not in the enrolling agents, but in the system and means and appliances at the command of the agents. The Commission were unable to devise any process or means to correct the enrollment and make it what it should be as a reliable and satisfactory basis for the adjustment of quotas. Whatever might be done in this direction would necessarily be by estimates and calculations, and these would be founded upon some assumed data, so that there would be nothing reliable in any result of a guess, or proceed upon some arbitrary rule which it might be supposed would equalize the enrollment of the State of New York with that of the other States. But the result would not inspire any confidence as to its correctness, either absolutely or comparatively. If the New York enrollment should be made to conform to the average of the other States, to wit, 721 to each thousand of the first class, it would be the result of a rule adopted for convenience and without foundation in reason or principle. Such correction would leave the enrollment and quota of New York large than that of the New England States, and would make it smaller than that of Pennsylvania and some of the Western States, with nothing in the character of the population to justify the discrimination. The same remarks will apply with like force to any other plan or process for equalizing or correcting the enrollment of New York by estimates and calculations. The Commission were therefore unable to correct the enrollment and make it right, or substantially or comparatively so, and as the quota assigned upon an enrollment imperfect and erroneous is necessarily erroneous and may be unjust, they were compelled to resort to some other means to correct it. The facts and figures show conclusively that the enrollment of the cities of New York and Brooklyn are excessive, and the Commission are of the opinion that any enrollment made by faith the present limitations upon their powers and discretion, and nt helps and means, must be excessive and cannot constitute a proper basis for apportionment of men to be furnished upon a call for volunteers.

The quota assigned to the city and State of New York under the call of October 17, 1863, being therefore excessive, the next inquiry was, in what way the error could be corrected and the quota made right.

Three methods were suggested: First, to adjust it upon the basis and in proportion to the entire male population; second, upon the basis and in proportion to the male population between the ages of twenty and forty-five; and, third, upon the basis and in proportion to the entire population. The first two methods were rejected and the third adopted, for the following among other reasons:

First. It was less favorable to the city and State of New York than either of the other two, and yet, while it was so, it was a rule of which the State could not complain, as it was a rule by which other benefits and burthens are distributed among the States.

Second. A call for volunteers is in one sense a tax upon the States and communities; large bounties have to be paid to obtain the men, and States and communities act upon this established fact, and by tax compel each man to contribute his share, so that the burthen falls upon property as directly as if Congress had laid a direct tax for the same purpose. In this respect representative population is a constitutional basis for the apportionment of this burthen.

Third. In all the acts of Congress thus far passed upon the subject of raising volunteers by calls upon the several States, population has been made the basis of the apportionment. Acts of July 22, 1861, July