« AnteriorContinuar »
meration of the inhabitants of the State shall be Mr. SCHELL- My attention has been called taken under the direction of the Legislature, in to the apportionment as reported by the gentlethe year 1868, in the year 1875, and at the end man from Cortland [Mr. Ballard) and which has of every ten years after the last mentioned year. been adopted by the committee. "It will be seen And the Legislature shall, at the first session after that that is the same apportionment which has the return of the enumeration in the year 1868, maintained in the State since 1866, the Legislaand upon the return of every subsequent enurner ture of that year having made an apportionment ation, apportiou the State into thirty-two districts under which the Senate is to be elected this year. which shall be numbered from one to thirty-two In examining that apportionment, I find that it is inclusive, that each district shall contain as nearly unequal and unfuir, and I will call the attention of as may be an equal number of inbabitants who are the committee to it and to the population citizens, and shall remain unaltered until the return which the apportionment represents, of which of another enumeration, and shall consist of con. I have made a schedule so that the comtiguous territory-no county shall be divided in mittee may understand it particularly. It the formation of a senate district except such will be seen, if the committee follow me, county shall be equitably entitled to two or more that the first second, third, fourth, fifth, Senators.
sixth, seventh, eighth and niuth districts have “The districts as the same are now constituted populations varying from 95,412 to 169,707 for shall remain uutil the enumeration and apportion. its territory, making a total population for these ment as herein provided shall be made and the nine districts of 1,094,720, giving an excess of first election under this Constitution shall take 127,586 in those districts over the average which place in 1869."
should be allowed to each Senator. The average Mr. A. J. PARKER - I move that the com representation is 107,126; so that the committee mittee do now rise, report progress, and ask leave will perceive that in the lower part of the State, to sit again.
including nine districts, there was an excess of SEVERAL DELEGATES — Nol pol no! population of 127,586, being more than the rep
The question was put on the motion of Mr. resentation of one Senator. The sixteenth seved. Parker, and it was declared lost, on a division, by teenth, eigliteepth, nineteenth, twentieth, twenty. a vote of 38 to 64.
first, twenty-second. twenty-third, twenty-fourth, Mr. SCHELL - Mr. Chairman
twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth districts coutain The question was then put on the amendment an average population of from 84,655 to 111,531, of Mr. Schell, and it was declared lost.
making eleven districts represented by 1,065,397, Mr. BICKFORD-I offer the following amend showing a deficiency of 112,989 in these eleven ment.
districts, to meet the demands of the number Mr. WEED—I move that the committee do now requisite for representation. Thus it will be seen rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. that taking the districts from sixteen to twenty
The question was put on the motion of Mr. six-eleven districts in the central part of the Weed, and it was declared lost, on a division, by State - they show a deficiency of 112,000, a vote of 34 to 67.
sufficient to make one representative Mr. SCHELL-I move now to reconsider the in the Senate; and taking the nine disvote which has just been taken on my amend tricts from the lower part of the State, ment. In doing that I may be permitted to say they show an excess of 127,586, showing an I had the floor when the Chair was putting the excess of one representative. This is sufficient, question on my amendment. I was unfortunate in my judgment, and I think in the judgment of in not being recognized.
the committee, to show that it is an unfair and The CHAIRMAN-The Chair did not hear the unjust apportionment. Whether it be done for gentleman.
political purposes, or for what purpose, I would Mr. SCHELL-I now move to reconsider the not undertake to say, but at any rate, it has vote taken on my amendment.
been a great cause of complaint on the part of The CHAIRMAN announced the question on those with whom I was associated, that the State Mr. Schell's motion.
at the time of the apportionment was unjustly Mr. ALVORD—I rise to a point of order. Just and unfairly apportioned with respect to the inbefore the vote was announced, the gentleman terest of the party not in the majority in this from Jefferson (Mr. Bickford) offered an amend.Convention; and I do not think the majority of ment.
this committee will indorse that action which car. Nr. CONGER-I want to know if the gentleries evidence of its unfairness on its face. But there man (Mr. Schell], cannot move a reconsideration is another reason, one which has been adverted to and ask that it lie on the table.
by the gentleman from Rockland (Mr. Conger), and Mr. ALVORD-I have no objection to that. the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. E. Brooks), why
The CHAIRMAN-The Chair is of opinion this apportionment should be made at the earliest that the point of order is well taken.
