Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

discovers the method of its inaccuracies. Out of, mental in taking it for the southern district. its own own belly cometh forth its lie. On Your census for the whole State shows page xliii, a comparative view of the percentages that the population only increased twelve of increase or decrease for consecutive periods per cent, the same ratio in which it of five years each are given, ever since a census had increased at the taking of the previ was taken, either by the United States govern-ous census of 1855. I am willing to prove, and ment or the State of New York. I will not carry prove it by the census of 1865 itself, that you you any further back than the year 1830. The must either declare that the city of New York increase of population in the city of New York lost about twenty-five per cent of its population, from 1830 to 1835 was thirty-six per cent. the natural rate of increase, by the calamities of From 1835 to 1840, it was sixteen per cent. In the war, or else that this census of 1865 was an 1845, it was sixteen per cent over the numbers absolute wrong and injustice upon the city. The given by the previous census. In 1850, it was gentleman who asked this question [Mr. C. C. thirty-nine per cent. In 1855 it was twenty per Dwight] was patriotic, and, like the Marshal he cent, and in 1860 it was twenty-nine per cent. bears a military title; and I ask him, is he But in 1865 there was computed to have been willing to admit that the great proportion of eleven per cent of decrease. While there had been men who went to the war, and sacrificed their a steady increase up to 1860, on the basis of which, lives, came out of the city of New York, taking if you average the six preceding takings, the the whole State as a basis of enlistment? He population would have grown twenty-six per knows as well as I can that the city sent only cent from 1860 to 1865, this census of 1865 116,382 men to the war, while the State at large makes it eleven per cent diminution. That furnished 473,443, which last amount may serve makes a gross error of thirty-seven per cent. as a basis of inquiry as to the decline of the State Now, compare with the same figures the population, while the former fails to give any incorresponding rates for the whole State, and ob- sight into the alleged deficiency of the city. serve the results. The percentage of increase of population in the whole State by the same table for 1835 was thirteen per cent above the population of the previous census. By the census of 1840 it was twelve per cent; of 1845, it was seven per cent; of 1850, it was nineteen per cent; of 1855, it was twelve per cent; of 1860, it was twelve per cent; and when you come to 1865 it was two per cent. decrease. The average rate then of increase up to 1860 for the whole State during the last thirty years preceding is, by an easy computation ascertained to be twelve per cent.

Mr. C. C. DWIGHT-Does not the gentleman assume the absolute accuracy of the census of 1860, taken by Marshal Rynders?

Mr. KINNEY - Does the gentleman take into consideration the fact that during the war immigration almost entirely ceased?

Mr. CONGER-Suppose it did?

Mr. ALVORD - Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? I ask whether the immigration did not

Mr. HATCH-I want to know if the gentleman from Onondaga [Mr. Alvord] is in order? He is not in his place. [Laughter.]

Mr. CONGER-The argument about immigration into the city or State amounts to very little on this special question. The immigration into the city from 1855 to 1850 was 589,029, and from 1860 to 1865 it rose to 678,337. The city of New York, as the gentleman knows very well Mr. CONGER-As to the census of Marshal does not retain one-tenth of the population that Rynders, on which the gentleman lays so much comes from foreign shores, but the immigration is stress, the tables show he could not have made distributed over all the Western States of the more than nine per cent of error, unless Union; and the immigration from 1855 to 1860, you suppose the city of New York from 1855 exceeded that from 1860 to 1865, as by the to 1860 had no foreign increment. In attack-figures just given only about 90,000. But, ing the United States census of 1860 does not as wherever the immigration goes, it is a the gentleman see that he must also dispute fair supposition that it is evenly disthe State census of 1855 ? That census tributed throughout the State, I want to state gave the city of New York twenty per cent sir, this simple problem: When the census-takers increase on the previous one. The census of come here and give you a summary of their 1860, taken by the Marshal, gave only twenty-returns, they tell you that the State of New York nine per cent. Does not the gentleman know has lost two per cent of its population in the five that the population of New York increased years, while they tell you in the same breath that more from 1855 to 1860 than it had for the city of New York has lost eleven per cent of a period prior to that of ten years? "Suppose its population. If you take the average populathe Marshal was in error, or suppose he commit- tion of the census of the city of New York for ted a fraud, the average of these census tables the six preceding census it would have, accordshows he could have at best committed a fraud of ing to its natural rate, gone up to twenty-six per nine per cent, because the previous census of cent. If you take the average of the whole State 1855 made the city of New York increase twenty population for those six years, it would be but per cent on the previous rate; or only three per a fraction over twelve per cent; so that, if you cent, as the average of its increase for the six suppose the population of the State had declined would have entitled it to an increase of twenty-fourteen per cent from its natural rate of increase, six per cent in 1865. But to go to the in order to make this tabulation of the decrease of whole State census and follow this inquiry it is not the State for 1865 correct, still taking that fourteen to be urged that Marshal Rynders took the cen- per cent from the rate of increase of the city of sus of the whole State, though he was instru- New York, plus the decrease of eleven per cent

