. Poe Lan re ah O8. pete tease u ta 3 a armen pens - seve #35 . f+ Sinton fede gshed arte aia ® an ites sees tee aa: a © . to 4 st > ist athagst pel p as isa) os Sti Y piseeteteahictatd : Bet ; Ripe tmrrey i i ety wenee . <3? - : oe ‘ ; * sh ce Bnet apart erie Sonia he aglers regen fi . oath: ee ; ante UST uae Poe aint ~ + mae 4 pap sdet Latent lhe Ties ern sseretwist, Nee ren Siege st: i need Sennen irr.) % eR ea Ame Siero sip seis) hind seks Ltere ses Tet beayecin rinsetah pany Soneoratesmras teenie passer. bors Scaaicy HT 431 .F8 1926 Fry, C.. Luther 5b. 1894. American villagers Sk + Ye - Mest Sees Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library httos://archive.org/details/americanvillagerOOfryc Institute of Social and Religious Research AMERICAN VILLAGE STUDIES Edmund deS. Brunner, Director AMERICAN VILLAGERS C. LUTHER FRY The Institute of Social and Religious Re- search, which is responsible for this publication, was organized in January, 1921, as the Com- mittee on Social and Religious Surveys. It conducts and publishes studies and surveys and promotes conferences for their consideration. The Institute’s aim is to combine the scientific method with the religious motive. It co- operates with other social and religious agen- cles, but is itself an independent organization. The directorate of the Institute is composed of: John R. Mott, Chairman; Raymond B. Fosdick, Treasurer; Kenyon L. Butterfield, Re- cording Secretary; James L. Barton, W. H. P. Faunce and Paul Monroe. Galen M. Fisher ts Executive Secretary. The offices are at 370 Seventh Avenue, New York City. ee , , th — — y * ‘i ijt r ae ray fir ~ or * BY ; C, LUTHER ’FRY AUTHOR OF “DIAGNOSING THE RURAL CHURCH,” ETC. With an Appendix on the Social Composition of the Rural Population of the United States by Luther Sheeleigh Cressman NEW 59 YORK GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY AME ee » WERITGA Nia) 4 y LG awe ILLAGERS NLL OGICAL St \ Ww j COPYRIGHT, 1926, BY GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY AMERICAN VILLAGERS bb? EBs PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOREWORD Discontent is widespread among rural populations. As to its causes opinions differ; but the fact remains that rural life is not yielding the relative satisfaction it once gave. Thus there 1s today a marked tendency for rural people to move cityward, while many of those who remain behind are becoming class- conscious and dissatisfied. Both of these trends are of the greatest social significance. During the last generation it was rather generally taken for granted that the conflict between Capital and Labor was the outstanding economic issue of modern society; but reflection makes it apparent that the discontent of agricultural people may be as serious a menace to the peace and prosperity of the nation as is the discontent of industrial wage earners. As a contribution toward the solution of the rural problem in the United States, the Institute of Social and Religious Re- search decided to make a somewhat elaborate study of the economic, social and religious conditions in agricultural villages. For purposes of this investigation a village was defined as a place whose population ranged from 250 to 2,500, and an agri- cultural village as one that was located in a strictly farming area and that acted as a service station to the inhabitants of the surrounding countryside. The survey plan of the Institute’s Village Study called for the sending of trained investigators, in teams of two, to spend from two to three weeks in studying at first hand the actual conditions in each of 140 villages. The results of this phase of the study will appear in a separate volume. But in addition to its field studies the Institute not only assembled the more important published material about villages, but also secured access to hitherto unpublished data about them in the files of the United States Census Bureau. This latter phase of the study was solely in the hands of Dr. C. Luther Fry, Director of the Bureau of Standards of the Institute and Asso- ciate Director of the American Village Study, at whose sug- Vv vi FOREWORD gestion the examination of the unpublished Census data was originally undertaken. His investigations proved so fruitful and significant that it was decided to publish the results as a separate volume. Dr. Fry’s book necessarily deals with village problems in statistical terms; but I believe the reader will share my own feeling that he has brought to bear on his subject not only a singularly acute analytical sense, but also a keen appreciation of the warm human story that lies behind the statistical materials. EDMUND DES. BRUNNER. AUTHOR’S NOTE The reliability of the conclusions drawn from this study 1s, of course, limited by the fact that the available data about villages are meager. But it is believed that the materials are sufficient for reliable first approximations to the truth; and it is hoped that the conclusions may not only prove of interest, but that they may encourage more intensive studies of villages than have here- tofore been undertaken. It is not possible to mention all of the people who cooperated in this study, but the author wants to thank Mr. Robert W. McCulloch, of the Institute of Social and Religious Research, who edited the book and assisted in organizing the presentation. Wed ay CHAPTER Vil CONTENTS FOREWORD AuTHor’s NOTE . 4 PuRPOSE AND FINDINGS OF THE STUDY How Many VILLAGERS ARE THERE? ARE VILLAGE PopuULATIONS DECLINING? ; ; Wuat Kinp or PEeorLte Live IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES? ’ é ; ‘ : Wuat Do ViLLacGERS Do For A LIVING? . i Wuat ARE THE DISTINGUISHING PECULIARITIES OF VILLAGE POPULATIONS? Wuat FuNcTIONS Do VILLAGERS PERFORM? . : APPENDICES ANALYSIS OF THE “RURAL” AND THE “URBAN” PopuLATION FIGURES FOR CERTAIN NEw ENG- LAND STATES AS GIVEN IN 1920 CENSUS CLASSIFICATION OF THE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED Workers ACCORDING TO THEIR “SoctaL-Eco- NOMIC” STATUS ‘ : : Ture SoctiAL COMPOSITION OF THE RuRAL Popu- LATION OF THE UNITED STATES, BY LUTHER SHEELEIGH CRESSMAN . : : : , 112 ty 135 141 ttt rf Pa wk | rt i) a) . ne 9 a 7 a by i TABLE NUMBER { IT Ill Vil Vill XI LIST OF TABLES VILLAGE PopuLATIONS OF 12 STATES AS ListED BY THE RAND McNattiy ATLAS AND BY Cram’s Attias, 1920 PROPORTION OF VILLAGES THAT ARE INCOR- PORATED, BY Divisions, 1920 VILLAGES FOR Eacu 100 Square MILES OF ArEA, BY Divisions, 1920 . PROPORTION OF THE TOTAL POPULATION Tuat RESIDES IN VILLAGES, BY DIVISIONS, 1920 ‘ ; f , PROPORTION OF THE RurRAL POPULATION (Exctupinc New Encianp) Tuat RE- SIDES IN VILLAGES, BY Divisions, 1920 INCREASE IN NUMBER AND IN POPULATION or INCORPORATED VILLAGES, 1900 To 1920 PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF VILLAGE AND OF TotTaL Popuiations, By Divisions, 1900 Fo 1920. PERCENTAGE INCREASE BY DECADES OF IN- CORPORATED VILLAGE AND OF TOTAL PoruLaTIoNs, BY Divisions, 1900 To 1920 PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF THE POPULATIONS IN VILLAGES AND IN THE REMAINING Rurav Area, By Divisions, 1900 to 1920 PERCENTAGE INCREASE BY DECADES OF THE PopuLATIONS IN INCORPORATED VILLAGES AND IN THE REMAINING RuRAL AREA, BY Divisions, 1900 to 1920 . d , , RATE OF PoPpULATION GrowTH BY DECADES OF THE PLaces THaT IN 1900 WERE (A) INCORPORATED VILLAGES AND (B) ReE- MAINING RuRAL AREA, BY Divisions, 1900 To 1920. Xi PAGE 28 53 Ou 35 36 oo 40 43 45 46 48 xii TABLE NUMBER XII XIII XIV XV XVI XVII XVIII XIX XX XXI XXIT XXIII LIST OF TABLES RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES oF Piaces THat IN 1900 WeErE (A) INCORPORATED VILLAGES AND (B) CITIEs, By Divisions, 1900 to 1920 ; RATE OF PoPpULATION GROWTH BY DECADES oF PiacEes THat IN 1900 WERE (A) CITIES OF VARYING S1zE, (B) INcor- PORATED VILLAGES, AND (C) REMAINING RurAL AREA, 1900 To 1920 7 RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES oF Praces THat IN 1900 WerE (A) SMALL, (B) Mepium AND (C) Larce In- CORPORATED VILLAGES, BY Divisions, 1900 To 1920. 2 : : : ; PROPORTION OF INCORPORATED VILLAGES OF 1900 TuHat Hap (A) Growine, (B) STATIONARY OR (C) DeEcLtininc PopuLa- TIONS, BY Divisions, 1900 Tro 1920 . Cotor, NATIVITY AND PARENTAGE OF AGRI- CULTURAL VILLAGE POPULATIONS, By DI- visions, 1920 PLACE OF BirTH OF Roane Ba va LAGERS, BY Divisions, 1920 AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF VILLAGERS, BY SEX AND BY Divisions, 1920 MarITAL CONDITION OF VILLAGERS 15 are: OF AGE AND Over, By SEX AND BY DtI- VISIONS, 1920 t : 4 : Home OWNERSHIP AND S1IZE oF FAMILY AMONG VILLAGERS, BY Divisions, 1920 . SCHOOL ATTENDANCE OF VILLAGERS BE- TWEEN 7 AND 21 YEARS OF AGE, BY SEX AND BY Divisions, 1920 ; ILLITERATES 10 YEARS oF AGE AND OVER IN VILLAGES BY SEX, CoLor AND Nativ- ITY, AND BY Divisions, 1920 AVERAGE POPULATION OF VILLAGES, BY Reaions, 1920 PAGE 49 51 53 55 59 60 62 62 63 65 68 TABLE NUMBER XXIV XXV XXVI XXVIII XXVIII XXIX XXX XXXI XXXIT XXXII XXXIV LIST OF TABLES COMPOSITION OF VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE, BY Recions, 1920 ProporTION OF MALES AND FEMALES 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER GAINFULLY EM- PLOYED IN VILLAGES, BY AGE-GROUPS AND BY Recions, 1920 Proportion oF NEGROES AND WuitTes 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OvER GAINFULLY EM- PLOYED IN SOUTHERN VILLAGES, BY SEX AND AGE-Groupes, 1920 : A Y OccuPATIONS OF GAINFULLY EMPLOYED MALES AND FEMALES 10 YEARS oF AGE AND OVER IN VILLAGES, BY Recions, 1920 OccuUPATIONS OF THE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED MALES AND FEMALES IN VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE, BY Recions, 1920 OccuPATIONS OF NEGROES AND WHITES 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OvER EMPLOYED IN SOUTHERN VILLAGES, BY SEX, 1920 . SocraL-ECONOMIC STATUS OF GAINFULLY EMPLOYED VILLAGERS 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX AND BY ReEctons, 1920 SoctAL-Economic Status oF NEGROES AND OF Wuites 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OvER EMPLOYED IN SOUTHERN VILLAGES, BY SEX, 1920 DETAILED OCCUPATIONAL GROUPINGS OF GAINFULLY EmpLoyep Mates 10 YEAarS oF AGE AND OVER IN VILLAGES, BY Reaions, 1920 . DETAILED OCCUPATIONAL GROUPINGS OF GAINFULLY EmMpLoYyeD FEemaes’ 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER IN VILLAGES, BY Recions, 1920 Ps CoMPOSITION OF MeEpIUuM-SIZE CITy AND VILLAGE PopuLaTIons, By Recions, 1920 xiii PAGE 70 75 76 77 80 81 86 88 89 91 oS xiv TABLE NUMBER XXXV XXXVI XXXVIT XXXVITI XXXIX XL XLI XLII XLII XLIV LIST OF TABLES OccupaTIONS OF MeEpIUM-S1ZE CITY AND VILLAGE PoPpuULATIONS GAINFULLY Em- PLOYED 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY Sex AND BY Recions, 1920 SoctaL-EconomMic Stratus OF MEeEpIUuM- S1zE CITY AND VILLAGE POPULATIONS GAINFULLY EMPLOYED 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX AND BY Recions, 1920 CoMPOSITION OF THE POPULATIONS OF SPECI- FIED CiTiEs, 1920 OccuUPATIONS AND SOCIAL-ECONOMIC STATUS OF THE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED 10 YEARS oF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX, IN SPECIFIED Cities, 1920. COMPOSITION OF OPEN- Chua AND VIL- LAGE PopuLATIONS, BY Recions, 1920 DIFFERENCES AMONG (A) VILLAGE, (B) Mepium-Size City, AND (C) OPEN- CouNTRY PoPULATIONS ON SPECIFIED Points, By Recions, 1920 DIFFERENCES AmoncG (A) VILLAGE, (B) MeEDIUM-SIZE City, AND (C) OPEN- Country PopuLations IN AGE-DISTRIBU- TION, BY SEX AND BY Recions, 1920 DIFFERENCES AMONG (A) VILLAGE, (B) MeEDIUM-S1zE City, AND (C) OPEN- CouNTRY PoPULATIONS IN THE RATIO OF CHILDREN UNDER 10 To Eacu 100 Mar- RIED WoMEN 15 To 45 YEARS OF AGE, BY Recions, 1920 DIFFERENCES AMONG (A) VILLAGE, (B) URBAN, AND (C) OpEN-CountrRY PoPULa- TIONS ON SPECIFIED POINTS, BY a 1920 DIFFERENCES AMONG (A) Piece (B) UrBAN, AND (C) Open-Country Popu- LATIONS IN AGE-DISTRIBUTION, BY SEX AND BY Recrons, 1920 PAGE 96 oF 99 100 102 105 106 107 109 110 TABLE NUMBER XLV XLVI XLVII XLVIII XLIX Pek LET LIV LV LIST OF TABLES DISTRIBUTION OF PROFESSIONAL CLASSES IN VILLAGES AND MeEpIuM-SizE CITIES, BY SEX AND BY Recions, 1920 DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIFIED PROFESSIONAL CLASSES IN VILLAGES AND MeEpIuM-SIzE Cities, BY SEX AND By Recions, 1920 PROPORTION OF VILLAGE ScHooL Pupits TuHat LIvE IN THE OPEN ara BY Recions, 1920 CLERGYMEN TO Eacu 1,000 oF THE Peat. LATION IN VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE AND IN Mepium-SizeE Cities, sy Recions, 1920 Lawyers To Eacu 1,000 oF tHe Poputa- TION IN VILLAGES AND IN MepiuM-S1zE Cities, By Recions, 1920 . : : PuysiciaANs To Eacu 1,000 or tue Popv- LATION IN VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE AND IN Mepium-S1zeE Cirttiss, sy Recions, 1920 AVERAGE SIZE OF THE VILLAGE AND THE Opren-CounTRY PopuLaTions In 140 VILLAGE COMMUNITIES, BY SIZE AND BY Recions, 1920 Puysictans To Eacu 1,000 oF THE Been LATION IN VILLAGE COMMUNITIES AND IN MepiuM-Size Cities, sy Recions, 1920 Dentists TO Eacu 1,000 oF tue Poputa- TION IN (A) VILLAGES, (B) VILLAGE COMMUNITIES .AND (C) Meprum-Size Cities, By Recions, 1920 . Nurses To Eacu 1,000 oF tHE PopuLation IN (A) Vittaces, (B) Vittace Com- MUNITIES, AND (C) Meprum-Size Cirigs, BY ReEcions, 1920 Mintimum NuMBER oF Persons ENGAGED IN THE DIFFERENT PROFESSIONS IN VIL- LAGES OF VARYING SiZE, 1920 XV PAGE 113 114 116 118 119 121 1272 es" 124 io 126 * dhs + > ' ' 4 ,.# us 4 f } ay iY) * } ite a } &)F P ‘ j , \ - zx '? iy Ais ' ; LJ J he ; ; r ‘ ‘ ¥- “ \ “ ‘ r - .) ‘ ’ Py e 4 ‘ ' a : ‘ ' ’ ‘ ' y . > : - 4 . i j 4 ‘ be" ul > | 7, ’ #\ ’ / : t ’ b of j f at) ' ! ’ [o } A i” - 0 4 : ' J ya ‘ 7) a Fay a ; te ’ epi rf} is ” . ¥ he cana od ah Ny ce és A riwsy Ms Oe ian ft TAS ae | me ‘i “i ry i\ ‘ edt y y i. DIAGRAM NUMBER I II Ill IV VII DIAGRAMS Map Locating THE INCORPORATED VILLAGES IN THE UNITED STATES AVERAGE NUMBER oF ATLAS VILLAGES FOR Eacu 100 Square Mixes or AREA IN StatEs GROUPED BY Density oF Popu.ation, 1920 PoPpULATION GRowTH oF Paces TuHat 1n 1900 WerE (A) Cities, (B) IncorPoratTeD ViL- LAGES, AND (C) Remaininc Rurax Arga, 1900 TO LIZO mA Map LocaTtinec THE 177 AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES NuMBER oF Mates To Eacu 100 Fema.es IN VIL- LAGES, BY Divisions, 1920 NUMBER OF CHILDREN UNpeErR 10 Years or AGE TO Eacu 100 Marriep WomEN 15 To 45 YEars OF AGE IN VILLAGES AND OpEN CouNTRY, BY Recions, 1920 NumBer oF Puysicrans To Eacu 1,000 or THE POPULATION IN CITIES AND IN VILLAGE Com- MUNITIES, BY Recions, 1920 PAGE 103 123 art i La tor ue ns ALR Ca eet . a Ai a ye é Knee OY My dy, | ; i deow ; a ay eee a be Wang af Af ey ty 7 My rn + a at AMERICAN VILLAGERS Mea yayte:. - A - = ;: 5 NOP eae Aa as yi § “Ss iu i re ‘ ta baked © Bee - ial Gy 4 j , Lt Tig ae ks Re 4 eee #, ae ebay a >a i ‘ 1 P ‘ i : ‘ oi? ’ om... i he | ] es | ” FoR ia ’ es yas . ; ; 1 Se yi eae pik f Bik: ; Tee 7 } oe ‘ aw ee =} a (Pratik ey 1 ree. a nh PS, SPY: ‘i ao ut 7? « ¢, ue ches CHAPTER I PURPOSE AND FINDINGS OF THE STUDY In this book an attempt is made to answer these funda- mental questions about the villagers of the United States: How many villagers are there? Are village populations declining? What kind of people live in villages? What do villagers do for a living? What are the distinguishing peculiarities of vil- lage populations? What functions do villagers perform? A study of this sort is important for many reasons. If for no other reason, such an inquiry would be justified because of the large number of people living in villages. While individually they may seem insignificant, collectively villages are important. The Census of 1920 shows that the number of incorporated places having fewer than 2,500 inhabitants is approximately 12,900, and that their combined populations aggregate nearly nine millions. When it is remembered that these figures do not make allowances for the large numbers of people living in un- incorporated places, it becomes clear that village populations con- stitute not only a large fraction of America’s rural population, but of her total population as well. More important, however, than the number of village people are the many pressing rural problems that are intimately tied up with village life. The relations between villagers on the one hand and open-country inhabitants on the other, constitute an important rural problem which a study of villages should help to clarify. It is a matter of common knowledge that contacts between villager and open-country dweller are often characterized by friction and hostility. To a considerable extent, the history of the Non-Partisan League in North Dakota has been one of struggle for power between farmers and villagers. A study of villages should help to reveal some of the causes of this antagonism. A village study should throw light upon the problem of rural migrations. This analysis shows, for example, that village popu- 21 22 AMERICAN VILLAGERS lations are increasing more rapidly than those of the open coun- try; which means, of course, that villagers are becoming a more and more important element of the nation’s rural population. In addition to these wider social considerations, a knowledge of village conditions should be of value to different groups, in- cluding those engaged in manufacturing and in business, because the village is the place where farmers, as well as villagers, buy and sell. Protestant churchmen need such knowledge because a disproportionately large number of their churches are located in villages. Educators should be interested, because a large pro- portion of the children of both the open country and the villages attend village schools. Indeed, villages provide the only avail- able high-school facilities for approximately half the nation, since open-country as well as village populations depend upon them almost entirely. In short, villages are eminently worth studying because of their strategic location within the rural area. A village is not a group apart; rather it is a radiating center that powerfully influences not only the lives of its own inhabitants, but the lives of all who dwell round about it as well. Thus a knowledge of villages is an indispensable key to an understanding of our rural problem. IGNORANCE ABOUT VILLAGES Despite their importance, little is known about villages. This, indeed, was one of the main reasons for studying them. There is no other population group of equal size about which so little information is available. Many public and private agencies have helped to collect large bodies of facts about cities, while certain studies of the Department of Agriculture, and the special analysis of “farm populations” included as a part of the 1920 Census, have furnished important facts about our distinctly agricultural in- habitants. The amount of information about villages, however, 1s very meager. Although the Census collects its data for each incorporated place, and tabulates this material in detail for metropolitan centers, the amount of detailed tabulation diminishes with the diminishing size of the place, until for incorporated places hay- ing fewer than 2,500 inhabitants, the Census volumes furnish PURPOSE AND FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 23 only a single figure—the total population of each place. Need- less to say, this is very scanty material with which to work. Of course, the Census provides a rather minute analysis of the coun- try’s “rural” population; but, since this term, as used by the Government, includes the inhabitants of all unincorporated areas * as well as those of incorporated places having fewer than 2,500 inhabitants, there are grave doubts whether these figures do not really misrepresent conditions in villages. Certain rural experts are coming more and more to feel that village and open-country dwellers differ so widely that the Census term “rural,” which combines both groups under the one head, has little significance for either population group. One of the objectives of the present study was to ascertain whether this belief is well founded. The principal sources of information about villages, aside from the Census, are a small number of first-hand studies made by individual investigators. However, the usefulness of these studies is limited, because of the small number of places covered and because the different investigators have used various methods of research, with the result that the findings of one study are not comparable with those of the others. Since the Census Bureau has in its files at Washington a separate enumeration of each incorporated village, the Institute was able, through the courtesy of Honorable William M. Steuart, Director of the Census, and Dr. Charles J. Galpin, in charge of the Division of Farm Population and Rural Life of the Depart- ment of Agriculture, to secure access to hitherto unpublished facts about 177 villages. The facts secured by this special tabulation have already been presented in an Institute publication, A Census Analysis of American Villages. The primary purpose of the present book is to indicate the significance of the data already published in that volume. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Some of the more important findings of this study of American Villagers can be summarized as follows: 1, There are in the United States approximately 18,000 1 Unincorporated places that have 2,500 inhabitants or more are not classi- fied as “urban” because the Census does not secure separate enumerations for unincorporated places. Except in New England the number of such places is quite small, 24 AMERICAN VILLAGERS villages whose populations aggregate between twelve and a half and thirteen million. This means that nearly every eighth Ameri- can lives ina village. (Chapter II.) 2. Villages are scattered over the country in much the same proportions as the population as a whole, the most notable ex- ception occurring in the Mountain division where the number of villages is disproportionately large. (Chapter II.) 3. Contrary to general belief, village populations are in- creasing. From 1900 to 1920 villages actually increased in popu- lation more rapidly than the nation as a whole. (Chapter III.) 4. Although village populations increased more slowly in the period 1910 to 1920 than in the previous ten-year period, nevertheless in both decades villagers increased several times more rapidly than the rest of the “rural” population. As a result, villagers are steadily becoming a more and more important ele- ment of the nation’s “rural” population. (Chapter III.) 5. Agricultural villages, ie., villages located in distinctly farming areas and that act as service stations to inhabitants of the surrounding countryside, appear to be the most numerous type of village. (Chapter II.) 6. A special tabulation of Census data about agricultural villages reveals that the composition and characteristics of their populations differ widely from region to region. National gen- eralizations about villages should, therefore, be made with great care. (Chapter IV.) 7. Despite the fact that village populations vary widely from region to region, the “social-economic” status of the gainfully employed men in villages is much the same in the villages of the different regions. (Chapter V.) 8. Even in agricultural villages the gainfully employed men engaged in manufacturing pursuits form the largest group. (Chapter V.) 9. The inhabitants of middle western villages seem to be economically more prosperous than villagers in other regions. They have comparatively high proportions of home ownership and of young people attending school, and the rate of child labor is low. These facts point to a relatively high standard of living in the villages of the area, (Chapter IV.) 10. Child labor in southern villages seems to be partly a result of economic pressure. In those villages the relative number PURPOSE AND FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 25 of gainfully employed children under fourteen is comparatively high; but the proportion of gainfully employed old people also tends to be high. (Chapter V.) 11. Villagers differ from city dwellers. They have higher proportions of native whites and decidedly larger numbers of old people. (Chapter VI.) 12. On a number of important points village inhabitants differ at least as widely from open-country as from city dwellers. These data, therefore, raise the question whether the common practice of combining village and open-country populations under the one head “rural’’ is justifiable. (Chapter VI.) 13. The medical services performed by villages are decidedly less adequate than those performed by cities. In proportion to the populations they serve, villages have fewer physicians and dentists than have cities, while more than half the villages studied have no trained nurses at all. (Chapter VII.) CHAPTER II HOW MANY VILLAGERS ARE THERE? The first topic to consider in any population problem is the number of people concerned. Unfortunately there are no official population figures for a large proportion of the American vil- lages, because the Federal Census does not attempt to secure separate enumerations for places that are unincorporated. For this reason, the populations of unincorporated villages cannot be accurately ascertained. It is possible, however, by the use of figures from unofficial sources as well as of Census data, to arrive at an estimate of the number of all villages and of their total population. This, therefore, is the purpose of the present discussion, in which an effort will also be made to indicate the way in which villages are distributed over the country. The Census makes no attempt to enumerate separately the populations of the unincorporated villages; nevertheless the re- turns it does make testify to the importance of the village problem. The 1920 data? for the entire country show that the number of incorporated places with fewer than 2,900 inhabitants is 12,858,? and that their total populations aggregate 8,97 1,549, But these incorporated centers are not all considered as “villages” for the purpose of the present study, because this term has been restricted by the Institute to places having from 250 to 2,500 inhabitants, while still smaller centers, those having fewer than 250 inhabitants, have been defined as “hamlets.” On this basis, a reclassification of the 1920 Census data reveals that of the 12,858 incorporated rural places, 2,619 are hamlets whose populations total 461,890. Thus the number of incorporated villages is 10,239, and their aggregate population, 8,509,659—a million more than the entire population of New England, 1 Fourteenth Census, Vol. I, Table XXXI, p. 50. 