possible period. The census of 1865 has been Mr. TĀPPEN–Will the gentleman from Jefr: universally condemned as not being correct, and erson (Mr Bickford], give way for the reading of in saying that I do not care to reflect on the disthe amendment of the gentleman from New York tinguished official of the State government who (Mr. Schell), and to move a reconsideration ? superintended the making of it (for I do not
Mr. BICKFORD-I will if I do not lose my think he was a party to the act), but those whom chance. [Laughter.]
he employed to make the census in the city of The SEORETARY again read the amendment New York so far neglected their duty that it is of Mr. Schell,
susceptible of proof that large portions of the
city was not canvassed at all by the census- New York (Mr. Schell] allow me to ask him a takers. With the knowledge of that fact univer- question ? I would ask him whether he did not sally conceded I do not think this committee has last evening vote for the amendment of the gen. å right now to indorse and to perpetuate this tleman from Cortland (Mr. Ballard], which was apportionment founded on that census for the adopted ? remainder of the term for which it was made. Mr. SCHELL-I did not. Sir, I cannot conceive that it is necessary to urge Mr. A. J. PARKER—Will the gentleman from to the committee that that census was fraudulent Ontario [Mr. Lapham], allow me to ask him a or unfair and unjust and oppressive to the city question? What has that to do with the question of New York. During that period those who now under consideration. were there from 1860 to 1865, and those who were Mr. LAPHAM-When I get the floor I will familiar with the business activity of the city, know answer the gentleman. that during the three years down to 1865, property Mr. SCHELL—There is another mode of arrivincreased in value; that houses could not be rented ing at this, it strikes me, which ought to satisfy unless at large advances; that labor was dear; any fair minded man that this census is unjust that the population was large, and that every and oppressive on the city of New York. Taking department of business was filled to overflowing. the population of that city as returned in 1845, Persons gathered there from every section for the 371,223, and taking the population 1850, which purpose of residence, hotels were filled, and every was returned at 515,447, shows an increase for means of accommodation was afforded by the city those years of 295 per cent; king the of New York to supply the wants of others, such population of 1855, when it was 629,810, was the demand. But we are not left to mere shows an increase in 1850 of 203 per cent, conjecture on this subject. There are certain taking the population again in 1860, when it was data to refer to which will enable us to trace out 813,669, shows an increase on the population without any difficulty the population at that time of 1855, of 314 per cent, making an average for in the city of New York. I have taken the those four terms of 27 1-6 per cent, which would trouble to make a comparison of the votes in the show an increase on the population of 1860 to city of New York for some time previous 1865, of 221,046, making the population in 1865, to 1865, and I have gathered from those votes and 1,034,715. That is a plain proposition, and a matfrom the population existing at that time, the ratio ter of figures about which there can be no mistake. that existed between the population and the vote. But, sir, there are other matters connected with the Taking that data I have been able to fix almost city of New York, to show the progress of the peoto a certainty the population that existed in New ple, and from that we can also gather that there York in 1864, one year prior to the time of this has been an actual business increasing population census, and those who know the history of the in that city from 1860 to 1865. There is a class country know that from 1864 down to the time of institutions in our city known as savings the census was taken in 1865, the population of banks, which are the resort of people of moderate New York largely increased; and when I give the means, persons of moderate circumstances in life, population of 1864, I give it at a lower number than and I have taken occasion to refer to that class of that which existed in 1865. If the committee institutions in order to see whether there has will allow me, I will detain them but a moment in been any falling off in their business; for if referring to those data. The population of the 100,000 people had left New York in 1865, if our city of New York, in 1855, according to the census, business had become so bad, if the grass were was 629,810. The vote in 1856, the year follow-growing in our streets, if this silence came over ing, being the presidental vote, was 79,606, which the city, that class of institutions would have been showed an average ratio of voters to the popula. the first to have felt the effect of it. But, sir, I tion of seven and ninety-three one hundredths. In will read to the committee the result which I have 1860, the population, according to the census, gathered from examination of the deposits in the was 813,869. The vote was 95,583; the ratio was savings banks. In 1855 the average deposits in eight and filty one-hundredths to a voter. We find the savings banks were $26,111,719.20. In 1860 by a reference to the returns of 1864, the presi- the average deposits were $43,410,090.88; showdential election of that year, that the vote in ing an increase from 1855 to 1860 of $17,298,the city of New York
It will be observed that from 1851 to Taking the mean ratio between the years 1855 1860 there was a large increase in the population and 1866, it would be eight and twenty-two one of New York of 311 per cent. As I said hundredths, which gives a population in the city before the deposits in the savings banks in the of New York in 1864 of 907,405. Now, Mr. year 1860 were $43,410,090.88, and in 1865 they Chairman, is there any member of this committee had reached the sum of $72,928,854.59, showwho can believe with this data before him, that ing an increase in that class of business of the population of New York receded from 1864 $21,518,763.71. If New York had been in that to 1865 some two or three hundred thousand ? | bad state when the population was falling off and If there is any doubt about the fact that it did business paralyzed, would it be possible for that not recede from the population of 1860, 813,669, class of our citizens, including the mechanics and there is no doubt in my mind that the candid ex- men of small means, to have made that large sum aminer would come to the conclusion according to of money and deposited it in the savings banks ? this data that the population in 1864 was 907,705, There are other means of reference which I will and it could not have diminished in the following call the attention of the committee to. I hold in year upward of 200,000.
