Democratic Sentinel, Volume 6, Number 3, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 February 1882 — Apportionment—The Pending Bill. [ARTICLE]

Apportionment—The Pending Bill.

Washington dispatches state that indications point very clearly to the rejection of the pending Apportionment bill in tho House in the present shape. The Democrats are generally against it, and many Republicans are openly opposing it. Representative Blackburn says that it is au unjust measure, that it ignores the rapidly growing Western States, and gives an increase in the representation to the Eastern States that are declining in population. He says it will be rejected. Page, of California, says it is founded upon injustice, and it will be beaten badly. Blount says it is infamous, and the method of apportionment on which it is based is outrageous. He is satisfied it will be beaten. Pound, of Wisconsin, feels sure the bill will be rejected. Sparks, of Illinois, is opposed to it, and predicts its defeat. It was supposed that as the bill conferred the increase proposed upon the larger States it would get the support of the delegations from thesd States, but this is not so. Several members from Pennsylvania now do not think the bill ought to pass. One substitute that will be offered for the pending bill will propose to fix the membership of the House at 321, as that would distribute tbe representation, it is claimed, more equitably among the factions than any other number. Democrats generally favor the smaller number, and it will be proposed from their side to keep the House at its present figure, 293. Some of those who have studied the drift of opinion think 307 will be the number finally adopted.