White, Harry, Wright and Walker, President-49. So the division was rejected. ABSENT--Messrs. Addicks, Baker, Bannan, Barclay, Bardsley, Biddle, Black, Chas. A., Black, J. S., Boyd, Brodhead, Bullitt, Carey, Cassidy, Church, Clark, Collins, Corson, Craig, Cronmiller, Curtin, Dallas, Darlington, Dodd, Elliott, Fell, Finney, Gilpin, Hall, Hazzard, Hemphill, Heverin, Horton, Lamberton, Lear, Littleton, M'Murray, Mann, Mantor, Mitchell, Mott, Newlin, Niles, Palmer, H. W., Patterson, T. H. B., Porter, Pughe, Purman, Read, John R., Reynolds, Ross, Runk, Simpson, Smith, II. G., Stanton, Temple, Wherry and Woodward-57. The PRESIDENT. will be read. Mr. MACVEAGH. I confess it seems to me that the balance of inconveniences is against this proposition. It appears to me that this offers a premium to gerrymandering in the Legislature of the greatest possible character, and that whatever party is in the majority will divide the city of Philadelphia and the city of Pittsburg so as to secure the return of its own ticket in those districts. You give them virtual control, as it seems to me, of the city. I am not very well acquainted with the map of Philadelphia, and with the political predilections of the inhabitants of its different quarters; but it seems to me almost certain that a shrewd man in the Legislature could divide this city into five districts, and make them The third division every one of one political complexior. Certainly he could if parties are at all evenly balanced, or nearly so. The CLERK read as follows: "Counties and cities entitled to more than five representatives shall be divided into legislative districts of contiguous territory by township and ward lines, each as large as possible, not to be entitled to more than five representatives. Every county and city containing more than the two-hundredth part of the population of the State shall constitute a district, and every county and city of less population shall be attached to such contiguous district as will tend most to equal representation." Mr. BROOMALL. I ask for a division of that last division, leaving distinct the question whether the large counties and cities shall be divided. The PRESIDENT. The proposed division will be read. Where does the gen tleman desire it to end? Mr. BROOMALL. At the word "representatives." The CLERK read as follows: "Counties and cities entitled to more than five representatives shall be divided into legislative districts of contiguous territory by township and ward lines, each as large as possible, not to be entitled to more than five representatives." Mr. BROOMALL. That presents the question whether we shall divide the large counties and the cities into legislative districts, each of which shall be as large as possible, but not having more than five representatives, or whether we shall vote by a whole ticket, or whether, on the other hand, we shall divide them up into single districts. Therefore 1 desire a vote upon it. This may be a merely imaginary danger, but it seems to me if no other restrictions are to be given than the restrictions of this clause such a result will follow, and that after all the Convention will find that the proposition prepared by the gentleman from Philadelphia (Mr. J. Price Wetherill) and waiting to be voted on after these amendments are out of the way, does guard this question better than any substitute which has yet been offered. It is a plan which was most thoroughly debated in Illinois, and received the final sanction of the Constitutional Convention of that State, and when it comes to be fully and fairly considered here, I think it will be found to meet the difficulties of the case more fully than any other plan that has been suggested. But I am not positive about it, and say to the gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. Broomall,) as he said to everybody else, if his plan is better than ours, for Heaven's sake let us take it and dispose of the subject; but I do not believe it is safe to give to the Legislature of this State the opportunity of separating Philadelphia into four districts, to elect by general ticket all the members in those districts. I see the disadvantages on the other side. I know that the larger is the district, ordinarily the better is the man, and this would go very far to elevate the character of the representative. But, nevertheless, there are other political considerations to be taken into account, and one of them is the very great danger of the evils of gerrymandering large cities like this, and it seems to me these evils outweigh the probable advantages tleman from Philadelphia. I move to of this division. strike out and insert: The division was rejected. "The House of Representatives shall The PRESIDENT. The fourth division consist of one hundred and fifty memwill be read. The CLERK. The fourth division is as follows: "Every county and city containing more