Full text of Statistical Atlas of the United States, 1910 : Descriptive Text

View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

STATISTICAL ATLAS
DESCRIPTIVE TEXT

POPULATION.
AREA OP ENUMERATION: l!M
O.

The area of enumeration in 1910 embraced the states
and territories and the outlying possessions of Alaska,
Hawaii, and Porto Rico. The gross area in square
miles of the territory enumerated April 15, 1910, with
the population as returned, is shown in Table 1. The
area in square miles was 3,627,557 and the population
returned, 93,402,151.
The increase in population from 3,929,214 at the cen
sus of 1790 to 93,402,151 at the census of 1910 was
89,472,937, or about 24 persons in 1910 to each person
returned at the First Census. During the same period
the area was extended from 892,135 square miles
to 3,627,557 square miles. The area, therefore, in
creased only four times, as compared with a population
increase of nearly twenty-four fold.
T a b lu

dross area
(land and
water) in
square
miles.

T a b le 1
territory en u m e rate d :

1910.

Copulation.

U nited States *with oullving possessions)........

3.627, 557

93.402.151

United States, exclusive o f outlying possessions..........

3,026,789

91,972,868

600,768

1,429,885

590, Wit
6,119
8,435

61,356
191,909
1,118,012
55,608

Outlying possessions.........................................................

Military and naval service abroad..........................

In Table 2 is given the gross area in square miles of
the United States, including all its outlying posses
sions, at each enumeration from 1790 to 1910, together
with the population; the area land, water, and total—
and the population of the United States, excluding the
outlying possessions; and thegross area of the outlying
possessions.

U N ITED STATES AN D ITS O C T L Y IN Q POSSESSIONS

United Sti»tes (excluding outlying possessions).
C ENSUS Y E A R .

Aggregate
population.

101,115,487
77,256,630
62,979,766
50,189,209
38,558.871
31,443,321
23,191,876
17,009,453
1 2 ,8 6 6 ,0 2 0

9,638,453
7.219.881
5,308,483
3,929,214

dross area
(land and
water) In
square miles.

3,743,306
3,742,870
3,617,673
3,617,673
3,617.673
3,020.789
2.997,119
1.792,221
1,792,223
1,792,221
1,720,122
892,135
892,135

The gross area, land and water, of the United States
at the Thirteenth Census was 3,743,306 square miles.
The outlying territories had an area of 716,517 square
miles, approximately one-fifth of the total area. In
1790, at the First Census, the area was 892,135 square
miles, less than one-fourth of the present area, and
was confined to the territory lying between the
Atlantic Ocean and the Mississippi River, with the
exception of the territory known as Florida. The

dross area of
outlying
possessions
in square
miles.

Area in square miles.
Copulation.

01,972,266
75,994,575
62,947,714
50,155,7.83
38,558,371
31,443,32!
21.191,876
17,069,453
1 2 ,8 6 6 ,0 2 0

9,638,453
7,239,881
5,308,483
3,929,214

dross area
( land and
water).
3,026,789
3,020,789
3,026,789
3,026,789
3,026,7K9
3,026,789
2,997,119
1,792.221
1,792,223
1.792,221
1,720,122
892,135
892,135

l.and.

2,973,890
2,974,159
2,973,965
2,973,965
2,973,965
2,973,905
2,944,337
1,753,588
1,753,588
1.753,588
1,685,865
867,980
867,980

Water.

52,809
52,630
52,824
52.824
52,824
52,824
52,782
38,635
38,635
38,635
34.257
24.155
24,155

716,517
590, KM
590.884

largest accession of territory at any decade was that
of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. During the
decade from 1840 to 1850 there were three accessions
of territory, aggregating 1,204,896 square miles,
which, with the area of the Louisiana Purchase,
covered an area of over 2,000,000 square miles.
The annexations made in other years, with the excep
tion of Alaska, were smaller in area, but more densely
populated.
(9)

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.

Table 3 gives the gross area with the date of an
nexation of each accession of territory from 1790 to
1910. Colored Plate Xo. 1 shows the boundaries of
the original 13 states and each of the accessions of
territory.
T a b le 3
ACCESSION.

Date ac
quired.

GROSS AREA ( LAND AND
WATER) IN SQUARE
MILES.
Area of
accession.

Total
area.

3,743.306

I'nited States....................................................
Outlying possessions........................................

3,026,789
716,517

Territory in 1790 •.......................................................
Louisiana Purchase......................................
Florida..........................................................................
By treaty with Spain.........................................
Texas................................................
Oregon..............................................
Mexican Cession.....................................................
•
iadsden Purchase.................................................
Alaska....................................................
Hawaii..............................................
Philippine Islands..........................................
Porto’ R ico................................................
(iiiam................................................................
Samoa..................................................
Panama Canal Zone.......................................

iiim m u u z

A ggregate, 1910 I'nited States and outlying
possessions......................................................____

827,9*7
5«, 666
13.435
389,166
2*6.511
529.1*9
29,670
800,884
6,449
115,026
3.435
210
77
436

*92,135
1.720.122
1,778,788
1.792.223
2,181,889
2.167.930
2.997,119
3,617,673
3.624.122
3,739,148
3,742,583
3,742,793
3,742,870
3,743,306

1Includes the drainage basin of the Red River of the North, not a part of anv
accession, but tn the past sometimes considered a part of the Louisiana Purchase.

Table 4 shows at each census the population, accu
mulative increase, per cent of increase from 1790, land
area, anti number of persons per square mile for the
United States, exclusive of its outlying possessions.

The increase in population in 1840, after 50 years of
growth, was 334.4 per cent, having increased a little
over four times. The increase for 100 years, to 1890,
was 1,502 per cent, or there were then in the United
States 16 persons where in 1790 there was one person.
The increase for 120 years, to 1910, was 2,240.7 per
cent; in other words, there were 23 persons in conti
nental United States to each person returned in 1790.
The land area has increased almost three and one-half
times, while the population per square mile has
increased nearly seven times, the increase in density
from 1900 to 1910 being greater than during any
previous decade. The increase and decrease in den
sity of population is represented by Diagram 1, Plate
No. 135.
Table I
CENSUS Y E A R .

1910............................
1900...................
1*90..........................
1880.........................
1*70............................
1*60..........................
1850............................
1*40............................
1*30............................
1820............................
isln............................
ISOO....................

1790.............................

Population of
Per cent
continental
Accumula
tive increase. of increase
United
from 1790.
States.
91,972,266
75,994.575
62,947,714
50,1.55,7*3
3*. 55*. 371
31,443,321
23,191,870
17,009,453
12, *66.020
9, 638, 4.53
7,239, S*1
5,308,483
3,929,214

**,043,052
72,065,361
.59,01*, 500
46,226,569
34,629,157
27,514, 107
19,262,662
13,140,239
*,936, *06
5,709,239
3,310,667
1.379.269

2,240.7
1,834.1
1,502.0
1,176.5
881.3
700.2
490.2
334. 4
227.4
145.3
*4.3
35.1

Land area
in square
miles.

2,073,890
2,974.159
2,973,965
2,973. 965
2,973,965
2,973,965
2,944,337
1,753,588
1,753,58*
1,753,5**
1,685,865
867,9*0
*67,9*0

Popula
tion per
square
mile.
30.9
25.6
21.2
16.9
13.0
10 6
7.9
9.7
7.3
5.5
4.3

6 .1

4.5

The increase in the land area of each of the states
and of the entire United States is given in Table 5.

POPULATION.

L A N D A R E A O F T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S IN S Q U A R E M IL E S , B Y S T A T E S A N D T E R R I T O R I E S : 1790 T O 1910
T a b ic &
STATE AND TERRITORV.

United States

1910

1900

>2 973 890 >2.974 159

|890

I860

1*70

i860

18.0

18 H
I

i8.no

18-20

1*10

1.753. 58* ‘ 1 753 58* * 1 685 8*5

184N
I

17941

867 980

• 8*7 980

2.973.965

2.973 965

2.973.965

•2 973 965

•2 944 337

1 753.58*

Alabam a..........................
A rirona............................
Arkansas.........................
California.........................
Colorado..........................

51,279
• 113,810
52.525
» 155,652
103,658

51,279
113.840
52,525
> 156.092
•
103.65S

51.279
113.810
52.525
155,900
1in. 658

51.279
113,840
52,525
155, Mfl
103,658

51,279
113, MO
52|525
155,900
103,658

51,279

51 279

51,279

51 27)

52.525
155|900
n |in. 658

52,525
155,900

52, .525

52.525

105,275

Connecticut....................
Delaware.........................
District of Columbia___
Florida.............................
Georgia.............................

4,820
1,965
on
54,861
58,725

4,820
1.965
»60
54.861
58;725

4.830
1.965
58
54, 86!
58,725

4.830
1,965
58
54.861
58,725

4,830
1,965
58
54, 861
58,725

4,820
1,965
58
51,861
58,725

4.820
1,965
58
54.861
58.725

4.830
1,965
90
54.861
5s! 725

4.820
1,965
90
54,861
58,725

4.820
1.965
90
54.861
5h! 725

4.820
1,965
Ml

4,83(1
1,965
i*>

1.820
1.965

58,725

I I I ,877

145,196

Idaho...............................
Illinois..........................
Indiana............................
Iow a.................................
Kansas.............................