charged by the census against the city, you find, do not know as it has ever been shown or stated twenty-three per cent as the error of the census by any one until this evening that they have done in regard to that population. Thus, sir, I think so. the census, on the face of it, shows that a great injustice was done to that portion of the State, and a like method of inquiry will discover a much greater injustice practiced on the county of Kings. I contend that by the census this Convention has Mr. FRANK-In the next place, they make it in its power to do justice, or to approach to some their argument to show us that we ought to give measure of justice to these districts. First, in them a larger representation in the Senate, or a order to do that you must add at least twenty greater number of senatorial districts than the per cent to the 726,000 given by the census report of the committee of this Convention has as the population of the city of New given them. The gentleman from New York York, which makes it largely over 800,000, [Mr. Hutchins], corroborated by the gentleman and that would make the city of New York from Westchester [Mr. Greeley], states that at entitled, under an apportionment of the State into the last election, which was one of the most thirty-two districts, to seven Senators. I would exciting in New York, they cast no more like to ask the gentleman from New York [Mr. votes than were cast in five of the rural disHutchins], who made so elaborate an argument to tricts. It would seem to be additional proof that prove that that city has been depopulated in the the report of the committee is a fair one for the last five years, whether he would like to swear city of New York. Neither the gentleman who to-day that he does not believe there are not last spoke [Mr. E. Brooks], nor the other gentle900,000 souls living in the city of New York, or man [Mr. Conger], has attempted to answer that, whether he believes there were anything less and I would like to hear their explanation. in 1865 than 800,000 people living and residing there?

Mr. E. BROOKS-I say on the authority of the Statistical and Geographical Society, on information given to me by a member of that body, that they were incorrectly returned-notoriously so.

Mr. HUTCHINS-In answer to the gentleman I have to say that I have the same right to suppose a fraudulent

The CHAIRMAN-The gentleman from New York [Mr. Hutchins] is not in order.

Mr. HUTCHINS-The gentleman assumes that the census of 1860 was a correct census.

Mr. E. BROOKS-I would answer that-
Mr. AXTELL-I suppose the gentleman is
out of order. He has spoken once.
Mr. FOLGER-I object.

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair is of opinion he is out of order.

Mr. CONGER-I suppose I have the floor. I yielded it to enable the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. Frank] to ask a question.

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair understood that the gentleman from Rockland [Mr. Conger] vacated the floor.

Mr. CONGER-The Chair is mistaken. I had not consumed my time. The gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. Frank] asked me a question.

Mr. RATHBUN-I rise to a point of order. The gentleman from Rockland [Mr. Conger], when he sat down, said, "That is all I have to say."

The CHAIRMAN - The gentleman from Rockland [Mr. Conger] says he had not vacated the floor. He will again proceed.

