Apportionment in the House

a href=”http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDERAL/federalist/feder55.html” target=”_blank” rel=”noopener”>Federalist Paper No. 55:

EXCERPTED FROM
Federalist Paper No. 55:
“The Total Number of the House of Representatives”

(February 13, 1788)

After reading the inspired words of the “Father of the Constitution” I think the intentions of the founding fathers were clear that as the population of the states grew so would number of representatives in the states.

The Re-Apportionment Act of 1929 clearly violated the Constitution and the principles and original intent of our founding fathers.

“…let us weigh the objections which have been stated against the number of members proposed for the House of Representatives. It is said, in the first place, that so small a number cannot be safely trusted with so much power. The number of which this branch of the legislature is to consist, at the outset of the government, will be sixty five. Within three years a census is to be taken, when the number may be augmented to one for every thirty thousand inhabitants; and within every successive period of ten years the census is to be renewed, and augmentations may continue to be made under the above limitation. It will not be thought an extravagant conjecture that the first census will, at the rate of one for every thirty thousand, raise the number of representatives to at least one hundred. … At the expiration of twenty-five years, according to the computed rate of increase, the number of representatives will amount to two hundred, and of fifty years, to four hundred. This is a number which, I presume, will put an end to all fears arising from the smallness of the body. I take for granted here what I shall, in answering the fourth objection, hereafter show, that the number of representatives will be augmented from time to time in the manner provided by the Constitution.”

From the Federalist Papers #56 We read that a representative for every THIRTY THOUSAND INHABITANTS will render the latter both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.





“The Total Number of the House of Representatives”
(February 13, 1788)

After reading the inspired words of the “Father of the Constitution” I think the intentions of the founding fathers were clear that as the population of the states grew so would number of representatives in the states.

The Re-Apportionment Act of 1929 clearly violated the Constitution and the principles and original intent of our founding fathers.

“…let us weigh the objections which have been stated against the number of members proposed for the House of Representatives. It is said, in the first place, that so small a number cannot be safely trusted with so much power. The number of which this branch of the legislature is to consist, at the outset of the government, will be sixty five. Within three years a census is to be taken, when the number may be augmented to one for every thirty thousand inhabitants; and within every successive period of ten years the census is to be renewed, and augmentations may continue to be made under the above limitation. It will not be thought an extravagant conjecture that the first census will, at the rate of one for every thirty thousand, raise the number of representatives to at least one hundred. … At the expiration of twenty-five years, according to the computed rate of increase, the number of representatives will amount to two hundred, and of fifty years, to four hundred. This is a number which, I presume, will put an end to all fears arising from the smallness of the body. I take for granted here what I shall, in answering the fourth objection, hereafter show, that the number of representatives will be augmented from time to time in the manner provided by the Constitution.”

From the Federalist Papers #56 We read that a representative for every THIRTY THOUSAND INHABITANTS will render the latter both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.