than the two-hundredth part of the population of the State shall constitute a district, and every county and city of less population shall be attached to such contiguous district as will tend most to equal representation." The division was rejected. Mr. STRUTHERS. I rise to offer an amendment. I believe the first division of this amendment was adopted, and I ask to add to that what I now present. The PRESIDENT. The first clause of the amendment of the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Broomall) was adopted as an amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from Philadelphia (Mr. J. Price Wetherill.) There is nothing now before the Convention but the first clause of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Delaware. Mr. MACVEAGH. I move to reconsider the vote by which that division of the amendment to the amendment was adopted so as to get rid of it and get back to the amendment of the gentleman from Philadelphia. Mr. HUNSICKER. I second that motion. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to reconsider. bers. Each county as a community shall be entitled to one member. The ratio shall be ascertained by dividing the inhabitants of the State, as ascertained by the last preceding census, by eighty-four, and the districts respectively shall be entitled to one member for each ratio of population they contain. Any deficiency in making up the number of one hundred and fifty shall be made up by the largest fractions in the district." Mr. President, that embraces two. ideas: in the first place, community representation- that is, that each county which is a community shall be represented. Each county has its separate and distinct organization and arrangements, and has many matters to be looked after that wealth; and it is very proper, in my estimation, that each county should therefore have a representative. When that is done, it will take sixty-six of the members, leaving eighty-four to be divided on population. Divide the whole population, then, by eighty-four, and it gives you a ratio, and according to that ratio distribute the members. It appears to me that this is the most equitable proposition that has yet been made. are not common to the whole Common The PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment to the amendment. Mr. S. A. PURVIANCE and Mr. STRUTH The motion was agreed to, ayes thirty- ERS called for the yeas and nays. eight, noes not counted. The PRESIDENT. The first division of the amendment to the amendment is again before the Convention. Mr. BROOMALL. I ask that it be read. The CLERK read as follows: "The number of representatives shall be one hundred and fifty." Mr. MACVEAGH. I desire to have it negatived so as to reach the other proposition, which is the same in number. The division was rejected. The PRESIDENT. The question recurs on the amendment of the delegate from Philadelphia (Mr. J. Price Wetherill.) Mr. STRUTHERS. I meant to offer an amendment to the proposition just disposed of; but inasmuch as there has been a reconsideration, and that part voted down, I offer my proposition now as an amendment to the amendment of the gen Mr. MACVEAGH. I should ask for a division of that amendment. I beg the indulgence of the House for a moment. I had an amendment to offer, but I yielded to the gentleman from Warren, in these few words: "Provided, That each county shall have at least one member." Now, the gentleman has covered precisely that ground, and if we can have a distinct vote upon that question it will settle one matter at least. The PRESIDENT. This amendment to the amendment is now before the Convention, and the yeas and nays are asked for. Mr. MACVEAGH. Can it be divided? SEVERAL DELEGATES. We will vote it down. Mr. MACVEAGH. Then I withdraw the call for a division. Mr. BROOMALL. The first branch of it presents the very question the gentleman desires to raise. Mr. MACVEAGH. May I ask a question? If this is voted down, can I then offer an independent amendment to the present section embracing one of the matlers included in this amendment? ["Certainly."] The PRESIDENT. Undoubtedly. Mr. MACVEAGH. All right, then; there need be no division. both. You may take a single item of one and vote it in The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of that opinion, but when a division is asked of a subject susceptible of division, the Chair must divide it. Mr. BIGLER. I was about to attempt to relieve the Chair of just that difficulty by saying that it would become the body to waive that particular rule, because it is not practically applicable here. The Chair is right; the Chair rule; but in this case the rule ought to Mr. HARRY WHITE. I call for a divi- makes his decision according to a settled sion of the question. The PRESIDENT. A division is called apply to each proposition, because they for. Mr. J. PRICE WETHERILL. Before a division is taken on this