CONGRESSIONAL APPORTIONMENT.
On motion of Mr. NEWCOMB, the Congressional Apportionment bill [S. No. 1 see page 217 of these reports] was taken up and read the second time, with the amendments reported from the Select Committee - striking out "Monroe and Lawrence," in the seventh section, and inserting the words, "and Putnam," in lieu; and striking out "Putnam" from the 8th section, and inserting "Monroe and Lawrence" in lieu.
Mr. WOLFE hoped the amendment would not be passed. It made the Vermillion district nearly two-thirds the length of the State; and it was the most extraordinary thing that could be conceived. He preferred the arrangement in the original bill.
The amendments were adopted - yeas 44, nays 26.
Mr. BAKER proposed further to amend, as follows:
Strike out "Perry" and insert "Martin" in lieu; and strike out "Martin" and insert "Perry" in lieu.
Mr. BAKER. The proposition in this bill was to make the first district the largest in the State. It had been found necessary to take in counties with which we have no business connections, and throw out counties with which we are connected. The change which he proposed only made the upper portion of the district a little heavier. It would not make a difference of one hundred votes politically. The representative from Martin [Mr. Inman] was desirous of this change.
Mr. NEWCOMB said the gentleman might see that the Republicans will have the next Congressman from his district by about 250; when by his amendment he might reverse this majority. He was not willing to accomodate him. He defended the general fairness of the bill, as to equalization of population, & c. There was not he inequality complained of. The German population of Perry would make very good district associates for the gentleman, and he would do well to make their acquaintance.
Mr. O'NEIL gave additional reasons for the adoption of the amendment. The first was not only the largest district in the State, but its original rectangular shape was spoiled. If Perry county were left out entirely, it would still leave an unseemly corner reaching up the river. He did not defend the districting made sixteen years ago.
Mr. LITSON said it was a hopeful sign when the Democracy refused to defend the Democratic districting 16 years ago. This shape for the first district was not worse than the Democrats made the fourth district, nor so bad as another district which was made out of two rectangular figures of territory joined at their corners.
Mr. KIZER made a general speech against the bill.
Mr. NEWCOMB answered complaints on account of the shape of the first district. No Democrat could reasonably object to it, who would look at the districting of 1850. On his motion, the amendment was laid on the table - yeas 44, nays 26.
page: 264[View Page 264]Mr. EDMONDSON proposed to amend by striking "Perry" out of the first district, and inserting it in the second, and striking out "Dubois" from the second district and inserting it in the first.
It was laid on the table - yeas 44, nays 28.
Mr. HONNEUS proposed to amend by striking "Jackson" from the second section, and inserting "Lawrence" in lieu; and striking "Lawrence" from the fourth, section and inserting "Jackson" in lieu.
Mr. NEWCOMB appealed to gentlemen not to delay the bill by dilatory amendments.
Mr. HONNEUS spoke in favor of his amendment.
Mr. ROSS made a general speech in opposition to the bill. Its unfairness was manifest in the fact that the bill will allow the Democratic party but one Representative in Congress, when they were in but a merely nominal minority of about twelve thousand votes. Telling the majority plainly what they were doing, he was satisfied with that.
Mr. DUNN defended the action of the majority here in supporting the Senate bill.
Mr. HUGHES said he was satisfied with the character of the bill, except the second district; and others with him could have desired that that were arranged a little better. But he defended the effort to prevent the representation of bad principles in Congress. In reply to Mr. Wolfe, he read a secession extract from the Monroe Freeman newspaper, which was a democratic campaign paper, just before the time of the meeting of the democratic Chicago convention, in 1864. He read it and added comments at length to support the principle just announced. It were better to have representatives of those principles wholly silenced in Congress for the time, till the democratic party might purge itself from the infection indicated in that paper.
Mr. McFADIN retorted, reading extracts from such republican papers as the New York Tribune, Chicago Tribune, Indianapolis Journal, &c, preferring disunion to civil war. He also commented at length.
Mr. BELFORD insisted that the gentleman could not find a republican paper either justifying the rebellion, advocating an armistice, or repudiating the war, after the time of the bombardment of Fort Sumter.
Mr. McFADIN proceeded in a general speech against the enormities general and special.
Mr. NEWCOMB said if the gentleman from Cass would take the trouble to look through the articles in those three Republican papers from which he had read, he would find that they held the principle that, if a majority of the Southern people desired to go out of the Union, and would make such an expression, without coercion, they should be allowed to go out without war. He stated, also that the first speech for the presentation of the Union by war was made by Oliver P. Morton. The Democratic party repudiated the idea of going to war on any terms whatever.
The amendment was laid on the table - yeas 47, nays 29.
Mr. NEWCOMB demanded the previous question on the passage of the bill to the third reading, as amended, and there was a second, and the main question was ordered.
The bill was then passed to the third reading, and the amendments were ordered to be engrossed, without a division.
On motion of Mr. CAMPBELL, his court bill [H. R. 293] fixing the times of holding the circuit courts in the 5th Judicial Circuit, was taken up.
On motion of Mr. NEWCOMB, it was amended by adding, with reference to the time of holding court in Marion county, these words: "or longer, if the business require it."
The bill was then ordered to the engrossment.
On motion by Mr. THACHER, Mr. Moore obtained leave of absence till Wednesday.
The House then adjourned.