83,354
1 U 043
>•36,045
55,586
81.774

83,354
.36,002
35! 885
55,'586
81,774

83,354
56,002
3.5! 885
55,586
81,774

83.354
56,002
35. ss.5
55,586
81,774

83.354
56,002
35! 88.5
55! .5X
6
81.774

.56 002
35, 88.5
55! .586
» 81,774

56 ID2
35! 885
55,5.86

V,
sss
191,656

.56 002
35!SH5

V, i■r*
_
3.5! 885

192,381
42;933

252.084

K enttickv.......................

40.181
43.40!*
29,80S
9.941
8.039

40,181
45, 40!)
2»j
!), 9tl
8,039

40.181
45. 409
29.805
9.941
8.039

40,181
45. 1 1
19
39, S95
9,911
8,099

40,181
4.5, IIP)
29; 895
9,941
8,039

40.181
45,409
29. **5
9.941
8,039

40.181

40,181
4.5 4 P
1i
29!895
9.941
8.041

40,181
4't. M
r*
29.’ **5
9.941
8,041

40.181
4.1 4 r*
*
29|806
9,941
8. (Ml

40,181
> ;u nto
«
n 29. 895
9,941
8.041

40,181

u 40,181

29, **5
9.941
8.041

»’ 29.805
9.9U
8.041

n 29,896
9. !*!*9
8.011

57. 1*1
81), 858
46.362
us. 727
lit) 201

57,480

57. 4*1
*1. 858
46.362
68,737
1 M 201
»

57,4**
so 8.5s
46,362
68.727
1| 1O
tl S

57. 4*)
It Ml.KVi
46!362
68.727

57. 4*1
163!457
46.362
68.727

186,652

186,052

42,62.5

46362
68,727
14#» 201

57, 48)
*1.858
46,362
68. 777
1 »• 201
»

57.480

Mississippi......................
Missouri.......................

46.362
68,727

46,362
65,618

46,3*12

u 97,641

XI, 319

Nebraska.........................
Nevada............................
New H ampshire... ___
New Jersev.....................
New Mexico....................

76,808
109.821
9,031
7,514
122,503

76, H
IM
109,821
9.031
7.514
122,503

76.818
100,821
9.1n1
7,514
122,503

76.172
1 1 821
1 !*.
9. (HI
7,514
122.503

76,172
109.821
9. (HI
7.514
122,509

» 118.915
1 61,260
1
9.031
7.514
» 247.782

9.631
7.514
236.548

9,081
7,514

9,1m
7,514

9,611
7,514

9.1n1
7. .3 4
1

9,031
7,514

9.ini
7,.514

New Y ork .......................
North Carolina........... ..

47.654
4S.7IO
70,181
40.740
09. 111

47,654
t s .;« i
70.181
40. 740
38,621

47.654
48, rtn
70.183
40. 710
38,624

47,654
48,740
(»•)
40.740

47,654
48.740
(»)
40,740

47,654
48.740
(!»)
40.740

47,652
48,740

47.652
48,740

47.652
48,710

47,652
48,740

47.652
48,740

47.652
48.740

47.652
18.710

40,740

40.740

40,228

40.228

» 40.228

Oregon.......................
Pennsylvania.................
Rhode Island..................
South Carolina...............

95,607
41.832
1.067
30. 4 >
<5
76,868

95.607
41.8t2
1,067
30. 495
76,868

95,607
44.812
1,067
30,495
76,868

95,607
44,832
1,067
30. 49.5

95.607
44,832
1,067
30. 49.5

95,607
44.832
1.067
30, 493

282,257
44.842
1,067
30.495

44.832
1.067
30,465

44,K<2
1,067
30, 495

44,832
1.1*57
30,496

44,832
1,067
30. 495

44,8.32
1.067
30, 495

» 41.642
1,067
:to. 495

Tennessee. ....................

41.687
262,398
82,184
9.124
40,262

41,687
262,3W
82! lHt
9,124
40,262

41.687
262,398
82,184
9,124
40,282

41,687
262,398
82.18t
9.124
40,262

41,687
262.396
82,184
9,124
40,262

41,687
262,3* <
8
" 122,887
9.124
64,284

41.687
262,308
230,610
9,124
64,284

41,687

*>46.977

.........

9.124
64.252

9,124
64,252

9.124
64.252

9,124
64.252

9,134
64,284

66,836
24.022
55,256
97,594

66,836
21!022
55! 256
97! sot

66,836
24,022
55,2.56
97,594

66.836
24,022
55,256
97. .591

66, 836
24,022
.55,256
97,594

183,254
55,256

82,643

25, RSS

318,167

Maine...............................
Maryland........................
Massachusetts................
Michigan.........................

O h io.................................
Oklahoma................ ..

V erm ont..........................
Virginia...........................

(•»)

(>)
•

55,256

9,124
64.252

Territorv northwest of
Territorv south o f Ten5,290
608,565
Indian Territory and
Dakota territorv.......

30,790

30, ?.»)

.......... ......... 1

69.414
147,687

69, 114
147,699

i S ot reduction of 269 square milos duo to the drainage of lakos and swamps in
Illinois and Indiana (201 square milt's of land), and tho building of tho Roosevelt
and Laguna Reservoirs (30 square milos of water surface), and tne ovorflow of the
Colorado River into the Salton So a in California (440 square miles of water surface).
» Increase of 194 square milos duo to tho reclamation of 2 square miles of Potomac
River Flats in tho District of Columbia and 192 square miles of Lake Tulare in
California.
* Includes Gadsden Purchase (29,628square miles) In 1853.
* Includes Texas annexation (385,590 square miles) in 1845: Oregon territory
(282,257 square miles) in 1846; and Mexican Cession (522,902 square miles) In 1848.
* Includes Florida Purchase (54,861 square miles) and territory gained b y treaty
with Spain (12,862 square miles) in 1819.
• Includes Louisiana Purchase (817,885 square miles) of 1803.
1 Includes the drainage basin of the Red Itlver of the North.
• Decrease of 25 square milt's duo to tho building of the Roosevelt Reservoir and
5 square milt's duo to the building of the Laguna Reservoir.
• Decrease of 440 square miles duo to the overflow of the Colorado River into the
Salton Soa
i» Increase of 192 square miles due to the reclamation of part of Lake Tulare, Cal.
» Area given is that in 1861.

69,414
» 312,094

535.063

511,967

674,183

*• 777,940

52,750

.........

» Increase of 2 square miles due to reclamation of Potomac River Flats in the
District of Columbia.
» Increase of 41 square miles due to drainage of lakes and swamps.
> Increase of 160 square miles due to drainage of lakes and swamps.
*
1 Then part of Virginia; area given Is that in 1792, when it was admitted as a
4
state.
• Then named Orleans territory; includes 4,611 square miles of disputed terri
•
tory attached to the state of I-oulxiana in 1812, and excludes 1,134 square miles
gained b y treatv with Spain in 1819.
1 Then under the jurisdiction of Massachnsetts; ndmitted as a state in 1820.
1
l* Includes 5,880 squats' miles of disputed territorv attached to Mississippi ter
ritory in 1812.
»• Then part of Dakota territorv.
*• Then part of “ territory northwest of tho Ohio R iv er;’ ’ area given is that in
1802, when it was admitted as a state.
*> Includes 314 squaro miles ceded to the United States by the state of New York
in 1781 and sold to the state of Pennsylvania in 1792.
** Then known as ‘ ‘ territorv southwest of the Ohio River. ’ ’ includes 3,290 square
miles of territory ceded to the United States hv the state of South Carolina in 1787.
51 Then named territorv of Louisiana.

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.
GEOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS.

In making comparisons of the growth in population,
manufactures, and agriculture for groups of states, it
lias been found of groat advantage to diride the United
States into certain groups termed geographic divisions.
a natural one, and by the aid of it certain character
istic features in the development of groups of states are
brought out. At the Thirteenth Census the United
States was divided into nine groups or divisions
termed geographic divisions. The boundaries of those
divisions are shown on Plate No. 2. The divisions
and states comprised in each division are as follows:
NEW ENGLAND DIVISION.

Maine.
New Ilam]>'hire.

Yormont.
Massachusetts.

Rhode Island.
Connecticut.

MIDDLE ATLANTIC DIVISION.

New York.

New Jersey.

Pennsylvania.

EAST NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION.

Ohio.
Indiana.

Illinois.
Michigan.

Wisconsin.

WEST NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION.

Minnesota.
Iowa.

Missouri.
North Dakota.
South Dakota.

Nebraska.
Kansas.

SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION.

Delaware.
Virginia.
Maryland.
West Virginia.
District of Columbia. North Carolina.

South Carolina.
Georgia.
Florida.

EAST SOUTH CENTRAL DIVISION.