2 Forty-eight incorporated Places whose populations are not known, have not been included in this figure, while Littleton, N. H., which is a village of 2,308, has been included although for some reason it was omitted from the total com- piled by the Census and presented in Table XXXI, Vol. I, Fourteenth Census. 26 HOW MANY VILLAGERS ARE THERE? 27 Large as are the Census figures, they do not really give the country’s total village population, since they include only the inhabitants of incorporated places. Unincorporated centers are entirely omitted, yet it is a matter of common knowledge that the number of unincorporated villages is large. It is recognized that in certain states there are more of them than of places that are incorporated. Obviously, therefore, unincorporated places should be taken into account in an estimate of the nation’s total village population. ATLAS COUNT OF VILLAGES Because complete Census figures were not available, the In- stitute was compelled to turn to unofficial sources to ascertain the total population of American villages. Such a source is the Rand McNally Atlas, which attempts to publish the name and to give the population of not only every city and town in the United States, but of smaller centers as well. Here, then, is a basis for estimating the total number of both villages and villagers. Using the 1921 edition of this atlas, which gives population estimates as of 1920, the Institute counted all of the places rang- ing in size from 250 to 2,500. This computation disclosed that the Rand McNally Atlas lists no fewer than 18,381 villages, and that these have a total population of 12,858,521.° If correct, this estimate means that nearly one out of every eight Americans lives in a village, and that villagers constitute a quarter of the total “rural’’ population as defined by the Census, “rural’’ popu- lation being that in unincorporated areas and in incorporated places with fewer than 2,500 inhabitants. Before commenting further upon the significance of these figures, a word is necessary concerning their reliability. How accurate is the atlas? This is a difficult question to answer, but there are several reasons for thinking that it furnishes a reason- ably sound basis for estimating America’s total village popu- lation. So far as possible, the data in the Rand McNally Atlas are secured from official sources. Thus it happens that in the 1921 edition of the atlas the populations of incorporated villages are taken directly from the 1920 Census. This means that the 3 These figures supersede any previous estimate the Institute has made of the number of villages as of 1920 listed in the Rand McNally Atlas. 28 AMERICAN VILLAGERS number and size of only unincorporated villages are based upon unofficial counts. According to the atlas, the total number of unincorporated villages is 8,142 and their aggregate population is 4,348,862. On the face of it, the atlas count is quite convincing. The number of unincorporated villages is known to be large, so that the atlas enumeration seems reasonable, since it indicates that ap- proximately one-third of the country’s total village population is to be found in these villages. The atlas count also seems valid because it shows that the larger centers are the ones that are incorporated. The average size of all atlas villages is 700, which compares with 831 for those listed by the Census. This means that the average population of the unincorporated centers is 534, or 36 per cent. less than the figure for incorporated villages. The general reliability of the atlas count was further con- firmed by checking, in twelve widely scattered states, the Rand McNally count with similar figures furnished by Cram’s Atlas. This comparison is presented in Table I. TABLE I—VILLAGE POPULATIONS OF 12 STATES AS LISTED BY THE RAND McNALLY ATLAS AND BY CRAM’S ATLAS, 1920 Villages Number Population State Rand Rand McNally Cram McNally Cram Ota lier rad wate Uh eh ue ot 7,785 8,282 5,501,586 5,820,221 Pennsylvaitia ats.) hres 1,590 1,750 1,170,580 1,233,593 UNG Wey Oise, tar ts a 1,108 1,262 731,358 918,050 COTA SS etna tee ee ON eee 878 912 596,011 605,663 Bilis PTR, RU eu ria eee 934 963 711,468 724,346 MOWAT oie ai betak Hen ae 663 667 470,069 473,536 Missotirs fae) eee y Bale hee 612 622 439,786 433,464 redrein til eo al Ae eee Bae 457 467 311,172 314,266 PLATAIA eee Meee er ke 388 432 271,160 289,681 SOARO Hirt tle aes ati eee nee 146 159 92,355 98,603 Waloradge 2206 ahs Ay na 190 206 131,497 137,608 VWranlunctones ds. eta weed 299 308 191,769 196,513 ASAT Orrin, fae 1 Da ge ye 520 534 384,361 394,898 This table shows that the village figures given by the two atlases check very closely indeed. For every state but one the population total of the Rand McNally Atlas is more conserva- tive; but in only one state does it differ from Cram’s by as much as 10 per cent., while the average difference for both the number and the population of villages is roughly 6 per cent. HOW MANY VILLAGERS ARE THERE? 29 Of course the mere fact that the two atlas counts closely cor- respond is not conclusive proof that the village populations of the United States are so large as the Rand McNally figure indicates, since both atlases may present somewhat overestimated totals. Even assuming a possible tendency toward exaggeration, it should not greatly distort the village estimates because the inclusion in the village estimates of unincorporated hamlets whose populations had optimistically been placed at 250 or more, would be partly compensated for by the exclusion from the rural group and the inclusion in the urban group of certain unincorporated villages whose population of actually less than 2,500 had been over- estimated. Moreover, it seems almost certain that some unincorporated villages have been entirely overlooked by the atlases. This fact would reduce still further any tendency for an atlas count to over- estimate the country’s village inhabitants. It is safe, therefore, to assume that the more conservative figures of the Rand McNally Atlas are reasonably correct, or in other words, that between twelve and a half and thirteen million Americans live in 18,000 villages. This is 12 per cent. of the entire population of the United States, while the number of individual places con- cerned is more than six times the total number of cities in the United States. DISTRIBUTION OF INCORPORATED VILLAGES Having arrived at an estimate of the total number of villages, it is important to know how they are distributed over the country. Diagram I actually locates each of the 10,239 incorporated vil- lages whose populations are separately listed by the Census. This diagram is enlightening even though unincorporated villages are omitted. It shows, for example, the concentration of incor- porated villages around many of the larger metropolitan centers. Most of the clusters of dots, particularly in New Jersey, Penn- sylvania, Ohio and Illinois, represent villages in the immediate vicinity of such large centers as New York, Chicago, Philadel- phia, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc. The diagram, therefore, makes it plain that an appreciably large number of incorporated villages are suburban to metropolitan centers. The majority of incorporated villages, however, appear to be $o}e1G powUup oy} Ur sose]IA peyetodiosuy ay} SsurjeooTy dep I WVvaovIG M me] oO ai pi ae ed +A oa a | i 9.5 15.1 29.6 Zhe PIALe TAUIATTIC oak oe coe sees 3.0 15:2 10.9 25.0 PacteiVortn Gentral .. 2% veleee + sa's phe Vs 122 14.2 West North-Central”. ........... 11.8 78 22.6 125 BSMtIVOATIANILIC .foccs esas edeaes 11.9 14.7 46.5 16.8 meet South Gentral®. soo. 6es. 5s 5.8 Sif 47.9 11.4 MVest, south. Central)... .. 6.25... 27.8 16.6 83.3 34.5 MUTT CHATHIO ey os Oo core Sc cites ck er 41.9 26.7 62.0 57.3 RCC My eT aie a ios He oe 8.5 32.8 84.3 73.5 * Minus sign (—) denotes decrease. These data raise the question whether village populations are not increasing faster than the country’s rural population. This question is particularly important because an affirmative answer would mean that villagers are becoming a proportionately larger element of the nation’s “rural” population. 44, AMERICAN VILLAGERS VILLAGE VS. “RURAL”? INCREASE Probably the simplest way of testing this hypothesis is to work out the proportion of the rural population living in incor- porated villages in 1900, and then to compare this figure with the same ratios for 1910 and 1920. This computation shows that 13.5 per cent. of America’s rural inhabitants outside of New England lived in incorporated villages in 1900; but that by 1910 this proportion had increased to 16.0, and that in 1920 it was 16.9. This means that between 1900 and 1920 the relative im- portance of incorporated villages within the rural area increased one-quarter ; which, to say the least, is a very decided increase. The same general tendency is confirmed by the atlas count of villages, which indicates that in 1900 about one-fifth of all rural inhabitants lived in villages, while the ratio for 1920 is one- fourth. Clearly villages are becoming a proportionately larger element of the country’s rural population; and this tendency has not been confined to any particular area. Both the atlas count and the data for incorporated villages alone, show that in the period 1900 to 1920 this increase held not only in every one of the eight divisions but for thirty-nine of the forty-two states under discussion. Moreover, the general trend held for both decades, as is demonstrated by the fact disclosed by the Census figures, that during the period 1900 to 1910 every one of the forty-two states except Colorado increased its incorporated vil- lage population more rapidly than the remaining rural area; while during the decade 1910 to 1920 only nine states fell within the exception, Since village populations are becoming a proportionately larger element of the nation’s total rural population, it follows, of course, that the rural population living outside of villages is increasing more slowly than the total rural population. This, in turn, implies that even the comparatively slow increase of rural populations tends to exaggerate the population increase in rural districts outside of villages. Such a conclusion becomes doubly important when it is remembered that the great majority of America’s farmers live in Open-country areas. Table IX presents, for the period 1900 to 1920, the percentage increase of popula- tions in villages and in the remaining portions of the rural area. Before comment is made on the table, a word as to how the ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? 45 figures were compiled is necessary. As a check upon each other, two different methods were employed. According to the first, the “open-country” population for both 1900 and 1920 was secured by subtracting the population of incorporated villages from the total rural population. On this base, the percentage increase of that part of the rural population not located in incorporated vil- lages is shown in the next to the last column of Table IX. By this method, however, the actual per cent. of increase of rural populations other than those of villages is overestimated; because unincorporated villages are included as a part of the “open- country” area. A second method was therefore employed which eliminates this difficulty. The increase of the rural population other than that of villages was calculated by subtracting the atlas counts of villages from the total rural population given in the Census. The results of this computation appear in the last column of the table. TABLE IX—PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF THE POPULATIONS IN VILLAGES AND IN THE REMAINING RURAL AREA, BY DIVISIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Per Cent. of Rural Population Increase * Total In Villages In Open Country Rural Total Outside Outside Incorp. (Rand of Incorp. of All _ Division (Census) McNally) Villages Villages United States, excluding New England ....... 13.1 41.9 47.2 8.7 5.4 Middle Atlantic ....... 3.9 6.9 16.1 3.2 —2.5 East North Central .... —3.9 14.6 20.1 come —11,2 West North Central .... 5.6 37.0 3f.5 end WY 2.6 Souto Atlantic -..0. 4... 17.5 63.9 82.7 13.4 9.7 East South Central .... 7.5 56 61.9 4.2 a2 West South Central .... 32.8 134.4 124.0 24.6 20.5 MOAN et tS cin bc ots ae 87.2 129.9 111.0 78.1 77.4 POCA re ohne ea Tiers Sp ave 61.9 99.9 97.8 pooh 6 49.0 ® Minus sign (—) denotes decrease. On either basis, however, the conclusions to be drawn from the figures are much the same. As might have been expected, the former method shows an appreciably higher per cent. of “open-country” increase than the latter; but in both cases the outstanding fact is that village populations have increased much more than has the open-country population. Even on the most conservative basis, the figures for the eight divisions combined 46 AMERICAN VILLAGERS prove that between 1900 and 1920 the number of people living in incorporated villages increased nearly five times as fast as the number of the inhabitants of the remaining rural area; while the atl: s count shows this difference to be about nine-fold. On either basis there are amazingly wide variations. The facts also tend to prove that village populations, com- pared with those of the open country, showed relatively the same high per cent. of increase in the decade 1910 to 1920 as during the earlier ten-year period. The available data on this point are presented in Table X, which gives by decades the percentage increase of the populations of incorporated villages compared with similar figures for the remaining rural people. TABLE X—PERCENTAGE INCREASE BY DECADES OF THE POPULATIONS IN INCORPORATED VILLAGES AND IN THE REMAINING RURAL AREA, BY DIVISIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Per Cent. of Rural Population Increase * 1910-1920 1900-1910 In Outside In Outside Incorp. of Incorp. Incorp. of Incorp. Division Villages Vaullages Villages Villages United States, excluding New England Saas v6.0 cece aye 9.5 oe 29.6 6.3 MiddlewvAtilantic 7.4 beg <8 e ees —3.6 0.8 10.9 2.4 Fast. North Gentrali. . 20s). st sie Ze — 3.7 12.2 —4.8 West North Central ..........-. 11.8 —2.5 22.6 0.8 South Atiantice cf sive tsetse o> 11.9 is 45.5 aif East? South Gentral aise nes <4 5.8 0.5 47.9 ahs West) South / Central #. 2c. e008 +: 27.8 3.9 83.3 20.0 Motintain vison ce ne eases 41.9 22.0 62.0 45.9 Paciher) 6: cag he ok del het ee esate sie 8.5 17.5 84.3 32.1 * Minus sign (—) denotes decrease. According to these figures, populations of incorporated vil- lages in the eight divisions showed an average increase in both decades that was considerably more than four times as high as that for the rest of the rural population. The table shows that, in the 1900 to 1910 period, incorporated villages increased 29.6 per cent., while the remaining rural areas increased 6.3 per cent. ; during the next ten years incorporated villages expanded 9.5 per cent., compared with 2.2 per cent. for the rest of the rural area. This phase of the analysis shows that, contrary to general be- lief, villages have increased in population, not decreased. More- ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? AT over, their populations increased more rapidly from 1900 to 1920 than did the population of the nation as a whole. True, this village increase was less rapid from 1910 to 1920 than during the preceding ten years; but this was to be expected, not only because the nation as a whole showed a less rapid increase, but more particularly because the country’s rural population living outside of villages showed a much less rapid increase. The populations of the villages themselves made, therefore, in rela- tion to the rest of the rural population, a very decided increase during the last two Census periods. This means that villages are becoming a more and more important element of the nation’s rural population. RATE OF VILLAGE GROWTH How is this increase to be explained? The first reason that comes to mind is that village populations are growing at a rela- tively rapid rate. There is, however, another factor that must be taken into consideration—the number of places classed as vil- lages. Suppose the rate of growth of open-country populations and that of village populations were the same; nevertheless there might still be a constantly decreasing proportion of rural inhabi- tants living outside of villages, for no other reason than that the natural excess of births over deaths would tend to swell the population of the open country and thus bring more and more communities into the village class. Any hamlet, no matter how small, if it but maintain a rate of population increase, will sooner or later pass the 250 limit and enter the village group. Thus it is only reasonable to expect in any growing rural area a constant passage of open-country communities into the village class. Even if village and open-country populations expanded at the same rate, it would still mean that the rural territory not included within villages would constantly decrease from decade to decade, while the number of places classed as villages might tend to increase. Of course this latter tendency would be en- tirely balanced provided enough villages passed the 2,500 mark and entered the urban class. If this is not the case, the high rate of population increase in villages, compared with the increase in other rural areas, can be in part explained by the fact that in a growing country like America, many places that are hamlets at 48 AMERICAN VILLAGERS one decade develop into the village class by the next Census period. In order to eliminate this factor it was decided to consider the changes in village and in open-country populations that took place between 1900 and 1920 in the same territory. For this purpose, the populations as of 1910 and 1920 were computed ; first, for the places that were incorporated villages in 1900,” and, secondly, for the rest of the rural area as that area was con- stituted in 1900. On this basis, the rate of population growth since 1900 was then worked out separately for incorporated villages and for the rural territory not included in these villages. This method was adopted because it eliminates the disturbing effect arising from the passage of hamlets into villages or of villages into cities, etc. TABLE XI—RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES OF THE PLACES THAT IN 1900 WERE (A) INCORPORATED VILLAGES AND (B) REMAINING RURAL AREA, BY DI- VISIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Rate of Rural Population Growth * 1900-1920 1910-1920 1900-1910 © re os td 1d 1d a SS < 38 <= SS Sow = Be *— ae *e Sv wa Sy 38 a ae weiSt. sees 2a 33 29 Ba OF gF S85 S23 gc S85 SS cepa ee Division Be SAR Os Be AA OG Ra Re eR a T Fo %G Jo. Yo. '% Jo) To: VG United States, ex- cluding New Eng- Rarity seo 4 PANEER KWON 4 Ge Py ESR 8.5 186 68 139 27,5 Ane Middle Atlantic .... 23.8 52.7 17.7 0.54195 2.71 13.0 27.7. 92 East North Central. 5.3 256 0.6 S16 12580 ioo 17°) IL7 06 West North Central 10.7 29.6 64 SAP ere me ay 4 1672055 South Atlantic .... 23.7 818 18.7 9.0. 248: 7.3 13.4), 45,4205 Fast South Central. 11.3 499 88 is Poets ie Se ae 74. 295-2 West South Central 47.9 121.6 42.3 P27 A Oh a) Lind 31.3 60.7 29.0 Mountain) cae. 112.7 93.4 116.5 14 ae OA. BB 8 IY f 63.2 574 643 PIE Ty Ga wet a po 101.3 137.7 95.0 29.4 32.7 28.8 55.5 79.1 -Sa4 * Minus sign (—) denotes decrease. This computation, which is summarized in Table XI, reveals that the places that were incorporated villages in 1900 grew in 2 According to the 1900 Census there were at that time 7,240 incorporated villages in the United States. In computing the growth of these places during the next twenty years it was necessary to eliminate 220 of them because their 1920 populations were not available—105 having consolidated with other places, and 5 having given up their articles of incorporation, while the other 110 were absent from the later Census volumes and could not be accounted for. ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? 49 populations during the next twenty years, 51.3 per cent.; while the remaining rural territory grew only 19.5 per cent., or at two-fifths the rate for incorporated villages. When it is re- membered that in this calculation villages that were unincor- porated in 1900 were necessarily included as part of the “open- country” territory, it becomes obvious that even this two-and- a-half-fold variation probably underestimates the actual differ- ence between the rate of growth of villages and that of the open country.® TABLE XII—RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES OF PLACES THAT IN 1900 WERE (A) INCORPORATED VIL- LAGES AND (B) CITIES, BY DIVISIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Rate of Population Growth 1900-1920 1910-1920 1900-1910 Se B Be § £8 g 8 2 £8 alu ae cooley UNE Pasta eS) Wot Division United States, excluding i He ih a Ze ve New England ....... 6.4 sie 24.5 18.6 Ga,7, 27.5 Middle Atlantic ....... 54.8 Vad { 17.9 19.5 31.4 21.4, East North Central .... 69.6 25.6 31.1 125 29.3 11.7 West North Central ... 47.6 29.6 18.0 Thi AM | 16.7 mouth Atlantic: ov... .. 6. 71.9 81.8 Re 24.8 29.2 45.7 East South Central .... 55.1 49.9 17.1 15:7 32,5 29.5 West South Central ... 1028 121.6 34.2 37.9 51.1 60.7 PERMA oak ol ek aes 71.0 93.4 18.1 22.9 44.8 57.4 TI We eek sini o's ne vlc POS9 Ese 7, 35.9 Jey, 94.2 79.1 Table XI shows these same growth figures by divisions and by decades, and proves that even when the comparison is con- fined to identical territories, villages in every division except the Mountain grew in population decidedly faster than the open- country areas. Indeed, in most regions, villages grew at a rate approximating that of the cities, as is clearly seen in Table XII, which compares the rates of growth by decades of the places that in 1900 were incorporated villages and those that were cities. 8It may be argued that the figures in Table XI tend to underestimate the actual rate of growth of “open-country” territory because urban centers that extend their boundaries sometimes absorb populations that were previously classified as rural. Unfortunately, there are no adequate data showing the effect of this factor. However, it is not believed that this factor would begin to compensate for a trend in the opposite direction arising from the fact that unincorporated villages were included as a part of the “open-country” territory, 50 AMERICAN VILLAGERS According to these data the places that were cities in 1900 increased their populations during the next twenty years by two- thirds and villages by one-half. When it is remembered that the rural populations outside of incorporated villages in 1900 de- veloped only one-fifth during the same period, it becomes ap- parent that villages have been increasing at a rate that more Division PERCENTAGE GROWTH 0 50 100 150 MIDOLE ATLANTIC EAST NORTH CENTRAL WEST NORTH CENTRAL Ff SOUTH ATLANTIC Bo Wer WS EAST SOUTH CENTRAL WEST SOUTH CENTRAL’ MOUNTAIN a ROSAS CLONE PACIFIC ROOOERLLOOESS KKK BS cities KEI INCORPORATED VILLAGES [___] REMAINING RURAL AREA D1acrRAmM III ' Population Growth of Places That in 1900 Were (A) Cities, (B) Incorpo- rated Villages, and (C) Remaining Rural Area, 1900 to 1920 nearly approximates the growth of cities than that of the open- country areas. In fact there are three divisions—the South Atlantic, the West South Central and the Mountain—where be- tween 1900 and 1920 villages actually grew at a more rapid pace than the cities of the same area. Moreover, the populations of incorporated villages grew almost as fast as those of the smaller cities. This statement is ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? 51 upheld by the figures in Table XIII, which show that between 1900 and 1920 the places with populations of from 2,500 to 10,000 grew 59 per cent., compared with 51 per cent. for the villages. In this connection it is interesting to note that since 1900 the places that have grown most rapidly have not been the largest cities but rather those with populations of from 25,000 to 100,000. Surprisingly enough, villages are growing almost as rapidly as America’s great metropolitan centers. TABLE XIII—RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES OF PLACES THAT IN 1900 WERE (A) CITIES OF VARYING SIZE, (B) INCORPORATED VILLAGES, AND (C) REMAINING RURAL AREA, 1900 TO 1920 Rate of Population Growth No.of 1900-1920 1910-1920 1900-1910 Size of Place Places ¢ % Jo Jo Cities * RMN CATILACver bs se dice ¢ a2 63.0 24.4 31.0 Z5tN0 to - 100,000 |. .0. 32. o. « 96 91.1 29.7 47.4 BAN £0 20000 Fe vat. eae: 228 67.3 26.3 32.4 Pandit eal) OOO) bo So a Me Lee 1,157 59.3 20.9 31.8 Villages * (Incorporated) ...... 6,959 51.3 18.6 27.5 Remaining rural area* ........ 