New-York tribune., 1882-02-08

matter any when he recalled the fact that before
emancipation personal property, in the form Of
slaves, was actually represented the floor of the
House.
Mr. Robinson, of Massachusetts,, in clear and
fOrcible speech attacked the new method and cited
figures to show that the Alabama paradox" which
Colonel SeatOn says first called his attention to the
inaccuracy of the old method, is repeated many
times under the new method. Mr.. Robinson's OPP
position to the bill reported by the committee was
regarded as quite significant, as he comes from one
of the more populous States whose representation is
the same under both methods of apportonment.
Mr. Horr made short and farcible speech in op-
position to the committees bill, and when, in con-
clusOn, he denounced it as an outrage upon COM
mon sense' he was greeted with hearty applause
from both sides of the House. He called attention
to the fact that should the total number of members
be fixed at 321 and apportioned according to the
old method, as provided in an amendment
offered by Mr.. Burrows Of Michigan, 1t
would happen that the additional number of
members that would be assigned to certain states
on largest remainders would exactly coincide with
the number of States which would have remaInders
exceeding fifty per cent of the representative unit
which would be 1J3,S sos
A new member Mr. Chace of Rhode Island, made
a speech also in opposition to the committees bill,
which attracted very general attention and elected
warm commendation. The House was i'll great con-
fusion when he began to speak, but before he had
gone very far members became interested and at
tentivc. Mr.. Chace read number of tables to sup
port his assertion that the new method discovered
by Colonel Seaton is unsound, because
it attempts TO base the apportionment
upon Congressional Districts instead of
States. For example, according to the
new method the State of Illinois, with population
OF 3.O77,S71, would have twcnty-one members, the
total number being 800, while by the same method
and with the same total number the five States of
Arkansas. California, Wisconsin, Rhode Island and
Florida. with aggregate population OF 3,j2s,122
would have only twenty members. Under the old
method Illinois would have twenty mem bcrS and
the other five States mentioned would have twenty
three. BY another example Mr.. Chace showed that
under the new method with the total number 800
the four large States of Illinois, New-lork, ONO
and Pennsylvania, with an aggregate population
somewhat exceeding 15000,9 would have 100
members. While twenty-five smaller States with an
aggregate population exceeding 100000 would
have only 100 members.
The friends of the bill reported by the committee
assert that they will be able TO persuade the House
before the debate is concluded that the method
is better than the old one and that the bill does
substantial Justice all the States AS the matter
now stands however, this out of the question:
and several members from New York and other
large States which would profit by the adoption of
the bill reported, declare that they cannot vote
for it, The discussion promises TO be a long and
very lively one.