- oil ira /.

From the Bangor Wing.
THE APPORTIONNIENT.
{"character_count": 5038, "word_count": 836, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9591000080108643], "ccnet_perplexity": [923.7999877929688], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
the blush of shame on the faces of locofoco lead
ers and demagogues, and make them hide their
heads in very shame, dispassionate comparison
of the course of the two parties in relation to the
apportonments Of 1881 and of 1871 would pro-
duce this unheard-of effect. The bra2en-faced
impudcnce Of these would-be leaders of the peo-
pie, surpasses all belief. An apportionment fair,
and Constitutional and equal, is made the basis
Of notification resolves, Ga specimen of which we
some time since gave our readers) of party ha-
rangues in staring capitals, the terms OUTRA-
GEOUS, WICKED, UNCONSTITUTIONAL
and UNJUST are put forth as the softest words,
and which are applied in unsparing profusion, and
with reckless and undistinguishng denunciation
by those who know that there is in truth, no just
ground for such Trades, and whose only hope
and wish is, to excite prejudice and produce a
temporary effect, by abuse, without arguments,
and assertions without proof.


We pronounce the charges thus brought against
the apportionment, unfounded and unsupporta-
BILE. And any one who will look at the Resolves
and the newspaper criticisms will see that the
great cry raised, is all noise and made up of high
sounding and startling words without facts or
figures We propose to allude to one or two
FACTS which will set the course taken by the


two parties in true light. We begin to-day by
reference to one point which has not called forth
so much notice as it deserves.


By the Constitution, as is we'll known, it is
provided that at every apportonment, the first
thing to be settled is, the whole number of Sena-
tors and Representatives to be apportioned Ev-
cry town having fifteen hundred inhabitants is
entitled to one Representative, every town hav-
ING three thousand seven hundred and fifty in
habitants is entitled to two Representatives, and
so on and other towns, having less than fifteen
hundred inhabitants, to be classed so as to in
clude in eacn that number of inhabitants as near
as may be- But when this apportonment,
the number OF Representatives shall be two hun
dred, a different apportonment shall take place
upon the same principle and proportion. And
whenever the number of Representatives shall
be Two hundred, at the next annual meeting of
elections and at every subsequent period of ten
years, the people shall give in their votes, wheth-
er the number of representatives shall be increa-
sed or diminished, and if majority of votes are
in favor thereof, 1t shall be the duty of the next
Legislature thereafter to increase diminish the
number by the rate prescribed


The meaning Of this is plain. When the pop
ulation of the State is large enough to give 200
representatives, allowing fifteen hundred for Il
representative, and three thousand seven hund-
4 CO.., : t,o ,Pt al
Legislature to apportion two hundred represen-
tatives, and then submit the question of increase
or decrease to the people.


In 1881 the census upon which the Legislature
acted, showed the whole number of inhabitants
to be 399, ,353, which, divided by 1900, would give
two hundred and sixty Representatives Or,
taking another view, there were ninety seven
towns having over fifteen hundred inhabitants
each, giving ninety-seUen Representatives-four
towns having over three thousand seven hundred
and fifty, giving ten epresentatives-leayin Q
the other towns with an aggregate population OF
6S,62l, to be apportoned into classes of fifteen
hundred each, giving for districts, one hundred
and hcelpe Representatives, making at least, Two
HUNDRED AND NINETEEN Representatives.


It was clear, therefore, that it was the Consti-
tutional duty of the Legislature of 1881 to appor-
ton tlvO hundred Representatives upon the prln-
ciple laid down in the Constitution, and then sub
nit the question to the people. Nopossible con-
struction can avoid this conclusion. If it was the
duty of the last Legislature to do this, it was
equally the duty ofthe Legislature of 1881. And
yet having the power in 1881, the party cast about
to find what number of Representatives would
best answer their purpose, and without any Con-
sttutional right and in plain disregard of its pro-
visions, they arbitrarily fixed upon ONE HUMID
RED AND EIGHTY-sIx, as the number to be appor-
toned, and proceeded to assign them for the ten
gears, riding with iron heels over the ConstItu-
ton, and utterly disregarding the requirement to
submit the question of increase decrease to the
people, which would then authorize the next
Legislature thereafter to apportion according to
the will of the people.


Let any one look at the Constitution and he
will see at once with what high handed usurpa-
ton and disregard of the Constitution the appor-
tionment of 1881 was made. They were bound
to apportion two hundred representatives., but
this number was inconuenient in view of ulteror
objects. II they had apportioned two hundred,
they must have submitted the question TO the
people, and this would have led, necessarily, to
another apportionment. No one can mistake the