Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/157

 CH. IX.]  allotted in this bill; for, trying the several ratios of 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, the allotments would be as follows:

"It will be said, that, though for taxes there may always be found a divisor, which will apportion them among the states according to numbers exactly, without leaving any remainder; yet, for representatives, there can be no such common ratio, or divisor, which, applied to the several numbers, will divide them exactly, without a remainder or fraction. I answer, then, that taxes must be divided exactly, and representatives as nearly as the nearest ratio will admit, and the fractions must be neglected; because the constitution wills, absolutely, that there be an apportionment, or common ratio; and if any fractions result from the operation, it has left them unprovided for. In fact, it could not but foresee that such fractions would result, and it meant to submit to them. It knew they would be in favour of one part of the Union at one time, and of another part of it at another, so as, in the end, to balance occasional inequalities. But, 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, government would acquiesce in that arrangement, if other constitutional provisions existed sufficient to preserve its due execution. The provision, as it stands has the strong recommendation of public convenience, and facile adaptation to the particular local