19.5 6.8 11.9 * Excludes totals for New England. t Includes only those places listed in the 1920 Census, In considering these figures it should be kept in mind that the rates of growth for urban centers have been disproportion- ately influenced by immigration. During the twenty years since 1900 a relatively large number of the immigrants who entered America have settled in our cities. The 1920 Census shows that there are 13,920,692 foreign-born people living in the United States. Of this number 10,500,942 live in cities, while only 3,419,750 reside in rural areas. Of the ten and one-half million aliens living in urban places, 5,478,989 are known to have entered the country after 1900, while only 1,416,106 of the three and one-half million rural aliens fall into this group. In other words, of the seven million aliens who are known to have entered the country since 1900 and who are still living here, only one-fifth are living in rural communities, while four-fifths are living in urban centers. Naturally, this tendency helps to explain the rela- tively rapid growth of cities as compared with rural growth. Had it been possible, it would have been interesting to eliminate the effect of immigration and then to compare the rate of increase 52 AMERICAN VILLAGERS since 1900 of cities, villages and the remaining rural area. Un- fortunately, the number of aliens who have settled in villages is not known; but since it is known that proportionately few im- migrants settle in rural areas, it seems almost certain that if the immigration factor were eliminated, the figures would show the rate of village growth to be very similar to the average rate of growth of very large cities, and also of very small cities. The fact seems to be that, instead of declining, villages are growing two-and-a-half times more rapidly than open-country populations. This conclusion not only shows the current belief that villages are steadily declining to be iil founded, but serves to give a peculiar significance to studies of American village life. Villages are worth investigating not only because so little is known about them but also because they are steadily becoming an ever larger element of the nation’s rural population. Indeed, they are growing so rapidly that the question arises whether a considerable part of the exodus from the open country is not to the village rather than to the city. It may conceivably be that America is at the beginning of a new agricultural era in which farmers, thanks to good roads and the automobile, will come more and more to live together in villages in order to enjoy greater social advantages. Be that as it may, the net result of the various population trends now at work in America is for open-country populations to expand far more slowly than those either of villages or of cities. This development will naturally tend to give villages an increasingly prominent place in American rural life. ARE LARGE VILLAGES GROWING MORE RAPIDLY THAN SMALL? Before leaving this discussion of the growth and decline of villages, a final question remains to be considered. Are larger villages growing at the expense of smaller ones? On the face of it, there are reasons for thinking so. Indeed, the rural experts called together to advise upon the conduct of the Institute’s vil- lage study were nearly a unit in recommending that the Institute confine its investigations to the larger villages because “‘the larger village is the village of the future.’ With the coming of the automobile, the smaller village, so runs the argument, will not be able to survive the competition of the now easily accessible larger ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? 53 centers. Thus the tendency in America will probably be to have fewer, although larger, villages. TABLE XIV—RATE OF POPULATION GROWTH BY DECADES OF PLACES THAT IN 1900 WERE (A) SMALL, (B) MEDIUM, AND (C) LARGE INCORPORATED VILLAGES, BY DIVI- SIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Rate of Population Growth No. of Incorp. Villages 1900-1920 1910-1920 1900-1910 Division (1900) % Jo J United States, excluding New England ERIE Rare ee econ Been olan eae ay 4,930 48.8 1 27.5 PRO ey this fc ohne anita s 3 1,395 53.3 20.1 27.6 9 hey ie A RG 634 53.4 PRR Middle Atlantic CU OO RE ne aN Rae I 577 50.2 20.8 24.3 EO CERES, PGBS Mae eo) ea OP 226 51.5 19.0 27.3 BPAY Es Oc estes we otis Oks ke se 145 56.6 18.7 1.9 East North Central Pe earns ch ee Oo as Ov Cee ink 1,401 24.5 11.5 11.7 PMELIATHY Av oe sds ie wk bites s OR 420 24.1 122 10.5 Be OCS ae oc Ta asta ts, 162 30.6 15.1 13.4 West North Central STO ALS RA RO ee 1,407 26.9 10.0 15.4 PIG e Mi ale ca ee Oa 312 OLik 11.9 18.6 Ra of ed ah pe a a 132 32.4 13.0 17.2 South Atlantic TES CRANE SORE oe RAN gt 648 85.3 23.4 50.2 PCRS LTS, sree seek pees 144 86.4 32.3 40.9 PTO Ge ss ck cc Cee eee 61 66.4 17.9 41.2 East South Central aL eer te 8, ores sats 355 577 17.8 33.8 ULE Lan CR 97 43.9 14.4 A § Beare eee ese ihe le SY, 38 42.0 12.8 25.8 West South Central CTO TA Le Aika ial toa aa 272 117.9 Lh it 71.3 AES CEES ii ke Re Se AEE Sg 103 139.7 44.5 65.9 BAVC lois sees oe cic ee Ba ole 50 102.4 46.7 37.9 Mountain SA OCs Sag CERES ARE Sanaa ms aL 133 112.1 27.3 66.6 PUEPUIIETIN: oh tos vi G). Bnei noe 48 98.6 26.1 Lp BERT UERT An or a dhe win ok Ne 22 55.8 9.5 42.3 Pacific a BO a Tn 137 112.5 20.9 75.8 URTEA LITTER ues how Fs inti“a 5G ahe'y Ae ee 45 137.1 26.3 87.6 BRAT eed Gh, yi oaitlu'y de 24 175.1 57.9 74.2 In order to test this hypothesis, it was decided to trace the growth records since 1900 of villages of various sizes. For the purpose of this analysis, the places that were incorporated villages 54 AMERICAN VILLAGERS in 1900 were divided into three groups. Those with populations of from 250 to 1,000 were classified as “small” villages, those of from 1,000 to 1,750 were designated as “‘medium-size,” while places having from 1,750 to 2,500 inhabitants were called “large.” On this basis the growth tendencies of these three types of vil- lages were worked out separately by decades and divisions, The results are presented in Table XIV. According to this computa- tion, averages for the United States as a whole show that during the 1900 to 1910 decade, small, medium and large villages de- veloped at almost identical rates. During the last ten years, how- ever, the rate of increase of population in small villages was appreciably lower than in medium or large villages. But this trend showed decided fluctuations among divisions. Indeed, in certain divisions, notably in the Mountain, the South Atlantic and the East South Central, there was a diametrically opposite tendency. There, even in the last decade, small villages grew more rapidly than large. It may be that in the future small villages will be eliminated through the competition of large centers; but, as yet, this tendency does not appear to have pro- ceeded very far. PROPORTION OF VILLAGES THAT ARE GROWING The general conclusion of this investigation into the growth and decline of villages since 1900 seems to be not only that villages are growing in population but that in relation to the rest of the rural population they are growing very rapidly in- deed. Of course, this should not be understood to mean that all villages are growing. Obviously, some villages are actually losing population. The previous discussion would indicate, however, that far more villages are growing than are declining. That this is the case, is proved by Table XV, which shows the relative number of incorporated villages, as constituted in 1900, that had growing, stationary, or declining populations between 1900 and 1920. For purposes of this analysis a “stationary village’ was defined as one that did not, on the average, gain or lose in popu- lation as much as 1 per cent. a year, or 20 per cent. during the two decades; while all villages falling above or below these ex- tremes were defined respectively as “growing” or “declining” villages. ARE VILLAGE POPULATIONS DECLINING? 55 TABLE XV—PROPORTION OF INCORPORATED VILLAGES OF 1900 THAT HAD (A) GROWING, (B) STATIONARY, OR (C) DECLINING POPULATIONS, BY DIVISIONS, 1900 TO 1920 Per Cent. of Villages Size Total No. Growing Stationary Declining of of Incorp. (over C2070 (over Division Villages Villages 20%) +20%) 20%) United States, ex- cluding New Eng- land Dotalis i. ae 6,959 47.3 42.7 10.0 pmally te’. 2. 4,930 46.1 42.5 11.4 Medium 1,395 48.4 43.9 us Large 634 54.6 41.6 3.8 Middle Atlantic ‘POlal wie acs 948 47.8 44.3 7.9 Small iw. Ds7 42.1 47.8 10.1 Medium 226 52.2 42.0 5.8 Large 145 63.4 33.8 2.8 masteNorth. Central Total. ..0.%; 1,983 29.9 55.4 14.7 Sitallrei 1,401 29.0 54.2 16.8 Medium 420 29.0 59.3 Ti Large 162 40.8 54.9 4.3 West North Central Total ....... 1,851 44.1 48.1 7.8 SMlalieeecia: 1,407 44.8 46.5 8.7 Medium . 312 42.3 52.2 Se Large .. baz 40.2 56.0 3.8 South Atlantic Totapery eet 853 66.1 25.9 8.0 Sriiial borate g 648 64.7 26.2 9.1 Medium .. 144 ra ie 23.6 49 Laren. 61 ay * * East South Central Total ....... 490 54.7 33.1 122 Small Ne a a 50.3 G31 To5 Medium 97 * * = Large 38 * * * West South Central Total ....... 425 73.6 20.7 Wr, Small 203 2/2 Virw 19.9 6.6 Medium .. 103 72.8 2 4.9 Parco ns. 50 be Yi Mountain Totaheer ta: 203 65.5 20.7 13.8 Simialled.\s, 133 66.2 18.0 15.8 Medium 48 * * + Patra lies. 22 * * > Pacific abital cents La « 206 73.8 24.3 1.9 mimnally as. 137 70.1 28.5 1.4 Medium 45 * * * ear rey tes 24 % * * * Base less than 100. 56 AMERICAN VILLAGERS On this basis, one-tenth of all the places that were incorporated villages in 1900 fall into the class of declining villages, while nearly half—47.3 per cent.—are steadily growing. This means that during the last twenty years there were forty-seven villages that were rapidly growing in population for every ten that were rapidly declining. Of course, these ratios vary regionally. The East North Central division has the lowest proportion of increas- ing villages, while the West South Central and the Pacific di- visions have the highest proportions. CHAPTER IV WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE LIVE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES? Thus far in this analysis an attempt has been made to come to some conclusions concerning the number, the distribution and the growth tendencies of American villages. The discussion has demonstrated the importance of the village in the nation’s life by showing that a large proportion of the population is to be found in villages; and that, contrary to general belief, the rate of village increase since 1900 has been relatively rapid. The American village has been shown to be a large and increasingly important element of the country’s rural population. The discussion will now center upon the kind of people that live in villages, the work that villagers do for a living, and the nature of the services that villagers perform. To deal with these problems it is necessary to rely upon the special tabulation of village data which the Institute secured directly from the files of the Census Bureau. This tabulation, it will be recalled, was undertaken because the Government does not make available in its published reports the detailed facts about the composition and characteristics of villagers. In all, the Institute’s special count of Census data included 177 widely scattered places. Their location is shown by Diagram IV. Strictly speaking, not every one of these places falls within the Institute’s definition of the term village, since four have popu- lations just above 2,500, while one has a population of 246 and is therefore really a hamlet. Nevertheless these five places have been included as villages because they come so near being villages, and especially because their effect upon the averages for all villages is almost negligible. From the evidence presented by this sample, an attempt will now be made to ascertain what kind of people live in villages. 57 58 AMERICAN VILLAGERS Because the Institute’s special tabulation of Census data was restricted to “agricultural” villages—in other words, to villages located in agricultural areas and that act as service stations to farmers—this analysis has necessarily been limited to places of that type. This limitation was adopted because it was felt that if suburban, mining, lumbering, cotton-mill and other types of industrial villages were included along with agricultural ones as a part of this investigation, the number of places studied would © 60 260 30D Gaeta §caLe oF MuLes DracraAmM IV Map Locating the 177 Agricultural Villages be too small to admit of reliable national generalizations being made about any type of village. As it is, however, it is possible in this study to draw reasonably sound conclusions about the agricultural village which undoubtedly is the most numerous type. COLOR, NATIVITY AND PARENTAGE The wisdom of confining the investigation to one class of villages is fully confirmed by the present inquiry into the kind of people living in American agricultural villages. Analysis shows that even the composition and characteristics of agricul- tural villages alone vary so widely from one section of the United States to another that, on the basis of a much smaller sample, it would have been entirely impossible to draw national deductions about them. Indeed, the make-up of village popu- lations differs so much from division to division that it becomes PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 59 a serious question whether national averages from widely scat- tered villages have much significance; certainly they should be used with great caution. Of what value is the fact that on the average one in every eight inhabitants of agricultural villages 1s classified by the Census as “colored,” when further investigation reveals that colored inhabitants in villages are so largely con- centrated in the three southern divisions that no other division has as much as 2 per cent. of colored population. This and other regional differences among agricultural villages are revealed by Tables XVI to XXIV inclusive, which summarize by divisions the main facts about the composition and characteristics of agri- cultural villagers. TABLE XVI—COLOR, NATIVITY AND PARENTAGE OF AGRICUL- TURAL VILLAGE POPULATIONS, BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Percentage Distribution of Population No. of White Colored Villages Native-Born Foreign- Parentage Born Division Native Foreign Mixed Middle Atlantic* ....... 34 82.0 7.0 5.9 4.4 0.7 East North Central ..... 24 66.5 14.3 9.7 8.7 0.8 West North Central .... 41 61.5 155 10.7 13 1.0 Demet VE lANtiC sry sss 6s» 24 62.7 0.5 0.5 0.6 30.4 East South Central ..... 11 75.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 23.0 West South Central ..... 9 78.8 4.0 2.5 oA 9.6 MCR orn ae sare sc theke's 7 76.1 7.8 9.0 6.3 0.8 Meme Cilia eee as eae 27 66.5 10.7 9.4 11.6 1.8 * Following the procedure adopted in A Census Analysis of American Villages, Thurmont has been included as a Middle Atlantic village although it is located in Maryland. This procedure was adopted because facts reveal that this village, which is located just below the Pennsylvania state line, is northern rather than southern in its chief characteristics. For example, it has only one Negro in a total population of 1,074. Table XVI indicates that so far as color, nativity and parentage are concerned it would be hard to make generalizations that would be even approximately representative of agricultural villages in all the different divisions, The wide differences among divisions in the proportions of the population that are “colored” has already been pointed out. The table under discussion also reveals similar differences in the proportions of the foreign-born. A weighted average for all of the 177 villages shows that 6.7 per cent. of the inhabitants are foreign-born whites; yet the divisional totals reveal that in two divisions, the South Atlantic and the East South Central, the foreign-born constitute only about half of 1 per cent. of the population; while in two other areas, the West North Central and the Pacific, they comprise 60 AMERICAN VILLAGERS more than 11 per cent. From many standpoints, therefore, the national averages would appear to be far less significant than divisional averages. TABLE XVII—PLACE OF BIRTH OF FOREIGN-BORN VILLAGERS, BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Per Cent. of Foreign Persons Born In North- No.of western Other All Division Villages Europe* Europe Canada Mexico Orient Other Middle Atlantic ..... 34 71.8 15.4 12:2 0.1 a 0.5 East North Central .. 24 76.9 14.8 7.4 0.1 + 0.8 West North Central . 41 79.6 7.9 10.0 2.1 0.1 0.3 South Atlantic ®...... 24 35.1 46.4 4.6 0.5 2.6 10.8 East South Central .. 11 18.0 64.0 33 1.6 3.3 9.8 West South Central . 9 12.2 15.9 1.7 70.2 + + Mioisitain 4 ol 7 55.0 13.0 13.4 9.3 6.4 2.9 Pacii@uts vasavret nee 27 51.5 ee 12.4 ioe 4.2 4.0 * Germany and Austria are included. ¢ Less than one-tenth of one per cent. According to Table XVII, the place of birth of the foreign- born population in agricultural villages also shows marked regional variations. In the East North Central and the West North Central divisions, more than three-fourths of the foreign- born come from Northwestern Europe, whereas the ratio in the West South Central division is less than one in eight. The proportions from “Other Europe’’ show even greater fluctuations. In the East South Central division, 64 per cent. of the foreign- born fall in this group; while in the West North Central division, this ratio is only 8 per cent. Canadians comprise from 1.7 per cent. to 13.4 per cent. of the alien population of villages and are found in the villages of every division. Mexicans in villages are found mainly in the West South Central, the Mountain and the Pacific divisions; while the relatively few Orientals in vil- lages are to be found mainly in the two Far West divisions. AGE, SEX AND MARITAL STATUS In addition to variations in nativity and color, agricultural villages also show wide differences among divisions in their age-distribution and sex-distribution. Diagram V presents data about the ratios between the sexes, and shows that there are 1 The term “Northwestern Europe” as defined by the Institute, includes the following countries: Denmark, England, France, Germany, Ireland, Norway, Nevers Scotland, Sweden, Switzerland, Wales, Alsace-Lorraine, Belgium, an ustria. PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 61 only 88 males to every 100 females in the Middle Atlantic states, while in the Mountain division this ratio is 107 men to every 100 women. These are fundamental differences. The facts about age-distribution, which are given in Table XVIII, further support the conclusion that villages differ de- cidedly among divisions. In proportion to their populations, Middle Atlantic villages have only about three-fourths as many children under ten as have those of the South Atlantic division. On the other hand, the relative number of people over seventy years of age in the West South Central area is only one-third as large as in the Middle Atlantic states. A relatively high pro- portion of old people in a population undoubtedly makes for social conservatism. OlVision WIODLE ATLANTIC SOUTH ATLANTIC EAST NORTH CENTRAL [i EAST SOUTH CENTRAL’ WEST NORTH CENTRAL §f WEST SOUTH CENTRAL §f PACIFIC’ . MOUNTAIN DIAGRAM V Number of Males to Each 100 Females in Villages, by Divisions, 1920 Curiously enough, the figures also show that in five of the eight divisions the relative number of females between ten and twenty years of age is greater than the proportion under ten. In all probability this surprising situation is not owing to a rapidly falling birth-rate, since the data for boys do not show the same trend. A more plausible explanation is that there is a tendency for young girls from the open country to come into the villages to find employment. Open-country boys, on the other hand, do not migrate villageward to the same extent, because they are badly needed on the farms. Another element in the situation is the fact that village boys probably migrate cityward to a greater extent than do the girls. 62 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XVIII—AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF VILLAGERS, BY SEX AND BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Per Cent. : Under 70& & Division 10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 Over S Males Middle Atlantic ......... 16.3. 15.4. .13.7,213.2., 13.2. 12.0 4962 Bee East North Central ...... 18.1. 16.9. 13.7. 128° 121. (12) Pee6ee oe West North Central ..... 18:2, °17:9) 14.6°-13.1511.6. 103) Reta see Sicrii thse thaniti Gis) bes oak ae ole 22.9.319:5" 17:12514.0: 114 & 7 2eeS2e eee East South Central ...... 20.7 20.1 16.5132 125 784 V5.7 a52 eee West South Central ...... 22.8: -200* 166 “148 10.9 >6.8 S25) 2a eee NIGUNTAID Woy os aa Wk asks 21.7 16.6 16.8 - 15.9% 12.0, (8:7 353232 Patiniceiey. cea sees eee 18.3 “166 15.0 14.6" 13.1 210207 733.5 eee Females Middle Atlantic .......... 14.2" 18.2) 13:8) 134°-13:;3 “122.1007 See East North Central ...... 16.2. .17.3, (15:37 '13:3 (11,9 1149985262 West North Central ..... 17.9 F188 16.06,13:6. 71.5. 69:4. 97:5) Se South ‘Atlantic’. ee ee. 20:5. 20:72 19-0 813.9108 <6.90 7476 AS East South Central ...... 19:49. 217320185 al O100 419) 7 da 456 3 See West South Central ...... 216 21.42 19.20 14:5 3.0 Oe" 6.2. 24.3% eo eee Mountain iin ee ore 225) VOAMAB FeSO 10:7 7.1 Ca Pacihen is. oi stan 18.99°18:77"15. 844-3551) 8° 69.4 eG eae TABLE XIX—MARITAL CONDITION OF VILLAGERS 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX AND BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Per Cent. Division Single Married Widowed Divorced Unknown Males Middle Atlantic ....... 26.8 66.1 6.7 0.3 0.1 East North Central ... 29:7 63.6 5.9 0.7 0.1 West North Central .. 33.3 60.4 5.5 0.6 0.2 South, atlantic woke tas, 335 60.8 Hd 0.1 0.4 East South Central ... 31.9 62.7 4.8 0.5 0.1 West South Central ... 31.6 61.5 52 0.3 1.4 Menintaine arenes ey. ame 62.0 4.2 1.1 0.2 Paeiiicinses ute sets 33.1 59.7 55 L5 0.2 Females Middle Atlantic ....... 26.7 56.3 16.4 0.5 0.1 East North Central ... 27.4 Shia 14.3 1.0 0.1 West North Central ... 28.7 57.6 12.8 0.8 0.1 South Atlaritiea? iA. 30.0 54.4 14.9 0.3 0.4 East- south Central :;, (26.7 58.5 13.6 0.9 0.3 West South Central ... 26.5 60.0 12.9 0.6 * Monntain < sea fie 224 66.6 9.2 1.4 0.1 Pariiceee, sora te ie 22.6 62.6 13.3 1.5 * * Less than one-tenth of one per cent. PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 63 The decided differences among divisions in the distribution of village populations would naturally lead one to imagine that villages also vary among themselves in the marital status of their inhabitants. That this is the case is shown by Table XIX. Because of the relative dearth of the young as compared with old people, and of men as compared with women, it is not sur- prising to find that the Middle Atlantic division has the smallest proportion of single men and that the two far western divisions, with their excess of men over women, have the smallest propor- tion of single females. The proportion of both men and women that are divorcees is highest in the Pacific division and lowest in the South Atlantic. These ratios would seem to provide a fairly reliable index of the general hold upon the people of traditional attitudes toward marriage. The discussion of marital conditions brings up the question of the size of family. Information on this point is presented in Table XX, which shows that the three southern divisions are the only ones that have an average of four or more persons to the family, while the Middle Atlantic has less than three and one-half. The other divisions fall in between. TABLE XX—HOME OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF FAMILY AMONG VILLAGERS, BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Percentage Distribution of Homes No. of Rented Owned Tenure Persons Encum- Un- Un- toa Division Total Free bered knownknown Family Middle Atlantic ....... 39.3 59.0 44.0 13.9 vi 1.7 3.4 East North Central .... 31.9 66.4\ 512. i404 0.8 LZ 3.6 West North Central ... 32.4 6,05 WG 2 arn Te Jit 1.6 3.6 moth Atlantic. i...... 50.0 45.8 35.8 6.5 BAe 4.2 4.2 East South Central .... 45.1 52.6 43.1 7.3 pas 2.3 4.0 West South Central .... 43.2 Sai soe 8.0 9.8 3.3 4.3 BPOUNT aT ha se oy seed 46.3 SUA a2 0 GeO 0.2 a0 3.9 ie! i aca id sees 42.8 54.4 374 143 2.7 2.8 3.6 Data about home ownership are also included in this table and show that in the East North Central and West North Central divisions, 66 per cent. of all homes are occupant-owned, but that in the South Atlantic division less than 46 per cent. fall into this class. 64 AMERICAN VILLAGERS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE AND ILLITERACY The Census data about school attendance, which are given in Table XXI, reveal that the proportion of boys and girls from seven to twenty-one years of age that attend school varies from about four-fifths in the Mountain division to two-thirds in the West South Central area. For the older boys and girls from eighteen to twenty-one years, the West South Central makes the poorest showing; while the West North Central shows up best for the boys, and the East South Central for the girls. TABLE XXI—SCHOOL ATTENDANCE OF VILLAGERS BETWEEN 7 AND 21 YEARS OF AGE, BY SEX AND BY DIVISIONS, 1920 Per Cent. by Age-Groups Division 7-20 ILI ERASE DC ge 16&17 18-20 Boys Middle Atlantic’. . o........5- fap 96.0 90.0 50.4 26.5 HastuNorin: Géentfal... 22585 67.4 80.8 83.0 63.8 24.9 Mountain fie ute cess: ea 79.9 96.8 94.3 69.6 Zhi Pace pce ce Aine ons ea oe 76.5 90.9 90.9 70.2 28.4 The question of school attendance naturally raises the problem of illiteracy. Data on this topic appear in Table XXII. For the total population, the proportion of illiterates is lowest in the Mountain division; and it will be recalled that on the whole school attendance is there the highest. The South Atlantic division, on the other hand, makes the worst showing, with an average illiteracy figure of more than 10 per cent. This very high ratio is owing mainly to the large number of colored people living in this area, as can be clearly demonstrated by showing separate rates for the different color and nativity groups. This comparison, which is also included as a part of Table XXII, PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 65 shows that in the South the rate of illiteracy among colored populations is as high as 25 per cent. Even in the East North Central division, where the ratio is lowest, the proportion is 6.5 per cent. for the colored. Among the native-born whites, however, the highest ratio is 2.6 and the lowest 0.2. In this respect, the East South Central area makes the worst record, and the Mountain division the best. TABLE XXII—ILLITERATES 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER IN VILLAGES BY SEX, COLOR AND NATIVITY AND BY DI- VISIONS, 1920 Per Cent. Illiterate W hite Native- Foreign- Division Classes Males Females Born Born Colored Middle Atlantic ......... ii 1.4 0.9 OS ea Les 9.4 East North Central ...... Le 1.2 1.1 0.8 4.2 6.5 West North Central ..... IS Yas 1.6 0.9 4.4 16.2 Buin ritianticy.. 