Page:EB1911 - Volume 18.djvu/456

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
432
MIGRATION
  


Causes. 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905
Insane 10  6  12  19  32  16  27  23  33  92 
Paupers 2010  1277  2261  2599  2974  2798  3944  5812  4798  7898 
Diseased 2  1  258  348  393  309  709  1773  1560  2198 
Assisted —  3  79  82  2  50  —  9  38  19 
Convicts —  1  2  8  4  7  9  51  35  39 
Prostitutes —  —  —  —  7  3  3  13  9  24 
Contract Labourers  776  328  417  741  833  327  275  1086  1501  1164 
All other 1  1  1  1  1  6  7  2  20  445 
Total debarred 2799  1617  3030  3798  4246  3516  4974  8769  7994  11,879 

No law of international comity is violated by the refusal to receive these unfortunates. They should be taken care of at home. The English legislature in 1905 passed an act to prevent the landing of undesirable aliens, and the number refused admission in 1906 was 493. (b) Immigration sometimes increases the competition in the labour market, and thus lowers wages. One case is particularly aggravating, viz. when employers import foreign labourers in order to take the place of their men who are on strike. In 1885 the United States passed what is called the Contract Labor Law, forbidding the landing of any person who is under contract to perform labour in the United States. It is very difficult to discover such cases, but the number rejected is fairly large (see table above). (c) The immigration of men of alien race who refuse to assimilate with the natives is said sometimes to be a danger to the country. This at least is the excuse for the entire exclusion of Chinese labourers from the United States since 1882 (provisions made more severe in 1888 and 1892) (see also the article Coolie).

Internal Migration.—In modern times there is constant movement of population within national lines, from section to section, and especially from rural districts to the cities. No record is kept of this, and we can trace it only through the census statistics of birthplace. In the United States, for instance, it was shown in 1890 that more than 21·5 per cent. of the native-born inhabitants were living in a state other than that in which they were born. Still further, it appears that about one-half of the native-born inhabitants had moved out of the county in which they were born. In 1890 there were 1,233,629 natives of the state of New York living in other states. The movement is principally westwards in direction and along parallels of latitude. For instance, New York has made large contributions to the population of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa and so on. Virginia has contributed largely to the population of West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri. In Europe there is a similar movement; but it is difficult to make comparisons, because of the differences in the administrative areas. In England in 1891, 71·6% of the population were residing in their native county; in Prussia, 69·7% in the kreis; in France, 81·7% in the department; in Austria, 80·2% in the bezirk; in Switzerland, 82·1 % in the canton where they were born (Weber, Growth of Cities, p. 249). The most important phase of internal migration is the movement from the rural districts to the cities. The statistical results are shown in the following table extracted from the admirable work of Weber, just quoted:—

Percentage of Population living in Towns of 10,000 and over at Three Periods.

About 1800
or 1801.
About 1850
or 1851.
About 1890
or 1891.
England and Wales 21·3 39·5 61·7
Scotland 17·0 32·2 50·0
Australia (7 colonies)  41·4
Belgium 13·5 20·8 34·8
Netherlands 29·5 29·0 31·3
Prussia (1816)  7·3 10·6 30·0
United States  3·8 12·0 27·6
France  9·5 14·4 25·9
Denmark 10·9  9·6 23·6
Italy 20·6
Ireland  7·8 10·1 18·0
Norway  3·3  5·3 16·7
Switzerland (1822)  4·3  7·3 16·5
Austria  4·4  5·8 15·8
Hungary  5·4  9·1 16·1
Sweden  3·9  4·7 13·7
Portugal 12·7  2·9 12·7
Russia  3·7  5·3  9·3

Everywhere the city population is increasing faster than the rural. In the United States the rate of increase per decade was as follows:—

Year. United
States.
In Towns of
 8000 and over. 
Rural
Districts.
% % %
1790–1800 35·1 60 34
1800–1810 36·4 69 35
1810–1820 33·0 33 33
1820–1830 33·6 82 31
1830–1840 32·7 68 30
1840–1850 35·9 99 30
1850–1860 35·6 75 30
1860–1870 22·6 59 15
1870–1880 30·1 40 27
1880–1890 24·9 61 15
1890–1900 20·8 37 14


In England and Wales the rural population increased in the aggregate during the first half of the 19th century, but at a gradually diminishing rate; in the second half of the century the population declined with varying regularity, until the decennium 1891–1900, when there was an increase. But notwithstanding this aggregate increase there are many rural districts which still show a steadily declining population. The urban population is increasing, as shown in the following table:—

Decennial Rate of Increase or Decrease.
 Year.  Urban.  Rural.
   %  %
1851–1861 +21·9 +1·88
1861–1871 +28·1 −5·86
1871–1881 +25·6 −3·84
1881–1891 +18·5 −2·76
1891–1900 +15·22 +2·94

Somewhat the same phenomenon is seen in France. According to the census of 1891 not less than 55 out of the 87 departments had decreased in population; and out of the 32 that had increased, 7 showed a decrease in their rural parts when the large towns were deducted. In Germany the towns of 10,000 and over show a much more rapid increase than the rural districts; and the same fact is generally true of the other countries of Europe. This more rapid increase of population in cities is due only in part to migration from the country. Until the 19th century deaths generally exceeded births in cities, so that if it had not been for constant immigration the cities would not only not have grown, but would have decreased in population. Cities grow more rapidly now than formerly, because the excess of deaths over births has been turned into an excess of births over deaths. Thereby the cities are becoming less dependent upon immigration for increase of population than formerly, but the migration still goes on. The causes of migration from country to city are mainly economic. In early stages of culture men are scattered over the country, or at most gathered together in hamlets and villages. Each of these is self-sufficing, having its own artisans and handicraftsmen, and producing what it needs. With the beginning of exchange commercial centres spring up, situated on navigable streams and especially at points where land and water journeys are broken. With the growth of manufactures, industrial centres spring up where the division of labour can be fully provided for. In modern times two factors have accelerated this process, viz.: (1) the building of railways, which have developed commerce to a very great degree and favoured the large towns at the expense of the small; and (2) the invention of machinery, which has greatly increased the possibility of division of labour and manufactures on a large scale. The old handicraftsman has been superseded by machine labour and the village artisan by the factory hand. At the same time improvements in agriculture and the opening up of new countries have enabled the modern community to gain its food and raw material with a less expenditure of labour force, and the surplus agricultural population has gone to the city. The attractive influences upon individuals have been higher wages, greater scope for the ambitious, and the social advantages of city life.

The general laws of internal migration may be summarized (according to Ravenstein) as follows:—

1. The great body of migrants proceed only a short distance.

2. The process of absorption goes on as follows: The inhabitants of the country immediately surrounding a town of rapid growth flock into it; the gaps thus left in the rural population are filled up by migrants from more remote districts, until the attractive force of one of the rapidly-growing cities makes its influence felt, step by step, to the most remote corner of the land. Migrants enumerated in a certain centre of absorption will consequently grow less with the distance, proportionately to the native population which furnishes them.

3. The process of dispersion is the inverse of that of absorption, and exhibits similar features.