Kentucky.

Tennessee.
Alabama.

Mississippi.

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL DIVISION.

Arkansas.

Ixmisiana.
Oklahoma.

Texas.

MOUNTAIN DIVISION.

Montana.
Idaho.
Wyoming.

Colorado.
New Mexico.
Arizona.

Utah.
Nevada.

PACIFIC DIVISION.

Washington.

Oregon.

California.

In the New England and Middle Atlantic divisions
the predominant industry is manufactures, conse
quently there is a tremendous growth of the urban
population, and more than half of the population in
these two divisions is in cities. The predominant industry in the South Atlantic and East South Central
divisions is agriculture, while in the East North Cen
tral division the development of manufactures has in
creased the urban element, and agriculture is not the
principal industry. In the West North Central and
West South Central divisions agriculture is the prin

cipal industry. In the Mountain division mining
probably is nearly as important as agriculture, while
in the Pacific division, in spite of the large urban ele
ment in some of the states, agriculture is the predomi
nant industry. A closer study of the industries in
these divisions would show a greater diversity in the
forms of agriculture followed, and in the Northern
states an especially large increase in the dairy farming
and a decrease in the area allotted to cereals.
GROWTH OF POPULATION.

Colored Plates Nos. 3 to 15 present graphically the
growth of the population of the United States since
1790. Theso maps may properly be termed the den
sity of the rural population, as the population per
square mile, upon which these maps, except Plate
No. 15, are based, was computed b y dividing the popu
lation of each county, exclusive of municipalities of
8,000 or more population, by its land area in square
miles. New England towns having over 8,000 popula
tion were not excluded. The density map for 1910 was
prepared on a slightly different basis. The density
was obtained as follows: The population of munici
palities having 2,500 or more inhabitants was deducted
from the total population of the county, and in the
New England states the towns with 2,500 or more
population were also excluded from the population of
the county, the remaining population, considered as
rural, being then divided by the land area in square
miles. All of tho maps were then shaded by groups,
as follows: Less than 2 persons to the square mile
I is regarded as unsettled area and left uncolored;
| tho area with 2 to 6 persons to the square mile has
! the first, or lightest, shade; the area with 6 to 18
persons to the square mile, the second shade; 18 to
45 persons per square mile, the third shade; 45 to
90 persons to the square mile, the fourth shade; and
90 persons or more per square mile, the fifth, or
darkest shade, thus dividing the country into six
groups of density. The cities with 8,000 or more
inhabitants are represented by circles of solid color in
size approximately proportionate to their population.
I he groups of density are closely related to the in
dustrial character of the country. The lowest group,
less than 2 persons to the square mile, which for census
purposes is regarded as unsettled territory, is inhabited
principally by hunters, prospectors, and stock raisers.
I he next group, 2 to 6 persons to the square mile,
includes stock raisers, also an area of sparse agricul
tural population where irrigation is relied upon for
raising crops. Agriculture is the principal occupation
of the group 6 to 18 persons to the square mile. The
next group, 18 to 45 persons to the square mile,
includes areas which have been given up to manufac
tures and commerce, although agriculture is still the
principal occupation. The farms, however, are smaller
than in the preceding group and the cultivation of the
soil is more thorough, In the two groups in which the

POPULATION'.
population exceeds 45 persons to the square mile,
manufacturing and commerce are of the greatest
importance and the greater proportion of the people
are in cities and towns.
D IS T R IB U T IO N O F PO PU L A T IO N : 17!>0.

The hirst Census of tlie United States, taken as of
the first Monday in August, 1790, under the provisions
of the second section of the first article of the Consti
tution, showed tlie population of the thirteen state's
then existing and of the unorganized territory to be, in
the aggregate, 3,929,214. This population was distributed, as shown on Plate No. 3, almost entirely along
the Atlantic seaboard, extending from the eastern
boundary of Maine nearly to Florida, and in the region
known as the Atlantic Plain. Only a very small pro
portion of the inhabitants of the United States, not
indeed more than 5 per cent, was found west of the
Appalachian Mountains. The average depth of settle
ment, in a direction at right angles to the coast, was
255 miles. The most populous areas were to be found
in eastern Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
and about New ^ ork city. The {aqndation had also
extended north up the Hudson, so that the Hudson
River Valley, as far north as Albany, had become
quite thickly settled. The settlements in Pennsyl
vania, which started from Philadelphia, extended
northeast and formed a solid body of occupation from
New York, through Philadelphia, down to the upper
part of Delaware.
The Atlantic coast, as far back as the limits of tide
water, was well settled at this time from Casco Hay
south to the northern border of North Carolina, also
around Charleston, S. C. In the “ district of Maine”
sparse settlement extended along the entire seal>oard.
The greater part of New Hampshire and Vermont was
covered with settlements. In New York, branching off
from the Hudson at the mouth of the Mohawk, the line
of population followed a broad gap between the Adirondacks and the Catskills and even reached beyond the
center of the state, occupying the whole of the Mohawk
Valley and the country about the interior New York
lakes. In Pennsylvania population had spread north
west, occupying not only the Atlantic Plain, but, with
sparse settlements, the region traversed bv the numer
ous parallel ridges of the eastern portion of the Appa
lachians. The general limit of settlement was at that
time the southeastern edge of the Allegheny Plateau,
but beyond this, at the junction of the Allegheny and
Monongahela Rivers, a point early occupied for mili
tary purposes, considerable settlements existed which
were established prior to the War of the Revolution.
In Virginia settlements extended west beyond the Blue
Ridge and on the western slope of the Allegheny
Mountains, though very sparse. From Virginia, also,
a narrow tongue of settlement, which was almost as
populous as Vermont or Georgia, penetrated into the

“ Kentucky country,” and down to the head of the
Tennessee River in the great Appalachian Valley,
where the “ state of Franklin " had been for four years
a political unit. In North Carolina settlements were
abruptly limited by the base of the Appalachians.
The state was occupied with remarkable uniformity,
except in its southern and central portions, where pop
ulation was comparatively sparse. In South Carolina,
on the other hand, there was evidence of much natural
selection, apparently with reference to the character of
the soil. Charleston was then a city of considerable
magnitude and alxmt it was grouped a comparatively
dense population; but all along a belt running south
west across the state, near its central part, settlement
was very sparse. This area of scattered settlement
joined that of central North Carolina and ran east to
the coast, near the junction of the two states. Farther
west, in the “ up country” of South Carolina, the den
sity of settlement was noticeable, due to the improve
ment in soil. At that date settlements were almost
entirely agricultural and the causes for variation in
their density were general. The movements of population at that epoch may be traced, in almost every case,
to the character of the soil and to the facility of trans
portation to the seaboard; and, as the inhabitants were
dependent mainly upon water transportation, the set
tlements also conformed very largely to navigable
streams.
Outside the area of continuous settlement, which has
been approximately sketched, were found a number of
smaller settlements of greater or less extent. The
principal one was located in the northern part of what
was known as the “ territory south of the River Ohio,”
and comprised an area of 10,900 square miles; another
in western Virginia, upon the Ohio and Kanawha
Rivers, comprised about 750 square miles; a third, in
the southern part of the “ territory south of the River
Ohio,” upon the Cumberland River, embraced about
1,200 square miles.
In addition to these there were a score or more of
small posts, or incipient settlements, scattered over
what was an almost untrodden wilderness— such as
Detroit, Vincennes, Kaskaslda, Prairie du Chien,
Mackinac, and Green Bay, besides the humble begin
ning of Elmira and Binghamton, in New York—which,
even at that time, were outside the body of continuous
settlement and embraced about 1,000 square miles.
The line which limited this body of settlement, fol
lowing all its undulations, was 3,200 miles in length.
In this measurement no account was made of slight
irregularities, such as those in the ordinary meanderings of a river which forms the boundary line of popu
lation, but an account has been made of all the promi
nent irregularities of this frontier line, which seem to
indicate a distinct change in the settlement of the
country, either of progression or of retrogression.
Thus the area of settlement formed that territory em