3. .% ge 6. 10.4 9.8 11.0 2.0 8.0 25.9 East South Central ...... 7.2 7.3 7.1 2.6 * 22.3 West South Central ..... 7.3 7.6 7.0 2VeTSLA 23.9 CETERA PST tien ae rae a 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.2 4.8 * REMAIN eira ke out ee ce a Ze 2.4 vag | HS 15.6 * Base less than 100. The surprising differences from division to division in the composition and characteristics of village populations caused the Institute to abandon the effort to analyze agricultural village populations by means of averages for the 177 villages combined. It was decided instead to base the interpretation upon regional totals. These were secured by classifying the villages tabulated into groups according to their geographic location. It was finally decided to use for this purpose somewhat larger areas than those employed by the Census. This procedure is justified by the fact that the number of villages is small and by the further fact that certain of the divisions have village populations that are quite similar. This is true of the two North Central divisions, of the three in the South and also of the two far western divisions. Throughout the remainder of this analysis, therefore, these di- visions have generally been combined when making regional com- parisons. In order to avoid confusion in the use of terms, the combined South Atlantic, East South Central and West South Central divisions are called the South; the East and West North Central divisions, the Middle West; and the Mountain and Pacific 66 AMERICAN VILLAGERS divisions, the Far West. The name of the Middle Atlantic area is unchanged because this region, as defined by the Institute, is identical with the Census division of the same name. REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF VILLAGERS The make-up of the agricultural village populations of these four regions can be briefly summarized as follows. The Middle Atlantic states, as compared with those in other regions, are characterized by remarkably homogeneous village populations. The great majority of the people are not only native-born whites but of native parentage. The remainder are mostly native whites of foreign or mixed parentage. Less than 5 per cent. are foreign- born and very few are “colored.” Indeed, half the villages tabu- lated from this region had no colored inhabitants at all, while only two of the thirty-four places had so much as a 2 per cent. colored population, the average being 0.7 per cent. This is the smallest proportion found in any of the regions, As far as the age and sex of the population is concerned, Middle Atlantic villages have a striking preponderance of elderly people and a marked excess of women as compared with the number of men. These facts probably explain the unusually small proportion of single men in these villages. The average size of the families in this region is less than in the other three areas. In the southern region the most outstanding characteristic of agricultural villages is the large number of Negroes, who com- prise, on the average, more than a quarter of the total populations of these villages. This proportion, of course, varies consider- ably, particularly with the location of the village. As a rule, there are relatively more Negroes in the villages of the far South than in those of the border states. The large number of Negroes probably accounts for the fact that the proportion of foreign-born whites in this region is far less than in any of the other three. Of the forty-four villages analyzed in this area, only four had more than twenty-five aliens in their entire population. In the West South Central division the foreigners have come mainly from Mexico, while in the rest of the region they are pre- dominantly of South European origin. Concerning the age of southern villagers, the number of young people is relatively larger, and the proportion of old people PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 67 is less, than in the villages of the other regions. In this con- nection it is interesting to note that the average age-distribution of southern villages is almost identical with the distribution of population of the United States as a whole. As might have been expected, the families tend to be larger in the South than in the other areas. Educationally the southern villages make a rela- tively poor showing, illiteracy being comparatively high and school attendance low. Middle-western villages are distinguished by an unusually high proportion of inhabitants of foreign birth or of foreign extraction who come mainly from Northwestern Europe, espe- cially from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Germany and Austria. Because these groups are so large the numbers of native whites of native parents are comparatively small. The village popula- tions of the Middle West seem to have reached a high level of economic well-being. The proportion of “homes owned” is appreciably higher than in any other region, as is also the per cent. of young people attending school. In addition, as will be shown in a later chapter, the number of boys under twenty and of old people over sixty-five that are gainfully employed is less than in the other areas. All these facts point to a relatively high economic standard of living. Turning now to the Far West, the villagers in this region show clearly the influence of the pioneer conditions through which they have but recently passed. Only 9 per cent. of the native whites have mothers who were born in state of residence, while in the Middle Atlantic region this ratio is 80 per cent. The effect of the pioneer period is also to be seen in the preponderance of males over females in the Far West. This is the only region where in villages the men outnumber the women. This situation in turn is reflected in the data as to marital condition. In this area, fewer of the women and more of the men are single than in any other region. The comparatively high divorce rate in this area is an indi- cation that far-western villagers are not bound by traditional modes of conduct to the same extent as the inhabitants in other areas. The presence of the Orientals is another distinguishing fea- ture of far-western villages. Although the problems raised by the presence of these Asiatics are highly involved, the number of 68 AMERICAN VILLAGERS such aliens is remarkably small. Out of a total village population of 42,838, there were only 323 Orientals, while fifteen of the thirty-four villages from this region had no Asiatics at all. EFFECT OF SIZE UPON VILLAGE POPULATIONS Thus far the facts have made it clear that there are decided regional differences among villages. The next subject to be dis- cussed is whether the size of a village influences the composition and characteristics of the inhabitants. From the standpoint of the present study, this is a most important question because, as it happens, the average size of the 177 villages which constitute the basis of the present analysis is appreciably larger than that of the general run of villages. Data on this point are presented in Table XXIII. TABLE XXITII—AVERAGE POPULATION OF VILLAGES, BY REGIONS, 1920 Total Incorporated Places Region (Rand McNally) (Census) Studied Middle wAtiattion sc sc tose mentee 712 1,021 1,098 Wiiddie “Westie drome win aire sere 702 772 1,293 SOUth aed ily Ss ee ee Sea 690 842 1,306 PATA ESE Listes weer ete 709 883 1,260 This table makes it plain that on the whole the 177 villages included in the Institute’s special tabulation are not only larger than the average size of all villages but of incorporated villages as well. The villages studied by the Institute were purposely weighted in favor of the larger type because at the time they were selected it was believed that the trend in America was for the larger villages to become the dominant type.? The fact that the villages tabulated by the Institute include a comparatively large number of places that are above the average in size means, of course, that if size is a factor that decidedly modifies the characteristics of villagers, then conclusions based upon this sample will give a distorted picture of the real con- ditions in agricultural villages. That this is not the case, can be seen in Table XXIV, which presents by regions figures 2 See discussion at end of Chapter III. PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES 69 . relating to the main points just covered for small, medium and large villages * separately. Turning first to the Middle West, which was selected for intensive analysis because the largest group of villages analyzed by the Institute is located in this region, the table shows that there are on the whole only very slight differences there among small, medium and large villages. These sixty-five places reveal almost negligible variations in the figures for illiteracy, home ownership, age-distributions and school attendance. The small villages in this area, however, have appreciably lower proportions of foreign-born than have the large villages. As a result, the proportion of native white decreases with the increasing size of the village. In addition, the marital condition of females tends to vary somewhat with the size of the center involved. Curiously enough, similar data for the males do not show this trend, since the men in small and in large villages are much alike in marital status. There is no marked tendency for the proportions of the sexes to vary with the size of villages—the medium-size centers disclose a lower ratio of men to women than either the large or the small villages. Data showing the effect of size upon the composition of village populations in the other three regions are also presented in Table XXIV. These figures make it possible to determine in how far the variations found among the small, medium and large villages of the Middle West reappear when the villages of the other regions are similarly classified according to size. Such a comparison reveals that there are very few trends common to the villages of the four areas. Indeed, the only tendency running through all four groups of villages is for school attendance for the girls seven to twenty-one years of age to be somewhat lower in the large villages than in the small ones. This is probably owing to the broader opportunities for gainful employment which the large villages afford. As will be demonstrated later, the number of people engaged in manufacturing enterprises tends to be proportionately higher in the large village than in the small one. This indicates that there are greater opportunities for industrial employment for young people, and would explain why school attendance tends to slump in the larger villages. 3 As defined in Chapter III, a medium-size village is one whose population falls between 1,000 and 1,750; while that of a small village falls below 1,000 and that of a large village is above 1,750, AMERICAN VILLAGERS 70 O'OT LO01 F5! 39 16 S°8 Ser 641 ovT L9T O'ST SLT SS A8A0> PUR 00 8°77 LEC ‘ce? LLI 0°02 £61 CCC LCC ooo 19¢ 0°SZ Vode Fs 0S PEP c OE 9°0E 6 62 Oe c 62 8°82 Vic O22 Oe 0°82 692 VOGs Se enc eee Oe: Cae 89¢ Ne Ore Vcr vip ery 6S¢ CSE C9 T6¢ Oe? GUE gee Oe wpm, sajD yy eas VrOL—OOOL —T'SOl 096 Tv6 806 Ly6 «66860 — 9°86 O08 0G Se Ss Olea 0} sojeur jo oney 8'6P O'rS LS oop e1S cvs 0'S9 8°99 8°99 L£8S 16S LOG cay, > eee ene vLYV Sch TOF l6r 8 OF 8 eV a ce a 61E S"6€ Toe Zk Se alg Gian :somoy jo ainuay LETS v9 + CLC 102 082 S°8 To} 0°02 t SOT + Ser one Sper c8t 16 LY 4% SZ t OP vy Ls St c6 SCL ° ayy Uloq-usia10.5 £0 £0 v0 sT BC LI 60 £0 OT UT v0 £0 == eh ye men! : IZAO pue sieof Q] ‘sa}e1oz IT e? eT 80 00¢ bee vo? 80 OT 60 T0 cl US ee eae ae 06 60T vit ot Uc 90 Eel 00 cL cy 8S fC * SYA U1o0g-usia10,4 £38 S28 828 $00 ensS Len O U4 TZ8 068 616 560 «6086 L6 * OHYM saneEN : uoljerndog aBAVT wnipayy yous abADT wmnipayy pjous IBID] Umipayy YoU abv wnrpapy you S mat] ieee 7 | #1 sT ST OT 47T 2-66 ec € +1 £I SIM 4D] yinos S94 A1ppryy INuDII 21ppryy ua) sag 0¢6l “SNOIDAY A ‘AZIS ODNIAUVA AO SADVTIIA AO NOILISOGNOD—AIXX ATEVL 15 condition, ii teres sce ae se os Marital years and over: PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURAL VILLAGES ero iso NOwW-4 &2O NRnmeN BANS lop To) CON ete AO 4 © \O mom OOors €9 \O anf oe ew MAING 6) \O ont HAINS 9 \O ad hea Dae 9 AINGS en mAN © OO RRS &9 \O NOM o Vawe ©9 \O oon ioe OWN a No NMI N|N wa lehtok=) NWO On a) Sse oeeeo eee eee see eeoereereveeeeon eoseoee Married Widowed Divorced P30 al fot 78.0 (12 007. 77.2 78.4 79.6 74.3 7 to 21 years of age 77.3 School attendance Females Age mOnNM Anse OOO N OMAN BAAN Or > NWN 1S N 31.0 11.5 wn Ne) oD OwWworo Cito XT OO es NO co onl (ore) a pee AQ0N NX mm co ZOO rs bE Torah gees | honing aren fal eet pe Nae Aone Sar Ast SOLE se eee 60 and over ........ 15 Sill Oia ena ea . e condition, Marital years and over MANS ON rt et NO et wmowMn NOON et NOr Wht a3 eS NO MtNCY WO STO was mAONN nwt o NM hMMHewM Sotto cone Orn Or OtroR One oh Tooke) bh 3S NW oOotrm weasS ONO NIN NAN © NW es as is Si mond An 4 ones WO od NW ose eee oe oeeeererov ee eoeerereveve eevee ee Married Widowed Divorced /3.2. 309.3 78.7 PB. od 78.5 71.4 tio 7 to 21 years of age 72.3 School attendance *Tncludes 3 towns. + Includes 1 town. t Base less than 100. 71 72 AMERICAN VILLAGERS The facts also show that in the South there is a rather pro- nounced tendency for the Negroes * to live in the larger villages, their proportion in the population being 23 per cent. in the small villages, and 30 per cent. in the large places. This tendency is again explained, in part at least, by the fact that the opportunities for gainful employment in manufacturing enterprises are rela- tively more numerous in large villages than in the smaller ones; and since Negroes are employed in many of these industries, they naturally flock to larger villages in disproportionately large num- bers. The whole question of gainful employment among villagers will be taken up in the next chapter. This phase of the study should not be understood as meaning that the size of a village does not influence in important respects the composition and characteristics of its population. The con- clusion to be drawn from this analysis is merely that, with the few exceptions already noted, size does not consistently modify points here discussed. Chapter VII, however, will show that there are aspects of village life which are decidedly modified by the size of the population of the village. 4 Virtually all of the colored population in the South is Negro. CHAPTER V WHAT DO VILLAGERS DO FOR A LIVING? The analysis has thus far shown that in their composition and characteristics villagers of one region differ decidedly from villagers of other regions on such fundamental points as color, nativity, age, sex, marital status, illiteracy and school attendance. The present inquiry will now take up the question of occu- pations. The first problem will be to ascertain for the villages in each region the proportion of men and of women that are gainfully employed,* and to point out the significance of these figures. Next, an effort will be made to classify the gainfully employed according to the regular Census method of grouping them on the basis of the type of industry in which they are engaged—agriculture, manufacturing, trade, transportation, etc. Finally, because a man’s occupation is a significant key to his social position, an attempt will be made to employ a new scheme of classification, devised by Alba M. Edwards of the Census Bureau, which is intended to show the “social-economic’”’ status of the workers by indicating whether they are proprietors, skilled workers, laborers, etc. Because the data available for dealing with these three points were secured entirely from the Census, it is important to know from the outset the nature of the material gathered by the gov- ernment, and the form in which it has been made available in the Institute’s special tabulation. The 1920 Census not only secured data about “the trade, profession or particular kind of work done” by each individual, but also inquired into “the in- dustry, business or establishment in which at work” and whether the person was ‘“‘an employer, salary or wage earner.’ On the basis of these facts the Census classified each gainfully employed man or woman over ten years of age on the basis of 580 occupa- 1As defined by the Census, the term “gainfully employed” includes “all workers, except women doing housework in their own homes, without wages, and having no other employment, and children working at home, merely on general household work, on chores, or, at odd times on other work.” See Four- teenth Census, Vol. IV, p. 9. 73 74 AMERICAN VILLAGERS tions and groups of occupations. In its special village count no attempt was made by the Institute to tabulate every one of these occupations separately. This means that the precise em- ployment of each individual was not enumerated as such. Thus, the number of carpenters, blacksmiths, painters, etc., living in the different villages is not known. Instead, these occupations were, with a few exceptions,? combined into groups in order to make possible the two methods of classification previously men- tioned, the one followed by the Census and the other devised by Mr. Edwards. PROPORTIONS GAINFULLY EMPLOYED Before discussing either classification it is important to know the proportions of the inhabitants gainfully employed. Since the Census secures the age of each inhabitant as well as his occupa- tion, it is possible to work out these proportions separately for different age-groups. Such figures have been included as a part of Table XXV. According to this table only slightly more than two of every three men over ten years of age living in the middle western villages are gainfully employed, while in the other three regions this ratio is three in every four. By age-groups, however, the regions show more significant variations. In the far western villages only 1.1 per cent. of the boys ten to fifteen years of age are gainfully employed while the figure for the South is 6.1 per cent., with the Middle West and the Middle Atlantic falling in between with 2.9 per cent. and 1.7 per cent. respectively. Even more surprising variations occur among the men sixty-five and over. In the Middle West only 37.3 per cent. of this group are at work, while in the South this ratio is 64.1 per cent. The data for females reveal that the same general situation prevails among the older women. Fewer than one in twenty of the women over sixty-five in the middle-western villages are gain- fully employed, while in the South this ratio is one in eight. In addition, the table also shows that the South has the highest proportion of married and unmarried women at work, while the Middle West has the lowest percentages. These figures tend, therefore, to confirm the conclusion that 2 Certain professional persons were tabulated separately, WHAT DO VILLAGERS DO FOR A LIVING? 75 the inhabitants of middle-western villages are relatively ‘‘well- off” economically. Certainly the facts indicate that in this region economic conditions do not compel either the very old or the very young to work for their living in the same relative numbers as in other areas. TABLE XXV—PROPORTION OF MALES AND FEMALES 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER GAINFULLY EMPLOYED IN VILLAGES, BY AGE-GROUPS AND BY REGIONS, 1920 Per Cent. Middle Middle Far Age-Group Atlantic West South West Males MA ees ATIC COVED. 5 old 2.9 ai 2.9 23 1.6 iMirdlie - Westic. ease es nase 2.8 te 2.9 2.6 Zi PARI ie oe fee aad cess 6 ae 3.6 Did 3.8 2.8 toa | PeaTERNY SENT) Gna etek sty ates ea 2.8 oe 2.8 Pay 2.0 Through the field studies of the Institute it is possible to approximate the size of the open-country population served by village doctors, since in each one of the 140 villages visited by the field workers the total population of the different village com- munities was carefully estimated. By “village community” is meant “the population of that area in which a majority of the people have a majority of their social, economic and religious interests in common.” The results of these first-hand investi- gations, which are summarized in Table LI, make it clear that, with the exception of one size-group in one region, more people live in the open-country areas of village communities than in the villages themselves. The information in Table LI makes it possible to work out the number of doctors for each 1,000 inhabitants in the 177 village communities. This procedure is justified because, as was mentioned before, virtually no doctors live in the open-country areas of village communities. This computation furnishes a basis for comparing the rela- tive number of physicians in village communities with the num- ber in medium-size cities; and in this way to come to some con- clusions about the adequacy of these services in the two popula- tion areas. It may be argued that this procedure is not war- ranted because city doctors undoubtedly serve certain patients that live outside the city limits, and therefore that it is not fair to com- pare the number of city doctors per 1,000 city inhabitants with 122 AMERICAN VILLAGERS the number of village doctors per 1,000 of the population living in the entire village community. In this connection, however, it should be borne in mind that a village community includes only “the population of that area in which a majority of the people have a majority of their social, economic and religious interests in common.” Thus the population of a village community as defined by the Institute will fail to include many open-country inhabitants that regularly turn to that village when they need the services of a physician. This factor should more than compensate for the out-of-town patients that were omitted when computing city TABLE LI~AVERAGE SIZE OF THE VILLAGE AND THE OPEN- COUNTRY POPULATIONS IN 140 VILLAGE COMMUNITIES, BY SIZE AND BY REGIONS, 1920 Region Size of Middle Middle Far Village Atlantic West South West Weighted * total POA a Lites Os yer te che 2,559 2,963 4,273 2,891 Willage yin satan Cae xh 1,088 1,301 1,303 1,230 Cipenscounthys Mw ues 1,471 1,662 2,970 1,661 Small TotalGuany ete, aetna es 2,050 1,765 3,054 1,793 Viliatad ats ae so ca thie uo 763 733 603 664 Open: CONN VN... teers 1,287 1,032 2,451 1,129 Medium TDatalany Corea awe eae ek ae es 2,871 3,055 4,358 3,200 Villages) condi ae erik eee 1,290 1,312 1,327 1,228 Open country fii so bee es 1,581 1,743 3,031 1,972 Large Totaling arwteae an wate ce 3,988 4,655 5,676 4,512 Villa@eUni bie tin scentee wee 1,991 2,170 2,136 2,364 Onenkcoutiry @ Goria. 1,997 2,485 3,540 2,148 * Weighted according to size-distribution of the 177 villages. ratios. It is therefore very significant to find, as Table LII so clearly shows, that village communities, whether small or large, have far fewer doctors than have medium-size cities. Diagram VII presents these figures graphically, and reveals that in every region cities have from one-third more to nearly twice as many doctors as have village communities. These differences are all the more significant because the distance a village doctor must travel in visiting many of his rural patients makes it difficult for him to care for as many people as can a city doctor. WHAT FUNCTIONS DO VILLAGERS PERFORM? 123 TABLE LII—PHYSICIANS TO EACH 1,000 OF THE POPULATION IN VILLAGE COMMUNITIES AND IN MEDIUM-SIZE CITIES, BY REGIONS, 1920 Physicians per Thousand In Village Communities In Region Total Small Medium Large Cities EEE ESTs a ed 1.2 1 Ey Lee js 1.6 MIUIBE VV ESE US clas sec iv ries es ja 1.4 TZ LZ fa Lane ag y ie iy SG, SAP Anes gs 1.1 1.0 1.2 jt 2.1 NOSE Beeb chiints vo Retina wer lehd ates Be 1.1 ts 1.4 2.0 REGION MIDDLE ATLANTIC MIOOLE WEST SOUTH FAR WEST GMB citics (—] VILLAGE COMMUNITIES DracraMm VII Number of Physicians to Each 1,000 of the Population in Cities and in Village Communities, by Regions, 1920 DENTISTS, VETERINARY SURGEONS AND TRAINED NURSES Turning now to the dental services performed by villages, the Census facts show that there are 313 dentists in the 177 villages, an average of less than two dentists to the village. T'wenty- three villages have no dentists, while one large village in the Far West has as many as six. Sixty-three villages have one dentist, and forty-three have two. Most of the small villages have but one dentist, while all but two of the thirty-seven large villages have two or more each. In proportion to the number of dentists found in medium- size cities, the number found in the villages themselves is rela- tively large. If, however, the open-country populations served by village dentists are again taken into consideration, village i24 AMERICAN VILLAGERS communities have fewer dentists than have cities. These ratios are presented in Table LIII. Of course, it can be argued that the poor showing made by village communities is explained by the inclusion in the analysis of the twenty-three villages that have no dentists, TABLE LIII—DENTISTS TO EACH 1,000 OF THE POPULATION IN (A) VILLAGES, (B) VILLAGE COMMUNITIES AND (C) MEDIUM-SIZE CITIES, BY REGIONS, 1920 Dentists per Thousand In Village In In Villages Communities Cities Region a b c) While Atiantee. oe Ne a Caan ae | Res 0.5 0.7 Middlen gy Gating vaste tees Neti wed ieee 1.6 0.7 1.0 MOULIT Ne Petvulels Wace ae cme wee eke 1.2 0.4 0.6 PAPWVV estore cys Mae ama ania 1.4 0.6 1.2 If, however, those villages that have one or more dentists are considered as a separate group, the number to each 1,000 inhabitants in village communities becomes 0.6, in the Middle Atlantic region, while remaining virtually unchanged in the other three areas. So far, therefore, as the present sample is con- cerned, the conclusion is warranted that one-eighth of the village communities have no dentists at all, and that the remaining places have appreciably fewer dentists than have cities in proportion to the population that they serve. Since the 177 villages included in this study are somewhat larger than the average, and since the smaller villages are the ones that, on the whole, have no dentists, it seems safe to con- clude that the findings of this study tend to overestimate rather than to underestimate the dental services performed by all vil- lages. Unless village teeth are of better quality than are town teeth, they are less adequately cared for. Data regarding veterinary surgeons in villages show that while there are 157 of these doctors in the 177 villages, neverthe- less there are seventy-five villages that have none. The numbers vary regionally. Only twelve of the forty-four villages in the South have a doctor of this sort, while all but twelve of the sixty- five far-western villages have one or more veterinaries. Even these numbers, however, are proportionately higher than the numbers found in cities. WHAT FUNCTIONS DO VILLAGERS PERFORM? 