The age-herald., 1900-12-17
REAPPORTIONMEMT OF REPRESENTATION South Will Not Lose by Disfran-
 chiSing Negroes THAT QUESTION IS SETTLED Proposition to Increase the Number of Representatives Does Not Meet
 With Favor, as There Are AL
 ready Too Many.
THAT QUESTION IS SETTLED

is impossible, at present. to forecast the action of the House on the reapporton- ment proposition except that there will be no reduction of representation from the southern states because of their disfran- chisement of negro voters. The question of reapportionment is one that embarrasses the census committee greatly. It is desired by all members not to increase the House membership unduly, and that the ratio must be considerably increased is generally agreed, but representatives from states that are in danger of losing representation be- cause their populations have not increased proportionately with other states are fight ing to prevent loss in representation. Maine, for instance under any ratio of rep resentatlon over 194,0OO would lose one Con- gressman, and have only three. The strong Maine delegation is vigorously opposing ev- cry scheme that does not leave Maine's rep resentation as It is. The question is wheth- CT or not they will be successful, and the Maine men claim to be confident that they will win. As Maine man, Ex-Governor Burleigh who is on the census committee, should have some influence.
 The reapportionment bill introduced by Representative Hopkins of Illinois, chair man on census, provides for a House of 357 members. or one more than the present House. Under this arrangement Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Nebraska, Ohio, South Carolina and Virginia would each lose one member Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and West Virginia would each gain one, while Texas alone would gain two representatives.
 Southern Losses.
 In the losses the South would lose one less than the North and in the gains, counting West Virginia as a Northern State, the North would gain two more than the South, causing a net loss of one for the South, which, considering the more rapid growth of the North and West, is certainly not fair.
 Judging from the standpoint of public business the Hopkins proposition is prefera- ble to any plan that would increase the number of representatives, for, the House is now too large for an orderly transaction of business, and 1t is a serious question where members could be seated if the House were enlarged.
 If the Hopkins bill should be approved by the census committee and agreed to by Congress it would give a far smaller in- crease in representation than has occurred in the history of the government On one occasion only was the size of the House reduced; that was in 1S4O The first census, that of 179O increased the House by forty, from 65 to 1O5.
 The Gradual Increase.
 or members, or III, the ratio remaining at one for every 8, 900 inhabitants. In 1910 the ratio was increased to one for every S5,000 and the House enlarged by 40 making the total 1S1. In 1920 the ratio was raised to 40,000, and the House enlarged to 213, a gain of 32. The census of 1880 resulted in an increase of the ratio to one for every 47, 700 people, the House being increased by 27, and numbering 240 members. In 1S4O the ratio of representation jumped from 47, 700 to 10000, and the House was reduced by IT to 223. The next census, that of 1S50 caused the ratio to be fixed at one for every 93, ,423 people, and the House got ten new members, or 233. In 1860 the ratio of rep resentation was made one for every 127,3S1 people and the House increased inly ten to 243. The census of 1870 saw the ratio in- creased only to 131,3N. while the House gained fifty members and numbered 293 The census of 1880 saw the ratio of repre- sentation increased by over twenty thou sand to 1910 and the membership of the House by 32 to 325. The census of 1890 saw the ratio increased by almost twenty thou sand and the house to 356 members, a gain of 31. This is the present representation.
 A Doubtful Question.
 It Is very doubtful whether the census committee will accept the Hopkins propo- sition. I am inclined to think it will de- cline it. The census committee comprises fourteen members of whom five-Burleigh (Maine), Crumpacker Qndiana), Griffith, Qndiana), Mcdowell (Ohio). and Wilson South Carolina), are from States that would each lose one representative in con- sequence. Heatwale of Wisconsin does not look favorably upon the Hopkins idea and perhaps two other members of the committee are not favorable to it.
 The States that would lose in representa- ton, in consequence of the Hopkins appor- tionment which would make the ratio one for every 20S,S6S people, have 72 votes in the House and with the votes of States that would gain in representation under some other apportionment they might be able to defeat the plan On basis of one member for every 194OOO people only two or three States would lose in representation and Maine would hold her four as would Ohio her twenty-one and Kentucky her eleven.
 Before the question can be settled 1t is very likely that caucus of the Republi- cans will be necessary And after the House has passed on the question the Sem ate will have its say
 EARL u GRATEFUL.