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.
braced between the frontier line and the coast, dimin west of the Susquehanna was as yet entirely unin
ished by such unsettled areas as lay within it and in habited. Population had streamed across the south
creased by such settled areas as lay without it. These ern half of the state and settled in a dense body about
are not susceptible of very accurate determination, the forks of the Ohio River, where the beginning of
Pittsburgh m aybe noted, and thence extended slightly
owing to the fact that the best maps are, to a certain
into the “ territory northwest of the River Ohio.
extent, incorrect in boundaries and areas. The settled
In Virginia then* was but little change, although
area of 1790, as indicated by the line traced, was
there was a general extension of settlement, with am
226,085 square miles. The entire body of continu- I
ously settled area lay between 31° and 45° north lati increase in density, especially along the coast. North
tude and 67° and 83° west longitude. Beyond this Carolina was at that time almost entirely populated;
the mountain region had, generally speaking, been
were the smaller areas previously mentioned, which,
added to the main body of settled area, gave as a total nearly all reclaimed to the service of man. In South
239,935 square miles, the aggregate population being Carolina there was a general increase in density, while
3,929,214, and the average density of settlement 16.4 the southwestern border of the settled area had been
extended to the Altamaha River. The settlements in
persons to the square mile.
The “ district of Maine ” belonged to Massachusetts; northern Kentucky had spread southward across the
Georgia extended to the Mississippi River; Kentucky state into Tennessee, forming a junction with the little
and Tennessee were known as the “ territory south of settlement on the Cumberland River, noted at the date
the River Ohio;” and Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, of the First Census. The group thus formed had
Wisconsin, and a part of Minnesota, as the “ territory extended down the Ohio, nearly to its junction with
northwest of the River Ohio.” Spain claimed posses the Tennessee and the Cumberland, and across the
sion of Florida, with a strip along the southern border Ohio River, where the beginning of Cincinnati can be
of Georgia, and all of the region west of the Missis noted. Other small settlements appeared at this
time on that side of the river. On the cast side of the
sippi River.
Mississippi River was a strip of settlement along the
bluffs below the Yazoo bottom. Above this, on the
D IS T R IB U T IO N OF POPULATION: 1800.
west side, was the beginning of St. Louis, not at that
At the Second Census, that of 1800, the frontier time within the United States, and directly across the
line, as it appears on Plate No. 4, had advanced so river a settlement in what was known as “ Indiana
that, while it embraced 282,208 square miles, it de territory,” while all the pioneer settlements previ
scribed a course, when measured in the same manner as ously noted had grown to a greater or less extent.
that of 1790, of only 2,S00 linear miles. The advance
From the region embraced between the frontier line
ment of this line had taken place in even' direction,
and the Atlantic must be deducted the Adirondack
though in some parts of the country much more tract in northern New York and the unsettled region
prominently than in others.
in northern Pennsylvania already referred to, so that
In Maine and New Hampshire only a slight northern the actual area of settlement, bounded by a continuous
movement of settlement was apparent; in Vermont, line, was 271,908 square miles. All this lay between
on the other hand, while the settled area had not 30° 45' and 45° 15' north latitude and 67° and 88°
decidedly increased, its density had become greater. west longitude. To this should be added the aggre
Massachusetts showed but little change, but in Con gate extent of all settlements lying outside of the
necticut the settlements along the lower course of the frontier line, which collectively amounted to 33,800
Connecticut River had appreciably increased.
square milt's, making a total area of settlement of
In Xew York settlement had poured up the Hudson
305,708 square miles. As the aggregate population
to the mouth of the Mohawk and thence westward was 5,308,483, the average density of settlement was
through the great natural roadway. The narrow
17.4 persons to the square mile.
tongue, which before extended beyond the middle of
The early settlements of this period had been much
the state, had now widened until it spread from the retarded at many points by the opposition of Indian
southern border of the state to Lake Ontario. A tribes, but in tho neighborhood of the more densely
narrow belt of settlement stretched down the St. settled portions of the northern part of the country
Lawrence and along all the northern border of the state these obstacles had been of less magnitude than farther
to Lake Champlain, completely surrounding what may south. In Georgia, especially, the large and powerful
l>e characteristically defined as the Adirondack region.
tribes of Creeks and Cherokees had stubbornly opposed
In Pennsylvania settlements had extended up the the progress of population.
Susquehanna and joined the New York groups, leaving
During the decade Vermont, formed from the New
an unsettled space in the northeast corner of the state,
Hampshire grants, territory claimed by both New York
which comprised a section of rugged mountain countrv.
and New Hampshire, had been admitted to the Union;
With the exception of a little strip along the western also Kentucky and Tennessee, formed from the “ terri
border of Pennsylvania, the northern part of the state
tory south of the River O hio;” Mississippi territory

PO PU LA TIO N .
had been organized, having, however, very different
boundaries from what was known later as the state of
that name; while the “ territory northwest of the River
Ohio” had been divided and Indiana territory organ
ized from the western portion. The District of
Columbia, comprising 100 square miles, was formed in
1701 from portions of Maryland and Virginia.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1810.

During the decade from 1800 to 1810 (Plate No. 5)
great changes will be noted, especially the extension of
sparse settlements in the interior. The hills of western
New York had become almost entirely populated,
settlements had spread along the south shore of Lake
Erie well over into Ohio, and effected a junction with
the previously existing body of population about the
forks of the Ohio River, leaving unsettled an included
heart-shaped area in northern Pennsylvania, which
comprised the rugged country of the Appalachian
Plateau. The occupation of the Ohio River Valley
had now become complete, from its head to its mouth,
with the exception of small gaps below the mouth of
the Tennessee. Spreading in every direction from
the “ dark and bloody ground” of Kentucky, settle
ment covered almost the entire state, while its south
ern border line had been extended to the Tennessee
River, into what was known as “ Mississippi territory.”
In Georgia settlements were still held back by the
Creek and Cherokee Indians, although in 1802 a treaty
with the former tribe relieved the southwestern portion
of the state of their presence and left the ground open
for occupancy by the whites. In Ohio, starting from
the Ohio River and from southwestern Pennsylvania,
settlements had worked north and west until they
covered two-thirds of the area of the state. Michigan
ami Indiana were still virgin territory, with the excep
tion of a small strip about Detroit, in the former, and
two small areas in the latter, one in the southeastern
part of the territory extending along the Ohio River,
and one in the southwestern part extending up the
Wabash from its mouth to and including the settle
ment at Vincennes. St. Louis, from a fur-trading
post, had become an important center of settlement,
population having spread north above the mouth of
the Missouri and south along the Mississippi to the
mouth of the Ohio. On the Arkansas, near its mouth,
was a similar body of settlement. The transfer of the
territory of Louisiana to our jurisdiction, which was
effected in 1803, had brought into the country a large
body of population, which stretched along the Missis
sippi River from its mouth nearly to the northern
limit of what was known as the “ territory of Orleans”
and up the Red and Ouachita (Washita) Rivers, in
general occupying the alluvial regions. The incipient
settlements, noted on Plate No. 4, in Mississippi territory effected a junction with those of Louisiana terri
tory, while in the lower part of Mississippi territory a
similar patch appeared upon the Mobile River.

During this decade large additions were made to
the territory of the United States and many changes
effected in the lines of the interior division. The pur
chase of Louisiana, an empire in itself, had added
827,987 square miles to the United States and had
given to the people absolute control of the Mississippi
and its navigable branches. Georgia, during the same
period, had ceded to the United States about twothirds of its territory. The state of Ohio had been
formed from a portion of what had been known as the
“ territory northwest of the River Ohio.” Michigan
territory had been erected, comprising at that time
the peninsula north of Ohio and the upper part of In
diana territory south of the straits. Indiana territory
had become restricted in its limits to the following
boundaries: Lake Michigan and Michigan on the north,
Ohio on the east, the Ohio River on the south, and
Illinois territory on the west, with a detached area b e
tween Lake Superior and Lake Michigan. Illinois terri
tory comprised all territory west of Lake Michigan and
Indiana territory, north of the Ohio and east of the
Mississippi. The “ territory of Orleans,” which was
located west of the Mississippi, had been carved out
of the Louisiana Purchase. The remainder of the ter
ritory acquired from France was known by the name
of “ Louisiana territory.”
At this date the frontier line was 2,900 nub's long,
ami the settled territory included between this imagi
nary line and the Atlantic comprised 408,895 square
miles. From this must be deducted several large areas
of unsettled land: First, the area in northern New
York, somewhat smaller than ten years before, but by
no means inconsiderable in extent; second, the heartshaped area in northwestern Pennsylvania, embracing
part of the Allegheny Plateau, in size about equal to
the unsettled area in New York; third, a strip along
the western part of Virginia, extending south from the
Potomac, taking in a part of eastern Kentucky and
southwestern Virginia, and extending nearly to the
border line of Tennessee; fourth, a comparatively small
area in northern Tennessee upon the Cumberland Pla
teau. These tracts together comprised about 26,050
square miles, making the approximate area of settle
ment included within the frontier line 382,845 square
miles. All this lay between latitude 29° 30' and 45° 15'
north and longitude 07° and 88° 30' west.
Beyond the frontier there were, in addition to the
steadily increasing number of outposts and minor set
tlements, several considerable bodies of population,
which have already been noted. The aggregate extent
of these, and of the numerous small patches of popula
tion scattered over the West and South, may be esti
mated at 25,100 square miles, making the total area
of settlement in 1810, 407,945 square miles. The
aggregate population was 7,239,881, and the aver
age density of settlement 17.7 persons to the square
i mile.