125 Coming finally to the facts about trained nurses, the Census data show the total number in the 177 villages to be 221. But eighty-seven villages have no such nurses, while forty-two have but one and twenty-six but two. The remaining 127 nurses are, therefore, distributed among only twenty-two villages. In the main, these are places with public and private hospitals or with health resorts. In other words, half of the villages analyzed have no nurses, while one-eighth of the villages have half the nurses. TABLE LIV—NURSES TO EACH 1,000 OF THE POPULATION IN (A) VILLAGES, (B) VILLAGE COMMUNITIES AND (C) MEDIUM-SIZE CITIES, BY REGIONS, 1920 Nurses per Thousand In Village In Villages Communities In Cities Region (a) (b) (c) Pr teria PU TLATITIO LY « B,setercied Cee be cele Tet 0.5 2.4 PUPMSIIEMEVVIENEOT Mey eee Ces iol ays 2 0.5 mg | koi a Cg etn dael ah rl A TAD asi ae a a 0.5 0.2 2.9 OEE Te ae DS US aD IBD ream 1.3 0.6 32 Compared with the numbers of nurses relative to the popula- tion in cities, the numbers found in villages are very small. Data on this point are given in Table LIV. Whether the number of nurses be considered in relation to the population of the villages themselves or in relation to the total population of the entire village community, the relative numbers are far smaller than those for cities. This is particularly true in the South. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE Each of the more important professional classes in villages having been analyzed separately, it is now possible to find out the combination of professional services rendered by villages of varying size. Information on this point is presented in Table LV, and makes it clear that the professional functions rendered by villages steadily expand with the increasing size of the village. Every one of the large villages has at least ten teachers, two clergymen, three physicians, one lawyer and one dentist, while the only professional persons found in every small village are one teacher and one physician. Three-quarters of all the large villages have not fewer than twenty-one teachers each, five clergymen, four physicians, four lawyers, two dentists, one mu- 126 AMERICAN VILLAGERS sician and one veterinary surgeon; while three-quarters of the small villages have only seven teachers, two clergymen and two physicians each. TABLE LV—MINIMUM NUMBER OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE DIFFERENT PROFESSIONS IN VILLAGES OF VARYING SIZE, 1920 Proportion of Villages Having Designated Number of Professional Persons Large Villages Medium Villages pita Villages Profession All .% % “% ie —— oO a ae Oe el; ee i i APPENDIX C 151 10-year age-periods, which were secured by a special tabulation of information in the files of the Census Bureau, and which are now published for the first time. The material on villages was obtained from a special tabulation of 1920 Census data for 177 representative agricultural villages made for the Institute of Social and Religious Research from cards punched directly from the original Census sheets. Partial results of this tabulation have been published in A Census Analysis of Amer- ican Villages, by C. Luther Fry, of the Institute of Social and Religious Research, which volume contains the data on illiteracy and occupations used in this study. In addition, the author of the present study compiled tables showing for the first time the marital conditions by 10-year age-periods, and also showing the distribution of the population by age-periods different from those used in Dr. Fry’s book. This new material is presented in the source tables of this study. Since the marital condition by 10-year age-periods had to be secured by a hand-count of the cards punched from the original Census sheets, financial considerations and the lack of time necessitated the limitation of the sample for this study to 155 of the original 177 villages. This sample, classified in six geographical divisions, was used to represent the total village population in the respective divisions. In each case, the estimated total village population was then sub- tracted from the total rural population to secure that for the open country. The method used is later explained in detail. . Adequacy of the Data The village sample used in this study consists of 155 incor- porated agricultural villages representing all parts of the United States except New England.’ The term “village,” as defined by the Institute, includes all centers with populations ranging between 250 and 2,500. Not all the incorporated places in this study fell strictly within these limits, one village with 246 inhabitants and four with slightly more than 2,500 having been included. Their inclusion in the sample is justified because these villages are so widely scattered and so few in number that their effect on the results is virtually negligible. This study was necessarily limited to agricultural villages because the original Institute sample was confined to villages of this type. 3In Massachusetts and Rhode Island it is not the practice, as in practically all hilar states, to incorporate, as separate municipalities, the relatively densely populated portions of towns’ (which are the primary divisions of the counties) and no town as a whole is SEE ER a as a municipality until! it attains a po Poet greatly in excess of 2,500. ...” Fourteenth Census of the United States, Vol. II, p. 20. 152 AMERICAN VILLAGERS By agricultural village is meant one that is a service station to a farming community. The Institute limited its study to agricultural villages because they are the most numerous and the most permanent type, since they depend for their existence upon the cultivation of the soil rather than upon the extraction of minerals or the chance development of a particular area of the country. It is a matter of common knowledge that an agricultural village differs from the open country less than does, for example, a mining or an industrial village. If, therefore, it can be shown that there are significant differences in the composition and characteristics of open-country populations and those of agricultural villages, it follows that the differences between the open country and all villages will be even greater. This study will, therefore, tend to underemphasize rather than to overemphasize any differences that may exist between villages and the open country. This study was also limited to incorporated villages. Table I shows the number and proportion of the sample’s incorporated vil- lages in each division. The total number of incorporated villages was secured from the Fourteenth Census. TABLE I—RATIO OF VILLAGES STUDIED TO TOTAL NUMBER OF INCORPORATED VILLAGES, 1920 Incorporated Total Villages Number in Sample Ratio of th (a) (b) (b) to (a) Division Jo MiddterAtlantion.? 057-04. ae t aoe 1,014 ae 3.3 BSOUEL dara eates Mae nee ee ae 3,200 37 2 Hast North) Central. a 2,346 Le 0.9 West North Central 325.000) 2. 2,648 38 1.4 Dati tain air he Latah ea Sh a 545 7 1.3 Pacific wives. PE PTR OREN AR ie el UPF Ae 408 18 44 Because separate returns for the populations of villages are made only when the villages are incorporated, it was necessary to study incorporated villages. This procedure was justified, not only because 59 per cent. of all villages of between 250 and 2,500 popula- tions are incorporated, but also because the incorporated villages contain 70 per cent. of the total village population. Table II shows by divisions the percentage of all villages that are incorporated. The total number of all villages and their total population were taken from the 1921 Rand McNally Atlas, which presents figures for the year 1920. APPENDIX C 153 TABLE II—TOTAL VILLAGE POPULATION, 1920 All Villages Incorporated Villages Number Population Number Population Ratio of Division (a) (b) (c) (d) (c) to (a) % AL ae Sere, 2k 17,249 12,079,631 10,161 8,426,385 58.9 Middle Atlantic ...... 3,027 2,154,431 1,014 =1,035,710 33.5 SORTS Gch baw et bss 5,798 3,999,160 3,200 2,695,590 AB? East North Central ... 3,504 2,475,587 2,346 1,937,589 67.0 West North Central ... 2,989 2,081,129 2, 648 1,916,700 88.6 MCMMMAUL I Se oes ele ae 979 694,603 545 456,522 55.8 RACING ahs ios woe peo ws 952 674,721 408 384,274 42.9 INCREASE OF POPULATION If the sample is representative, its rate of increase in population should be generally similar to that of all incorporated villages. Table III shows this to be true. The Mountain division was excluded because only three of the sample villages were incorporated in 1900. This procedure was necessary because the Census does not collect data on population of unincorporated villages. TABLE III—INCREASE OF VILLAGE POPULATION, 1900-1920 All Incorporated 127 Viilages Villages in Sample Division Jo %o ETE EAT ICK 4 WIG Y hee Fis dee Gade hk OLD 19.4 12.9 PALES ey ene SOU eh owe Coe is 49.7 64.5 PeeeereGLitiy ON TAL. Ladd Gane bo bee cae ete seek & 9.0 137. CR EMEU OES IY COUT AL (ic oe va dite nek dbiee nee 20.5 18.0 MEAT eee tc ue Ge yc chee Linke ce ke 59.2 85.9 The increases are greatest in the South and the Pacific divisions, being respectively about 15 points and 26 points greater in the sample villages. The differences in the other divisions vary from 2 to 6 points.* DIFFERENCE IN SIZE The most important test of the adequacy of the sample is the influence of size of population upon the characteristics being studied. Table IV shows the average size of the 155 sample villages com- pared with the average population of the atlas villages and of “all incorporated” villages. This table shows that the average size of the sample villages is 4¥For a full discussion of the factors affecting the increase in population, see page 154 of A Census Analysis of American Villages, by C. Luther Fry. 154 AMERICAN VILLAGERS larger than that of all villages. The question therefore arises: Does this difference destroy the validity of the sample? To ascer- tain the effect of size, it was decided to analyze by size the villages of the West North Central division, since they are the most homogeneous group because there are so few large cities in the division. ‘These villages were divided into three groups of equal range of population, 250 to 1,000, 1,000 to 1,750, and 1,750 to 2,500, described hereafter as small, medium and large. The age and sex distribution, the marital condition, and the percentage of widowed females 65 years of age and over, were then calculated separately for the sixteen small, the fifteen medium, and the seven large villages. Tables V, VI, VII and VIII show the results of these calculations. TABLE IV—AVERAGE POPULATION OF VILLAGES, 1920 Rand McNally All Division Atlas Incorporated Sample Niddie mA tlantic. 10. «Ab eeul anes ples 732 1,021 1,099 SOGTERLL MES ree arate sh coate tthe bats As eas eee 690 842 1,292 Bastévorth Central's, <0: revere sons 707 826 1,419 West? North Central ee). aleeee 696 724 1,209 NIOULLAM Ie ley eee ae Remon 710 838 1,403 PACE Beets Pe Sols ties apn ice 709 942 1,314 Table V shows that the influence of difference in size on age- distribution is virtually negligible; but that sex-distribution is slightly affected, there being constantly lower ratios of males to females as the villages get larger. That these differences are not important, however, is shown by a detailed comparison of population by sex for each size of village. For the native-born white, the small village has 1.4 points more males than the medium-size village and 2 points more than the large village. The medium-size village has only six- tenths of a point more males than the large village. As might be expected these differences for the foreign-born white are somewhat greater. In Table V, it should be noted that percentages for the medium- size villages do not differ appreciably from the percentages of the small-size villages. This fact is particularly significant for the study when it is remembered that the average size of the sample villages in each division is in the medium-size class, and that the average size of all incorporated villages, which contain 70 per cent. of all the village population, is either in the medium-size group or near the upper limits of the small class. Since it has been shown that there is no appreciable difference in age and sex distribution between the small and the medium-size villages, this sample of medium-size villages may be used as representative of all villages. OO SS a eee oo 155 APPENDIX C Tet cS 6cl Stl O'eT cZl | 672 a ak =)e3 ve % % a W 4920 PUD SQ p9-SP br-ST W 9° OT 0° v Gr rT o i a OT i v sayy 44 Uso g-ub13a40 4 STI Srl cy SP 09T SCL es TS orl Ltt 6+ ov % % % % SIPLY Jf Us4OG-92140 NT d WN d W Cl 4apuyn G 4apuy) abp fo sava x SHOVTIIIA ‘IVYLNG) HIYON LSaM ge LLY acs O'Sr O°SS Or 02S £cS Zev Z£1S e837 £0S LO6v % % 4 W saby 11 9°60T eeeeoe os1eT CC stamina te tN ViCelte Soo aa eutS 0'16 eevee sie] 1S en ee a 636 ‘ott tt [pews % SI]DULI sab0] o} “1A S310] fo fo aB4S OHO SUAOVTTIA AO NOILNEGIMLSIG XHS GNV ADV NOdN 4ZIS JO LOddda—A ATAVL 156 AMERICAN VILLAGERS Table VI shows little difference in marital condition caused by difference in size of village. The large villages show larger per- centages of single persons for both sexes than either of the other two classes of villages. But again, the difference between the medium and the small villages in respect to marital condition appears to be too small to be significant. TABLE VI—EFFECT OF SIZE UPON MARITAL CONDITION OF VILLAGERS 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER 38 West NortH CENTRAL VILLAGES Single Married Widowed Divorced Size of Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Villages %o Yo %o Jo Yo To Yo %o Siriaas ol aitaionk 25.5 60.9 61.6 D3 12.1 6 iz Medium .. 31.8 oral 61.5 58.8 5.9 13.2 6 7 Large .... 35.4 33.2 58.5 53.0 5.4 12.7 2 8 Table VII shows that the percentage of widowed females 65 years of age and over increases with the size of the village, that for the native-born white there is an actual increase of 5.6 points from the small to the large village. For the foreign-born white, the increase is 6.3 points. But the medium-size village, which is the typical village of the sample, strikes an average between the small and the large village; this average size again justifying the use of the sample as a basis for calculation. TABLE VII—EFFECT OF SIZE OF VILLAGES UPON THE PER- CENTAGE OF WIDOWED FEMALES 65 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER 38 West NortH CENTRAL VILLAGES Widowed Size of Native-Born White Foreign-Born White Villages Jo % PRETUAEL Tatas 1s ol ea bid OER ane ieee eC Uk 50.7 47.7 M eclitein thie oe ay A ead Regie We 53.9 52.3 Lr We AiG He OU Ne Oras eek eee Ra naenee & ok 56.3 54.0 As a final test of the influence of the size of villages upon the reliability of the sample, the nativity composition of the 38 incor- porated villages of the West North Central division was compared with the nativity composition of the medium-size villages, as is shown in Table VIII. This table shows a quite insignificant difference of three-tenths of a point in the nativity composition between the medium-size and the total sample villages. It must be recognized, however, in deal- So OE a APPENDIX C 157 ing with the reliability of the sample, that of these characteristics examined, no one can be used as providing a sufficient test in itself. They must be considered in their interrelationship as describing the whole sample. One thing stands out as characteristic of these data on the different size villages; namely, a variation related to the size of the village in each category tested. The large villages show fewer married and more single persons for both sexes, and more white widowed females 65 years of age and over, than do the small and medium-size villages. But these differences do not destroy the reliability of the sample. The analysis has shown that the medium- size and the small villages differ very slightly from each other; therefore, since the villages analyzed fall within the medium-size group, and since the average of all incorporated villages falls on the border line between these two groups, it is evident that the sample 1s sufficiently representative of all villages. TABLE VIII—COMPARISON OF ALL VILLAGES AND OF MEDIUM-SIZE VILLAGES 38 West Nortu CENTRAL VILLAGES Native-Born White Foreign-Born White 4 % CUE SALTO ad iigls's die to 5\s's\ioe a'ssin ales 88.1 11.9 Wiedmim-size villages J.0.0-....0's sess 87.8 12:2 Method of Utilizing Data In order to hold the nativity factor constant,® the population was separated into native-born white, foreign-born white, and Negro. All others, that is, Chinese, Japanese, Indians, etc., exist in these villages in numbers too small to be treated as the other nativity groups are treated in this study, and were, therefore, excluded from the calculations. The following method was used to calculate the open-country population. The total village population was broken up into nativity-groups and sex-groups on the basis of the percentages of each nativity-group and sex-group of the sample® in each division. These classifications were already available for the total rural popu- 5 By holding constant one factor is meant keeping the influence of that factor the same in each group of data under comparison while other factors are varied. or example, when comparing the sex-ratio of the village and of the open country for the native-born white population, any differences that occur cannot be owing to different nativity composition of the two classes, for the same nativity group has been used in each case—the native-born white populations of village and of open country. Nativity has been held constant by classification. The difference must therefore be owing to the effect of the variable factors, village life and country life, on the population. 6 Because 250 was the lower limit of population of a village, as defined by the In- stitute, not all of the places which the Census considers as villages have been here included. 158 AMERICAN VILLAGERS lation. Therefore, the subtraction of the estimated total village population in each of these classifications from the corresponding total rural gave the estimated total open-country population for each of the required groups. Fortunately, it was not necessary to follow this long and cum- bersome method when computing the other characteristics for com- parison. The total rural population consists of the total village and the total open-country population. Since the village and the total rural population are known, it is a simple mathematical process to solve for the open country; because any percentage of total rural is equal to the weighted average’ of the corresponding percentages for the village and the open country provided they are combined in the relative proportions in which they actually occur. In other words, the total rural population was generalized into an equation based upon the relation which the village population bears to the open-country population. This ratio was calculated separately by sex for each nativity class and for each division, by dividing the village population into the open-country population.* The equation follows: 7 By a “weighted average” is meant an average calculated by giving to each item, instead of the value one, a value which represents what part it is of the whole. For example, we want to get the average per cent. of widowed females 65 years of age and over of the village and of the open country. Take the South, native-born white population. Here the open-country population is five times as large as that of the yiage, so we get a ratio of 5 to 1. In other words, the per cent. of village population should be multiplied by one and the per cent. of open-country population for this class should be multiplied by five. The sum of these products should then be divided by six instead of two. The result is the weighted average. SoutHERN Native-Born Wuite Femares 65 YEARS oF AGE AND OVER Widowed Weights 0 % Villageda eicdy Piss aaa ele sono. Cable 60.2 1 60.2 Kinen Country 2 iscsdssiessGa eas cases 50.8 5 254.0 _—_— 6 314.2 314.2% ~- 6 = 52.4%, which is the weighted average, and which differs from 55.6%, which is the simple arithmetic average. 8 The assumption underlying this method; namely, that the ratio of village to open- country population remains the same for each age-period, is probably not entirely true. It may be argued that it would be more accurate to use the method of securing actual numbers for the classes of the open-country population by the method of subtracting the village population from the total rural population than by calculating the percentages as has been done in this study. It seems that the method of calculating the open-country data by the use of equations is more accurate for the following reasons. The ratio is an average ratio for the whole group comprising the different classes. Therefore, the use of the ratio tends to give an accurate result because of the compensating errors. In some cases a percentage might be slightly too large, in others slightly too small. The ratio, assumed to be the same for each class, would tend to eliminate these deviations. On the other hand, if the subtraction method were used, the exact error traceable to the lack of complete reliability in the sample would be kept and reproduced in the calculation of the open-country population. The relative accuracy of the two methods is shown in calculating the sex-ratio (males to 100 females) for the open country. The calculation of the ratio of males to females for the open country by the use of the actual numbers gives 116.4 for the native-born whites of the Middle Atlantic division; while the equation method gives 114.5, or a difference of 1.9 of a point, which is quite negligible. In order to avoid being overmeticulous, a ratio, for example, a -+ 2.6x was changed to a + 2.5x, and one of a+ 2.9x to a+ 3x. This method of using the ratios in caicula- tions would cause a very slight change in the results obtained. APPENDIX C 159 a is percentage of village population in any class x is percentage of open-country population in any a+ (n—1)x a pipsielass n ~~ b is percentage of total rural population in any class n is the sum of the weights, that is, the sum of the ratios in which a and x combine to form b a and b are known, x is unknown If the ratio of the village population to the open-country population is 1 to 3, then the equation will read: at Oey 4 =a a+ 3x= 4b 3x 40-4 Le SU Bg 3 The known values are substituted for a and b and the equation solved for x. Before proceeding to analysis of the data, there remains a final question: How can a difference be recognized as significant? Inas- much as the accuracy of the estimates of the open-country popula- tion depends upon the accuracy of the village data, it is important carefully to check the reliability of the village sample; and ordi- narily this would be done by applying purely mathematical tests. Instead of this, another method was used. The different divisions were studied to discover differences between the village and the open-country populations, and, where these differences were found to show a consistent tendency from division to division, they were held to be significant. Results of the Analysis In presenting the results of the analysis of the village and the open-country populations, the characteristics will be taken up in the following order: (1) Nativity and color composition, (2) sex-dis- tribution, (3) age-distribution by sex, (4) marital condition, (5) il- literacy by nativity and color, (6) occupation by sex; and by color and sex for the South, because of the large number of Negroes in this region. Except in cases of the marital condition 15 years of age and over, percentages in the source tables have not been pre- sented where the base is less than 100; but in the text they have been presented for comparative purposes.® Moreover, in this study only the southern group of sample villages was used as representa- tive for the Negro. There is about the same percentage of native-born white in both 9In every text table where such percentages have been presented the fact that the base is less than 100 has been clearly indicated. 