proposition, I desire to call the attention of members to the working out of this plan as printed and laid on their desks some time ago. I would call their attention merely to one fact, that so fair is this proposition that it gives to Dauphin county, with a population of 61,000, two members, and to Warren county, with a population of 23,000, two members, and so on throughout, with thousands and thousands of unused fractions, in some instances amounting to over 21,000 in a county. The mere working out of the plan shows that it must be full of defects. Mr. BIGLER. Mr. President The PRESIDENT. The Chair, when the proposed division was suggested, had before him the wrong amendment, which was handed to the Chair as the pending amendment, beginning: "The House shall consist of one hundred and fifty members." In the proposed amendment that would be the first division, and then follows: "Each county as a community shall be entitled to one member." are submitted as complete in themselves. The text is one system of apportioning; the amendment is another. If you divide the amendment and vote some features of it into the text, you destroy the text and you destroy the amendment. Now, if the Convention itself would conclude that each member who rises with a proposition having considered it and prepared it, which will be a complete mode of apportioning the State, ought to have it voted on and accepted or rejected as an entire proposition, we should get along much better and more intelligently and satisfact@rily. I see no other way in which we can proceed with any kind of success or any kind of certainty. I have been obliged to vote without being able to tell what would be the effect of the vote, because of the divisions which destroy not only the amendments, but the original text. Mr. BAER. Mr. President: I am in favor of the amendment substantially as offered by the gentlemen from Warren (Mr. Struthers) with some amendment, but I believe at this point it is not amendable. I shall not be able to vote Mr. HARRY WHITE. I call for a divi- for it as it stands. One reason is that the sion, to end with the first clause. The PRESIDENT. A division is called, to end with the words: "The House of Representatives shall consist of one hundred and fifty members." basis of representation it fixes is unfair. The county of Somerset, from which I come, would, by this scheme, have two representatives, which I submit is more than it is entitled to in a House of one Mr. BROOMALL. The House has just hundred and fifty. The city of Philadelvoted that down. Mr. BIGLER. Mr. President; I rise for the purpose of interposing a point of order and insisting that the Chair shall adopt it. It must be very obvious that each one of these propositions to apportion the State is, and ought to be, and must be complete in itself. Now, if you allow a division of a proposition that is to supersede a text wich is complete in itself, the chances are that you destroy phia and the county of Allegheny would have, one seventeen and the other seven, much less in proportion to the amount of population. But I believe in the principle of county representation. If you fix the number at two hundred, instead of getting seventeen out of one hundred and fifty, Philadelphia would have twentyseven out of two hundred, and Allegheny, instead of seven out of one hundred and fifty, would have eleven out of two hun 44 dred, and Somerset would still have her two members. That would come nearer doing justice to all portions of the State than fixing it at one hundred and fifty on this basis. If the number can be increased to two hundred, then the basis of the gentleman from Warren would have some fairness, but limiting it to one hundred and fifty it certainly does manifest injustice to many portions of the State. It gives some portions much more than they are entitled to, and other portions much less. Either number will operate against large districts, but there cannot be much complaint of that if we make up our minds that communities shall be represented and that the House shall be largely increased; but it must be apparent to every member here that if we undertake to give communities representation, then we do certainly a great injury to the large populations, unless we increase the number of representatives; and I do not believe that the number of two hundred is any too large. I believe the sentiment of this Convention has long been that the number should be increased. I was all along opposed to increasing at all, unless we increased it very largely. I still believe if we are only to increase to a moderate rate, we had better adhere to one hundred. The sense of the Convention is, however, against confining the number to one hundred, and manifestly in favor of enlarging the number. If it is enlarged, then adopt a larger number than one hundred and fifty. If we would so frame it as to make it two