New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-11-24
A NEEDED FEDERAL LAW.
ENORMOUS INEQUALITIES IN THE REfhI
SENTATIoN OF THE VARIOUS STATES
URGENT NECESSITY OF REAPPoRTIoEMENT-
INSTRUCTIVE FIGURES FROM SOUTH
fer TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBUSE.l

INSTRUCTIVE FIGURES FROM SOUTH
CAROLINA AND KANSAS.
FIR TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBUSE.l
Washington Nov o3.-Within the last few h'on'i
there has been much quiet discussion among meooi'
~ both tho great potlcal parties respecting the pass
are NJ a Reapportionment law by the List Congress-
in order that the enormous inequalities when Nv"
exist may be rectifed before the next fros" :,
election 1t is understood that the census return" ~
population upon which the law must be DaSeu' 80
be completed ON or before October l, lo'o' -
will allow Congressional committees, IL ueS no" =.
sessions I'm the recess. to prepare bill ana lay ~
before Congress on the first Monday IN bo''" !,
1t is a matter Of much consequence to thirty Wv
the States the Legislatures OF which will be IN seSS
At various dates between January 10, i1ol' or
October. 1892 and which will not De III -
session again until two years afterwar' 'ha' :.
apportionment shall be placed on the statue oo !,
early as the former date. There are now OILY nv
,hc older states which havo annual sessions Of thef
Legislatures. ,rror-
But there is a still stronger reason why heaPpo ,
tionment law should be enacted prior 10 the next 1
ao,,,ai eIocton The makers Of the Constitution
Of course never designed that In one state t"o y" 49,
or SIX times as many people should DC re4uI.u
each District representative I'm the ELECTORAL
A. would be required In another state. lhe' ~
at absolute equality Of representation, with ue sue
eN
least one representative in Congress. and as oo'
ouence one electoral vote in addition to uie WV
dc~svcd from the states representation In the uh'
state, Senate This exception proves the r'lo' or
II gave TO Cleveland one electoral vote from Dc.S""
and 70 Harrison one electoral vote from ~
which they would not otherwise have recei'ou'
ober NJ those states at the Of the last census
contained a population sufficient To ehtue ~ -,
representative in Congress under the apportioh'''
| now in force. ,.o,
The present condition Of things is standing voi''On
of the spirit and design OF the Constitution, anu ~
| in part 10 the Congress which enactel INC l"N' "
apportonment law but more largely 10 an aPP1''.
decline of population in some OF the states anu -
equally randi increase ia other States. Whatever may
be the causes. the present inequalities Snouu -
moved as soon a. practicable, In order that no lla'
shall he elevated to the Presidency In 1s!'3 VINO va
| NOT formally chosen by consttutonaHy appo'h''u
| Presidential Electors in the respective states.
If Is vebemently asserted and reiterated on ever
| possble occasion, by the members OF one Oh '10
GREAT political parties that elections IN tue Oo''o
states are a. fair and free as any where IN the uni
States Let that be admitted without reserve anu
keeping It in mind let figures be examined. Al
1850 the population Of south Carolina was 99ooo''
the total vote for Presidential electors was 1'o'oo
| or one to $40 persons; the number OF her hePro-
sentatlves In Congress was five, which. OF COURSE
WAS the number Of votes In the Electoral Noios''
! mir la
ton of South Carolina in 1850 gave her Two 40
| d.,oral Renr,serta tlve, In 1884 she cast seven
District elec toral votes for Cleveland and the same
number for him in 1855 But the vote OF the latter
year showed an enormous decline in populatoIi "non
on me ratio of $40 to each voter. had recece '
Ina in Isss was entitled to cast only three District
electoral votes for Mr. Cleveland, instead OF seEen
tia electors south Carolina IN 1855 rePreen, HTu
population Of only 66119o5,793 less than ne nun IN
stare to vote in the Electoral College ana the avcISs
number Of votes received by each elector aScerLe9t
by DIVIDING the total NUMBER n % o Ho'e' O' '
Now elections free and fair in Kansas as IN Il,
District ecctoraI votes in 1ssssOut Carolina. sever
for Mr.. Cleveland, and kansas seven Tor Gehe. s.
| Harrison In 1850 the population OF Kansas was
| 900 600; the total vote for Presidential Electors wa
236 about one to every ve ocGira 1ds
The large population of Kansas in 1850 gave her fou
cast seven District electoral votes for Mr.. Blaine
| and in 1855 the same number FOR General Harrison
growth of population which on the ratio of FIVE II
| each voter had increased from 100000 10 162O17o
so that Kansas the present basis Of Congressional
| raprcsentaton-one 10 every 151 9l2 persOns-woub
| have been entitled 10 cast eleven District eectora
votes for General Harrison instead Of seven In ohs
Kansas in lass. represented population OF 23l, 4o3
or 70,j41 more than the number required b entfle M
| State 70 a IN the Elec tora College: and tn
average number of votes to each District elector wa
The facts may be summarized as follows:
| South Cafolina-Populaton IN 1850, 995.577; II
| 1885 4G2 80 decrease. OBJ OF.
| Kausas-PopulatiOn in 1850. 100000; in lass
| $40 10 increase. 624. 17j.
| South Carolina District Elect0rs-1ss0. FIVE; less
seven, population 10 each e.ect0r I'm ls5O. 142 d..
Kansas District EicctOr--i- so. thr"r: 1855,
| population each EectOr In lass. 1929.
| south Carolina Population to each elector IN 1888
| Sc 49, votes 10 each clectOr. 11.305.
Kansas-Pupulaiion 10 each eector in 1888 23l 455
| votes 10 each eectOr. 1921.
In these calculations exactly the same tests ar
appled 10 both States II f. admitted without
that elections in both states equally free and fair
The results speak for themselves and form a con
Frolng and imprcgnablc reason why there should b.
rcappOronment Of Representatives IN Congress before
| the next Presidential election.