160 AMERICAN VILLAGERS the village and the open-country populations of the East North Central division. In the South, the native-born white population in the village is greater by 1.9 points than in the open country. But the South has a large proportion of Negroes, who make up 26.6 per cent. of its village and 28.2 per cent. of its open-country popula- tion. The two North Central divisions are the only ones that show a higher percentage of foreign-born white population in the villages than in the open country. The remaining divisions show much larger percentages of native-born white population in the villages than in the open country. Table IX shows that in the Middle Atlantic, Mountain and Pacific divisions, the open country attracts relatively more of the foreign-born white population than do the villages. The reverse tendency which is to be found in the East and West North Central divisions, is probably traceable to the fact that the great majority of the foreign-born in these divisions are from Northwestern Europe. TABLE IX—NATIVITY AND COLOR COMPOSITION * FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY Native-Born Foreign-Born W hte White Negro Open Open Open Village Country Village Country Village Country Division J Jo % Jo 0 % Middle Atlantic ....... 94.7 81.2 45 16.7 8 1.9 South Mer wie ret chee 71.8 69.9 1.6 1.5 26.6 28.2 East North Central .... 90.3 90.7 9.4 8.0 a 1.0 West North Central ... 87.2 89.4 11.8 9.1 8 9 Mistintaitr os foe ne oto 92.9 77.5 6.3 15.9 ie 9 atic ake ease ees 87.2 74.8 10.8 19.5 S We ® “All others” have been excluded, therefore percentages will not total 100. SEX-DISTRIBUTION Table X shows clearly the striking differences between the village and the open country in ratio of males to 100 females. There is a greater percentage of native-born white females than males in the villages, except in the Mountain and the Pacific di- visions. The slightly greater number of males than females in the villages of the Mountain division fits in with the general preponder- ance of males in that division. The same may be said for the Pacific division. But the significant point is the general tendency for the number of males to 100 females to show, in all divisions except the South, about the same ratio of difference, between the village and the open country. Furthermore, the village ratios of males to 100 fe- APPENDIX C 161 males are different from the corresponding ratios for cities of differ- ent sizes.1° Here then, in the sex-distribution, is found a significant difference between the populations of village and of open country. TABLE X—RATIO OF MALES TO 100 FEMALES BY NATIVITY AND COLOR FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY * Native-Born Foreign-Born W hite White Negro Open Open Open Division Village Country Viuliage Country Village Country Middle Atlantic ...... 87.4 114.5 105.6 Lagee 88.3 71 (Gy Alaa 94.1 108.4 121.5 162.1 90.6 102.2 East North Central ... 90.1 113.2 111.6 144.6 91.1 128.8 West North Central .. 94.2 112.7 118.7 145.8 107.8 120.8 BCMA ha se os ens 102.8 122.9 170.9 166.7 + + emt ke ss key ee coe 100.0 127.1 148.4 193.0 108.9 193.5 * Formulas showing ratio of village to open-country population by sex, nativity and color are as follows: va. Native-Born White Foreign-Born White Negro Division Male Female Male Female Male Female Middle Atlantic ... a+1.6x a-+1.2x a+6.7x a+5.1x a-+4.4x a-+ 3.3x Swi) GA eee a+ 5.2x a-+4.6x a-+5.3x a-+3.9x a-+5.6x a- 4.9x East North Central. a+ 2.7x a+2.1x a+2.3x a-+1.8x a-+9.5x a- 6.7x West North Central. a+ 3.1x a+2.6x a+2.3x a+1.9x a-+3.3x a-+ 2.9x WVTQUinitditt) 2s sic « 01s,<78 a+19x a+16x a+5.1x a+5.3x a+7.9x a-+ 22.5x ACHIOMD corres «ors 0'5,6 a-+s20x “a'p1.6x (a+ 4.2x (a--+ 3.2x a +i lic.” a+ 0.6x + Insufficient data. AGE-DISTRIBUTION NATIVE-BorN WHITE The comparison of the village and open-country population by age-periods shows striking differences.1t Table XI shows that among the native-born whites of both sexes, there are greater per- centages of population under 5 years of age in the open country than in the village. The differences average about 2 points. The differ- ence is greatest in the Middle Atlantic and least in the Pacific division. The southern region, whose age-distribution shows for all classes a close correspondence with the age-distribution for the total United States, has a 1.9 greater percentage of each sex under 5 years of age in the open country than in the village. The fact that in the Pacific division the percentage difference for this age-period is only one point greater for the open-country population than for the village, may be owing to the presence in this division of large numbers of casual laborers in lumbering, mining and agriculture. That such an explanation is plausible is indicated by the low per- centage (only 49 per cent.) +? of married males 15 years of age and 10 Fourteenth Census of the United States, Vol. II, pp. 136-139, shows that there is a higher ratio of males to females for the urban population than for the villages in the eorresponding Census divisions, except in the Mountain and the Pacific divisions and among the Negroes in the South and West North Central. , 11 For complete data, all ages, consult source tables at end of this study. 12 See Table XXIII. 162 AMERICAN VILLAGERS over in the open country in this division. For the open-country population of the South, 61 per cent. of males 15 years of age and over are married; which is 12 points more than in the Pacific division, or 16 points more when the influence of age is held constant by standardizing the age-distribution.1* Thus the ordinary differ- ences which hold for the other divisions, hold for these two also; but to a less extent. Quite possibly this may be owing to the peculiar cultural conditions in these two divisions—the large amount of migratory labor in the Pacific division and the prevailing agricul- tural life of the South. When the percentages under 15 years of age in the village and in the open country are compared, the differences become more striking as is also shown in Table XI. TABLE XI—NUMBER OF POINTS BY WHICH THE PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN AMONG THE NATIVE-BORN WHITES IN THE OPEN COUNTRY EXCEED THOSE IN THE VILLAGE Years of Age Children under 5 Children under 15 Division Male Female Male Female Niddie *Atiantio woe). 54%01.0 6 4.1 41 11.3 10.1 SSuth Weak see eet eee 1.9 1.9 5.4 4.3 Fast. NorthyGentrall ic. see 1.9 1.8 53 4.2 West North Central ........ 2.3 2.1 5:7 4.7 lot tatnn me rene a vs ted oe fay) oe 6.2 5.0 Pacific aes etc t eo ane Mal 1.0 4.2 2% In the period 15-44 years of age (combining the 10-year age- periods of source tables) a significant change occurs. TABLE XII—NATIVE-BORN WHITE POPULATION 15-44 YEARS OF AGE, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY Male Female Open Open Village Country Village Country Division % Jo Jo Jo Middle Atlantic ys sis'sas oho oh bie 19.1 21.4 kes 18.4 South is vawe sa eek ey ee ene fA Ww | 21.8 24.5 20.6 Hast. North? Centratr.2 0s os0e 19.5 22.8 23.4 20.0 West eNorth Central oi. 9.7 See 21.4 24.0 24.4 id Mibutitait fase yates vited tok ae 23.4 23.9 24.2 18.4 PACliCuly et eteae oe hte arent. 2ue 22 PaaS: 19.6 The males, for all divisions combined, show an average of about 2.0 points more in the open country than in the village, a difference so small that it is virtually negligible. But the females show from 2.7 to 5.8 points more in the village than in the open country. The change to a greater percentage of females in the village population 18 See footnote 19, showing method of standardizing age. APPENDIX C 163 occurs as the source tables show in each division 14 in the period 15-24 years of age. Table XIII shows the percentages of population for village and for open country for the age-period 45-64 years. For this age- period there are 3.5 points more males in the village than in the open country in the Middle Atlantic division. In the South, the East North Central, and the West North Central respectively, there are 1.4, 1.4, and 2.1 points more males in the village than in the open country. In the Mountain and in the Pacific divisions there are respectively 1.3 and 0.2 points more males in the village than in the open country. TABLE XIII—NATIVE-BORN WHITE POPULATION 45-64 YEARS OF AGE, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY Male Female Open Open Village Country Village Country Division % %o 0 % Bee UAC ls. esd. on 3s 10.8 7.3 12.8 48 RRM Te is, oc kas olee fag 8.1 6.7 8.0 5.3 maervotth Central 2:...0.0. 0%. 98 8.4 10.6 6.5 West’ North Central ........... 8.7 6.6 8.5 4.7 OOS TI A a a Ps) a ara 8.2 6.9 6.5 3.9 hel UAL gal ea a a 9.6 9.4 8.7 SW) There are larger percentages of females of this age-period (45-64 years) in the village than in the open country; the differences range from 8.0 per cent. in the Middle Atlantic division to 2.6 per cent. in the Mountain. TABLE XIV—NATIVE-BORN WHITE POPULATION 65 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY Male Female Open Open Village Country Village Country Division 0 %o % % merce Atlantic’... cuss. sce ss 4.8 1.9 6.2 1.1 OO Baie edo Sar a 2.6 2.0 2.8 1.7 mast orth ‘Central ....:....... 3.8 a5 4.3 1.9 Muect= North Central :,:....... 3.2 1.6 a3 1.1 MMT AITD UCR SA ho eclectic 's 2 Wes 1.7 6 BSINODES ces LIE eke vie 3.4 G45) 3.1 0.9 In the period of 65 years of age and over, significant differences again occur; relatively more old persons being found in the villages and more females than males. 14 See tables of age-distribution of population by sex for each division at the end of this study. 164 AMERICAN VILLAGERS The analysis of the age-distribution for the native-born white population has shown that the open country has a larger percentage than the village of those under 15 years of age of both sexes; that the village has a larger percentage of adult women than the open country and a larger percentage of men 45 years of age and over ; finally, that the village has relatively more who are 65 years of age and over, the preponderance of women in this group being greater than that of the men. FOREIGN-BORN WHITE TABLE XV—FOREIGN-BORN WHITE POPULATION 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY AGE AND SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE Years of Age 15-44 45-64 65 and over Open Open Open Village Country Village Country Village Country Division % Jo Jo Jo % 0 Middle Atlantic ....... 18.0 35.6 18.7 16.8 12.8 3.6 SOUT us co vhs (oleae aan 29.7 33.0 14.8 WZ 4.3 6.5 East North Central .... 14.0 277 21.0 A We 16.7 8.8 West North Central ... 15.2 25:2 22.4 24.3 15.4 9.0 Monntain verreres casts 31.1 36.6 22.5 16.6 1 4.3 PACHIC Os cu ca wee ceo eee 27.4 35.6 19.2 21.9 8.7 6.3 FEMALE Middle Atlantic ....... 177 26.2 17.1 10.7 12.8 2.9 OU, os ienieey henna 23 19.4 8.6 10.0 3.6 3.8 East North Central .... 12.6 19.4 19.2 13.2 14.7 6.2 West North Central ... 12.6 17.0 19.1 15.4 13.0 6.7 Motintain was 1 ehh os 19.1 20.7 12.6 9.0 4.6 2.8 Paciticays bois sone toning 2 19.1 17.7 11.1 17.1 6.3 3.2 In the white population there is, on the whole, an age-distribution for the foreign-born distinctly different from that for the native- born. There are virtually no foreign-born white persons under 5 years of age, and only about 2 per cent. under 15 years of age.’® The average age in this nativity-group is less in the open country for both sexes, except in the case of females in the South, a variation which may be caused by the Mexicans in the southwest. In the villages of the Middle Atlantic, the East North Central and the West North Central divisions, there are larger percentages of males 45-64 years of age than in any other period. For the remaining divisions, the larger percentages of males are in the period 15-44 years of age, quite possibly owing to the Mexicans in the population. For females in villages the larger percentages are in the period 15-44 years of 15 See tables showing age-distribution, at the end of this study, APPENDIX C 165 age, except in the East and West North Central divisions. The largest percentages of females in the open country in all divisions are in the period 15-44 years of age. NEGROES *° Approximately 90 per cent. of all Negroes in the United States are in the South. In the South there is, for males, little difference in the age-distribution of the Negro and the native-white population. The comparative characteristics of the latter for the village and the open country have already been pointed out. There are more males among the Negroes in the open country than in the village, except for the period 15-44 years of age. The greater percentage of males in the village in the period 15-44 years of age is probably owing to the occupational concentration of Negroes in manufacturing. TABLE XVI—NEGRO POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY * MALE Years of Age Under 15 15-44 45-64 65 and over is re © 2 © = & a Sere Bui) ee) Gus earn rele aa Cee = iss = Se Wises aS ae hs) we Ob we Ob pate te 1 Division % % % %o % Jo % % Middle Atlantic ...... 146 14.7 17:27 8288 10.6 8.8 AS 137 hd PR ae 163722 Pe Lineal & 6.5 7.4 jy Ge Bh Hast North Central .. 10.3. .15.4 LE LG S yeh tn a BS 3.007) ee West North Central .. 179 13.9 17.3. 26.6 1 AS Loh RE 4.05759 7 CUS ee Sy ae 15.4 9.7 213) 440.8 PAI AS.S ASE FEMALES Middle Atlantic ...... 18.7 14.0 21.6 24.6 7.6 6.2 A eh by BETTE ces cas be We Pal 27-97 222 6.0 4.9 19 1.4 East North Central ... 14.0 14.2 30.8 19.1 5.6 7.4 19s" 238 West North Central .. 124 158 eo 20k 8.9 6.8 KA _ * Data for the Negro by age-periods for the Mountain division and for the females in the Pacific division are too meager for presentation. The proportion of male Negroes is nine-tenths of a point greater in the open country than in the village for those 45-64 years of age, and a tenth of a point greater for those 65 years of age and over. These percentages are not pointed out as significant differ- ences, but as showing a slight variation from the age-distribution of 16 See source tables for age-distribution. The variability outside of the South may be owing to the small number of cases for the Negro in these divisions. The percentages by age-periods outside of the South are not presented as significant, but to indicate what the data show, 166 AMERICAN VILLAGERS the native-born white with which the Negro age-distribution was compared. Of Negro females in the South, beginning with the period 15-44 years of age, there are larger percentages in the village than in the open country, a characteristic that is true of the native-born white females in all divisions. But in the divisions other than the South, the Negro population does not show the regularity of differences between the village and the open country found to be characteristic of the native-born white. For the Middle Atlantic division there is a greater percentage of females under 5 years of age in the village than in the open country, while the reverse is true for the males. In the West North Central division, there is a greater percentage of males under 5 years of age in the village than in the open country. The other age-periods show, in the different divisions, the same variability; so that the only general difference between the village and the open country that can be pointed out is the greater percentage of old people 65 years of age and over in the villages. The varying percentages in the different age-periods from division to division are probably to be accounted for by the different occupational status of the Negroes in the different areas, which probably results in people of different ages being selected for different occupations. For example, manu- facturing probably selects workers from the period 15-44 years of age, while personal and domestic service would probably select both the younger and the older workers rather than those of the middle age-periods. This comparison has shown significant differences between the village and the open-country populations by age, by sex, and by nativity classes; has shown a larger percentage of children in the open country; a larger percentage of females, beginning with the period 15-24 years of age, in the village for both the native-born white and the Negro; has shown particularly a larger percentage of old people in the village population for both sexes. It has shown also a general similarity in age-distribution for the Negro and the native-born white of the South, except in the period 15-44 years of age, in which there is a larger percentage of male Negroes in the vil- lage than in the open country. It has shown wide variability among the small number of Negroes in the other divisions; and for all divisions the same general tendencies for the foreign-born white as for the native-born white, subject to modification by the special age- groupings of an immigrant population. APPENDIX C 167 MARITAL CONDITION—SINGLE NATIVE-BoRN WHITE?" TABLE XVII—SINGLE NATIVE-BORN WHITES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE FEMALE ; Open Open Village Country Village Country Division % Jo Jo % MIO PIATING 5 oes « o0s'e hae: hte 41.7 27.3 29.9 RRO Pees te kre os cae Sens 32.8 34.2 29.4 25.1 MectaNorth Centraly . i ac.6.6 06 32.2 ahd 29.9 25.4 West North Central ........... 36.5 41.7 KYA) 28.8 MECN Pe ain ok was aiae a2 33.0 43.1 23.8 24.3 Re es a eis ON so whey ie 8 3 Bo 44.5 23.4 23.9 For native-born white males there are striking differences be- tween the village and the open country in the per cent. single. The differences in the marital condition pointed out in this section must not be accepted as final, because age and sex distribution affects the per cent. single and married. The significance of the age and sex distribution in marital condition will be discussed later. In every case there are more single males in the open country than in the village. These differences vary from 14.5 points in the Middle Atlantic to 1.4 points in the South. The next smallest difference is 5.1 points, for the East North Central division. In the West North Central division it is 5.2; in the Mountain, 10.1; and in the Pacific, 11.0 points. For native-born white females, the differences in per cent. single in open country and village are less than for males. The South, the West North Central and the East North Central divisions show greater percentages of single females in the villages, while the other divisions show greater percentages of single females in the open country. The tendency would seem to be to have a greater per- centage of single females in the village because the difference between the sum of the percentages of the divisions in which there are more single females in the villages and the sum of the percentages in the divisions in which there are more single females in the open coun- try, shows a preponderance of 9 points in the relative number of females in the villages. The Middle Atlantic, Mountain and Pacific divisions have larger percentages of single males in all age-periods in the open country than in the villages. For the East North Central division, there is a greater percentage of single males in the village up to the period 45 years of age, when the change to a greater per- centage in the open country takes place. 17 Source tables at the end of this study show the marital condition by 10-year age- periods, nativity, color, and sex, 168 AMERICAN VILLAGERS There are larger percentages of single females in the village in every age-period for the South and Middle Atlantic divisions. For the West North Central division there are larger percentages of single females up to the period 55 years of age and in the East North Central division, up to 65 years; while in the Mountain division, the open country has the larger percentage beginning with the period 95-64 years of age, and in the Pacific division, the open country has a greater percentage single in the periods 35-54 years of age and 65 years of age and over. These trends show conclusively a decided difference between the open-country and the village population in the percentage of single native-born whites 15 years of age and over. FOREIGN-BorN WHITE TABLE XVIII—SINGLE FOREIGN-BORN WHITES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE FEMALE Open Open Village Country Village Country Division % Jo 0 % Middle SAtlanitic .o ts steer tee 18.0 24.7 9.2 10.3 SHITE ACE ate it ney eee ace 23.8 320 15.9 12.5 East North’ Central’). 39) 10.8 25.0 6.5 Epos West North -Central’........... 18.9 2.2 8.4 6.7 PLOUDEAIT pete Sid ade vc ee Ce a 24.9 39.7 9.4 9.5 Fg Teh CRM Nie BY BONA pad lediting BO a: 28.4 42.1 10.2 8.7 The same general differences that hold for the native-born white hold for the foreign-born white, but to a greater degree. The exag- geration of the differences may result from the general excess of males over females in this nativity-group. Table X shows that the differences between the ratios of males to 100 females for the vil- lage and the open-country foreign-born white are greater than the differences between the corresponding ratios for the native-born white. For the foreign-born white, the proportion of single females in the villages is 4.4 points greater than in the open country, although there is a slight variation in the Opposite direction in some cases. The marital condition of the open-country population by 10-year age-periods for this nativity group was estimated for only the West North Central division, for which a large enough sample was avail- able. The first and last periods, 15-24 years of age, and 65 years of age and over, show a greater percentage of single males in the open country. This characteristic of the first period is probably owing to the excess of men in the open country, for which the ratio of males to 100 females for the period 15-24 years of age is 147. A striking characteristic of the foreign-born white is the small propor- APPENDIX C 169 tion of single females, 15 years of age and over, about 7 per cent. or 8 per cent. in both the village and the open-country population as compared with 20 per cent. to 30 per cent. for the native-born white. In the West North Central division, the great excess of males over females among the foreign-born white, 118.7 males to 100 females in the village and 145.8 males to 100 females in the open country, would result in a smaller percentage of single females for this group than for the other nativity groups. Furthermore, the concentration of females in the foreign-born nativity group in the period 25-44 years of age would result in a larger percentage married and a smaller percentage single than if more of the foreign-born white population were to fall in the 15-24 age-period. NEGRO TABLE XIX—SINGLE NEGROES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR. VILLAGE AND OPEN: COUNTRY MALE FEMALE Open Open ore Village Country Village Country Division % Jo %o % Dr URS a 2s ree a te 34.1 * 39.7 foe 23.3 TLE) Bae a aa ee teat 34.6 31.1 28.4 24.4 Mest North Central. ......3..2. 25.4 40.3 24.2 22.6 * Base less than 100. Data for East North Central, Mountain and Pacific divisions too meager for presentation. Only in the South does the Negro present a really satisfactory sample for purposes of analysis into separate age-classes with respect to marital condition. But in two of the other divisions the number in the combined age-classes 15 years of age and over is sufficiently large to group and present in these classifications. It is a question whether the Negro situation in the South should be held to be the normal, or whether the distribution in the other divisions should be so considered. The Negroes are numerically greater in the South ; but their cultural milieu is quite different from that of Negroes in the other divisions. It is therefore better to discuss the two groups separately, South and not-South. For the not-South, the same tendencies hold as for the native-born white in the same divi- sions. For the South, there are greater percentages of single Negro males by 3.5 points in the villages than in the open country. This is a complete reversal of the tendencies that hold for the Negroes in the other divisions, and for other nativity groups in all divisions. This difference, although it is a complete reversal of the general tendency, which showed a larger percentage of single males in the 170 AMERICAN VILLAGERS open country, preserves in the South the distinctive character of the village and the open-country populations. For female Negroes in the South, the same general tendencies hold as in the other divisions, and the same tendencies that are shown by other nativity classes in all divisions. MARITAL CONDITION—MARRIED NATIVE-BorN WHITE The percentage of those married is just the reverse of the per- centage of those single, except in the older age-periods. Therefore, the discussion of the percentage married has been very considerably shortened. TABLE XX—MARRIED NATIVE-BORN WHITES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE FEMALE pen Open Village Country Village Country Division %o Jo % % MiddtesAtlanticsii ce ee 66.1 52.8 56.1 64.2 SOU CL roar sere Te ae 62.3 60.9 S77 66.3 Hast North Gentrah 4) Ua ee 61.8 SRE 56.4 67.5 West North Central <2 ....4...% 57.9 54.1 56.0 65.4 GUNEAT eee Cea Ch ee er wie tee ae 61.7 Die 66.2 69.4 Pacwic se eee uke ee cor 60.1 49.2 62.6 69.6 Among the native-born white males, the village has larger per- centages married in all divisions than has the open country. For the native-born white females the reverse is true. FOREIGN-Born WHITE TABLE XXI—MARRIED FOREIGN-BORN WHITES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE FEMALE Open Open Village Country Village Country Division Jo % %o % Middle Atlantic... 6 0.0 ogo, 69.2 70.0 64.3 79.5 SOUT Ve NOEL Bes Oye eo ait 68.6 59.8 66.6 74.0 FAstoNOtth Geotail a cede eee 78.2 65.1 65.7 78.1 West North Central ........... 