Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science Volume 14 (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1896 edition. Excerpt: ... ment was now brought up and rejected. Wise and Finney offered plans, but both were defeated. The proceedings became ridiculous, proposition after proposition being proposed and rejected.1 Mr. Chilton now introduced a plan, the same as the report of the committee of eight, except, should the Legislature in 1865 fail to reapportion representation, the Governor should submit to the people four propositions: (1) the suffrage basis, (2) the mixed basis, (3) the white population and (4) taxation only. This was carried in the Committee of the Whole by a vote of 55 to 48.2 In the Convention this was amended so that, should the Legislature in 1865 fail to agree on a reapportionment, each House should propose its schemes of representation, and transmit them to the Governor who should submit them to the vote of the people. If the Legislature neither apportioned representation nor proposed the schemes, then the Governor should submit to the voters the following: (1) The suffrage basis for both Houses; (2) the mixed basis for both Houses; (3) taxation only for the Senate and the suffrage basis for the House of Delegates, and (4) the mixed basis for the Senate and the suffrage basis for the House of Delegates. In case none of these propositions received a majority of the votes cast, the two having the largest number of votes were to be again submitted to the people.3 As thus adopted, the clause on representation was embodied in the constitution with one change; namely, the House of Delegates was increased to one hundred and fifty-two, giving one delegate more to each of the two sections.4 This compromise 1 Journal, Appendix, pp. 14-17. Journal, Appendix, pp. 18-22. The mixed-basis men who voted for it were Messrs. Arthur, Bowden, Chilton, Claiborne, ...

R273

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles2730
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1896 edition. Excerpt: ... ment was now brought up and rejected. Wise and Finney offered plans, but both were defeated. The proceedings became ridiculous, proposition after proposition being proposed and rejected.1 Mr. Chilton now introduced a plan, the same as the report of the committee of eight, except, should the Legislature in 1865 fail to reapportion representation, the Governor should submit to the people four propositions: (1) the suffrage basis, (2) the mixed basis, (3) the white population and (4) taxation only. This was carried in the Committee of the Whole by a vote of 55 to 48.2 In the Convention this was amended so that, should the Legislature in 1865 fail to agree on a reapportionment, each House should propose its schemes of representation, and transmit them to the Governor who should submit them to the vote of the people. If the Legislature neither apportioned representation nor proposed the schemes, then the Governor should submit to the voters the following: (1) The suffrage basis for both Houses; (2) the mixed basis for both Houses; (3) taxation only for the Senate and the suffrage basis for the House of Delegates, and (4) the mixed basis for the Senate and the suffrage basis for the House of Delegates. In case none of these propositions received a majority of the votes cast, the two having the largest number of votes were to be again submitted to the people.3 As thus adopted, the clause on representation was embodied in the constitution with one change; namely, the House of Delegates was increased to one hundred and fifty-two, giving one delegate more to each of the two sections.4 This compromise 1 Journal, Appendix, pp. 14-17. Journal, Appendix, pp. 18-22. The mixed-basis men who voted for it were Messrs. Arthur, Bowden, Chilton, Claiborne, ...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

Rarebooksclub.com

Country of origin

United States

Release date

May 2014

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

May 2014

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 10mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

182

ISBN-13

978-1-235-61438-5

Barcode

9781235614385

Categories

LSN

1-235-61438-7



Trending On Loot