my hand a statement showing the taxes and ex. Mr. LAPHAM - Will the gentleman from 'penditures of the city of New York during those
times, and if the population had departed, and preserving more than they have ever done before the census of 1865 is correct, it would bave in the same period of time. I am opposed to the been invecessary to have taxed the city of amendment of the gentleman from New York New York with this large additional expense (Mr. Schell) for this reason. He proposes which this record now exhibits. In 1860, the That, for the simple purpose of fixing the basis of tax levy was $9.746,559.58. In 1865 the tax levy senatorial representation, there shall be an enuwas $18,202,857.56. Our board of education, meration of the inhabitants of the State taken in which would have been the first to have felt the the year 1868. There is no precedent for incur. effect of any loss of population, makes this return: ring the enormous expeuse involved in taking In 1860 the amount appropriated for the use of such an enumeration for the simple purpose of that board was $1.278,781.' In 1865 it amounted making it the basis of representatiou in one brauch to $2,293,508.58 uearly 100 per cent additional of the Legislature, and I trust the gentlemen of appropriated by the city and county of New York this Convention are not prepared to join w teach the children of the city of New those who are proclaiming here that the people York in 1865 and above the amount ara taxed beyond their ability to pay, and appropriated in 1860. Now, in reference are not willing to place upon the shoulders of to the police: In 1860 $1,359,625 was the people the additional burden of incurring sufficient to pay the expenses of that depart-this enormous expense for the simple purpose of ment, but it required $2,214,556.56 to pay correcting a basis of representation which was so the expenses of the same department in unanimously sustained in the vote that was taken 1865. With this data before the com- last evening. I have another objectiou to the mittee, it seems to me that it cannot be ques- proposition of the gentleman from New York (Mr. tioned but that the population of New York Schell]. If I understand it rightly, it provides city instead of diminishing from 1860 to 1865 that no county shall be divided in the formation had largely increased. Every evidence possible of senatorial districts. If that be true, it is a to bring before the committee would be evidence glaring injustice to the city of New York. for it of that fact. Nothing stands in the way except compols that city, which, under the present enumthe census made by the direction of the Legis. eration, is entitled to five Seuators, to subrnit to lature of 1860, which is evidence to the contrary. have but one. That is the legitimate, necessary I hope the amendment I have offered will prevail, effect of the proposition of the gentleman-that and that this committee will not indorse that no county shall be divided in the formation of census, and will not indorse the apportionment senatorial districts, and I am not willing to sanc. made under it by the Legislature of 1866, but ion that injustice to the city which he represents. that we shall have opportunity, by a new enu. [Laughter.] meration which may be taken in 1868, to have Mr. HUTCHINS-It may be that the census of the city re-apportioned in 1869, so that this Con. 1865 Was erroneous, and it may be that it was stitution may be effective and operative, and not. This much is true, it is hardly to be apportioned upon a fair and just apportionment expected that any census that may be taken of the representation of the State of New York. will come down to a mathematical accuracy. We cannot afford to remain in New York without There is one test that can be applied to this matbeing properly represented. I say we cannot ter, which, it seems to me, must set at rest once afford, when we know we have nearly half the and for all time this continual cry which we have taxable property of the State in the city of New heard of the unfairness of the census of 1865. York, where we are called upon each year to That there is a large population in the city of contribute to assist in paying the expenses of the New York no one will dispute. That a large State, and, sir, I hold in my hand also, the amount mass of humanity congregates there every day, which we were called upon during the year transacting business, crowding the streets, and 1865 to pay to the State as the portion of the giving the appearance of an overwhelming poputaxes to be paid by our city, which amounted to lation as residents of that city, there is no doubt. $2,592,000.73.