Mr. CONGER-I had no reference to that in the question I ask. I ask the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hutchins] or any gentleman representing New York on this floor, whether as a man and a citizen, if he was sworn, he would say he believes the city of New York has anything less than 900,000 souls living in it to-day, or had anything less living in it in 1865, than 800,000. This generally I show by the census, when you come to compare the census by itself, and show an error in its tabulations, that the census must be taken to mean that the city of New York, had in it when the census was taken, over 800,000 souls, and that is confirmatory proof of the statements which have been alleged here, that there were large portions of the city of New York that were not visited by the census takers. The census itself Mr. FRANK-I supposed the gentleman [Mr. corroborates everything that has been said, in Conger] had the floor. I simply rose to ask him regard to its inaccuracy in that city, and I hope a question. I would be glad to have him answer there is a remaining sense of justice left in the it if no objection is taken. mind of this Convention, whenever they finally determine this question of what shall be the representation of the city of New York, to give it its fair, just and proper numerical apportionment, according to a just review of this census. That is all I ask.

Mr. FRANK-We have heard very much here since the opening of this Convention. as to the census of the city of New York, both from the gentleman who has last addressed us [Mr. Conger], and others. Now, if I understand it correctly, the census of 1865 was taken by men sworn to do their duty faithfully and honestly. We are bound first to believe they did so, unless it can be shown that they intentionally committed a fraud or made a mistake. I

Mr. CONGER-I will not make it a question of veracity with the gentleman who last took his seat [Mr. Rathbun]. If I said that, that is sufficient. I will make the answer some other time.

Mr. SCHELL-I would be glad to add the words, "except a county shall be equitably entitled to two or more Senators," after my amendment.

The CHAIRMAN - The amendment is not in order, the pending motion being to reconsider the vote by which the amendment of the gentleman [Mr. Schell] was lost.

Mr. SCHELL-I ask the unanimous consent of the cominittee to perfect the paper I sent up. Mr. ALVORD - I object.

The CHAIRMAN-The amendment is not in order, the motion being to reconsider.

Mr. SCHELL-The motion on the amendment is in the power of the proposer until some action is had by the committee, is it not?

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair will inform the, enumeration of the inhabitants of the State shall gentleman that his amendment is not before the committee until the vote is reconsidered.

Mr. SEAVER-I understood the gentleman from Rockland [Mr. Conger] to be on the point of taking his seat, when the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. Frank] rose to ask him a question. I hope he may be permitted to proceed.

Mr. SCHELL-I hope the gentleman will let me complete my amendment.

be taken, under the direction of the Legislature, in the year 1868 and in the year 1875, and at the end of every ten years after the last mentioned year; and the Legislature shall, at the first session after the return of the enumeration in the year 1868, and upon the returu of every subsequent enumeratfon, apportion the State into thirtytwo districts, which shall be numbered from one to thirty-two inclusive; that each district shall contain as near as may be an equal number of inhabitants who are citizens, and shall remain Mr. E. BROOKS-I call the gentleman from unaltered until the return of another enumeration, Onoudaga [Mr. Alvord] to order. He is not in and shall consist of contiguous territory. No his place and has not a right to call any member county shall be divided in the formation of a to order. senate district except such county shall be The queston was put on the motion to recon-equitably entitled to two or more Senators. sider the vote by which the amendment of Mr. Schell was lost, and it was declared lost.

Mr. ALVORD-I call the gentleman [Mr. Schell] to order.

The CHAIRMAN-The question now recurs on the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Richmond [Mr. E. Brooks] as amended.

Mr. BICKFORD-I call now for the reading of my amendment.

Mr. SCHELL-I now propose the original paper I presented with this addition as an amend

ment

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair is of opinion that it is not now in order.

Mr. CONGER-I appeal from the decision of the Chair.

Mr. CHOONMAKER-I move that the comm ttee do now arise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The question was put on the motion of Mr. Schoonmaker, and it was declared lost on a division by a vote of 29 to 62.

The districts, as the same are now constituted shall remain until the enumeration and apportionment as herein provided shall be made and the first election under this Constitution shall take place in 1869."

Mr. SCHELL-This is an amendment to Mr. Flagler's amendment.

The CHAIRMAN - Mr. Flagler's amendment is not now before the Convention. The amend ment now before the Convention is the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Richmond [Mr. E. Brooks], as amended. Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schell], move this as an amendment to that.

Mr. SCHELL - Yes, sir.

The question was put on the amendment of Mr. Schell, and it was declared lost.

