Characterized by efficiency in collecting data, an unusual dearth of refusals by the parties concerned to part with information, and a creditable brevity in assembling the facts, the United States census for 1930 has come to an end. There remains only the inevitable array of conclusions always drawn from the inevitable set of statistics.
Theoretically, the numerical reapportionment to a score of states of seats in Congress is the most important consideration. The abstract problem of selecting the grouping of districts comprising 250,000 persons each is bad enough. The unfortunate quality of the men controlling state politics presents as actual and certainly a more difficult obstacle. Since Massachusetts over a century ago instituted the general practice of gerrymandering, a strategic system whereby the party in office arranges the sections in such a manner that the voting power results in abnormal splits which always favors its own candidates, the thing has become a habit despite gentle dissuasion by more idealistic elements.
Ironically enough, the first offender in this malformation will this time be sufficiently protected from abuse because of its republican legislature and democratic governor. The fifteen seats will probably show true representation. In such a state as California where both the legislature and executive are of the same party a left-handed selection of the new districts would prove one more epitome of American political trends. The remark made long ago that a statesman, according to the American definition, is a dead politician, will perhaps once again be justified by the ancient and not so honorable practice of gerrymandering.