71.9 67.1 66.3 77.6 Mountain 208s phi) el Tt a 67.9 5339 fp, 76.2 Patihe weet cane oe) aie, 61.2 51.3 71.8 78.6 There is a greater percentage of married among foreign-born white males in the open-country population than in the villages of APPENDIX C 171 the Middle Atlantic. But this tendency is offset by the fact that in the other divisions greater percentages of males in the villages are married than in the open country. The sample for the West North Central division shows, for the foreign-born white males, a larger percentage married in the village; and for the foreign-born white females, a larger percentage married in the open country. The same general tendency toward greater percentages of mar- ried males in the village than in the open country holds also for the Negro males, except in the South where there is a larger percentage of married male Negroes in the open country than in the village. For the Negro females, the differences between the village and the open country are of the same type as in the other nativity groups. NEGrRo 28 TABLE XXII—MARRIED NEGROES 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY SEX FOR VILLAGE AND OPEN COUNTRY MALE FEMALE Open Open Village Country Village Country Division Jo Jo Jo Jo PE TeeC@UN LIATITICI ss 64 0 os'¢,¢'e os0 56.8 * 54.0 50.0 * 63.7 SU? cag iy 8 el ge 58.1 62.5 52.0 63.1 West: North Central ....6.5...: 61.9 50.3 60.5 62.5 * Base less than 100. In the discussion of the single foreign-born white element of the population, attention was called to the influence of age-distribution as affecting the percentage single and married. If a population is heavily concentrated in the younger age-period, in which there is a smaller percentage married than in the older age-periods, it follows that it will have a smaller percentage married 15 years of age and over than a population heavily concentrated in the older age-periods. Since there is a wide difference in the age-distribution of the village and of the open-country population, it is necessary, in order to secure comparable data on the percentage married in the two popu- lations, to calculate what the percentage married would be if each of these populations had the same age-distribution. To do this, the age-distribution of a third population (in this case that of the total United States, all classes, by sex) 15 years of age and over was calculated by 10-year age-periods. This is called the “standard population.” The population of the village and that of the open country, 15 years of age and over, were then redistributed according 18 Data probably non-representative for the East North Central, the Mountain, and the Pacific divisions, because of the small number of cases. See source tables at the end of this study. 172 AMERICAN VILLAGERS to the percentages in each 10-year age-period of the “standard popu- lation.” ‘This method gives the same age-distribution by 10-year age- periods to both the village and the open-country populations. The method of this detailed procedure is shown in a footnote,!® while the results of the calculation are presented in Table XXIII. This table shows the actual per cent. married, 15 years of age and over, in the village and in the open country, compared with the percent- ages married when the two population groups are standardized. The general result of standardizing the age-distribution was to reduce for males, and to increase for females, the differences between village and open-country percentage married. Among the foreign- born white males of the West North Central division, the differ- ences between the village and open-country percentage married are virtually eliminated by reducing the respective populations to the same age-distribution. For the native-born white males of the same division, however, the effect of holding the age-factor constant is to cause the percentage married in the open country to exceed that in the village by four-tenths of a point, despite the fact that the actual figures show the village exceeds the open country by 3.8 points. The differences already existing in this respect for the Negro males in the South is increased by 1 point.2° For the females, the effect of standardizing the populations is to accentuate the differences between the village and the open country. The only important exception to this tendency occurs in the Pacific division. The result of this standardizing process is simply to emphasize — the fact that the village and the open-country populations show 19 Method of applying a standard population: 33 MippLe ATLANTIC VILLAGES Males Native-Born ifs 3 1 4 5 67 Population 15 Per Cent. Village Pop- Per Cent. Number Years of Age Distribution ulation Accord- Married in Married Age- and Over, Males, of Population ing to Per Village by in Period all Classes, 1920 «in Column 2 Cent. in Age-Periods Village (Thousands Column 3 omitted) 15 Bnd OVELs Wass 94 36,920 100.0 11,944 7 5i2 eee. hy as MAD 9°20 24.9 2/974 17.4 51 D534 hd ee eee 8,669 2355 2,807 70.6 1,981 Es ote @ tera Saab ie Lies 753 19.9 Pope iT 82.9 1,970 A554 MNGIOAL feels) erate 5,653 1523 1,827 84.2 1,538 5 OOS Wee te tel ene siete wie 3,461 9.4 $123 83.1 933 65 and Povets....5 2,483 6.7 800 69.0 552 Wnknrown' 5 «e608 9 a 36 58.3 21 ane X 100 = 62.9%, or the per cent. married 15 years of age and over if the village population had the same age-distribution as the total United States, all classes, 15 years of age and over. The same method is then applied to the open-country population and the results are compared. *Column 4 is obtained by multiplying total village population 15 years of age and over by items in Column 3. t Column 6 is obtained by multiplying Column 4 by Column 5. 20 Why this change should occur raises a most interesting problem of causation; but it is outside the limits of this study. APPENDIX C 173 significant differences in the marital condition. In concluding this phase of the discussion, certain general effects of difference in age- distribution on the marital condition must be pointed out.2* In the TABLE XXIII—DIFFERENCES IN THE PER CENT. MARRIED BE- TWEEN THE ACTUAL AND THE STANDARDIZED AGE-DIS- TRIBUTION OF VILLAGE AND OPEN-COUNTRY POPULA- TION 15 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER MALE FEMALE Village * Open Married Exceeds Married Country ben Open Open Open Exceeds Class and Division of Village Country Country Village Country Village Population % % (Points) Jo Jo (Points) NATIVE-Born WHITE Middle Atlantic Bra Layo darko! 66.1 52.8 a0 56.1 64.2 8.1 Standardized .... 62.9 56.1 6.8 56.4 65.3 8.9 South PETA Eg ois tee venis fs 60.9 1.4 ST 66.3 8.6 Standardized .... 62.6 65.3 —2.7 58.9 68.5 9.6 East North Central EAL ete Ga 8 61.8 ais 4.5 56.4 67.5 11.1 Standardized .... 60.0 59.8 2 56.8 68.1 Lis West North Central POT UEA Os TAG in’s 66 57.9 54.1 3.8 56.0 65.4 90.4 Standardized .... 58.5 58.9 goat A Lv RS 67.8 10.5 Mountain PRCEISA LIES tes ico's. 5 2 61.7 512 10.5 66.2 69.4 3.2 Standardized .... 61.4 53.8 7.6 65.6 70.3 47 Pacific PCT UALS Waede' es 60.1 49.2 10.9 62.6 69.6 7.0 Standardized .... 58.9 49.5 9.4 62.8 68.7 5.9 ForEIGN-BorNn WHITE West North Central | PA PRVIAV OA rr it?s va 71.9 67.1 48 66.3 77.6 11.3 Standardized .... 55.3 54.4 Ae) 63.0 77:2 14.2 NEGRO South Ottial fas eek ces 58.1 62.5 —44 52.0 63.1 11.1 Standardized .... 61.5 67.3 —58 52.6 65.4 12.8 ® Minus sign (—) denotes that open country exceeds village. population of the United States there are small percentages mar- ried, about 20 per cent. to 30 per cent., in the period 15-24 years of age. The period 25-54 years of age has the largest percentage mar- 21 For a full discussion of the effect of age-distribution and sex-ratios on the marital condition consult The Cause and Conditions of Marital Status tn the United States, by William Rielding Ogburn. This study is still in manuscript. 174 AMERICAN VILLAGERS ried for both males and females. From 55 years on, the percentage married decreases and the percentage widowed increases, especially for females. Accordingly, in the population of the United States, any group that has a larger percentage in the age-period 15-24 than in the 25-54 age-periods, would have a smaller percentage married than would a group having the greatest percentage of its population in the age-period 25-54. A population having a larger percentage in the very young period, 15-24 years of age, or in the period 55 years of age and over, would have a smaller percentage of married, 15 years of age and over, than would a population with the greatest percentages in the middle-age periods, 25-54 years of age. INFLUENCE OF SEX-RaTIOs The open country has a higher ratio of males to 100 females than has the village.2?. For the native-born white population of the vil- lages, the ratio of males to 100 females varies from 87.4 in the Middle Atlantic division to 102.8 in the Mountain division; while for the open country, the ratio ranges from 108.4 in the South to 127.1 in the Pacific division, This ratio is higher in the villages of the Mountain and the Pacific divisions than in the other divisions; but the rate of difference between the village and the open country is about the same for all divisions except the South. On the other hand, the excess of males in the open country will result in a smaller percentage of married males than of married females there, as the period 15-24 years of age for the foreign-born white in the West North Central division so well shows. An increase in the percent- age married will reduce the percentage single, unless the increase is drawn from the widowed and divorced. Too great a disparity between the sexes will reduce the total percentage married, since the excess Of one sex over the other will prevent many of the more numerous sex from marrying. The foreign-born white element of the population has a greater percentage of males than females both in the villages and in the open country, in all divisions. The ratios vary in the villages from 105.6 males to 100 females in the Middle Atlantic division to 170.9 in the Mountain division. The open country varies from 137.7 in the Middle Atlantic division to 193.0 in the Pacific division. This higher ratio of males to 100 females is one of the causes of the very high percentages of married females for the foreign-born white, especially in the open country, where the excess of males is greater. The Negroes, who have about the same ratio of males to 100 females as the native-born white, range for the villages from a ratio of 88.3 in the Middle Atlantic to 108.9 in the Pacific division; and for the open country, from 102.2 in the 22 See Table X. APPENDIX C 175 South to 193.5 in the Pacific. The Mountain division presents too small a sample to show for the Negroes the effect of the disparity of the sexes on marital condition. But the South, with a higher ratio of males to females in the open country than in the village, has a greater percentage of males married in the open country. Just why this should be so, it is impossible to decide at present. These differences in the percentage married, which are partly the result of differences in the sex-ratios, as has already been pointed out, show that the differences between the village and the open-country sex-ratios are fundamental and have far-reaching results upon the marital condition of the two classes of population. WIDOWED The widowed males fifteen years of age and over are more numerous in the villages than in the open country. But there are some exceptions: that of the Negro in the East North Central division, where there are more widowed males in the open country ; that of the foreign-born white in the West North Central; that of the native-born white in the Mountain division; and that of the Negro in the Pacific division. In the case of the Mountain and Pacific divisions, the occupational opportunities might draw off the unmarried from the villages to the open country; but the opposite tendency would seem to be true for the rest of the country. Except in the Mountain and Pacific divisions, the migration of widowed males is apparently into the villages, especially in the case of those of the older age-periods, among whom the greatest number of wid- owed is found. Probably both these conditions obtain, and must be explained in terms of the particular cultural milieu of the two areas. The most striking fact about the widowed is this group’s large percentage of females in the period 65 years of age and over. Table XXIV presents this data. For native-born white males, the largest percentages of widowed 65 years of age and over are in the open country, except in the South, where the reverse is true for both the native-born white and the Negro. There are larger percentages of widowed native-born white females in the villages in all except the Mountain and Pacific divisions. The greater development in some divisions of agriculture, which tends to draw laborers to the open country, and in other divisions of manufacturing, which draws to the village, may perhaps account for these differences. The differ- ences between the male percentage widowed and that of the female must be accounted for in part by the differential death rate, since there is a higher death rate for males than for females. 176 AMERICAN VILLAGERS Whether or not the foreign-born present a different situation cannot be stated. Perhaps the open country’s greater percentage of widowed females 65 years of age and over, among the foreign-born white in the West North Central division, is traceable to the fact that the average age is lower in the open country than in the village. For the southern Negroes, there is a larger percentage of wid- owed males 65 years of age in the village than in the open country. A startling fact is that 77 per cent. of all female Negroes 65 years of age and over in the southern villages are widowed. An inter- esting fact about the South is that it has, for the period 65 years of age and over for all nativity classes, higher percentages of widowed than any other division. TABLE XXIV—WIDOWED, 65 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX NATIVE-BorN WHITE MALE FEMALE Open Open Village Country Village Country Division % Jo Jo % MiddlesAtlantic: ook.) ed seco ne Zoi 28.4 56.9 47.2 SOME th de eee eae eae 25.3 24.0 60.2 50.8 East North ‘Centralivoveis a. ee 21.8 26.5 53.7 50.3 WesteNorth: Gentraliq. vey eo eee PAWS) fgslise Le 50.8 Motintainy 27ng 1 Oe sce upton e 20.3 29.1 53.6 57.0 Paine eee. Dube aoa ot ee 18.6 28.5 54.6 5513 ForEIGN-Born WHITE West ‘North: Central tire 2u2.. 3: 20.4 29.6 52.1 LN fe NEGRO SOUT eee UE en ee Ree Ba.2 24.5 77.0 60.6 DIVORCED The differences between the relative number of divorced in the village and in the open country are not very significant. All that can be said is that there is a tendency towards larger percentages of divorced among males in the open country than in the villages, and that the reverse is true for females. This situation may be owing to the migration of divorced females to the villages. There is a progressive increase from East to West in the percentage of divorced. The larger percentage of divorced in the West than in the East is probably the result of the more lenient divorce laws of the western states. The divorce data are to a large degree unre- APPENDIX C 177 liable because of the unwillingness of divorced persons to report their marital status as divorced.” SUMMARY OF MARITAL CONDITION In the discussion of the marital condition, it has been shown that: 1. There is a greater per cent. of single males in the open country than in the village, except in the case of the southern Ne- groes; and that the reverse condition holds for females. 2. There is a greater per cent. of married males in the villages than in the epen country, except in the case of the southern Ne- groes; and that the reverse condition holds for females. TABLE XXV—ILLITERATES 10 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER, BY WATIVI Ly. NATIVvE-Born ForEIGN-Born WHITE WHITE NEGRO Open Open Open Village Country Village Country Village Country Divisions % % % % (a) O Middle Atlantic ........ a 1.6 10.3 20.4 9.3 8.9 SSE oRrC RM ran outs Sle ok a3 7.4 OO. Les 25.9 29.7 Fast North Central .... .8 1.5 4.0 11.2 + West North Central .... 8 LZ 4.4 6.0 16.7 17.0 WRUIEAI TEM core nes oc, fe 4.4 4.8 16.7 t SE leg 0 GE 6 6 16.2 10.4 a * The per cent. of foreign-born illiterate in the villages of the South exclusive of the Southwest is 7.2 per cent.; the per cent. in the Southwest is 47.4, due to the large number of Mexicans. t Per cent. not shown. Base less than 100. 3. Holding the age-factor constant tended to diminish the dif- ference between the percentage of males married in the village and in the open country; and to increase this difference in the case of females. 4. That the open country’s higher ratio of males to 100 females in part accounts for the open country having a greater per- centage of married females than have the villages. The smaller number of males to 100 females in the villages in part accounts for the greater percentage of married males in the villages. 9. The villages have larger percentages of both widowed males and widowed females than has the open country. . 6. The divorce data are too meager to be significant. ILLITERACY AND OCCUPATION 24 Among the native-born white, illiteracy is greater in the open 23 William .F. Ogburn, The Cause and Conditions of Marital Status in the United States. This study is still in manuscript. 24 See Table XLVI. 178 AMERICAN VILLAGERS country than in the village. Wide differences occur only in the South and the Mountain divisions. For the foreign-born, the same tendencies hold in a general way. The greater illiteracy among the foreign-born white of the villages than among those of the open country in the South and Pacific divisions, can probably be ac- counted for by the concentration of Mexicans in those divisions. A tendency for a group of Mexicans to concentrate in the village would increase the illiteracy there. Attention is called to the slight excess of illiterate Negroes in the open country in the South. While the general differences are not so great, there is a trend which results in the open country being set off from the village by a higher per- centage of illiteracy. The two occupations with the highest percentage of males em- ployed are manufacturing and trade; but in the Pacific division and among southern Negroes, they are manufacturing and agriculture. The highest proportion of males in manufacturing, 47.5 per cent., is found in the Middle Atlantic division. Of the gainfully em- ployed southern white males, 27 per cent. are engaged in manu- facturing, the lowest proportion for any division. The Southern Negro has 46.1 per cent., and the other divisions from 30 per cent. to 38 per cent. The proportion of the gainfully employed males engaged in trade varies from 15.3 per cent. to 28.3 per cent. The number engaged in agriculture is relatively small, except in the Pacific division, where 25.8 per cent. of the gainfully employed are in this occupation. The figures for the other divisions vary from 8.6 per cent. in the Middle Atlantic to 16.1 per cent. in the Mountain division. Of the southern Negroes, 22.6 per cent. are engaged in agricultural occupations. Females are most heavily concentrated in personal service, pro- fessional, and clerical occupations, in the order named. In the Middle Atlantic, however, 35.9 per cent. are engaged in manufac- turing. The percentage engaged in agriculture is negligible, less than 1.0 per cent. for three divisions, 1.2 per cent, for the Mountain, and 3.8 per cent. for the Pacific, 2.5 per cent. for the southern white, and 8.3 per cent. for the southern Negro. This discussion is suf- ficient to show how strikingly non-agricultural the occupational life of the villages is. On the other hand, the occupation of the open country is pre- dominantly agriculture. In certain areas there are large numbers engaged in other pursuits, such as mining and lumbering; but for the United States as a whole and by divisions, the open-country population is essentially a farm population.?® 25C. J. Galpin and Veda B. Larson, Farm Population of Selected Counties (1924), U. S. Bureau of the Census. APPENDIX C 179 Thus there is a striking occupational contrast between the village and the open country, which would seem to effect quite differently the attitudes and point of view of the village and the open-country population. The farmer buys a large proportion of the things he wants from the village tradesman. It is the business of the trades- man to sell to the farmer at the highest price possible and to buy from him at the lowest price. The farmer is essentially interested in the basic price, the price he receives for a commodity, but the tradesman is interested in the differential, or the difference between his cost price and his selling price. The farmer is essentially a producer and a consumer, the villager a distributor and a consumer. As producers and distributors their interests are quite opposed. Conclusion It has been shown conclusively that the population classified under the category “rural” consists of two separate elements, the village and the open country, which vary from division to division but always consist of two distinct elements. ros att ane 4 ts iF h ; ’ ) ARN, o : 4 ry mary a r AD. eve MDs be Cee te eves he Ye) PO a RL Ch ego a he LS aha , ‘ ° , 7 { : ’ . d Aut , ae. TCP ale BD ae FAD ; ’ os) Af n : m1 ‘9 or Ney Clg at ‘a De | lay " gus Vay Arar ' a . : aS 2 A, ; 1 VWi< t ‘ —" sf or ‘ eo oe rua \, alah led aa = . ) a bw ee ; \ ' i f, Ve ihre aD rm ‘ee Ua el ths ON ; PAS ey pt Utey . Me ‘ 7 ¥ hit a ‘ his ios le Pe Pea ee hy poe } hie pig 14 ahs A i: } Fae CMA ERY AR SHAS, he) > bh A PALY VET Et aD ge 7 - ad + q ( 4 id « he? ae) t . . a i } Vi? tM ACE A tie Mad Papi yh bi a US Sig Ne Be i] ¢ } j , j ‘ \ ik "is ee ? j ij 7 4 ig he | v ‘fs R 4 ‘ y ‘ K ‘ as 4 . ; Kt ‘ ( Jit . . ‘ 1 > a ‘ i io ) 5 mat / yi ] ¥ = < i ' ‘ any i j \ : es - \ , = \ . be a oe 4 | [ « ’ ° i p = oe , | : ; 4 y Y Ad , : } , ' ne " . q : i jg ‘ ; “8 ts ' ih + J hey 2 i" ri p 7 *” iy ‘ 7 a a | i ; i | x is , : aw ' = ty j . | f ' Ki Es AP ie ~ ‘ ' 7 4 . * — s * } j J ; boty | Ae _ i , | nh . . , a 7 a 4 | iA i ; i) ' i 4 3 | ' } | ct } ; } \ ; ri ' 5 AN i J } : | - a ae bm ; ; { vat Dy. ’ 7 , } 4 sa ‘ ‘Ad ‘ ? r ry ; i ne: - ’ j ‘ q . of ‘ rae | ‘ e i ’ ae DU A ee ta ay : PAA u ld ye fi : Ad rns v vera f i ig Tae wy » 5,449 2,680 7.8 2,769 8.1 Ss OO 2,368 6.9 2,792 8.1 -. 4,564 2,092 6.1 2,472 Of Lea 45318 2,102 6.1 2,416 7.0 ~. 4,451 2,044 5.9 2,407 7.0 ato). OD9 1,670 4.9 1,989 5.8 ee 4796 1,656 4.8 2,140 6.2 oe 23 12 bg 11 he 186 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XXVIII (Continued) Age-Periods Total Male Female Number Number Per Cent. Number Per Cent. FOREIGN-BORN WHITE DOtal eh, 42 ts ee heehee: 1,626 835 Lye’ 791 48.7 Darden iS Make came eens 6 —_— —_ 6 4 Pm LA Mena ian. eee 40 29 1.8 11 7 15274 ae Be eee ee 99 55 3.4 44 te | 2554 a. Se nts ee aa ae 208 109 6.7 99 6.1 SSA Ce Sab, Bos 274 129 7.9 145 8.9 ASSAY ei cc a e aa 303 154 D5 149 9.2 5 5=64 Te nies te 278 149 9.2 129 7.9 65. Cand’ “Gverece co soeet 417 209 12.8 208 12.8 Unknown hasaeer ces ee 1 1 4 — ao NEGRO LEGUALIAS a oie SIE ice cree sR inode 273 128 46.9 145 53.1 Linderc Shia eel cteehs eee. 31 11 4.0 20 vee: Erica [pm a Ves ear OY Phe ees Sore 60 29 10.6 31 11.4 D524 Rian hste exe crete ete ae 37 18 6.6 19 7.0 PANEL SD 1 ake EATEN A. retard nan ay 14 bee Z3 8.4 SOS ere ay, ec alee ease 32 : 15 5.4 17 6.2 45 =54 Med atnsiek ee Tee 34 21 Ged. 13 4.7 eas of NARS PAN Woy 4 5 ee 16 8 2.9 8 23 GhRanahovenw te ea. 24 12, 4.5 12 4.5 Unknown moment 2 -- “ 2 a7. * Less than one-tenth of one per cent. 1920 Census 33 Incorporated Villages Middle Atlantic Division TABLE XXIX—MARITAL CONDITION OF MALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE Totalyrce oss dee 11,944 3,253 2 2 7,892 66.1 743 6.2 48 4 LO 24 ae oa stele 2,368 1,944 82.1 413 17.4 5 a2 1 ft D534 eee 2,092 576 £75 1,478 70.6 29 1.4 8 4 354 4a 2,102 297 14.1 1,742 82.9 46 Ze 17 8 4554 liek te 2,044 213 10.4 M722 84.2 95 4.6 13 6 S5=64 reieratas 1,670 122 73 1,388 83.1 152 9.1 7 4 65 and over.. 1,656 97 5.8 1,142 69.0 415 25.1 Z eal Unknown ... 12 4 7. 7 T 1 7 —_-_ — FoREIGN-BORN WHITE Aiba wos ei wales» 806 145 18.0 558 69.2 102 12:7 — — De Ae ss etacs 55 43 7 12 T — Ae: a pat 25=34 i eee ens 109 37 33.9 70 64.2 2 1.8 — — BAA ates ete 129 24 18.6 102 79.1 3 O05 — — ABSA elu owes 154 1¢ 9.1 127 82.5 13 8.4 — — D5 =64 025 sues: 149 10 6.7 126 84.6 13 8.7 — — 65 and over.. 209 16 tif 121 57.9 71 34.0 — — Unknown ... 1 1 f — — — — ihe Be NEGRO LGtAL en Akh ee 88 30 T 50 tT 8 Tt — —_ P5=a24 ee eae 18 16 T 2 Tf —_ —_— — — BOKD 4 ois eisistow 14 5 T 9 Tt — —_ — — TS WANED Shady 15 1 t 12 t 2 t Ubi See Ay Be Lai ty pil ZA 5 T 14 T 2, ny — eee 55-64 Woes eve 8 2 Tt 6 Tt ae — -- ~ 65 and over.. 12 1 T 7 7 4 t we fd Unknown ... — * Total includes pores whose marital condition was not reported. + Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. ¢ Less than one-tenth of one per cent. SOURCE TABLES © 187 1920 Census 33 Incorporated Villages Middle Atlantic Division TABLE XXX—MARITAL CONDITION OF FEMALES BY 10-YEAR AGE- PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE AW 9 Lge rae to 14,228 3,890 27.3 7,974 56.1 2,274 16.0 69 aS 15-24). 4 es 2,792 2,056 73.6 716 25.6 12 4 6 az. HBA Lobe. shane 2,472 661 26.7 Neo! 70.1 62 25 13 set 35-44 ..... 2,416 377 15.6 1,869 77.4 145 6.0 a3 1:0 A= 54s. stele 2,407 333 13.8 1,764 PASTS) 287 11.9 17 of Be =O4 hehe oc 1,989 233 1 by 1,196 60.1 550 27.6 5 a8 65 and over 2,140 226 10.5 691 82.3 L217 56.9 bs) 2 Unknown... 11 4 i 5 — 1 t _-_ — ForEIGN-BORN WHITE SD OCA arevcters! ste 774 71 9.2 498 64.3 203 26.2 —_— — 15-24 . 44 27 T 17 T — — — — OSH eee as 99 8 T 85 ci 6 T = = Soe © ier 145 8 Seo 126 86.9 lal 7.6 — — PY tape 149 10 6.7 120 80.5 18 12.0 — 564 2.0 oe 129 9 7.0 92 fps 28 led, — “= 65 and over 208 9 4.3 58 27.9 140 67.3 — — Unknown... _— — _ —_ — — — — —_ NEGRO gS ook Fae 94 35 T 47 T 12 tT — — M24 lis ins 19 13 T 6 T — — —- — PAY. UP Pea 23 9 Tt 14 tT == — — — eS | eee 17 7 T 9 Tt 1 rT — — 45-54 .....- 13 1 T 10 T Be 7 — — S5=64 sys 8 2 T 4 he 2 T -_- — 65 and over 12 3 7 3 T 6 T a — Unknown .. 2 — -— 1 T 1 5 —_- — * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. + Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census 37 Incorporated Villages Southern Division TABLE XXXI—AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION BY NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX Age-Periods Total Male Female Number Number Per Cent. Number Per Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE Dota Wares otsclaele ¢ << 34,249 16,604 48.5 17,645 S15 Wtidene Sin nese cee 3,628 1,855 5.4 De Lio 52 Sa) cvareye si evere 7,424 3,641 10.6 3,783 TO gC 7. ee Age HORE 2,808 8.2 3,439 10.0 me EM avd woe tel sles « 5,224 2,465 Thay 2,759 8.1 IS eae J) Sy caaPengene os 4,351 ZA, 6.3 2,194 6.4 SDA eka vuaue ate eee Breas 1,626 4.7 1,607 4.7 SS =O 4c te wie eleven ates 2,243 1,142 3.4 1,101 Se3 O5eandsoveti...2)) 1,090 876 2.6 974 2.8 uknown .s 5. 