STA TISTIC AL ATLAS.

ments in Alabama, which previously had been veiy much
retarded by the Creeks, had been rapidly reenforced
Tho decade from 1810 to 1820 (Plate No. 6) witnessed
and extended, in consequence of the victory of Gen
several territorial changes. Florida at tliis date (1.820) eral Jackson over this tribe and the subsequent cession
had not actually become a part of the United States; of portions of this territory. Immigration to Alabama
the treaty with Spain to transfer tliis territory to the had already become considerable, indicating that in a
United States had been signed, hut had not gone into short time the whole central portion of thestate, embrac
0111*01. Alabama and Mississippi, made from Missis ing a large part of the region drained by the Mobile
sippi territory, had been organized and admitted as i River and its branches, would be covered with settle
states, Alabama having been made a territory in 1817. ments, to extend north and effect a junction with the
Indiana and Illinois appeared as states, with restricted Tennessee ami Kentucky settlements, and west across
limits. The “ territory of Orleans,” with somewhat the lower part of Mississippi, until they met tin* Louisi
enlarged boundaries, had been admitted as a state and
ana settlements. In Georgia the Cherokees and the
was known as Louisiana. The “ district of Maine” had
Creeks still held back settlement along the line of the
also been erected into a state. Arkansas territory had ,
AJtamaha River. There were, however, scattered bod
been cut from the southern portion of the territory of
ies of population in various parts of the state, though of
Louisiana. The Indian Territory had been constituted
small extent. In Louisiana is noted a gradual increase
to serve as a reservation for the Indian tribes. Michi
of the extent of redeemed territory, which appeared to
gan territory included all area east of the Mississippi
have been limited almost exactly by the borders of the
River and north of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. That
alluvial region. In Arkansas the settlements, which in
part of the old Louisiana territory remaining, after
1810 were near the mouth of the Arkansas River, had
cutting out Arkansas and the Indian Territory, had
extended up the bottom lands of that river, forming a
received the name of “ Missouri territory.”
Again, in 1820, there was a great change in regard to body of population of considerable size. Besides these,
a settlement was found in the south central part of the
the frontier line. It had become vastly more involved,
territory, at the southeastern base of the hill region,
extending from southeastern Michigan, on Lake St.
( ’lair, southwest into Missouri territory; thence, mak and another in the prairie region in the northern part.
The frontier line had a length of 4,100 miles, em
ing a great semicircle to the east, it swept west again
bracing an area (after excluding all unsettled regions
around a body of population in Louisiana, and ended
along the Gulf coast in that state. The area east of this included between it, the Atlantic, and the Gulf) of
line had increased immensely, but much of this increase 504,517 square miles, all lying between 29° 30' and
45° 30' north latitude, and between 67° and 93° 45'
was balanced by the great extent of unsettled land
west longitude. Outside the frontier line were a few
included within it.
settlements on the Arkansas, White, and Ouachita
Taking up the changes in detail, the great increase
(Washita) Rivers, in Arkansas, as before noted, as well
in tho population of central New York will be noted,
as those in the Northwest. Computing these at 4,200
a belt of increased settlement haring swept up the
Mohawk \ alley to Lake Ontario, and along its shore square miles in the aggregate, there was a total settled
nearly to the Niagara River. A similar increase was area of 508,717 square miles, the aggregate population
experienced about the forks of the Oliio River, and in being 9,638,453, and the average density of settlement
18.9 persons to the square mile.
northern Pennsylvania the unsettled region on the
Appalachian Plateau had sensibly decreased in size.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1830.
I he unsettled area in western Virginia and eastern Ken
tucky had very greatly diminished, population having
In the early part of the decade from 1820 to 1830
extended almost entirely over the Allegheny region in
(Plate No. 7) the final transfer of Florida from Spanish
these states. The little settlements about Detroit hail jurisdiction was effected and it became a territory of
extended along the shore of Lake Erie, until they had
the l nited States. Missouri, carved from the south
joined those in Ohio. The frontier line in Ohio had eastern part of the old Missouri territory, had been
crept north and west, leaving only the northwestern
admitted as a state; otherwise the states and terri
corner of the state unoccupied. Population had spread tories had remained nearly as before. Settlement
north from Kentucky and west from Ohio into southern during the decade had spread greatly. The westerly
Indiana,covering sparsely the lower third of that state.
extension of the frontier did not appear to be so great
The groups of population around St. Louis, which at as in some former periods, the energies of the people
the time of the previous census were enjoying a rapid having been mainly given to settling the included areas.
growth, had extended widely, making a junction with In other words, the decade from 1810 to 1820 seems to
the settlements of Kentucky and Tennessee, along a
have been one of blocking out work which the succeed
broad belt in southern Illinois; following the main
ing decade was largely occupied in completing.
watercourses, population had gone many scores of miles
During this period the Indians, especially in the
up the Mississippi and the Missouri Rivers. The settle
South, had still delayed settlement to a great extent.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1820.

l’O P l'L A T lO X .
rhe Crooks and ( herokees in Georgia and Alabama,
and the ( hoctaws and Chickasaws in Mississippi, occupiod large aroas of the host portions of those states and
successfully resisted encroaclimont upon their territory.
Georgia, however, had witnessed a large increase in
settlement during the decade. The settlements which
heretofore had extended along the Altamaha had spread
westward across the central portion of the state to its
western boundary, where they reached the barrier of
the Creek territory. Stopped at this point, they had
moved south into the southwest corner and over into
Florida, extending even to the Gulf coast. They
stretched toward the west across the southern part of
Alabama and joined that body of settlement which had
previously formed in the drainage basin of tin* Mobile
River. The Louisiana settlements had but slightly
increased and no great change appeared to take place
in Mississippi, owing largely to the cause previously
noted, namely, the occupancy of this area by Indians.
In Arkansas the spread of settlement had been in a
strange and fragmentary way. A line reached from
Louisiana to the Arkansas River and along its course to
the boundary of the Indian Territory. It extended up
the Mississippi and joined the body of population in
Tennessee. A branch extended northeast from near
Little Rock to the northern portion of tin* territory.
All the settlements within Arkansas territory were
as yet very sparse. In Missouri the principal exten
sion of settlement had been in a broad belt along the
Missouri River, reaching to the state line, at the
mouth of the Kansas River, where quite a dense body
of population appeared. Settlement had progressed
in Illinois, from the Mississippi River east and north,
covering more than half of the state. In Indiana it
followed the Wabash River, thence spread toward
the northern state line. But a small portion of Ohio
remained unsettled. The sparse settlements about
Detroit, in Michigan territory, had broadened out,
extending toward the interior of the lower peninsula,
while isolated patches appeared in various other
localities.
Turning to the more densely settled parts of the
country’ , it will be noted that settlement was slowly
making its way northward in Maine, although discour
aged by the poverty of the soil and the severity’ of the
climate. The unsettled tract in northern New A ork
was decreasing, but very’ slowly, as was also the case
with the unsettled area in northwestern Pennsylvania.
In western Virginia the unsettled tracts were reduced
to almost nothing, while the unsettled region in east
ern Tennessee on the Cumberland Plateau was rapidly
diminishing.
In 1830 the frontier line had a length of 5,300 miles,
and the aggregate area embraced between the Atlantic
Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the frontier line was
725,406 square milt's. Of this, however, not less than
97.389 square miles were within the included unsettled
2S5460—14------2

tracts, leaving only 628,017 square miles as the settled
area east of the frontier line, all of which lay between
latitude 29° 15' and 46° 15' north ami longitude 67°
and 95° west.
Outside the body of continuous settlement large
groups were no longer found, but several small pat chi's
• f population appeared in the states of Ohio, Indiana,
>
and Illinois, and Michigan territory, aggregating about
4.7(H) square miles, making a total settled area in 1830
of 632,717 square miles. As the aggregate population
was 12,866,020, the average density of settlement was
20.3 persons to the square mile.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1S40.

During the decade ending in 1840 (Plate No. 8) the
territory of Michigan had been divided: that part
east of Lake Michigan and north of Ohio and Indiana,
together with the greater part of the peninsula l>ctween Lakes Superior and Michigan, had been created
into the state of Michigan, the remainder being known
as Wisconsin territory. Iowa territory had been
created out of that part of Missouri territory lying
north of the Missouri state line and east of the Mis
souri River, and Arkansas had been admitted to the
Union.
In 1840 we find, by examining Platt' No. 8, that the
settlements had been growing steadily and the frontier
line of 1810 and 1820 advanced still farther. From
Georgia. Alabama, and Mississippi the Cherokee,
Creek. Choctaw, and Chickasaw Indians, who, at the
time of the previous census, occupied large areas in
these states and formed a very serious obstacle to
settlement, had been removed to Indian Territory,
constituted under the act of June 30, 1834, and their
country opened up to settlement. Within the two
or three years which had elapsed since the removal of
these Indians the lands relinquished by them had been
i entirely’ taken up and the country covered with com
paratively dense settlement. The Sac and Fox and
the Potawatomi tribes having l>een removed to Indian
Territory, their country in northern Illinois had been
promptly taken up and settlements had spread over
nearly the whole extent of Indiana and Illinois, also
across Michigan and Wisconsin as far north as the
forty-third parallel. Population had crossed the
Mississippi River into Iowa territory and occupied a
broad belt up and down that river. In Missouri settle
ments spread north from the Missouri River nearly to
I the boundary of the state, and south until they covered
1 most of the southern portion, connecting (on the right
and on the left) with the settlements of Arkansas.
The unsettled area found in southern Missouri, together
with that in northwestern Arkansas, was due to the
hilly and rugged nature of the country and to the pov
erty of the soil, as compared with the rich prairie
, lands surrounding. In Arkansas the settlements re! maim'd sparse, but had spread widely away from the