But whether they are legal voters or not is anHere the gavel fell, the twenty minutes having other and a very different question. For my expired.
part, I have no doubt that there are at least three Mr. LAPHAM - I am opposed to the amend hundred thousand people to-day in the city of New ment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. York, doing business there, who are either aliens Schell], and I hope it will not prevail. I am very or who are residents of other parts of the State happy to learn from his statistics that the depos-or of other States or the United States. Why, sir, its in the savings banks of the city of New York Connecticut pours her population in daily by thouhave increased from 1860 to 1865 to the sum of sands. New Jersey pours her population into the over thirty millions of dollars. It is a complete streets of New York by tens of thousands. Long answer to the cry which has been so often Island and Westchester county, and even the intesounded during the session of this Conven-rior of the State join in swelling the tide of humantion, of the onerous, grinding effect of taxation ity that daily pours into that city. Now, take this upon the people. The deposits in those test, take the actual vote which is cast at any banks are the savings of the laborers of the city, election in the city of New York, and you will and they present the gratifying spectacle that find that there are five senatorial districts in the amid all the exactions which have been made interior of this State, that at each of your elec. upon the people to sustain the government in the tions cast a larger vote than the five senatorial ordeal through which we have passed, the com- districts in the city of New York. Under the mon people after all have been saving more and I first Constitution of this state the enumeration
was hy electors. The representation of your| Mr. E. BROOKS — I suppose the majority have assembly and senatorial districts was upon the concluded that we are in for a night's session, basis of electors. Take that now, which is a fair and I can assure them that I can stand it, for way of representation, and you will find that New one, just as well as they can. Now, Mr. ChairYork to-day, upon the vote that she cast, is not man, I wish to say a word or two in regard to entitled to over five Senators. Last fall we had, the census of 1865, to which the gentleman from I suppose, as exciting and as close a contest
, New York (Mr. Hutchins), who has just taken in the city of New York, as we ever had, his seat, has made allusion. Sir, I pronounce or ever shall have again, for we had an issue then here, in my place, and I can give the authority that came bome to our doors, and the people of if need be, that the census of 1865 taken in the the State of New York looked on the issue city of New York, by the authority of the State which was to be decided in the city of New of New York and by the officers of the State, York, for the whole election turned upon was, in all respects, or mainly, an unfair, unjust the issue that was raised there, namely, the and negligent census return; that it is within excise law wbich had been passed by the Legisla- the power of the Statistical and Geographical ture of last year. Will the gentleman who has Society of the city of New York, which addressed us, from New York (Mr. Schell), say revised that census, and which visited many of that every vote was not cast that could possibly the wards in that city, to prove what I say to be be dragged to the polls on that occasion ? Have true, and that there were whole streets where we not been told by the gentleman from New these census-takers, which cost the city of New York (Mr. Dalg) one of the judges of the court of York some fitfy thousand dollars for the percommon pleas, that his court was kept open day formance of that work, never visited and never and night for the purpose making every legal pretended to visit. Why, _sir, the thing is Foter it was possible to make, that his vote might palpable on its face. The Federal census was be cast at the election ? Was not every house taken in the year 1860, and with very great care, ransacked, every street explored, and every wbere not only the people were enumerated in person taken by the collar and brought to the their respective dwellings, but where the governpolls
that occasion ? Was ment officers had to make returns, not only in DOC every man enrolled whose name could regard to the occupations of the people and tho be obtained, in order that he should be in a posi. number of the people, but in regard to the proptiup to vote at that election, and what was the erty of the people; and the census of 1860 deresult? A less vote in the five senatorial dis. monstated this fact, that there were 813,000 tricts of the city of New York than was cast in people in the city of New York in the year 1860, five other senatorial districts in the interior of the whereas by the State census taken five years State. Sir, this large population that we see later, to wit, in 1865, that census had been rein New York, is not a population residiog duced to 726,000. Sir
, is it not obvious to every there. It is a population made up in great part, gentleman upou this floor that that cengus was not the major part but in great part, of those unfair in its character ? Does not every man who are there temporarily transacting business. know, if he chooses to knowMy friend, as he walks down Broadway, aster Mr. C. C. DWIGHT — I would like to ask the taking his breakfast, meets the tide of popula. gentleman a question, whether it is a fact, which lation, and he looks on every one of them I hear stated on all sides of me, that the census as a resident of the city of New York, whereas of 1860, to which the gentleman refers, was it is from your hotels, your boarding houses taken under the direction of Captain Ísaiah that they come — some two hundred thousand Rynders, at two cents a name? of them not residents of New York, but tempo. Mr. E. BROOKS - Whether it was taker under rarily staying there and transacting busi- the direction of Captain Isaiah Rynders at two ness; and it is this reason, and this alone, I cents a name or not, is immaterial to the ques. think, which has given rise to the idea that the tion at issue. Why, sir, the fact I have stated is census was unfairly taken. I, for my part, in proved by the action in regard to the enlistment looking this matter over carefully, have come to question. When officers visited these various the conclusion that the census was as fairly taken wards to know who were there, proper subjects as those of previous years have been. I hope for enlistment, there was no doubt on the part of this Convention will not be guilty of this foolish the officers at the time as to who were ach, merely in consequence of clamor, and as I liable to military duty, and it was a general think, nothing but clamor-to say that the census admission on the part of gentlemen of all shall be taken again as proposed by the gentle parties that the population of New mau from New York (Mr. Schell), and tho State York
million of people redistricted.
