El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1910-05-20
some other state would have to lose
Scattered States Would benefit.

some other state would have 10 lose
Scattered States Would Benefit.
An examination of these losses and
gains by states will disclose the fact
that the strong and powerful states of
the central west and of New England
would be most injured, whereas the
benefits of the few gains would be
widely scattered. Also, cOEceding that
political party conditions remain about
the same as they now are, eight Of the
nine losses are Republican and three
Of the nine gains are assuredly Demo-
cratic.
The chief argument in favor of this
solution, or some other equally conser-
vative plan, is that it Will keep the
size of the house within reasonable
bounds. Only once has the congress fail
ed to increase the membership of the
house when making a new appOrtion-
ment.
First House Had So Members.
By the constitution, the membership
Of the first house was fixed at 65. In
der the first apportiOnment based on
the census of 1880, the house was in
creased to 1O5. Then it was increased,
at periods of ten years. successfully, to
al, 1S1, 213 and 240, the latter number
being based on the census of 1880 and
ratio of 47,7OO. After the census of
1910 the ratio was raised to 70,68O with
the result that the membership of the
house was decreased to 223. This is the
only time the house was ever decreased
in size. After the next census, 1850,
the membership was increased TO 233,
and then decennially to 243, 293, 1926,
| $50, and 3S6.
If the congress should decide to con-
tinue the present ratio of 194,182, the
| most liberal possible action, the mem
bership of the house would be increased
to 459- Under that appOrtiOnment no
| state would lose a member and thirty
four would gain. Only twelve states
| would remain stationary, Arkansas,
Colorado, Connecticut. Delaware, Idaho,
Iowa, Maine, Nebraska. Nevada. New
Hampshire, Vermont and Wyoming.
Many States Would Gain
New York would lead the list of gains
| with eight, followed by Pennsylvania
, with a gain of six, Illinois with five,
Oklahoma and Texas with four each,
and Ohio with three. Eight states would
gain two representatives each, Alabama,
Georgia. Massachusetts, Michigan. Min
nesota, Missouri, New Jersey and Ten
nessee. Twenty states would gain one
representative each, California, Florida,
Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maryland, Mississippi Montana, North
Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode
Island, South Carolina, South Dakota
Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Vir-
ginia and Wisconsin
Advantage for the South
Under this liberal scheme the gains
would be widely distributed among the
states, with the advantage to those
northern states having large cities, and
to the south. Considered by sections
the scheme presents peculiar difficult
ties. The eastern Atlantic states gain
nineteen, the Central states gain SIX
teen, the west gains seven and the south
gains twenty-four-
If the census estimate is borne out
by the actual census figures, it will
be impossible to increase the house
without giving the largest sectional
81 re of the gains to the south. This
condition may again precipitate the
question OF cutting down the repre-
sentation of the southern states on the
ground that they have DISTINGUISHED
the negroes. That proposition, cham
piOned by representative Crumpacker of
Indiana and others, has had little or no
support in recent years. but It may
house IS close.
Eastern Stutes Would Fight
The older states of the Atlantic coast
will fight to the last ditch to prevent
the loss of representation. Maine now
has four members. in 1890 it had eight
/ Virginia now has ten members and
West Virginia five When the two were
one state they had twenty-three mem
bers in 1910. Even New York had forty
in 1890 and thirty-seven now. Vermont
and New Hampshire, now having two
each, had six members each in 1910 a
century ago. But reductions are not
easily made now. and under the last
census of 1901. no state was reduced
from its standing under the former
apPortiOnment.
On account of the greater compare
tive growth OF the cities and the south
it is probable that the Democrats will
be inclined TO be more liberal in the
matter of increasing the size of the
house than Will the Republicans But
the history of the recent past shows
that party lines are not adhered to
when old states are fighting to main
tain their diminishing prestige.
Tomorrow, Possibilities of the Ger
rymander."