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.

streams, covering much of the prairie regions of the
state. There was, besides the area in northwestern
Arkansas just mentioned, a large area in the northeast
ern part of the state, almost entirely within the allu
vial regions of the Black River, and one in the south
ern portion, extending over into northern Louisiana,
which was entirely in the fertile prairie section. The
fourth unsettled region lay in the southwestern part
of the state.
In the older states we note a gradual decrease in the
unsettled areas, as in Maine and New York. In north
ern Pennsylvania the unsettled section had nearly dis
appeared. A small portion of the unsettled patch on
the Cumberland Plateau still remained. In southern
Georgia the Okefenokee swamp and the pine barrens
adjacent had thus far repelled settlement, although
population had increased in Florida, passing entirely
around this area to the south. The greater part of
Florida, however, including nearly all the peninsula
and several large areas along the Gulf coast, still
remained unsettled. This was due in part to the nature
of the country, being alternately swamp and hummock,
and in part to the hostility of the Seminole Indians,
who still occupied nearly all of the peninsula.
The frontier line in 1840 had a length of 3,300 miles.
This shrinking in its length was due to its rectification
on the northwest and southwest, owing to the settle
ment of the entire interior. It inclosed an area of
000.65.8 square miles, lying between latitude 29° and
46° 30' north and longitude 67° and 95° 30' west.
Tho unsettled portions had, as noted above, decreased
to 95,516 square miles, although they were still quite
noticeable in Missouri and Arkansas. The settled area
outside the frontier line was notably small and
amounted in the aggregate to only 2,150 square miles,
making the approximate settled area 807,292 square
miles in 1840. The aggregate population being
17,069,453, the average density was 21.1 persons to
the square mile.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1850.

Between 1840 and 1850 (Plate No. 9) the limits of
our country were further extended by the annexation
of Texas and of territory acquired from Mexico by the
treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The states of Florida,
Iowa, and Wisconsin had been admitted to the Union
and the territories of Oregon and Minnesota created.
Unit portion of the District of Columbia south of the
Potomac originally ceded by Virginia was receded to
that state July 9, 1846. An examination of the map
shows that the frontier line had changed very little dur
ing the decade. At the western border of Arkansas
the extension of settlement was peremptorily limited
by the boundary of Indian Territory: and, curiouslv
enough, tho western boundary of Missouri also put
almost a complete stop to all settlement, notwithstand
ing the fact that some of the most densely populated
portions of the state lay directly on that boundary.

In Iowa settlements had made some advance, mov
ing up the Missouri, the Des Moines, and other rivers.
The settlements in Minnesota at and about St. Paul,
which existed in 1840, had greatly extended up and
down the Mississippi River, while scattered bodies of
population appeared in northern Wisconsin. In the
southern part of tin* state settlement had made con
siderable advance, especially in a northeasterly direc
tion toward Green Bay. In Michigan the change had
been very slight.
Texas, for the first time on tin' map of the United
States, appeared with a considerable extent of settle
ment; in general, however, it was very sparse, most of
it lying in the eastern part of the state and being
largely dependent upon the grazing industry.
Tho included unsettled areas now were very small
and few in number. There still remained one in south
ern Missouri, in the hilly country; a small one in north
eastern Arkansas, in tin* swampy and alluvial region;
and one in the similar country in the Yazoo bottom
lands in western Mississippi. Along the coast of Flor
ida were found two patches of considerable size, which
were confined to the swampy coast regions. The same
was the case along the coast of Louisiana. The sparse
settlements of Texas were also interspersed with sev
eral patches devoid of settlement. In southern Geor
gia the large unsettled area heretofore noted, extending
also into northern Florida, had disappeared, and the
Florida settlements had already reached southward to
a considerable distance in the peninsula, being now
free to extend without fear of hostile Seminoles, the
greater part of whom had been removed to Indian
Territory.
The frontier line, which now extended around a con
siderable part of Texas and issued on the Gulf coast at
the mouth of the Nueces River, was 4,500 miles in
length. The aggregate area included by it was about
1,005,213 square miles, from which deduction must be
made for unsettled area, in all 64,339 square miles.
The isolated settlements lying outside this body in the
western part of the country amounted to 4,775 square
miles.
It was no longer true that a frontier line drawn
around from the St. Croix River to the Gulf of Mexico
embraced all the population of the United States,
except a few outlying posts and small settlements.
From the Pacific a line could be made to encircle 80,000
miners and adventurers, the pioneers of more than one
state of the l nion soon to arise on that coast. This
hod} of settlement had been formed, in the main,
since the acquisition of the territory by the United
States, and, it might even he said, within the last year
(1849-50), dating from the discovery of gold in Cali
fornia. These settlements may be computed rudely
at 33,600 square miles, making a total area of settle
ment of 979,249 square miles, the aggregate population
cing 23,191,876, and the average density of settle
ment 23.7 persons to the square mile.

PO PU LATIO N .

numerous. They included, among others, a strip ex
tending far up the Rio Grande in Texas, embracing
In I860 (Plato No. 10) the first extension of settle
7,475 square miles (a region given over to the raising
ments beyond the line of the Missouri River is noted.
of sheep); while the Pacific settlements, comprising two
The march of settlement up the slope of the Great
sovereign states, were nearly three times as extensive
Plains had begun. In Kansas and Nebraska popula
jus in 1850, embracing 99,900 square miles.
The total
tion was found beyond the ninety-seventh meridian.
areji of settlement in 1860 was 1,194,754 square miles,
Texas had filled up even more rapidly, its extreme i
the aggregate population 31,443,321, and the average
settlements reaching to tin* one hundredth meridian,
density of settlement 26.3 persons to the square mile.
while the gaps noted at the date of the previous census
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1870.
had all been filled by population. The incipient set- i
dements about St. Paul, in Minnesota, had grown like
During the d in1
ado from 1860 to 1870 a number of
Jonah's gourd, spreading in all directions, and form territorial changes had been effected in the extreme
ing a broad band of union with the main body of settle
West. A great tract called Alaska, stretching into
ment down the line of the Mississippi River. In Iowa Arctic regions and containing few people, was pur
settlements had crept steadily northwest along the I chased from Russia in 1867. Arizona, Colorado, Da
course of the drainage until the state was nearly | kota, Lhdio, Montana, and Wyoming had been organ
covered. Following the Missouri, population had ized jus territories. Kansas and Nebraska had been
reached out beyond the northern border of Nebraska admitted jus state's. Nevada was made a territory in
territory. In Wisconsin the settlements had moved
1861 and admitted as a state in 1864. West Virginia
at least one degree farther north, while in the lower pen had been cut off from the mother commonwealth and
insula of Michigan they had spread up the lake shores, made a separate stjite.
nearly to the point of the peninsula on the side next to
In 1870 (Plate No. 11) a gradind and steady exten
Lake Michigan. On the upper peninsula the lit tie settle sion of the frontier line west over tin* Great Plains will
he noted. The unsettled arejis in Maine, New York,
ments which appeared in 1850 in the copper region on
Keweenaw Point had extended and increased greatly and Florida had not greatly diminished, hut in Michi
in density, as that mining interest had developed in gan the extension of the lumber interests north wjird
value. In northern New York there was apparently and inward from the lake shore had reduced consider
no change in the unsettled area. In northern Maine ably the unsettled portion. On the upper peninsula
was noted for the first time a decided movement to settlements had increased somewhat, owing to the dis
ward the settlement of its unoccupied territory in the covery of rich iron deposits destined to play so impor
extension of the settlements on its eastern and north tant a part in the manufacturing industry of the
ern border along the St. John River. The unsettled country.
regions in southern Missouri, northeastern Arkansas,
Settlement hjid spread west to the boundary of the
and northwestern Mississippi had become sparsely state in southern Minnesota, and up the Big Sioux
covered by population. Along the Gulf coast there , River in southeastern Dakota. I o w j i was entirely
was little or no change; in the peninsula of Florida reclaimed, excepting a small area of perhaps 1,000
square miles in its northwestern corner. Through
there was a slight extension of settlement south.
Kansas and Nebraska the frontier line had moved
Between 1850 and I860 the territorial changes noted
were as follows: The territory of New Mexico had steadily west, following in general the course's of the
larger streams and of the newly constructed railroads.
been created, and the territory south of the Gila River,
which had been acquired from Mexico by the Gadsden The frontier in Texas had changed hut little, that little
Purchase (1853), added to it; Minnesota admitted as a consisting of a general westerly movement. In the
state; Kansas and Nebraska territories formed from Cordilleran Region settlements had extended but
parts of Missouri territory; California and Oregon slowly. Those upon the Pacific coast showed little
admitted as states; while in the unsettled parts of the change, either in extent or in density. In short, every
Cordilleran Region two new territories, Washington where the effects of the war were seen in the partial
and Utah, had been created, the former out of part of arrest of the progress of development.
Settlements in the West, beyond the frontier line,
Oregon territory and the latter from part of the Mexi
had arranged themselves mainly in three belts. The
can Cession.
The frontier line now measured 5,300 miles and em most eastern of these was located in New Mexico, cen
braced approximately 1,126,518 square miles, lying be tral Colorado, and Wyoming, along the eastern base of
tween latitude 28° 30' and 47° 30' north and between and among the Rocky Mountains. To this region set
tlement was first attracted in 1859 and I860 by the dis
longitude 67° and 99° 30' west. From this, deduction
should be made on account of unsettled portions, covery of mineral deposits, and had been retained by
amounting to 39,139 square miles, found mainly in New the richness of the soil ami by the abundance of water
for irrigation, which served to promote the jigriculturid
York and along the Gulf coast. The outlying settle
industry.
ments beyond the one-hundredth meridian were now
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1860.