A count was called for, when the ayes were were taken and reported at 24.

The noes were called for, and delegates arose.
The CHAIRMAN-It is evidently lost.
Mr. E. BROOKS-I insist that the negative
vote shall be counted. I think it is very doubt-

Mr. CONGER-I wish to take an appeal from
the decision of the Chair on the offer made by the
gentleman from New York, Mr. Schell, to present
a new proposition. Unless the Chair misunder-ful whether there is a quorum present.
stood the gentleman from New York [Mr Scholl];
he presented a further proposition.

The CHAIRMAN The Chair understood it was an amendment to his former amendment that was lost.

Mr. BICKFORD-I rise to a point of order. The amendment of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schell] is not in order, because mine was in order first. [Laughter.]

The CHAIRMAN — The Chair is of the opinion, on reconsidering the subject, that the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Bickford] is now in order.

The SECRETARY proceeded to read the amendment offered by Mr. Bickford.

The CHAIRMAN - The Chair is of the opinion that the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Jeffersou [Mr. Bickford] is not in order, as the second section is now under consideration, and he proposes to amend the third and fourth sectious.

Mr. SCHELL-I now offer the amendment in the hands of the Secretary, with the addition of the words I suggested.

The SECRETARY proceeded to read the amendment, as follows:

Strike out after the words "four years" and insert "and shall be constituted as follows: an

The question was again put on Mr. Schell's amendment, and, on a division, it was declared lost by a vote of 24 to 76.

Mr. TAPPEN-The hour of eleven has arrived; the thermometer is at 81°, and the stenographers have used up their pencils. [Laughter.] I, therefore, move that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The question was put on the motion of Mr. Tappen, and it was declared lost, on a division, by a vote of 42 to 60.

Mr. SCHOONMAKER I offer the following amendment. The object of it is to have three Senators in each district, and to have one Senator elected in each district every year.

The SECRETARY proceeded to read the amendment, as follows: "Strike out the words 'thirty-two' whenever they occur, and insert fifteen,' so as to make fifteen senate districts. Strike out the word 'one' whenever it occurs as designating number of Senators for each district, and insert three."

[ocr errors]

"Strike out four years' whenever it occurs designating terms of office, and insert three years.'"

The question was put on the amendment of Mr. Schoonmaker, and it was declared lost, on a division, by a vote of 34 to 66.

Mr. BOWEN-If it is in order I beg to offer an Mr. ALVORD-I rise to a point of order; the amendment to the amendment of the gentleman gentleman from Erie [Mr. Hatch] has no right to from Richmond [Mr. E. Brooks] by arranging call me to order, he not being in his place. terms of office so that one-quarter of the Senators shall go out every year instead of one-half every alternate year.

The CHAIRMAN - It is.

Mr. S. TOWNSEND-Not having the printed proceedings before me, Mr. Chairman, I am unable to say exactly where my proposition should come in; but the idea I wish to elucidate is this: Mr. BOWEN-The amendment is as follows: serious objections have been made to the census Amend by striking out that part providing for of 1865 in the State, the grounds of which the time when the term of office of the Senators have been alluded to by the gentleman from first elected shall expire and insert as follows: New York [Mr. Schell]. We have, I believe, "The term of office of those Senators elected for recognized the impartiality, validity, and corthe first, fifth, ninth, thirteenth, seventeenth, rectness of the United States census, and have twenty-first, twenty-fifth and twenty-ninth dis- confidently referred to it in our operations in tricts shall expire in one year, and the term of this State. As indicating the want of reliabilthose elected for the second, sixth, tenth, four-ity in the census of 1865, I will refer to the fact teenth, eighteenth, twenty-second, twenty-sixth that the breaking out of the war caused a partial and thirtieth districts shall expire in two years, cessation of foreign immigration to this country. and the term of those elected for the third, seventh, eleventh, fifteenth, nineteenth, twentythird, twenty-seventh and thirty-first districts shall expire in three years, and the term of those elected in the remaining districts shall expire in four years.

[ocr errors]

I will detain the committee but a moment. One object in extending the term of office of Senators is that they may have experience, and another object, which is equally important, is that there should be more permanency to the Senate. The amendment I have offered, I think, will effect the purpose more effectually than the one proposed by my colleague.

