Omaha daily bee., 1894-02-05
IoWA Axp HER stsrnR srarEs.


CEDAR RAPIDS. IA. Feb. ITO the Edi-
tor OF The Bee: No state in the union was
more blessed by nature than Iowa. Bounded
on the east and west by two of the mightiest
rivers that flow; crossed from northwest to
southeast by the shallow but never failing
Des Moines; with streams that never 20 dry
flowing in every direction across the fertile
p~rairies in between the we'll wooded hills;
with inexhaustible stores OF coal. lime and
other building stones and many mineral
resources hardly yet developed, the
full as it has been, is hardly
a matter for comment. The only
wonder that might be excited on reflection
Is that the growth of Iowa has not been
more vigorous, and that, instead OF having
two. the state has not three or more mil
lions OF happy, prosperous citizens. But
Iowa has not grown at the rate that might
reasonably be expected OF a commonwealth
having the natural advantages 1t possesses.
Crop failure was never experienced by the
farmers who tickle the deep black loan of
the bottoms or the sandy clay OF the uplands,
and gathered the bounty of natures respond
ent smile In heaps of yellow corn and bins
filled with golden grain. Fat stock feed on
the luscious grasses of the valleys, and east,
west. north and south the mantle OF peace
and plenty is over the land. All that at
tracts population is there, but the population
Is not come.
In 1880. according to the United States
census OF that year. Iowa had a population
of 1924, go. Nebraska had 1921. In 1885
Iowa had grown to 1.753. $50, and Nebraska
to 740, 645. In these five years Iowa in
creased in population 2 1880, or a fraction
less than s per cent; Nebraska's increase
was 422, 374, or 1903. So per cent: the total
growth of Nebraska in individuals being
equal to 327. 20 per cent of Iowa's total
grown but 1871, 916. while Nebraska's increase
Iowa a population of l,911 ,S96, and Nebraska
LOSS, $40. In these FIVE years Iowa had
grown but 157, $40, while NebrasSa's increase
was 21S, 265. During the second half of the
decade Iowa's increase In population was but
8 per cent of the population of 1885. In this
second semi-decade Nebraska's total pop
ulation Increased 1898 per cent, and the
individual addition to the total was 50.16
per cent Of that of the five years from 1880
to 1886. Nebraska's actual growth in pop
ulation in these five years is equal to 1884, %
per cent Of Iowa's actual growth during the
same time. The increase in ratio of devel-
opment is so apparent that the most
patriotic Nebraskan or pessimistic Iowan
will hardly undertake to account for it on
the score of Nebraska's more attractive
natural advantages. Something else must
be looked to for the reason. On all sides
Of Iowa this state of affairs is noted. In
1880 Illinois had a population of 3,077, 81 and
in 1890 had attained 1926 1851, a gain of
74S, $3.50 in the ten years; Missouri in 1880
had 2,16S, $50 and i'm 1890 had 2,679, 1874, a
9on 80 T.. Ioos , ~ zoe ~ a., Ieoo hod
ap r a. ooI COG aainina ao7 oos IN Tho
srot hoIS 80 80 Sooado and Isi oos In The
naoora hoIs nr so1 aSs In tho tor years
Crorn,n re- earros Cor closer con,narison
thou pnsont tba foi1ouiua tahIe.
S"sy - 1870 ,TIoM n, Tr,N vr,pS
VAIN iN GRoNI tsso To 800 H IAN
u OCT 90,
Illinois 74S $50
Minnesota sell 53
Missouri 5lO.SO4
Nebraska 6O6,5OS
Any citizen of Iowa must, on contempla-
tion of these figures, ask himself why
these facts are true. Nebraska's great in
crease might be. ascribed to the rush for
government land, as might Minnesota's. But
Illinois was well populated before Iowa was
opened to settlement, and so was Missouri.
The growth of these two states cannot be as
cribed to the influx of seekers for free homes.
1t must come home to the Iowa man that
there Is something wrong with his state, or
it would not be thus avoided by home seek
ers. The man who has his money invested
there feels this, for he is losing the "un-
earned increment that comes with in
creased population. After canvassing the
situation carefully. comparing the natural