ST A TISTIC A L ATLAS.
The second belt of settlement was that of Utah, set
tled in 1S47 by the Mormons fleeing from Illinois. This
community differed radically from that of the Rocky
Mountains, being essentially agricultural, mining hav
ing been discountenanced from the first by the church
authorities, as tending to fill the “ Promised land with
Gentile adventurers and thereby imperil Mormon in
stitutions. The settlements of this group, as seen on
the map for 1870, extended from southern Idaho south
through central Utah and along the eastern base of the
Wasatch Range to the Arizona line. They consisted
mainly of scattered hamlets and small towns, about
which were grouped the farms of the communities.
The third strip was that in the Pacific states and ter
ritories, extending from Washington territory south
to southern California and east into western Nevada.
This group of population owed its existence to the
mining industry; originated in 1849 bv a great immi
gration movement, it had grown by successive impulses
jus new fields for rapid wealth had been developed.
However, the value of this region to tho agriculturist
had been recognized and the character of tho occupa
tions of tho peoplo was undergoing a marked change.
Those three great western groups comprised ninetenths of the population west of the frontier line. Tho
remainder was scattered about in tho valleys and the
mountains of Montana, Idaho, and Arizona, at military
posts, isolated mining camps, and on cattle ranches.
The frontier line in 1S70 embraced 1,178,068 square
miles, between 27° 15' and 47° 30' north latitude and
between 67° and 99° 45' west longitude. From this,
however, deduction must be made of 37,739 square
miles on account of interior portions uninhabited.
What remains should be increased by 11,810 square
miles, on account of settled tracts east of the one-hun
dredth meridian, lying outside of the frontier line, and
120,100 square miles on account of settlements in the
Cordiileran Region and on the Pacific coast, making
the total area of settlement for 1870 not less than
1,272,239 square miles. The aggregate population was
38,558,371, and the average density of settlement 30.3
persons to the square mile.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1880.

During the decade from 1870 to 1880 Colorado had
been added to the sisterhood of states. The first notice
able point in examining Plate No. 12, showing the areas
of settlement at this date, as compared with previous
ones, is the great extent of territory which was brought
under occupation during the decade. Not only had
settlement spread west over large areas in Dakota,
Nebraska, Kansas, and Texas, thus moving the frontier
line of the main body of settlement west many scores
of miles, but the isolated settlements of the Cordiileran
Region and of the Pacific coast showed enormous acces
sions of occupied territory.

The migration of farming population to the north
eastern part of Maine had widened the settled area to a
marked extent, probably more than had been done dur
ing any previous decade. rI he unsettled portion of the
Adirondack Region of northern New \ork had de
creased in size and its limits had been reduced practi
cally to the actual mountain tract. The most notable
change, however, in the North Atlantic states, also in
Ohio and Indiana, had been the increase in density of
population and the migration to cities, with the conse
quent increase of urban population, as indicated by the
number and size of the spots representing these cities
upon the map. Throughout the Southern states there
is to be noted not only a general increase in the density
of population and a decrease of unsettled areas, but a
greater approach to uniformity of settlement through
out the whole region. The unsettled area of the penin
sula of Florida had decreased decidedly, while that
previously seen along the upper coast of Florida and
Louisiana had entirely disappeared. Although the
Appalachian Mountain System was still distinctly out
lined by its general lighter shade of color on the map, its
density of population more nearly approached that of
the country on the east and on the west. In Michigan
there was a very decided increase of the settled region.
Settlements had surrounded the head of the lower
peninsula and left only a very small body of unsettled
country in the interior. In the upper peninsula copper
and iron interests and the railroads which subserve
them had peopled quite a large extent of territory. In
Wisconsin the unsettled area was rapidly decreasing as
railroads stretched out over the vacant tracts. In
Minnesota and in eastern Dakota the building of rail
roads and the development of the latent capabilities of
this region in the cultivation of wheat caused a rapid
flow of settlement, and the frontier line of population,
instead of returning to Lake Michigan, as it did ten
years before, met the boundary line of the British pos
sessions west of the ninety-seventh meridian. The set
tlements in Kansas and Nebraska had made great
strides over the plains, reaching at several points the
boundary of the humid region, so that their westward
extension beyond this point must be governed hereafter
by the supply of water in the streams. As a natural re
sult, settlements followed these streams in long ribbons
of population. In Nebraska these narrow belts reached
the western boundary of the state at two points, one
upon the South Platte and the other upon the Republi
can River. In Kansas, too, settlements followed the
Kansas River, its branches, and the Arkansas nearly to
the western boundary of the state. Texas also had
made great strides, both in the extension of the frontier
line of settlement and in the increase in the density of
population, due to the building of railroads and to the
development of tho cattle and sheep raising industry,
and other agricultural interests. The heavy popula
tion in the prairie portions of the state is explained by

PO PU LATIO N .
the railroads which traversed them. In Dakota, boside's the agricultural region in the eastern part of the
territory, may be noted the formation of a body of set
tlement in the Black Hills, in the southwest comer,

which, with the corresponding section in Washing
ton territory, was coming to the front as a wheat
producing district. In most of the settled portions
here spoken of, irrigation was not necessary for the
cultivation of crops, consequently the possibilities of
the region in the direction of agricultural development
were very great. In Washington territory, which in
1870 had been scarcely touched by immigration, the
valley west of the Cascade Mountains was fairly well
settled throughout, while the stream of settlement had
poured up the Columbia into the valleys of the Walla
Walla and Snake Rivers and the great plain of the
Columbia, induced thither bv the facilities for cattle
raising and by the great profits of wheat cultivation.
The length of the frontier line in 1880 was 3,337
miles. The area included between this line, the Atlan
tic Ocean, the Gulf coast, and the northern boundary
was 1,308,940 square miles, lying between 20° and 49°
north latitude ami 07° and 102° west longitude. From
this must be deducted, for unsettled areas, a total of
89,400 square miles, distributed as follows:

Indians. This settlement was the result of the dis
covery of valuable gold deposits. In Montana the set
tled area had been greatly extended and, as it was
mainly due to agricultural interests, was found chiefly
along the courses of the streams. Mining, however,
played not a small part in this increase in settlement.
rdahd,:tioo, showed a decided growth from the same
causes. The small settlements which in 1S70 were
located about Boise and near the mouth of the Clear
water River had extended their areas to many hun
dreds of square miles. The settlement in the south
eastern corner of the territory was almost entirely of
Mormons, and had not made a marked increase.
Of all the states and territories of the Cordilleran IL4
gion, Colorado had made the greatest stride during the
decade. From the narrow strip of settlement extending
along the immediate base of the Rocky Mountains, the
belt increased so that it comprised the whole mountain
8< |iian >
STATIC.
m i le v
region, besides a great extension outward upon the
plains. This increase was the result of the discovery of
2.310
extensive and very rich mineral deposits about Lead- Now Y o r k .......................................................................................
M ichigan............................................................................................................................
1 0 .3 0
1 0 .3 0
ville, producing a “ stampede” second only to that of
cu .iv o
31. w o
1849 and 1850 to California. Miners spread over the
whole mountain region, until every range and ridge
To the remaining 1,300,540 square miles must be
swarmed with them. New Mexico showed but little
change, although the extension of railroads in the ter added the isolated areas of settlement in the Cordilleran
Region and the extent of settlement on the Pacific
ritory and the opening up of mineral resources prom
ised in the near future to add largely to its population. coast, which amounted, in the aggregate, to 260,025
Arizona, too, although its extent of settlement lnul in square miles, making a total settled area of 1,560,565
creased somewhat, was but just commencing to enjoy a square miles. The population was 50,155,783, and the
period of rapid development, owing to the extension of density of settlement 32 persons to the square mile.
railroads and to the suppression of hostile Indians.
DISTRI Bl’TION OF POPULATION: 1890.
Utah presented a case dissimilar to any other of the ter
During the decade from 1880 to 1890 a trilling change
ritories— a case of steady growth, due almost entirely
to its agricultural capabilities and to the policy of the was made in the boundary between Nebraska and Da
kota, which slightly increased the area of Nebraska.
Mormon church, which had steadily discountenanced
Dakota territory was divided and the states of North
mining and speculation in all forms, and encouraged in
every' way agricultural pursuits. Nevada showed a Dakota and South Dakota admitted. Montana and
slight extension of settlement, due mainly to the gradual Washington were added to the sisterhood of states.
increase in agricultural interests. The mining industry The territory of Oklahoma was created out of the
western half of Indian territory, to which was added
was probably not more flourishing in this state than
the strip of public land lying north of the panhandle of
it was ten years before, and the population dependent
upon it was, if anything, less in number. In California Texas.
The most striking fact connected with the extension
the attention of the people had become devoted more
and more to farming, at the expense of mining and I of settlement during this decade was the numerous
cattle raising. The population in some of the mining additions which were made to the settled area within
the Cordilleran Region, as defined on Plate No. 13.
regions had decreased, while over the area of the great
valley and in the fertile valleys of the Coast Ranges it Settlements spread westward up the slope of the plains
until they joined the bodies formerly isolated in Col
had increased. In Oregon the increase had been mainly
in the section east of the Cascade Range, a region orado, forming a continuous body of settlement from
the East to the Rocky Mountains. Practically the
drained by the Deschutes ami the John Day Rivers,
whole of Kansas became a settled region and the
and by the smaller tributaries of the Snake, a region

