In re Whitney

27 N.Y.S. 657, 75 Hun 581, 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 581, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 156
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 12, 1894·Published

Opinion

PRATT, J.

It is not necessary to discuss the questions raised in this case, as they are involved in the case of Baird and others against the same defendants now before the court. 27 N. Y. Supp. [658]*658535. The only point in this case not raised in the Baird Case is as to whether the defendants were bound to divide the county into 18 assembly districts, equally, in reference to citizen population, as near as attainable. Assuming such to be the construction of the law, it does not appear that there is any such material discrepancy in this case as will justify setting aside the apportionment. It would be impossible to have an exact mathematical equality, and the law does not require it. The court below has found that that makes no difference, as the citizen population practically bears the same relation to the alien population in all the assembly districts, and we are forced to the same conclusion. Order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Whitney, 27 N.Y.S. 657, 75 Hun 581, 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 581, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 156 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

27 N.Y.S. 657 (In re Whitney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Baird
27 N.Y.S. 535 (New York Supreme Court, 1894)