New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-01-30

The remaining increase of 26 members
goes. II to the South, and IA 10 tnc
North. The eight Southeastern States gam
4 members. but five of the States gain L
each. viz: Virginia, West Virginia, North ana
soutb Carolina. and Georgia, while Florida
loses /. The eight Southwestern States
Gncluding Missouri) gain members
Kentucky. Missouri Arkansas and Miss
issippi 1 each, and Texas A. Ihere
would seem to be little reason TO douoC
that such an allotment will be accepted as
fair and even liberal by the South, since ten
of the sixteen States gain in representatives.
The remaining increase of fourteen members
goes 70 the Northwest, not one OF the ten
States losing n member. Ohio gains / !;
Michigan. Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Ne
brosla gain Q each, and Kansas gains 8.
This mighty section, with a population OF
15,2O0OOO, will have just 100 representa-
tives-a trihe over 81 per cent OF the Whole
representation for q small fraction less than 81
per cent of the population. But this is not I'M
fair. for that section is growing more rapidly
than any other. II is probable that TINS appor-
tionment as it gives an increase OF representa-
ton TO twenty-one States, which cast ABOUT
two-thirds of the votes in the House, Will DE
adopted substantially as it comes from the
committee. Mr.. Cox has offered substitute
nroviding for 3O7 members, which would Work
well if the object were to give the largest pos
sible share Of mower to the Democrats. But
that is not likely to be the prevailing purpose
of the majority this year.
Assuming that the number will be fixed as re-
ported some controversy may be expected as to
the treatment of those States to which the
proposed apportionment gives members as fol-
lows: California 5, and Rhode Island and
Florida l each If the old method of allot-
ing members with exclusive regard to the
size of remaining fractions were followed, these
States would each have / member more, and
New York, Pennsylvania and Illinois each l
less. But in that case member III fIorlda
would represent only 134,746 inhabitants, III
Rhode Islam only 1926, and in California
ONLY 144,ll6. In no other State would the
ratio of inhabitants to members then be as
small in other words, the voters OF those
States would have disprOpOrtionate share OF
power. Hence it was proposed by Colonel
Seaton, Superintendent of the Census, to allot
the members with regard to the resulting ratio
of population to representatives, and his plan
was commended as the farest yet devised by
the late Superintendent, General Walker There
is something to be said on the other side,
however. The proposed plan will give only
l member to 276,53l inhabitants in Rhode
Island, only l to 269,493 in Florida,
and to 1898 in California, and
these numbers are further above the av-
erage than those which wOuld result from
an increase of representation TO these States
are below the average. An addition OF
member to State having SO or Is
means very little, but the loss of mem
Der to a State having only means
much Politically, the exchange would be Of
small consequence, though, if Florida were al
lowed l more member, the South would gain
| more while the Eastern States, now
having %, would have only %. The
power of the small States in the Senate was
intended by the Constitution to he, and i'll
fact is, ample compensation for their compare
tive weakness in the House, but it is well to
avoid even the appearance of harshncss to the
weaker members of the family. Nevertheless,
| the method proposed by Colonel Seaton, and
adopted by the committee is well calculated
to avoid some very unjust results which the
Use of the other method at times involves