University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
The Jeffersonian cyclopedia;

a comprehensive collection of the views of Thomas Jefferson classified and arranged in alphabetical order under nine thousand titles relating to government, politics, law, education, political economy, finance, science, art, literature, religious freedom, morals, etc.;

collapse sectionA. 
386. APPORTIONMENT RATIO, Two Divisors.—
expand sectionB. 
expand sectionC. 
expand sectionD. 
expand sectionE. 
expand sectionF. 
expand sectionG. 
expand sectionH. 
expand sectionI. 
expand sectionJ. 
expand sectionK. 
expand sectionL. 
expand sectionM. 
expand sectionN. 
expand sectionO. 
expand sectionP. 
expand sectionQ. 
expand sectionR. 
expand sectionS. 
expand sectionT. 
expand sectionU. 
expand sectionV. 
expand sectionW. 
expand sectionX. 
expand sectionY. 
expand sectionZ. 

expand section 
expand section 

386. APPORTIONMENT RATIO, Two Divisors.—

Instead of such a single common ratio, or uniform divisor, as prescribed by the
Constitution, the bill has applied two ratios, at least, to the different States, to wit, that
of 30,026 to the seven following: Rhode
Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, Kentucky, and Georgia; and that of
27,770 to the eight others, namely: Vermont,
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut,
New Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina, and
South Carolina. * * * And if two ratios
be applied, then fifteen may, and the distribution
become arbitrary, instead of being
apportioned to numbers. Another member of
the clause of the Constitution * * * says
“The number of representatives shall not exceed
one for every 30,000, but each State shall
have at least one representative.” This last
phrase proves that it had no contemplation
that all fractions, or numbers below the common
were to be unrepresented; and it
provides especially that in the case of a State
whose whole number shall be below the common
ratio, one representative shall be given
to it. This is the single instance where it allows
representation to any smaller number
than the common ratio, and by providing especially
for it in this, shows it was understood
that, without special provision, the
smaller number would in this case, be involved
in the general principle.—
Opinion on Apportionment Bill. Washington ed. vii, 596. Ford ed., v, 495.