Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-01-08
Daily kennebec 3ournaI.
IN NAMES BEHALF.
Continued from page p

himself, prepared in answer to a verbal
inquiry october %. 1881, more than six
months after the letter of the director
10 Mr.. Cox. Let me read what Mr.
Seaton. the chief clerk, says about this
interesting mathematical proposition
that is now out and now in. that Won
now see and now do not. He SAYS:
while making these calculations 7
met with the so-called Alabama para
dox," where Alabama was allotted 8
representatives out of a total of 299. re-
ceiving but when the total became
500
1t struck him as very unusual pro-
ceeding. or perhaps, as the great Conk-
ling once said in an argument before
the supreme court of New York. as |
am informed, as ''vociferous and hal
cyon proceeding" He says:
such Il result as this is to me con-
elusive proof that the process en-
ployed in obtaining it is defective. and
that it does not in fact 'apportion rep
resentatives among the several states
according to their respective numbers.
This conclusion has been confirmed
by the discovery of other anomalies.
and the result Of my study of this ques-
ton is the strong conviction that an
entirely different process should be en-
ployed.
Now, Mr.. Speaker. l state again that
the argument of the gentleman abso-
lutely contradicts the proposition that
he lays down. 1t simply illustrates
this: 1t is true that no apportionment
can be made of the membership of this
uanSa that iS nor made in !, l., VOC ak.
gree in an arbitrary manner The plan
suggested by Mr.. w; lker never has
produced the results desired-to give
to all the states an equal and fair dis
tripution in accordance even with its
fundamental idea--and the plan sug-
gested is based altogether on an arbi-
trary conclusion. because in every in
stance they stop in adding their frac-
tons when they reach the number with
which they started, independent of the
fact of whether the majority fractions
are still unused, and sometimes go in
to the minority fractions. That is pre-
csely the proposition we maintain.
If the proposition set out by the gen.
tleman so urageously in his speech
were sound, no fractions would have
any representation. If it is not sound,
this committee leaves the representa-
ton to be based arbitrarily upon what
the House deems to be fair and reas-
enable and right and just. The con-
clusion to be reached either by Mr..
Walkers method or by the fourth
method which is reported by the COM
mittee from the census Office, which
undertakes to reach results in this
manner. takes an arbitrary ratio. or
basis of representation-l94. 900. for in
stance-divideS the population in each
state for the purpose of getting the
whole numbers. and the fractions left
are disposed of by taking the majority
fractions in their order until they are
exhausted. and thus the membership
of the House is reached by that method
OF computation. more simple. more
plain, and more clear and direct and
less subject to criticism than the COM
plicated and peculiar system adopted
by Mr.. Walker and relied upon by both
bills.
The minority bill is made up precise
~ according to the statement in the re-
port of the committee: and following a
precedent established by this House in
1872 it takes Il table that is based up
on the representation of 3S4. and when
we find the representation of 3S4 under
that table we find two states with ma
jority fractions left out and unrepre-
sented-Nebraska and Virginia. And
the minority propose to add to the
number as given in the 3S4 calculation
Nebraska and Virginia, because they
have each majority fraction and are
equally entitled to representation, eN-
cept for the matter of the size of the
fraction. as any other state having a
ma jority fraction.
This bill stands upon a precedent
which goes vastly farther than is nee
eSSary to Justify even this legislation
and this apportionment. ! call atten-
ton to the report of Mr.. Mercur. Of the
committee on the judiciary-a unani-
NOUS report-made in 1872, upon bill
which added to the membership of the
House.
The report says:
The recent action of Congress in in
creasing the size of the House to 2S3, in
order to save states from diminu
ton in the number of their representa-
tives, has inclined the committee to
recommend a further increase of9mem
beers. making the whole number 292
which is believed to be the smallest
number that, upon an equitable and
constitutional apportionment, Will
leave each state with at least its pre-
sent representation.
In making this apportionment the
committee have adopted the figures and
tables which We're prepared by the IN
terror department and We're before the
House on a former occasion, apportion-
ing 800 members
Then follows the table, after which
the committee continues:
The committee. however. in addition
to the - members assigned to fractions
by the above table, assign one to New
Hampshire and one to Florida. making
in all a House of 292. The reason for
this is that greater injustice Will be
done each of these states by not giving
it the additional representative than
to the other states by giving it.
Those states came in at that time on
a minority fraction because the COM
mittee on the judiciary believed it to be
proper in order to make the represen
tation fair and just.
The chairman of the committee as
sailed the minority report with great
force and violence do not suppose he
will have any objection to my recogniz-
ing that his arguments was forcible OF