hundred, I think it would give greater satisfaction in many quarers where at one hundred and fifty it will not satisfy the people at all. Mr. HUNSICKER. Mr. President; This question has been in obeyance since we sat here in this Hall in the month of June last. There are quite a number of propositions all looking to this same object, to wit, to fix an apportionment here; and there is a proposition on my desk offered by Mr. Simpson, of Philadelphia, who is not here to-day, and as it is not likely we shall reach any result, I move that the Convention do now adjourn. Mr. J. PRICE WETHERILL and Mr. MACVEAGH called for the yeas and nays on the motion, and they were taken with the following result: YEAS. Messrs. Bailey, (Huntingdon,) Beebe, Bigler, Bowman, Boyd, Broomall, Bucka lew, Corbett, Corson, Cuyler, De France, Messrs. Achenbach, Ainey, Alricks, So the Convention refused to adjourn. Mr. STRUTHERS. I see, on looking over it, that the misapprehension about this proposition has arisen out of the fact that there is a very bed misprint in the carrying out. For instance, as printed here, it gives Philadelphia seventeen members. The carrying of it out in detail, as I think I sent it to the printers, gives Philadelphia twenty-eight members. The print, it is true, gives but two members to Dauphin county, but Dauphin county will only have to increase her population about 4,000 to get an additional member. Warren county, on the contrary, with which the gentleman from Philadelphia (Mr. J. Price Wetherill) made his comparison, will have to increase 28,000 before it gets an additional member; and that is the way it will work throughout. I see that in a number submit the general proposition, and every of particulars the print is incorrect. I gentleman can carry it out for himself. Sixty-six counties in the first place are Mr. MACVEAGH. I think if the gentleman from Delaware will consider it he will find that no other figure will possibly answer for Warren county so well as that figure does. [Laughter.] Mr. BROOMALL. Eighty-four added to the present number of counties makes one hundred and fifty. Mr. MACVEAGH. It depends entirely upon the stand-point you occupy. From Delaware you want some other figure, I grant you; but I defy the most skillful arithmatician of this Commonwealth to place himself on the stand-point of Warren county, and find any other figure that will divide this State as well as eightyfour. [Laughter.] That gives Warren county her maximum representation. I do not blame the gentleman from Warreh. It is precisely like every other pro position that we have had here, or like the very great majority of them, it seems to me. For several days we adopted every proposition that any gentleman offered, who said that if you added one more, it would give his county a better chance. Afterwards we tore down all those card houses and came down to the hard-pan of Mr. Wetherill's proposition, but are slow in getting to it again. We shall amend it, I trust, and put it in shape. I hope the vote will be taken on this proposition as a whole. Mr. J. N. PURVIANCE. I move that this whole subject be referred to a committee of seven, of which the gentleman from Dauphin (Mr. MacVeagh) shall be the chairman. I will state my purpose in making this motion. There are many propositions before the Convention. They were submitted before we adjourned by some half dozen or more of members. They were ordered to be printed, and they were printed. Those propositions in a general way embrace about the same principle and I think if a committee of seven were appointed to take up those propositions and consider them and report upon them, the probability is that we would get such an apportionment article as would be satisfactory to the Convention and to the people of this Commonwealth. Now, when you look into all the amendments that are offered, how crude they are! Mr. Struthers does not mean, I know, that each county of this Commonwealth as a community shall be entitled to a member, and yet he has it He would start out with Philadelso. phia as a community with one member and then give twenty-eight or thirty on population, and so with Allegheny, and throughout the whole Commonwealth. Therefore the words "as a community" should be omitted. Then he has not the words "at least" in his amendment. It would read, if thus amended: "Each county shall be entitled to at least one member of the Legislature." That is the amendment that he means to offer. Now, I submit a motion that a committee of seven be appointed by the President for the purpose of taking all these amendments into consideration and making such report as that committee may deem proper; and I designate Mr. MacVeagh as chairman of the committee for this reason: By parliamentary courtesy the chairmanship of the committee might be given to the mover of it, but as he is the chairman of the Committee on the Legis |