitution shall again
and discretion are to be
intervals and in certain
legislature upon a cen
bets exercised the power
kportionment. based upon
the same division and
which, 1t is admitted.
uld be nothing but re-
Int and discretion of that
led upon the same facts
essly authorized by the
i've can not think that
ion OF those who adopt
that succeeding legis-
aside the action of the
bnd remodeling districts
hdition contemplated by
lists.
lake appointments has
ercised at exact periods
he power conferred by
a continuing one from
nstitutionally devolvsd
uro until 1t is per-
|aving a general plan Of
ar to our own, have by
forbidden a change be-
fixed In such constitu-
itions are conclusive OF
ase must be the subject
which has been prac-
the legislature for a
e as we have already
* pich an express prchibi-
lgttHltion Is not. as before
nclusive that the prohibi-
Med. Plausible reasons
IA sustaining the power
this particular instance
I4lly apreal with force tc
gi hat tina apportionmsni
ID by some other mctiv,
BID or a desire to secure
Arly as possible equalit,
Grafton can not havt
provisions of the con
to he remembered thai
h would permit a cor
would also permit tn,
nst and fair apDortion'
time fixed by tho con
Institution of unjust an
5 within the latitude al
ution Ct the legislature
h that thu construction
the constitution is tn
r feel ourselves urde
sclarlng the appor'ion
Unconstitutional and in
y writ OF msndamus |
Il the prayer OF the pe
led.
Ter dissent and a dis
! be fled"
-
ne Court.
I Hay 2.-The followini
d in the supreme cour
Is answered: II. II
insr Ell al. from Hooi
w. Sims, from Cooke
submitted County O
pucic, from Galveston
handed; Eugene Will
minlstrstor. VS.. Plan
s' National Bank O
Z Galveston.
. RNICA sALyE.
= b the world for Cuil
re-. salt Rheum. Fevs
7 ped Hands. Chilblain
Einptions. and pos
fr no nav required.
We perfect satisfactio