49 34 ot 15 #, FoREIGN-BORN WHITE Wotalieca ss aie Gov es 782 429 54.9 353 45.1 Linderiesine ele, s «6 10 4 ae 6 Vi Sa lars ta eleiets sono . 82 44 5.6 38 4.9 5 Ne I ea 129 67 8.6 62 7,9 Bom SA ers ¢ chiens 1,4 158 83 10.6 75 9.6 Sha AA WE o 6, vie eieie 159 82 10.5 77 9.8 A= GA ciel o-shera si 315 126 84 10.8 42 5.4 Beets hs ave ew Ae 56 31 4.0 25 332 GSmeand Oven, ««.< 62 34 4.3 28 3.6 | | | Dnknowny vee052 > —_ — 188 Age-Periods ee oes ereeves eereeree eee eres ses coer er eseee ee a ry cee eter eee eoesrececvece eee eee eee 6s and ‘ovet... Unknown AMERICAN VILLAGERS Total TABLE XXXI (Continued) Number 12,659 1,317 2,980 2,744 1:935 1,529 1,069 520 457 108 Male Number Per Cent. 6,016 47.5 676 ae 1,461 TS 1,210 9.6 898 GA 683 5.4 595 4.7 Zo 1.8 ZS ue #/ 49 4 * Less than one-tenth of one per cent. 1920 Census 37 Incorporated Villages Female Per Cent. Number 6,643 641 1,519 1,534 1,037 846 474 289 244 59 ur ee Ree Oh Oe BS Pa BO jak ak MowuUadpkoHN Southern Division TABLE XXXII—MARITAL CONDITION OF MALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Num- Num- Per ber ber Cent, NATIVE-BORN WHITE DOtal tweet 11,108 3,640 32.8 1b =24 i Anas 2,808 2,398 85.4 25-345 i ee 2,465 748 30.3 35=44 Deters PRE NG / 244 11.3 S55 4a ety. 1,626 123 7.6 5564) Wea. 1,142 67 5.9 65 and over. 876 43 4.9 Unknown 34 17, T FoREIGN-BORN WHITE Ota) greta hues 382 91 23.8 W524 Wile cn one 68 54 t 25-34. ees cies 83 18 T 35—44' 225022 82 6 Tt 45-5 AAS eee 84 8 T 55-64-00. coke 31 4 e 65 and over. 34 1 fT Unknown .. — es — NEGRO otal olen 6 oa 3,879 1,341 34.6 VOR 24 Pee 1,210 907 75.0 VARY. RIE eS 898 253 25.9 B5K44 re wea: 683 99 14.5 45-54 ...... 595 57 9.6 ORT oy Eee a) Bok 11 4.8 65 and over. 213 9 4.2 Unknown 49 25 Tt * Total includes f Per cent, not Married Num- Per ber Cent. 6,920 62.3 396 14.1 1,677 68.1 1,836 85.1 1,419 87.3 971 85.0 609 69.5 12 T 262 68.6 10K T 61 3 74 tT 69 T 23 tT Le T 2252 58.1 286 23.6 625 69.6 535 78.3 479 80.5 176 76.2 129 60.6 22 T Widowed Num- Per ber Cent. 512 4.6 6 ihe Si 1.3 Ties 3.3 82 5.0 97 8.5 222 25.3 2 Tt 28 7:3 4 tT 2 T 7 £ 4 ij 11 T 247 6.4 4 a: 29 3.2 45 6.5 53 8.9 40 172 75 35.2 1 T persons whose marital condition was not reported. shown, base less than 100. Divorced Num- Per ber Cent. 24 2 6 fs 7 wa 3 “pi 1 mi | 5 4 2 Aye 13 3 i ih 2 ca 3 4 4 ys 2 9 1 T 1920 Census SOURCE TABLES 37 Incorporated Villages 189 Southern Division TABLE XXXITI—MARITAL CONDITION OF FEMALES BY 10-YEAR AGE- PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Num- ber NATIVE-BORN WHITE PLO PANEE . Weva'e ci 12,091 pate hee 6 i acs 3,439 ZO=O4 ht oe 2,759 ERG Ne ef ove 2,194 45-54 ..... 1,607 S504) 66 axe 1,101 65 and over 974 Unknown 17 FOREIGN-BORN WHITE SOLAN Sates ste< 309 15249. es 6 62 Opes Ae. Ve vnle le 75 35-44 ..... ah A= SA cece 42 B52 64 0s eas 25 65 and over 28 Unknown... — NEGRO i Dg ee 4,483 15 =248 Se 3 1,534 25-34 . 1037, 35-44 ..... 846 CACY: Ne 474 HOOF Gee cas 289 65 and over 244 Unknown 59 Single Married Num- Per Num- Per ber Cent. ber Cent. 3,559 29.4 6,971 S74 2,386 69.4 1,014 29.5 20.4 2,089 hse | 11.9 1,766 80.5 10.1 1,170 72.8 8.8 631 B7aS 8.6 294 30.2 7 T 7 T 49 15.9 206 66.6 27 T 32 tT 8 T 63 T 8 T 61 Tt 4 T 30 ie 2 T 12 t — — 8 Tt T2075 28.4 230 52.0 874 57.0 604 39.4 18.7 723 69.7 Tet 585 69.1 9.3 262 aoe 7.6 102 ae 4.9 39 16.0 27 < 15 T Widowed Divorced Num- Per Num- Per ber Cent. ber Cent. 1,491 12.3 4} 3 29 8 3 Ail 87 3:2 15 oe 152 6.9 12 As. 267 16.6 6 4 367 33.3 3 23 586 60.2 2 a2 3 T SSS = Ry 16.8 1 “Oo 2 :j — —= 3 Tt 1 T 8 T ca == 8 T — —- 11 T — — 20 T os == 830 18.5 oe of 45 2.9 3 ee 105 10.1 13 183 150 1747 9 11 164 34.6 4 8 161 SGV ie Al 188 77.0 1 4 17 T = = * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. {t Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census 22 Incorporated Villages East North Central Division TABLE XXXIV—AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION BY NATIVITY, Age-Periods Total Number NATIVE-BORN WHITE EPotal maierccts Girone ese. « 28,188 RGIMGEENS 305 ate & oe & 2,617 Sea Aa go: oie fore 5 5,359 eA es) Mei ayia 4,776 PAERY, V Aled Bie eae 3,963 iS ae oases lai ah yer alos 3,373 TST DAs ae ee 3,182 SSEGO4 wet tAce meais'e-o 2,559 65 and over... 2,299 Wnknown) ett. 60 FoREIGN-BORN WHITE ALN te totes Sige eree 2,929 (eset Oty eee 1 Saad Ae le tiekate ts ane 46 ES = 24 eae ete oes 75 Zea AM rs eke ae 261 SO—AGihis cock os 60s 442 MR DAS wi oladia ning ws 544 je ey PN A 635 G5 *.and) Over... 920 Unknown ...... 5 COLOR AND SEX Male Number Per Cent. 13,361 47.4 1,330 4.7 2,656 9.5 PRY 7.5 1,837 6.5 1,546 55 1,552 5S 1,206 4.3 1,085 3.8 32 + 1,545 52.7 1 * 24 8 34 ic 144 4.9 231 7.9 306 10.4 310 10.6 490 16.7 5 iy Female Number Per Cent. 14,827 52.6 1,287 4.6 2,703 9.6 2,659 9.4 2,126 7.5 1,827 6.5 1,630 5.8 353 4.8 1,214 4.3 28 Al 1,384 47.3 ee 8 41 1.4 117 4.0 211 wee 238 8.1 325 5 | 430 14.7 | : 190 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XXXIV (Continued) Age-Periods Total Male Female Number Number Per Cent. Number Per Cent. NEGRO Ropal pee tet sik cts sere 107 51 47.7 56 52s Vader? sh eof e a: Y 6 4 3.8 2 1.9 fel, RY eipaiopah a 7A 20 7 6.5 13 12.1 LOS AA ee epee 18 7 6.5 11 10.3 25S a slits Cee ss 16 9 8.4 7 6.5 Son: Cs We AR ih See Zi 12 0 Wy LY, 15 14.0 7: Notrke 2. ERR sh 9 6 5.6 3 2.8 55-64 te. eh cletiee aes 5 a 1.9 3 2.8 6d) vand) ovens. 6 4 3.8 2 1.9 Wuknowl abies « — _ —_ — ao * Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census 22 Incorporated Villages East North Central Division TABLE XXXV—MARITAL CONDITION OF MALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE ERO Pal\weercemuortn 9375 3,019 3262 5,795 61.8 486 5:2 63 7 15 S24 Fire et Le lien 1,871 88.4 238 Re. a wh 4 2 25-34 eee 1,837 570 31.0 £2225 66.6 29 1.6 13 7 B5S4 4 os die 1,546 238 15.4 1,262 81.6 35 ORR 10 6 A= 54) BE Seueae 1552 174 2 1,288 83.0 68 4.4 21 1.4 55640 12 ae 1,206 107 8.9 976 80.9 113 9.4 10 8 65 and over. 1,085 53 4.9 793 73.0 236 21.8 2 3 Unknown ... 32 6 t 13 t 2 T 2 T FoREIGN-BORN WHITE MOtal@ue Adiga: 1,520 165 10.8 1,189 78.2 159 10.5 7 BS W5=245 Se oe. 34 26 i 8 Tt se a ate — Pic oe CAN a 144 39 Bik 103 7155 i 1.4 — — Oos44a lL AGAs PRM 30 13.0 196 84.8 Wn 2.2 — —_— A554 es ie 306 41 13.4 245 80.1 L7 55 3 1.0 SH O4 eG nos 310 WZ 3.9 270 87.1 25 8.1 3 9 65 and over. 490 17 335 362 73.9 110 22.4 1 a2 Unknown ... 5 — _- 5 T —_ — _ — NEGRO Dotalors $4. % eet 40 10 T 27 T 2 7 1 T L522 4 a, Pts 7 5 T 1 T —_— — 1 Tt Zor SALT Pls ole ers 9 4 T is T —- — —- = Soma sos icles 12 1 7 11 7 _- — — — Me Says ea 6 -— a 6 iT — — — -— B5=—640 2. be 2 — — 1 T 1 Tt — —= 65 and over. 4 — —- 3 fT 1 4 a _— Unknown * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. {7 Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. SOURCE TABLES 191 1920 Census 22 Incorporated Villages East North Central Division TABLE XXXVI—MARITAL CONDITION OF FEMALES BY 10-YEAR AGE- PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE EP GiAL Mee totes oe 10,837 3,241 29.9 6,108 56.4 1,367 12.6 105 1.0 95-24e7 SSS. 2,659 2,042 76.8 596 22.4 10 4 6 2 25-34 wees 2,126 552 26.0 1,498 70.5 55 ae 19 9 35-44 ..... 1,827 271 14.8 1,432 78.4 87 4.8 35 1.9 45-54 ..... 1,630 209 12.8 1,181 725 PMN Pe 13.0 27 1.6 55-64 ..... teaos 109 8.1 882 65.2 347 25.6 15 1.1 65 and over 1,214 54 4.4 504 41.5 652 S387, 3 «2 Unknown... 28 4 7 15 tT 4 T —_ —_ ForREIGN-BORN WHITE PPota lite steno 1,362 89 6.5 895 65.7 371 27.2 6 4 De 2 4 er cre 41 27 ; 14 T ae = — — 25=340 eae nhil7/ 14 12.0 100 85.5 3 2 -- — OKA MSc s.8 3 211 13 6.2 187 88.6 10 4.7 = — 45=54) ..... 238 14 5.8 186 78.3 37 LES 1 4 OS D4 ws ws. 00s 325 9 2.8 226 69.5 86 26.5 4 P22 65 and over 430 12 2.8 182 42.3 235 54.7 1 ye Unknown... — — _— — — —_— —_— — _— NEGRO PCA is oss 41 10 Tf 27 7 4 tT — —_ P5=24u ees 2% 11 9 7 2 7 = aS = == 2504. oe tise 7 — — 6 T 1 Tf = = BH 4 ee seins 15 1 T 12 7 Z ¥ aod => 45-54 ..... 3 — — 3 hf —~ —_ —_— —_ Bee. sass 3 —_ — 3 T — —_ — — 65 and over 2 — — 1 x 1 Tt — — Unknown... — — _— — aS —— —— =< * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. { Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census 38 Incorporated Villages West North Central Division TABLE XXXVII—AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION BY NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX Age-Periods Total Male Female Number Number Per Cent. Number Per Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE prOta lutte: she eiatets: s ote - 40,048 19,413 48.5 20,635 S155 Winder? 5! Poo. s.s 3,965 1,984 4.9 1,981 4.9 = TAg tc sistance 6 8,210 4,071 10.2 4,140 10.3 TSC 4w ree ss 7.555 3,483 8.7 4,072 10.2 RO eis) sides caveats 5,877 2,760 6.9 Orley, 7.8 SOKA AUeg tee len cts ce 4,881 2,311 5.8 2,570 6.4 Be SATs ea eke es 3,868 1,963 4.9 1,905 4.8 B= 64 Laaicte che sles 6 2,991 1,509 3.8 1,482 3.7 65 and over..... 2,574 1,270 Sve 1,304 3.3 NKR O WI te suis o's 126 62 el 64 Au ForEIGN-BORN WHITE Ah a a 5,423 2,944 54.3 2,479 45.7 Wnderaswesee sc « 16 10 2 6 ay] an Ate sieve oecsiare: 4 99 56 1.0 43 8 Dead he se hha ys: be 193 94 1.7 99 1.8 OO = SAUP. sic sb bees « 505 299 5e5 206 3.8 SHA eS als eoanei cet 809 432 8.0 377 7.0 BabA Ate a tere Bie bate 1,093 594 11.0 499 9.2 ES Sy ee ee ee 2155 617 11.4 538 9.9 65. and ‘over..... 1,538 834 15.4 704 13.0 Unknown s..... 15 8 al 7 el 192 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XXXVII (Continued) Age-Periods Total Male Female Number Number Per Cent. Number Per Cent. NEGRO AVERT: (Showin dy oteul eles 347 180 51.9 167 48.1 Under <5. 1920 Census 7 Incorporated Villages Mountain Division TABLE XLI—MARITAL CONDITION OF MALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE tal et ys wonvek 3,094 13022 33.0 1,908 61.7 122 3.9 35 a URE | 15-24) 4h ras 755 640 84.8 114 15.1 —_ — — — D5 SA ieee ees 747 208 27.8 514 68.8 12 1.6 9 5 35-44 ..... : 631 70 aie 531 84.1 22 B.S 8 1.3 45-54 ...0e 468 54 11.5 381 81.4 22 4.7 11 2.4 55 =640 Ee te. 281 30 10.7 223 79.4 25 8.9 3 et 65 and over. 202 16 7.9 141 69.8 41 20.3 4 2.0 Unknown ... 10 4 Tt 4 T — -- — a= FOREIGN-BORN WHITE OLA sn Bae eas 374 93 24.9 254 67.9 25 6.7 2 5 Loca a ae eee 22 Za 7 1 t ae —— — oe 25-34) y, | oe 81 34 Tt 44 T 3 f nase — Sor44 ces 88 16 Tf 71 Tf 1 T — — 45-54 ...... 78 12 Tt 62 t 4 7 — — 55-64. cececs 60 8 i 47 , 4 T uf x 65 and over. 44 2 t 28 t 13 Tf 1 7 Unknown ... 1 — — 1 f — oo os — NEGRO Otel apne sk vs 16 11 Tt 4 tT 1 tT — _ Do O4 Als uted She 6 6 T a — _ —_ — _ MOSS vt olsas 3 2 7 1 Tt — _— —_ —_ OER e cuat 4 3 7 1 7 — — — — Cah ae eee -— — — — — — — — — Do-64: Ghaw es Z — — 1 T 1 T — _— 65 and over. 1 — — 1 T -- — — - Unknown -— _— — — — — — — —_ * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. t Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census SOURCE TABLES 7 Incorporated Villages 195 Mountain Division TABLE XLII—MARITAL CONDITION OF FEMALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods ber NATIVE-BORN WHITE oral Ss he. ¢ 2,955 Leber, te a 818 Et ae re 814 Bona? eo 579 A554 fades. 362 oe ge ae 225 65 and over. play Unknown ... 6 ForREIGN-BoRN WHITE PRD Ere | s 223 L524 Wad ache 24 Bama 4 Who's ies 36 Seg Oe ae ey B5~54 "bh c's 48 Lee ee eee 30 65 and over. 28 Unknown — NEGRO Vi Ae 2 Loree es cc. o- BASE ee ere 1 © Ue ee ee ae —— 45-54 ...... — DOSOF ed ee _— 65 and over. 1 Unknown — Total * Num- Single Num- Per ber Cent. 704 23.8 524 64.1 117 14.4 33 aoe 20 a5 5 2.2 2 1.3 3 T 21 9.4 13 T 7 Tt Tt —_— Married Widowed Divorced Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber Cent. ber Cent. ber Cent. 1,955 66.2 255 8.6 39 its 285 34.8 5 .6 4 5 656 80.6 Zi a 12 es 513 88.6 29 5.0 + Y/ Ze 76.2 54 14.9 12 ahs) 158 70.2 58 25.8 4 1.8 65 43.0 81 53.6 3 2.0 2 T 1 T —_ at 161 72.3 38 17.0 3 Ns) 10 T 1 T — —_ 32 T 2 iF _ _ Gp T 2 T 4 — 38 T Z T 1 Tf 20 T 8 T a - 10 T 18 t — me 2 Li — —_ —_ _— 1 i — — — — 1 T — — —— — * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. t Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census Age-Periods NATIVE-BORN WHITE Total eee reece eeosen eeeeeee eoceresnesese ere er ereeee eeereeereseoe eeerreseeee eoceerere reese ere eee reese Total coe e ere ee eee eeeereee eeoerereceeeee e@eeserseseee eoereeeerese ererereecoe eeeeeesese Hsranduover: «cs. Unknown Total Number 18 Incorporated Villages TABLE XLIII—AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF THE POPULATION BY NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX Number 10,305 1,089 2,022 1,650 1,544 1077 1,136 852 Pacific Division Male Female Per Cent. Number Per Cent. 50.0 10,306 50.0 5.3 1,056 yal 9.8 WAS 10.5 8.0 1,764 8.5 a5 1,596 7.7 6.2 1,266 6.1 535 1,020 4.9 4.1 775 3.8 3.4 645 Aye | cal 9 c 59.8 1,023 40.2 6 7 ‘3 3.6 84 fe 5.1 94 Bed, 10.3 176 6.9 12.0 217 8.5 10.4 149 5.9 8.8 132 eZ 8.7 161 6.3 re 3 a 196 Age-Periods eee eter esee eee eee eee eres eos eee eeeees eee sees eos eer esreres eee er reese eer eeease 65 and over.... AMERICAN VILLAGERS Total Number . Unknown .,,.... TABLE XLIII (Continued) Male Number Per Cent. 61 Lene | 3 2.6 15 12.8 13 bh | 4 3.4 8 6.8 vf 6.0 6 ~ | 5 4.3 * Less than one-tenth of one per cent. 1920 Census 18 Incorporated Villages Female Number Per Cent. 56 _— | NANNANNNOMN _ tn UT et OV DO NI = em STO OO W Pacific Division TABLE XLIV—MARITAL CONDITION OF MALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Num- ber NATIVE-BORN WHITE LL ORALORN u's chee 7,194 D7 WN A a 1,650 Bo SHO as e's 1,544 S54die oe. 1,277 Ab = San eta, 1,136 55-64: Tides 852 65 and over. 709 Unknown ... 26 FOREIGN-BORN WHITE OLA 140.) sie chee 1,413 LS=24 ise au, 130 LOKSA Wiehe ae oe 261 Se. Me ae 306 45-54 ...... 265 SOR O4 pine ahels 223 65 and over. 220 Unknown ... 8 NEGRO Ota Ware see sees 43 ale a ace 13 DUA «inthe bale 4 Ro eee Salen Sara 8 45-54 .....2. i) 55-604 Wine aoe 6 65 and over. 5 Unknown ... —_ * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. Single Num- Per ber Cent. 2,402 Ses 1,431 86.7 473 30.6 197 15.4 £52 13:3 91 10.8 53 735 5 T 401 28.4 103 79.2 107 41.0 81 26.5 50 18.9 45 Z0e2 13 5.9 2 T 16 T il T 1 Tt 1 Tt 2 a 1 T t Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. Married Num- Per ber Cent. 4,322 60.1 206 125 1,023 66.3 1,015 79.5 894 78.7 658 Jive 517 72.9 9 Tt 863 61.2 26 20.0 146 56.0 209 68.3 198 74.7 146 65.5 io 61.4 3 T 24 T 2 sf 7 T 7 T 3 T 4 tT 5 Tt Widowed Divorced Num- Per Num- Per ber Cent. ber Cent. 346 4.8 108 a5 8 5 2 my 21 1.4 26 1.7 47 3.7 17 1.3 67 5.9 23 2.0 70 8.2 32 3.8 132 18.6 7 1.0 1 T 1 7 130 9.2 15 1.1 1 8 _ —_ 5 1.9 3 1.1 12 3.9 4 ies 13 4.9 4 ict 30 13.4 2 9 68 30.9 es 1.4 1 T napa — 2 T 1 7 1 T 1 T 1 T — — SOURCE TABLES 197 1920 Census 18 Incorporated Villages Pacific Division TABLE XLV—MARITAL CONDITION OF FEMALES BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY AND COLOR Age-Periods Total * Single Married Widowed Divorced Num- Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per ber ber Cent. ber Cent, ber Cent. ber Cent. NATIVE-BORN WHITE PURE ia ala tein 2a 7,075 1,655 23.4 4,430 62.6 871 BZy34 5 DES 1.6 M24 TO oat 1,764 1,175 66.6 559 31:7 il .6 16 ‘ 25-54 ite oes 1,596 285 17.8 1,236 oy Bs: 54 3.4 21 iss S546) G45 bs 1,266 84 6.6 1,061 83.8 99 7.8 21 1.7 AS —S4 lx. oles. 0 1,020 55 5.4 786 7d 146 14.3 aS Se 55 =645 ie a's 775 38 4.9 510 65.8 205 26.5 22 2.8 65 and over. 645 16 PS 275 42.6 352 54.6 2 Le Unknown ... 9 2 T 3 t 4 7 — — FOREIGN-BORN WHITE PLOta lps stelste «ads 932 96 10.2 669 71.8 161 Wie: 6 6 MOM 24 ents cite os 94 48 b 45 7 1 7 —_ — Ab a3 4s vars clate 176 17 9.7 155 88.1 4 FAV — a <)ope E S ae 217 13 6.0 196 90.3 5 ees 3 1.4 B54 os aes 149 9 6.0 119 79.9 21 14.1 _ — 55-64 fee bie 132 7 5.3 77 58.3 45 34.1 3 2.3 65 and over. 161 1 6 75 46.6 85 52.8 — — Unknown ... 3 1 T 2 T — — — — NEGRO wc ON es 42 10 7 24 f 7 i) 7 Ae ae oe 15 9 T 6 T _ — — PAR gs Caras ea 7 1 T 6 T — — — —_ oe” ee 2 —_ — 2 Tt — _- — oo 45-54 .....- 6 _ — 4 t 2 tT —_ — ES I SR 6 ~- _ 4 Tt 1 T 1 7 65 and over. 6 -- — y T 4 T —_ — Unknown — — — — -- — — — oa * Total includes persons whose marital condition was not reported. f Per cent. not shown, base less than 100. 1920 Census 155 Incorporated Villages Six Divisions TABLE XLVI—OCCUPATIONAL DISTRIBUTION BY SEX East West Class of Middle South North North Occupation Atlantic White Colored Central Central Mountain Pacific MALES % % % % % % % Pmeiculture ©) dec. cons oe cem 8.6 14.8 22.6 11.4 15.1 16.1 25.8 Extraction of Minerals .... Ye =f <3 2.0 9 8 6 Manufacturing f ......... 47.5 Dheo 46.1 37.8 30.4 31.0 32.0 TPRUSOOLTATION |." s. Gs cadens.» « 137 10.1 11.9 11.6 12.9 15.2 10.9 MT OCHON cole tve wits iaiiciein postere he Wi 28.3 4.1 PA ss: 23<3 19.8 LS Public Service} ...céocsae 1.4 2.9 V1 1.9 7, 1.6 ia Professional Service ...... ay 7.8 23 6.4 6.8 6.1 5.6 Personal Service § ....... our aed 10.2 4.3 5.8 6.0 4.8 CPERSCME? SadGs ee Rone des oo 3.9 4.9 is 2.9 3.1 3.4 35 198 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XLVI (Continued) East West Class of Middle South North North Occupation Atlantic White Colored Central Central Mountain Pacific FEMALES ASriCUItYTe: sn tsdie sessed oes ss 6 25 8.3 9 7 £2 3.8 Extraction of Minerals .... — — — — _— —_ _ Manutactaring To 2. obese xe 35.9 24.0 5.9 16.8 9.3 8.4 10.3 "Transportation Vc oae. hye ov 3.6 4.2 s | 4.3 5.0 Les 5.0 WPLAMEME EE Ht amaslcte ot cae ais 6.4 14.8 C7 11.4 Laud 1335 14.1 Public Service. $5 33-440.. Ye dipst | — 123 122 22 + Professional Service ...... 16.4 24.9 4.2 22.4 29.4 24.6 22.5 Personal Service § ........ 24.9 14.2 80.6 28.6 31.1 28.0 30.5 Clerical cates eek < tcsirceiti 11.8 14.2 ra 14.3 11.0 16.9 13.0 * Includes agriculture, forestry and animal husbandry. ~ Manufacturing and mechanical industries. t Public service not elsewhere classified. § Domestic and personal service. 1920 Census Six Divisions TABLE XLVII—ESTIMATED AGE-DISTRIBUTION OF THE OPEN-COUNTRY POPULATION BY NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX * Age-Periods Native-Born White Foreign-Born White Negro Male Female Male Female Male Female Mippie ATLANTIC % % % % % % WnG@er Woon siete 8.2 8.0 ii A 5.0 4.4 BaeclEe ais erecsis & eeisteete 1.0 14.1 1.8 2.0 9.7 9.6 Bae heen We ehere ine 9.6 7.9 4.9 4.6 10.8 9.4 PASE AY: UA neo ie Sern ets 4 6.4 5.8 14.4 wR ae | 9,1 7.9 SOSA BAe Babee euatted 5.4 4.7 16.3 10.5 8.9 a Ab =SAN ENS one costs iebees 4.5 2.9 ib Wat} 6.9 5.9 4.3 B5-OFM Siecs it oo aint sin aes 2.8 1.9 Rey) 3.8 2.9 1.9 GSeanNdOVveracs cic cele eke ip 3:0 2.9 197, 1.2 SouTH Underv5 0.) jac. cniess 7.3 7.1 We 6 6.6 6.6 DSTA oe tats ews uae set 14.1 13.4 4.5 4.0 14.6 14.4 1 Sash Peeters ts tolepeeeerca te 9.8 9.3 8.7 Sys 9.7 10.6 2 5A SA eolats erie abies 6.5 6.3 OAS 6.8 Bae 6.4 EME NS URL Ea oe 5.5 5.0 12.0 6.9 4.9 5.2 ASS Ardee Ba ae eerie Ste 4.1 33 9.9 5.9 4.9 3.3 S55 G4 cise si lee! «i 2.6 2.0 Tod 4.1 25 1.6 65 ands OVEr e554 04505200 ie? 6.5 3.8 1.8 1.4 East NortH CENTRAL Wunder? 54 Seesceces 6.6 6.4 ail fil 4.7 4.9 Sala ae Ba ic getae eee 12.9 12.0 137 1.6 10.7 9.3 TAA A kets cteiele ats 9.4 8.0 4.2 SF 10.1 7.6 QOS AG ais ce. Sie 6 @ielere ate Fhe” 6.6 9.9 7.3 7.8 6.7 Yar ek CO Ca BY die ee ae 6.2 5.4 13.6 9.1 TE 4.8 AOE SAWALS welt scare 4's 5.0 4.0 11.6 8.0 7.0 4.7 B56 Wis ais cts letee ates 3.4 225 9.6 4 4.3 Oia 65 /andlover .44e%as. ces) 1.9 8.8 6.2 4.2 2.8 West NortH CENTRAL Waders 155 tice a setts 7.2 7.0 . 1 3:7 a Bart iy ea orstee oie aie ate 13.6 12.9 St er 10.2 10.6 TOS Z4AN FE hese ehedel die ce! aus 10.4 9.1 3.8 Qed, 10.8 8.3 Dore SA alate cfirkrekéaiecs se 7.8 pon 9.0 5.7 8.9 6.5 BoRAA DT UE A wltenelons 5.8 4.9 12.4 8.6 6.9 laps PAST Iey Si Sa teeh yd cape Ale 5 A 4.1 San 13.2 8.4 Tee 4.3 DS ehE eins Sicisla nt 225; 1.6 5 Ne | 7.0 i er 2 65handsovers 1. ces 1.6 iyi 9.0 6.7 3.9 25 SOURCE TABLES 199 TABLE XLVII (Continued) Age-Periods Native-Born White Foreign-Born White Negro Male Female Male Female Mgle Female MovuntTAIN OS Ea eee 8.7 8.3 a Ly 6 insuf- eC? | aA eI erie ee 14.3 13.6 4.1 4.1 a BY ficient TE Bd cin les wa'e's 9.5 7.9 7.4 5.1 25.6 data DSA Metal Oeie' Ciel saie toe 6 8.0 6.2 14.4 8.0 32.2 Pe TULA. yore s+ 6 6.4 4.3 14.8 7.6 8.5 Me er GMM, occ sities © s06 4.3 2.6 10.2 5.4 5.6 BOE Moleded SaNehee 0.0 )e « 2.6 133 6.4 320 8 Goma OVETa sis sits s 133 6 4.3 2.8 Aff PacIFIc Ob tre Gh Aeon are 6.4 6.1 ae 2} ED insuf- er liam ratorctetatacd oe, «a 86 12.9 11.6 1.9 1.8 4.2 ficient me2 at Bratetercre cierto oie oie 9.6 7.4 a5 Bez 6.6 data Bre eo Rueiiie nid & ahele's 8.0 6.7 14.2 6.6 18.0 MEE, be wes oo a fede 7.6 55 15.9 7.9 16.2 fe SANs isls.ds oie he sie 5.8 3.8 12.9 6.6 eed TIE Salers «4k 5h¢.0 ms 3.6 1.9 9.0 4.5 37 Oo (anc, Over ...-... 2.3 9 6.3 a 1.6 * Per cents. only given, since actual numbers were not calculated, being of no value for comparison. 7 Less than one-tenth of one per cent. 1920 Census Six Divisions TABLE XLVIII—ESTIMATED MARITAL CONDITION OF THE OPEN-COUNTRY POPULATION BY 10-YEAR AGE-PERIODS, NATIVITY, COLOR AND SEX * Male Female Age-Periods Single Married Widowed Divorced Single Married Widowed Divorced Mippite ATLANTIC Native-Born WIute % % % 0 % % % % 15 and over. 41.7 52.8 4.9 4 29.9 64.2 aA 2 1 524 chk 90.5 9.3 2 T 71.0 28.5 0.5 -0 SAGES PD eae 33.9 64.3 1.4 2 F532 82.6 2.0 a5 Se ee 18.0 78.5 aU 4 957 Sel 2.9 “6! 45=54 ..... 15.8 78.0 5.6 -6 8.8 83.3 an 4 BaeG4 cidin bs 13.6 74.3 eZ 7 9.4 74.0 16.2 4 65 and over. 9.8 60.9 28.4 -6 9.2 43.1 47.2 Ae Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 24.7 70.0 4.9 ‘ql 10.3 79.5 9.8 ak Negro 15 and over. 39.7 54.0 5:3 25 23.3 63.7 Take 6 SouTtH Native-Born White 15 and over. 34.2 60.9 4.4 3 25.1 66.3 8.2 4 T= 2A Te. ele os 81.1 18.3 a) aa 58.8 40.1 8 2 25-34) se ewd 22.8 75.0 1.8 4 11.6 85.1 ya j 5 LY ere 9.4 S7ak 2.9 4 6.4 87.6 5.4 5 AY, aa 74a 86.5 5.6 4 ay 82.3 11.6 4 BD O4- 4) oles as 6.0 82.3 11.0 4 5.9 69.1 24.4 5 65 and over. 4.9 70.3 24.0 4 ye 41.2 50.8 3 200 AMERICAN VILLAGERS TABLE XLVIII (Continued) Male Female Age-Periods Single Married Widowed Divorced Single Married Widowed Divorced SoutH Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 32.5 59.8 6.8 a8 12.5 74.0 13:2 Bs) Negro 15 and over. 31.1 62.5 5.6 6 24.4 63.1 115 1.0 Dies ied a EMR 76.4 22.4 8 1 56.4 40.4 2.2 rd Ae te Pars 18.1 77.6 Bat 9 9.5 82.0 6.9 1.4 35-44 ..... 73 86.7 4.9 9 3.9 83.2 gM 1.2 th: SF mee 3.9 87.7 Plea 8 Bef V1.3 18.6 ys | O64) ia sree 3.6 82.8 12.8 ¥/ 2.6 63.6 32.6 8 65 and over. 3.5 71.0 24.5 Ay 3.6 35.0 60.6 4 East NortH CENTRAL Native-Born White % % % % % % % % 15 and over. 37.3 5x59 4.4 ay 25.4 67.5 6.7 4 Pom AN cacy es 87.0 12.6 ts a 67.6 31.6 4 22 29=34 Wee ys 29.5 68.8 1.2 4 12.0 85.9 1.5 aly BHAA hea he 14.7 81.7 2.6 9 6.7 90.1 3.0 -2 4554 aks 12.7 81.1 4.9 9 5.9 87.5 6.1 als, BSG Ae ee 10.4 78.2 9.7 12 Ten 74.9 1730 sd 65 and over. 8.4 63.5 26.5 ac3 Fed 41.9 50.3 .6 Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 25.0 65.1 8.8 5 rie 78.1 13.8 4 Negro 15 and over. 39.5 50.4 8.3 1.4 21.4 63.5 13.4 1.4 West NortH CENTRAL Native-Born Witte 15 and over. 41.7 54.1 3.3 6 28.8 65.4 Pes Be P5=24 bas 87.9 115 a as 68.7 30.7 3 ok CO=S4 OF es oe 32.6 65.8 1.0 4 12.4 85.8 1.3 > SE mAB odes 15.7 81.0 25 aa 6.5 89.9 3.0 4 45-54 ..... 12:2 82.3 4.2 >!) Dye 85.9 7.7 8 DS SeOaal y she ate, 9.9 79.2 9.5 iba aes: 74.4 19.2 -6 65 and over. 7.2 66.5 24.7 1.0 4.3 43.8 50.8 a Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 23.2 67.1 8.8 6 6.7 77.6 1502 4 VBS 2A is va 90.2 9.3 3 + 45.4 53.4 -6 1 25-34 whl aas 42.0 56.6 -6 aa 4.8 93.2 1.4 5 044 OS t 21.0 rc | 2.8 -O 3.0 94.9 1.8 2 45-54 .'...2. 14.2 79.8 5.3 -6 2.0 89.8 7.6 4 Bt le erates 9.9 78.4 10.6 8 3.0 77.0 19.6 3 65 and over. 8.0 61.3 29.6 8 3.2 42.2 Gk ey 4 5 Negro 15 and over. 40.3 50.3 Ta 9 22,6 62.5 13.4 9 SOURCE TABLES 201 TABLE XLVIII (Continued) ; Male Female Age-Periods Single Married Widowed Divorced Single Married Widowed Divorced Mountain Native-Born White % % % % % % % % 15 and over. 43.1 Le ee 4.5 9 24.3 69.4 avd 6 OE an 88.6 10.6 ma =1 60.8 See 8 et POR S4 i de ein 34.2 64.0 1.4 4 7.4 90.4 1.6 AS; GB eaAN sek 20.7 74.9 2.9 ye 3i7 90.1 4.7 133 Cio kee eae 725 73.6 7.2 1.6 2.7 S727 9:2 au 55—64 > oS5 srs 15.9 67.1 13.6 iN | ase 69.6 26.1 1.0 65 and over. 15.4 527, 29.1 23 4.1 38.3 57.0 od Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 39.7 53.5 5.4 9 9.5 76.2 13.6 4 Negro Omitted because of insufficient data PAcIFIc Native-Born White 15 and over. 44.5 49.2 4.5 1.5 23.9 69.6 5.6 9 in it. he a 90.3 9.4 T At 65.2 34.5 ao | 25-34 . - 40.8 Bae 1.0 9 9.9 87.6 icf. Le SG e wate o 2050 69.6 aot Bue, 6.8 89.8 Pag | re BOA ak 23.8 67.9 yy. 2.7 6.4 85.6 753 0.6 DO AORe te sid.c 20.9 64.4 121 Ze 4.8 F{ SES 21.0 0.8 65 and over. 17.0 50.4 28.5 acU 4.3 38.9 5533 1.0 Foreign-Born White 15 and over. 42.1 51:3 sayy | 1.0 8.7 78.6 11.8 7 Negro 15 and over. 50.0 37.0 9.1 2.4 12.9 77.4 7.9 ies * Per cent. only given, since actual numbers were not calculated, being of no value for comparison. 7 Less than one-tenth of one per cent. Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries Bm ie | -. |r é : pe © | MARE he ee ne | ie i i i > a a ARs ce a 2 a a“ Py iy " fal - ; . a, ait oot aan OM i » Se 5S ane | Shay , fa a? 7) nv) Piva | om st oi Pe ak fat et tt aigetat ne oa oe blepeyy ig tee esheets Prinses ayo ane bare RET TSS = As i aa ities St PAdeeees : or Seay etn 6 anesiNieas on out : ae Babin 5 forces Pin rtttet Setyg Bynes anya irate, ; ahaa Sere ze eran Sree Sattaiptetatete ot en net i Acie ; ; : shes t ‘ “ ae s : arenes e et Roar Se : St Par b Tee ie : Ss ike : sheers eo eet - > . sory aetna eRe PAT ech nh r rahe ss spracnmets ; pir Bie : rea Oran est Reto eres ineecerte m cefip inte Beth S a0 palms % ian = 0 i = o > xf ate peg tet rd insets . . : i & nacrant 3 ; : 4s - fa feacn toca tmone rp tects ge PUES of - m . x . ¥ ; Se ect 2 tie 5x cos : airs : ve teh = : piere ss ef t oy : tind Nar ewket paces See aa “ : Wap inate . : ats = * -