, 1890-12-18
TUESDAY,.
A long Debate on the InefBoiency of
the Returns.

WAsHiSGroN, Dec. 16.-Mr. Mills, Of
Texas, as a privileged question offered
concurrent resolution providing for u
holiday recess from December %. 1890, to
January 8, 1891. Referred to the ways
and means committee.
Mr.. Dunnell, of Minnesota, called up
the apportionment bill, and briefly ex-
planned its provisions. There was
diversity of opinion among the members
OF the house as TO whether the present
representation should stand. or whether
1t should be increased, Finally IL was
determined by the committee to accept
356 as the proper number. After an in
eifectual effort to secure an agreement
as to the limitation debate. Mr.. Dunnell
gave notice that lie would call the previ.
Gus question at 5 o'clock this afternoon.
Mr.. Flower, of New York, protested
against the passage OF the bill and
severely criticised the census returns of
New York city.
Mr.. Mills, of Texas. said he believed
New York had lest enumeration to
which she was entitled, but her loss was
not as great as that OF his own state,
which amounted to 100, 600.
MIR. McRae, of Arkansas, gave notice
OF an amend ment increasing the repre-
sentation to 359.
Mr.. 0uthwaite, of Ohio, stated that
great injustice had been done in his
state in taking the census. Under the
census Illinois had become the third
sta to in the Union. IL was not true that
Illinois had grown so rapidly. nor Ohio
had fallen oil TO such an extent. The
whole census ought TO be retaknn so the
representation could be apportioned ac-
cording to the population and not ac.
cording to schemes Of political advance.
ment.
MIR. Frank of Missouri, earnestly ad-
vocated the bill, which was based upon
the bill originally introduced by him
self.
amendm ment increasing to thirty.iive the
representation from New York.
Mr.. Spinola, of New York, said when
the people of New York found they had
been wronged they applied to the secre-
tary of the interior. but obtained no re.
lief The secretary wrote back an i'm
pudent letter, which was unworthy to
elnanate from any man calling himself
gentleman. The census, us taken by
Superintendent Porter was crime
against the republic. 1t was a wrong
perpetrated 10y the superintendent, and
he knew IL. aud his heelers knew 1t.
Mr.. Covert, of New York, argu ed in
support of the amend ment providing for
q recount OF New York and Brooklyn,
aud an additional representation for
the state should the recount show an
increase of 10000 over the federal
census.
MIR. Lind, Of Minnesota, favored the
McRae amendment to the apportion-
mcnt bill. lie thought IL should be sat
istactory and Just to the country. 1t
WIS conceded on both sides there was
difficulty in regard to the census of New
York city. In order to nppeaso the
feeling of New York, considering its
lnrge population, 1t would be but fair
and just to give that state an additional
representative. The same was true of
Arkansas and Minnesota, and this bill,
while it might iit the arith metic theory
Of the committee, did injustice to those
states.
Mr.. Biggs, OF California, complained
THAI San Francisco mad not had fair
enumeration, not one enumerator there
being u democrat.
Mr. Peel, of Arkansas. declared that
Arkansas had lost loo, 900 by failure to
count.
Mr. Dunneil, in closing the debate,
spoke earnestly in favor OF the bill, and
expressed regret at the attack made on
the secretary of the interior by Mr..
Spinola, 1t had never seemed reason
able to the committee that New York
should bo granted II special privilege.
No other city had come here disregard
ing the law, and he regretted that the
al
should let iail from his lips an attack
upon on official Of she government, to
which the latter could not reply.
The hour of 8 o'clock having arrived