Evening star., 1932-10-11
RED|STR|CT|NG ACT
Of VIRGINIA invalid
Court Decision Will Force
Election of Nine Represent
atives at Large.
By the Associated Press

BY the Associated Press.
RICHMOND, Va, October 1.-THE
Virginia redictricting act of 1882, was
held unconstitutional today by the
Supreme Court of Appeals.
The court granted a writ of manda-
mus to DR.. William Moseley Brown
and Charles c. Berkeley, compelling the
secretary of the commonwealth to certi-
fy their names to electoral boards as
candidates at large for Congress. R.
Lindsay Gordon, who also made an ef-
fort to file notice of candidacy at large,
will also be certified to electoral boards
as a result of the decision.
Anti-Smith Leaders.
Brown and Berkeley, candidates for
Governor and Attorney General, respec-
lively, on the anti-Smith-Republi
coalition ticket in 1929, attacked the
Virginia act as violative of both State
and Federal constitutions in that the
districts created we're not contiguous
and varied greatly in population. Cor
don was also an anti-Smith Democratic
leader in 1929.
When the three men sought to file
at large the secretary Of the common
wealth returned their notices with the
statement that there were no provisions
for Representatives. in the
State. They then brought action for
mandamus, attacking the red1strlctlng
act.
36 Candidates to Run.
Meanwhile candidates of all parties
who had filed district notices hastened
to Richmond to offer to file at large
so that their candidacy would be in
accordance with the law in event the
act should be held invalid. Their notices
were returned by the secretary the
same as those of Brown, Berkeley and
Gordon.
The action of the court today will
place more than So candidates at large
in the field for the nine seats in Con-
gress, Virginia has under the reap
portionment.
The court today held that the redis-
tricting act must conform to the con-
stitution and if it is contended that the
act does not meet the requirements OF
the constitution 1t is subject to judicial
review.
AS to the questions of compactness,
contiguity and equality of population
the court said "thc inequality is OBJ
vious, indisputable and excessive. 1t is
demonstrative by the statement of facts.
The disparity in population between the
! largest, the seventh, and the smallest
is l52, 2,720."
Appeal Not Planned.
| The court added that scme counties
| by slight change in district lines
could have been included in other dis
tricts. thus making the act constitu-
| tional
Justice E. w. Hudgins wrote the
courts opinion. He said:
In reaching this conclusion we are
! not unaware of the fact that since
November 20, 1888, Virginia has been
| divided into districts for the purpose
of the electors in the respective dis
tricts selecting one Representative to
Congress and that the result of this
decision will be that for the first time
in 144 years the entire membership of
| the House Of Representatives from Viz
| ginia will be chosen by the electors In
the State at large.
However this may be, it Is our duty,
as it is the duty cf all others, to obey
! the mandate of the fundamental law
| and in obedience to the sovereign will
of the people, speaking through the
| constitution, we are forced to the con-
clusion reached in this case. The writ
of mandamus is awarded"
Mai E. H. Gibson, assistant attorney
general, said an appeal from the de-
cision of the court to the United States
| Supreme Court was not planned.