that time. This fact
proved Mr. E. BROOKS — As have been when the State authorities and city authori. in session here
hours, ties visiting those houses know with very brief intervals, I think it has who were liable to military duty at that time. I arrived at such a period of the night that do not kuow as regards the faci, whether Captain the majority can afford to rise, report pro- Rynders received two cents a name, or whether gress, and ask leave to sit again, and I make Chauncey M. Depew recieved two or three cents that motion.
It is iinmaterial to the issue ; but this The question was put on the motion of Mr. fact I do know, and have stated it here, that it Brooks and it was declared lost, on a division, by cost the city of New York fifty thousani dollars & vote of 41 to 70.
to take that census, which resulted in a deprecia
tion of its population to the number I have, ing to this census, there were 140,000 voters in
, and to the system, and I regret the action of the Convention mnountains. This was the time the census in that respect. But the Convention has settled was taken, and when the doors of the houses that matter, and the judgment it has passed were closed, and it was impossible in many in must be regarded as final. The Convenstances to get admission into those dwellings to tion has arranged the districts and the amendfind out who were there. So much for this sub-ment of my colleague [Mr. Schell] now submitted ject, and with these remarks I am willing to leave would disturb what we have already settled. And it for the present.
there is another objection to it. In the order of Mr. GREELEY-I desire simply to make a the State and national census, the taking of the statement which will elucidate the matter now census occurs every five years, and the proposibefore us. The official census taken in the sum- tion to take the enumeration of the inhabitants of mer of 1865 returns the number of legal voters the State at the year indicated by my colleague, in the city of New York at 128,975, as you will would disturb that order of numerical arrangesee in the document before us. There have been ment, to say nothing of the great expense attendsince that time two years of naturalization, and ing on taking the census. To provide for this oba very heavy naturalization last fall. A very jection in a particular part of the State, justice great effort was made to call out the vote of the may be done in that respect by conforming the city. We had the mayor of the city running for enumeration to the next national census, for Governor, and an immense personal interest in although it is a census with which the State has all the grog-shops of the city in favor of getting nothing to do, we may assume it will be fairly qut every vote for him. The utmost possible vote taken by the national government. But be that was called out, and the total number polled was as it may, I am opposed to the amendment, as it less than 114,000, when, according to this official would disturb the proposition of the gentleman census, there must have been as many as 140,000 from Cortland (Mr. Ballard], which we have acted voters in the city. I submit that this vote of upon and adopted. the people, taken last November, when there Mr. CONGER—Mr. Chairman. [Cries of ques. was no pretense that they were away in the conn- tion). I believe that I have the floor
, Mr. Chairtry, or at the seaside, or anywhere else, when man. I did not desire to address the committee compared with the official return of voters in this to-night, at an expense of great physical effort census, proves the census taken in 1865 to be fair and inconvenience to myself, and I was willing and just,
the committee should have adjourned at a much Mr. E. BROOKS—It is perfectly notorious in more reasonable hour; but as this is the only our elections, even in the most exciting of them, probable opportunity which may present itself to that not more than seventy or eighty per cent of show by a detailed examination of the census of the people who are voters deposit their ballots. 1865 that it was erroneous, I shall detain the
Mr. GREELEY-It was not so last fall, and I committee a few moments for that purpose. A make abundant allowance for that. I say, accord-I critical review of the tabulations of this census