The question was put on the amendment of Mr. Bowen, and it was declared lost.

Mr. CHESEBRO - I move that the committee rise and report progress.

SEVERAL DELEGATES-No! no!
Mr. CHESEBRO-I say Yes.

The question was put on the motion of Mr. Chesebro, and it was declared lost, on a division, by a vote of 23 to 68.

Mr. S. TOWNSEND-I believe that the committee have several times decided in favor of thirty-two senate districts. The main objection to the proposition offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schell] is the expense of taking a new census of the State, apart from the 'regular routine in reference to taking the State census. have an amendment which I propose to introduce somewhere in the article [laughter], and I would like to have the Chair inform me how the article stands at present that I may know where to introduce the amendment.

for

But the increased demand for labor caused by so
large a number of men being absent in the
army, caused a tendency on the part of
emigration, both foreign and home, toward
our larger cities, where the demand.
labor was most manifest, and where parties
from other localities came in quest of labor." This
tendency of unemployed persons toward our
large cities, caused a great demand for dwellings,
so great that it was impossible, in 1865 particu-
larly, to get a house without paying most exorbi-
tant rents, and even then vast numbers of people
were compelled to board; and yet with these facts
prominent to every man residing in the city of
New York, there was an actual diminution in the
population from 1860 to 1865, as shown by the
census of 1865. The fact is incredible; and it has
been developed that there were large districts
which the census-takers omitted to visit entirely.
I think there should be no disposition to hesitate
to make restitution to the city of New York at
the end of five years, of what it is entitled to, if
anything, over the representation it now has in
the Legislature; and that can be determined by
the census taken by the Government of the
United States.

The question was then put on the amendment
of Mr. S. Townsend, and it was declared lost, on
a division, by a vote of 23 to 64.
I Mr. TAPPEN-As I believe the Convention can
arrive at no practical result by further continuing
the session to-night, I move the committee now
rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The PRESIDENT - The Secretary will read the section as at present amended.

The SECRETARY read as requested; "the State shall be divided into thirty-two districts." Mr. S. TOWNSEND - Right there I propose to bring in this proposition:

Provided, That after the U. S. Census of 1870 is made, the Legislature at its next session shall make a distribution of the State [laughter] into thirty-two contiguous Senate disricts upon the basis of the said census.

The question was put on the motion of Mr. Tappen, and it was declared lost, on a division, by a vote of 30 to 61.

Mr. E. A. BROWN-I move to reconsider the vote by which the term of office of Senator was fixed at four years, and I desire to have the motion lie on the table.

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair is of the opinion that the motion is not in order. There has been no vote taken on that distinct proposition by itself if the Chair recollects aright.

Mr. E. A. BROWN-The vote was taken on precisely that proposition.

Mr. ALVORD-I would like to ask the gentle- The CHAIRMAN-It was taken on a division mau from Queens [Mr. S. Townsend] a question. of the question. The motion to reconsider a Mr. HATCH-I rise to a point of order. The part of the proposition, which was taken on a gentleman from Onondaga has no right to speak division, in the opinion of the Chair, is not in -he is not in his place. [Laughter.]

order.

Mr. MERRITT — I suggest that the object de-sentatives. As I said the other day, I conceive sired by the gentleman can be reached in com-it to be desirable, that at every election there mittee by a motion to make a term the least term. should be as many inducements as practicable, We have already settled the matter of the four- to bring out the voters to the polls. By this years term. In order to reconsider, as I under-pending proposition, as amended, we have all the stand it, the gentleman must couple other things important officers elected in the years having even with it; and if he makes a motion to reconsider numbers, and a few unimportant officers elected he must take the vote now. It cannot lie on the in the years having odd numbers. So that electable. tors will feel comparatively little interest in the Mr. E. A. BROWN-I rely upon the Chair en-elections held in the years having odd numbers, tirely for my parliamentary law; and if the Chair is of the opinion that the motion cannot be taken in order, I will not press it.

