Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 39, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 October 1892 — THE “BUNDY” APPORTIONMENT [ARTICLE]

THE “BUNDY” APPORTIONMENT

Compared with the Existing Law. The apportionment of 1879, which the Republican conspirators have undertaken to review through the supreme court, is as follows: Senatorial Districts. Posey and Gibson; Vanderburgh; War rick and Pike; Spencer and Perry; Crawford, Harrison and Orange; Dubois, Martin and Ijtwrence; Clark and Scott; Jefferson; Decatur and Shelby; Floyd and Washington; Franklin and Ripley; Dearborn, Ohio and Switzerland; Jackson and Jennrngs; Brown, Monroe and Bartholomew; Green and Daviess; Knox and Sullivan; Vigo; Clay and Owen; Parke and Vermillion; Wayne; Randolph and Delaware; Henry, Delaware and Randolph; Grant and Madison; Howard and Miami; Boone and Clinton; Montgomery; Tippecanoe; Benton, Newton and Jasper; Lake and Porter; Laporte; 8t„ Joseph and Starke; Marshall Cass; Kosciusko and Wabash; Elkhart; Lagrange and Noble; Steuben and DeKalb; Allen; Allen and Whitley; Huntington and Wells; Adams, Jay and Blaokford; Carroll, White and Pulaski; Marion; Marion, Hancock and Shelby; Hendricks and Putnam; Morgan and Johnson; Tipton and Hamilton; Rush, Fayette and Union. Each district has one senator except Marion which has two. Representative Districts. Posey; Gibson; Vanderburgh; Warriok; Pike and Dubois; Spencer; Perry; Crawford and Orange; Harrison; Washington; Dubois and Martin; Clark; Clark, Scott ami Floyd; Floyd; Jefferson; Ripley; Switzerland and Ohio; Dearborn; Franklin; Jackson; Jennings; Monroe and Brown; Lawrence; Daviess; Green; Knox; Sullivan; Knox, Sullivan and Green; Vigo; Clay; Owen; Parke; Vermillion; Wayne; Randolph; Marion; Hamilton; Hendricks; Morgan; Johnson; Shelby: Hancock; Bartholomew; Madison; Madison, Hancock and Henry; Marion, Shelby and Bartholomew; Decatur; Rush; Fayette and Union; Henry; Delavare; Grant; Wabash; Kosciusko and Wabash; Howard; Miami; Boone; Clay, Putnam and Hendricks; Putnam; Fountain; Tippecanoe; Benton and White; Newton and Jasper; Lake; Porter; Laporte; St. Joseph and Starke; St. Joseph; Fulton and Pulaski; j Cass; Kosciusko; Elkhart; Warren and Benton; La Grange; Noble; De Kalb; Allen; Whitley; Steuben; Huntington; Wells and Blackford; Jay, Adams and Wells; Adams and Jay; Carroll; Elkhart, Noble and DeKalb; Tipton. Under the apportionment of 1879, Vanderburgh, Vigo, Wayne and Tippecanoe are entitled to each two representatives; Allen three, and Marion, five. All the other districts one eaoh.

Apportionment of 1801—Senatorial Districts. Posey and Gibson*; Vanderburgh; Warrick and Spencer*; Dubois and Perry*; Orange, Crawford and Harrison*; Daviess and Martin*; Knox and Pike*; Lawrence and Jackson*; Sullivan and Greene*; Washington and Floyd; Clark, Scott and Jennings; Clark and Jefferson*; Dearborn, Ohio and Switzerland*; Ripley, Franklin and Union*; Shelby and Decatur; Hancock and Rush*; Henry and Fayette; Wayne**; Delaware and Randolph; Grant and Madison; Adams, Jay and Blackford*; Huntington and Welle*; Miami and Howard**; Clinton and Tipton; Boone and Hamilton; Tippecanoe*; Warren and Fountain; Newton, Jasper and Benton**; Monroe, Brown and Bartholomew*; Morgan, Johnson and Brown*; Marion and Hendricks; Clay and Owen; Vigo; Parke and Vermillion**; Putnam and Montgomery; Marion; Pulaski, White and Carroll; Cass*; Lake and Porter*; Laporte; St. Joseph and Starke*; Marshall and Fulton; Elkhart; Kosciusko and Wabash; Whitley and Allen; Allen*; Noble and DeKalb; Lagrange and Steuben. Eaoh district is entitled to one senator except Marion which is entitled to three. Districts marked with one asterisk have holdover Democratic senators, twentyone in number; those marked with two asterisks have holdover Republicans, in all four. Representative Districts.

Vanderburgh, Gibson and Knox; Posey; Gibson; Vanderburg; Warrick; Spencer; Perry; Knox; Pike; Greene, Daviess; Dubois and Martin; Lawrence, Orange and Dubois; Harrison; Floyd; Floyd, Harrison and Crawford; Washington; Jackson; Clark; Clark, Scott and Jennings; Jefferson; Ripley; Dearborn; Dearborn, Ohio and Switzerland; Ripley, Franklin and Union; Franklin; Decatur; Bartholomew; Monroe and Brown; Johnson; Morgan; Owen; Putnam; Hendricks;' Sullivan; Olay; Vigo; Parke; Sullivan, Vigo and Vermillion; Montgomery; Fountain; Montgomery, Putnam and Clay; Marion; Marion and Shelby; Madison; Hancock; Shelby; Rush; Henry; Wayne and Fayette; Wayne; Randolph; Delaware; Hamilton; Boone; Clinton; Tipton; Clinton, Tipton and Madison; Howard; Tippecanoe; Benton and Warren; Lake; Porter; Newton and Jasper; PuUski and White; Carroll; Cass; Fulton;* Cass and Miami; Miami; Wabash; Huntington; Wells; Grant; Adams and Jay; Adams, Jay and Blackford; Allen; Whitley; DeKalb; Noble; Steuben; Lagrange: Elkhart,; Elkhart and Kosciusko; Kosciusko; Marshall; St. Joseph; Laporte; Laporte and Starke. Vanderburgh, Vigo, Tippecanoe and St. Joseph are entitled to two representatives each, Allen three and Marion six. All other districts one each. The apportionment is based upon the enumeration of legal voters made by the township trustees once in six years. The last enumeration was made in 1889 and shows a total 551,048 voters of which 484,843 were whites and 11,048 colored. The American Non-Conformist, the people’s party organ, has analyzed the vote under the two apportionments, that of 1891 and the Bundy apportion* ment of 1879, and makes the following comments:

“ Judge Bundy will not be able to verify a very high spirit of judicial fairness when the people come to compare the facts of 1891 with 1879. By that act the counties of Henry, Hancock Madison were each given one Representative and a joint representative for the three. Under the enumeration of 1877, on which the apportionment of 1879 was made, the voting population of these three counties was 15,880. The number entitled to a representative was 4,510. Three representative would call for 13,580, which would leave a surplus of 2,300. But under the act of 1879, which the judge approved, these three ooun*

ties were given four representatives, whereas they lacked 2,210 of enough votes to entitle them to four. And this under the unpardonable supposition thai the enumeration of 1877 would bean equitable basis of representation foi 1892. But to bring forward these counties to the enumeration of 1889, it appears that the voters now required foi four representatives are 22,040 and that these three oountiea have but 18,941, which is 8,099 less than an equitable apportionment. In other words these three oountiea under the Democratic gerrymander have 2,411 too many voters for three representatives, and under Bundy’s gerrymander they have 8,099 too few for four representatives. It is possible that Judge Bundy had not consulted the almanac when he attached his signature to the elaborate typewritten decision.