1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 |
proposal which is presented as a compromise is in fact
not a compromise at all. It is the largest number of all
those numbers offered and represents nothing different
from the highest number which the committee examined.
It is a restatement of the minority position
of the commit tee.
In fact, it is made a little larger on the floor
here than ever introduced in committee. The compromise
position, the position on which we gained the greatest
consensus was the number of 105 to 35. It is on that
basis I think we should consider compromise.
I would also point out that a number of
references have been made here to the Eagleton Report.
The Eagleton report does not deal with size, but
with the organization of the General Assembly. But there
are other reports which do deal with size. The report
of the Committee for Economic Development, which our
committee considered carefully, the model constitution,
the new constitutions of this decade all urge very strongly
that we do not have an assembly of too large a size or
put the maximum number at 100. |