and nearly all the interest will center about the elections held in years having the even numbers. I am in favor of having Senators elected one year Mr. WEED-It seems to me that the motion and Congressmen the next, as now, in order to of the gentleman who last addressed the create an interest among the people at every elecConvention [Mr. E. A. Brown], is a proper tion, and thus call out as full a vote as practicable. one. Although a vote was taken on a Mr. Chairman, as there seems to be a disposition division it was decided on a separate and inde- to stay here to-night, I wish to say a word or two pendent vote of the Convention. And the Chair- pertinent to this particular proposition. Speakman, if he will think for a moment on the sub-ing for myself, from the position in which I ject, will, I think, see that two of the proposi- was placed by the distinguished gentleman tions might have been voted down and the other from Kings [Mr. Van Cott] when he argued to carried, or one voted down and the other this committee that I had, on a previous day, two carried, and it would have been the action made a fallacious argument in support of the of the Convention. If one of these propositions proposition that Senators should be elected by had been voted down and thrown out, certainly single districts. That portion of my argument to the proper and the only motion that could have which he alluded was made by me in answer been made would have been to reconsider the one to a suggestion that I read in the newspapers, lost. In reinstating the one that was lost you would not have to throw out the two that were carried. It seems to me, therefore, the motion of the gentleman is proper-to reconsider the vote by which the Convention had inserted "four" instead of "two years, as the term for which Senators shall be elected.

Mr. E, A. BROWN-If I make a motion that is debatable, could I say what I desire to say, and assign reasons for the motion made?

The CHAIRMAN-The opinion of the Chair is as it stated, but it is willing to be corrected by the committee. The opinion of the Chair is that when a question is divided, and a vote is taken on one part it does not entitle the gentleman to move to reconsider the vote on that part. But when the vote is taken on the entire question, the motion to reconsider must be upon that question.

I

Mr. E. A. BROWN-As I said, I will take my parliamentary law entirely from the Chair. will assent to the correctness of the ruling.

and which has been repeated over and over again on this floor, both before and since I made these remarks, in some form or other, that the larger the district from which a Senator was elected the better was the Senator. The fair interpretation of these words I take to be that the prospect of electing able and honorable Senators will be more certain if they are elected from large districts than from small ones in other words, the larger the constituency the better the Senator. In answer to that proposition and for the purpose of combatting it, I said that if it was true, why not make four districts or two districts in the State. or elect each Senator from the whole State. For, if the argument is true that the larger the district the better the representative, it is our bounden duty to take such measures as will give us the best Senator to discharge the duties of that important office. It will be better for the people of this State and so far as they form a portion of this nation-and of mankind it will be for the benefit of the whole of mankind. I say, if that argument were true and correct we should adopt it to the full extent, in order to realize the greatest Mr. E. A. BROWN-Then I move as an amend- benefits and to accomplish the most beneficial rement to the proposition as it now stands before sults. Now, there is no fallacy in that argument. the committee to make the number of senate dis- My honorable friend, I am sorry to say, on the tricts and the number of Senators thirty-six, and permanent records of the debates and proceedings to make the term of office of Senators two years of this Convention, has sent me down to posterity instead of four years. Mr. Chairman, I desire to as using a fallacious argument. Now, being up, state the reasons why I prefer two years instead I desire to say one other word- and say of four years as the term of office of Senator. This it seriously, too. It has been to me a matter of year, 1867, we vote throughout the State regret that it is assumed by honorable gentlemen for members of the State Senate, nearly the of this Convention, that we have habitually a cornumber of the members of the House of Rep-rupt Legislature within these halls-an assumpresentatives in Congress from this State. In tion that is scandalizing, not only to the legislators the year 1868 we vote for Representatives in that are elected by the people, but scandalizing Congress. On the proposition as it now stands and defamatory of the intelligent people of this we shall have to vote every two years for one-State who elect these representatives. If it be half of the State for Senators, and at the same true, as is intimated here, that the representatives time to vote for members of the House of Repre- that come here, year after year, are corruptionists,

The CHAIRMAN-The Chair will suggest to the gentleman he can attain his object by moving an amendment.

« AnteriorContinuar »