Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1903-05-23
For What
Was 1t Made?

added to the Fourth district. The
population of these four counties, to-
| wit: Rock Island county from the
Sixth district. and Mercer, Warren
and Henderson counties from the
Fifth district, is 1918, the popula-
ton of Rock Island county being So
249, of Mercer county being 20,045, of
Henderson county being 1885. and of
Warren county being 23.l63. But no.
1913 inhabitants were not added to the
population Of the Fourth district by
the annexation of these four counties
thereto. because Pike and Scott coun-
ties was I2,O50. If 42.O5O is deducted
from 1898, the remainder is 6s,143.
Therefore, the only addition made to
the population of the Fourth district
by the act of April ;. 1908, was 6S.193,
| less than the amount which, accord
ing to the statement in the preamble
Was required tn equalize the Fourth
district as nearly as might be with
the other districts.
| at is true that courts cannot in
quire into the motives which prompt
legislative action, but the constitu
ton provides that the alteration of
the boundaries must be upon the rule
of equality of population, and when
this court, which is empowered under
| the constitution to pass upon the va
llidity of an act of the legislature can
see upon the face of an act that its
purpose was not to carry out the rule
of equality of population, it is the
duty of the court, il seems TO me, to
pronounce the act invalid. 1t cannot
be said if the Fourth district was less
in population by more than 100000
than the other counties. it was neces-
sary to deduct 42.O5O from its popula-
ton and then add 1898 thereto
Why were not the Pike and Scott coun-
ties with their population of 42,O5O
allowed to remain a part of the
| Fourth district in accordance with
the provisions of the constitution,
which put them there. and sufficient
amount of population added to the
Fourth district with Pike and Scott
counties in il to- bring the district up
to an equality with the populations
of the other districts, as nearly as
such equalization could be accomplish
ed? In other words. instead of
ldeducting and then adding as was
done here. why was not the addition
made without any deduction? The
conclusion is irresistable that the OBJ
ject of this act was not so much to
equaliZe the population of the Fourth
district with the other districts. as it
was to get rid of the counties of
Pike and Scott.
while the legislature is allowed
considerable latitude in making the
posed in il is liable to great abuse,
and must be fairly and honestly exer-
cised. If, in making the aapportion-
ment, there is so wide a departure
from the constitutional rules of com
lpactness and numerical equality in
population. that it cannot be possibly
Justified by the exercise of any judg-
ment or discretion. but evinces an in
tention on the part of the Legislature
to utterly ignore and disregard the
rules of the constitution. in order to
promote some other object than
constitutional apportionment, the APP
pointment is unconstitutional and
void. q Am. and Eng. Enc. of Law
l2nd-P, S4S.) 1t seems to me that the
Language above quoted is particularly
Applicable to the case in hand. 1t fol-
llows. that even if the legislature has
the power under the constitution to
Ichange the boundaries of one district
at one time. more changes have been
made under the act of April ,. 1908. in
other districts than the Fourth dis
trict. and than can be regarded, by
any process of reasoning, as neces-
sary incidents to the alteration
sought to be effected in the Fourth
district
One of the results following from
the act of April ,, 1903, is substanti-
ally to disfranchise the voters of Pike
and Scott counties. at least for pc
Rod of three years. In 1908 the vo-
tiers of Pike and Scott counties should
vote for the election of a Judge of
the supreme court in the Fourth dis
trict. But as the act of 1908 now an
neXes those counties to the Second
district. they will have no opportunity
of voting for judge of the supreme
court before 1906, when the Second
district elects a supreme court Judge.
The people of these counties, instead
of being allowed to vote for SUI
preme court judge once in a period of
nine years. are deprived of the priv
l1ege of voting except once in IL
years. The opposite effect takes
place in regard to the people in the
counties detached from the sixth and
Fifth districts. The voters of the
county of Rock Island in the Sixth dis
trict cast their ballots for a judge
of the supreme court in 1897, and,
as that county is now added to the
Fourth district. the voters in that dis
trict have the privilege of casting
their vote for Judge of the supreme
court in 1908. within period of six
years; that is to say, they are given
the privilege of voting twice for
Judge of the supreme court within
period of six years. The voters in the
counties of Mercer, Henderson and