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.

one times, and the country grew from groups of settle
unsettled area of Nebraska was reduced in dimensions
to one-third of what it was ten years before. What had ments of less than 4,000,000 people to one of the leading
been a sparsely settled region in Texas in 1S80 became nations of the world, with a population of nearly
the most populous part of the state, while settlements j 85,000,000. In the decade from 1890 to 1900, Idaho,
’erc admitted as states, and
had spread westward to the escarpment of the Staked Wyoming, and Utah w
numerous additions of territory were made, compiising
Plains. The unsettled regions of North Dakota and
South Dakota were reduced to about one-half their Hawaii, Porto Rico, Philippine Islands, Guam, and
former dimensions. Settlements in Montana spread Samoa, covering an area of nearly 130,000 square miles,
until they occupied practically one-third of the state. with over 8,000.000 inhabitants.
It is a peculiar fact that, in spite of the great increase
In New Mexico, Idaho, and Wyoming considerable
in population of continental l nited States from 1890
extensions of area were made. In Colorado, in spite
<if the decline of the mining industry and the depopu to 1900, the unsettled area also increased, principally
lation of its mining regions, settlement spread over two- in the Western states. In these states, however,
the population of the settled area increased suffithirds of the state. Oregon and Washington showed
ciently to balance the loss in the sparsely settled
equally rapid progress and California, although its
districts, and the density of population for the state or
mining regions had suffered, made great inroads upon
its unsettled regions, especially in the southern part. I territory, as a whole, did not decrease, except in
Of all the Western states and territories Nevada alone Nevada. The unsettled area materially increased
was at a standstill in this respect, its settled area re in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Ne
maining practically the same as in 18.80. When it is vada, New Mexico, and Oregon, while in Nebraska,
remembered that the state had lost over one-third of Montana, Texas, and Wyomingslight increases were also
its population during the decade, the fact that it held ' noted. The western portions of Kansas and Nebraska
its own in settled area is surprising, until it is under- | showed an increase in unsettled area, although the den
stood that the state had undergone a material change sity of population of the state, as a whole, did not de
in occupations, and that the inhabitants, instead of crease, owing to the increase of population in the east
being closely grouped and engaged in mining pur ern portions of these states; this increase, however,
suits, had scattered along its streams and engaged in was slight, being but 1 person to 10 square miles in
agriculture.
Nebraska and 1 person to 2 square miles in Kansas.
Settlement was spreading with some rapidity in | In May, 1890, the territory of Oklahoma w as created,
Maine, its unsettled area having dwindled from 12,000 and a month later the enumeration showed an area of
to about 6,000 square miles. The unsettled portion of settlement of 2,890 square miles, which, in 1900, had
the Adirondack Region in New York had also dimin- I increased to 32,432 square miles, an actual increase in
ished, there remaining but 1,000 square miles. The ] thesettledareaof 29,542 square miles, a greater increase
frontier had been pushed still farther south, in Florida,
than that of any other state or territory, due to the in
and the unsettled area reduced from 20,800 to about crease in population during the decade from 78,475 to
15,000 square miles.
398,331, or 407.6 per cent.
Lumbering and mining interests had practically
Indian Territory also made a remarkable increase in
obliterated the wilderness of Michigan and reduced population, but, as it was not divided into counties, no
that of Wisconsin to less than one-half of its former detailed computation of the density of settlement or
area. In Minnesota the area of the wild northern comparison of the increase in settled area could be
forests had been reduced from 34,000 to 23,000 square made. The area of settlement, computed by taking
miles.
each Indian reservation as a unit, showed that every
Up to and including 1880 the country had a frontier portion of the territory had a density of more than 2
of settlement, but in 1890 the unsettled area had been persons to a square mile.
so broken into by isolated bodies of settlement that
The unsettled area of Maine remained practically
there could hardly be said to be a frontier line. Its unchanged, although the second group, from 6 to
extent and westerly movement can not, therefore, be
18 persons to a square mile, greatly increased. In
further discussed.
northern New' York the unsettled area of the Adiron
In 1890 the total population returned by the general dack Region was entirely obliterated by advancing
enumeration was 62,622,250, and the settled area
settlement. In Florida this area w practically un
’as
amounted to 1,947,280 square miles, making a density changed. Mining and lumbering enterprises and the
of 32.2 persons to the square mile.
extension of railroads effaced the unsettled area in
Wisconsin. In Minnesota the opening of Indian res
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION': 1900.
ervations, the growth of mining and lumbering enter
The Twelfth Census (Plate No. 14) marked 110 prises, and the extension of railroads caused a great
years of growth of the United States, during which influx of settlement to the northern portion and the
period the population increased more than twenty- unsettled area w reduced 7,000 square miles. North
?as

POPUL ATIO N .
Dakota decreased its unsettled area by 18,000 square
miles and extended its area of 2 to 6 persons per
square mile north and west to the Canadian line
and nearly to the border of Montana. The eastern
part of the state, especially in the valley of the Red
River of the North, made quite an increase in the
area of G to 18 persons to a square mile. In South
Dakota very little change was noted in the unsettled
area, but. the group from 2 to 6 increased and, in the
southeastern portion of the state, the group of IS
to 45 enlarged its area. The unsettled area in Texas
made a slight growth, the increase in population being
principally in the eastern half. The unsettled area
in the state of Washington decreased from 1890 to
1900, while in Montana, Oregon, and California an
increase was noted. Nevada showed a great decrease
in its settled area, the ent ire state having a population
of only 1 person to each 2J square miles of area; there
were, however, patches of settlement, as shown on
Plate No. 14, with a population of from 2 to 6 persons
to a square mile.
The total land area of continental United States, in
1900, was 2,974,159 square miles, ami the aggregate
population, including Indians, 75,994,575, giving a
density of 25.G. Excluding the unsettled area of
1,044,640 square miles, the density of population of the
settled area in 1900 was 39.4 persons to the square mile.
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION: 1910.

The returns of the Thirteenth Census measure the
growth of the United States after 120 years of devel
opment. During this period the country has grown
from less than 4,000,000 inhabitants to more than
90,000,000. During the period from 1900 to 1910
the Indian Territory and territory of Oklahoma
were admitted as the state of Oklahoma, and the
area of the Panama Canal Zone was added to the
outlying possessions. The great increase in populat ion
of the United States from 1900 to 1910, as illustrated
on Plate No. 15, has reduced materially the unsettled
area and increased the density of the population adja
cent to the great cities, due, in a measure, to the change
in character of the foreign immigration which, instead
of seeking the vacant lands of the West, remains in and
around the large cities, the greater proportion seeking
employment in manufactures and commerce. The un
settled area in Maine is practically unchanged, but
the unsettled area of most of the Western states has
been materially decreased, due to reclaiming arid
lands by projects completed by the Reclamation
Service of the United States, as well as by corpora
tions and individuals. The extension of what is
termed “ dry farming” has also reduced the areas
of sparse settlement.
The total land area of continental United States in
1910 was 2,973,890 square miles, and the population
returned, 91,972,266. Excluding the unsettled area

of approximately 870,000 square miles, the density
of the settled area Is almost 44 persons per square
mile, which is a little more than the density of the
state of Wisconsin. There are therefore 27 states that
have a lower density and 21 that have a greater den
sity than the United .States jus a unit.
After studying the increase in population of the
United States from 1790 to 1910, it will be of interest
to compare its growth in population during the past
century with that of the principal nations of Europe:
Plate No. 16 represents graphically the growth in popu
lation of the United States and nine of the most popu
lous countries of Europe, from 1800 to 1910. As it
was imp</ssiblo to obtain the population of European
countries for many of the decades shown, this diagram
has been based upon a chart prepared by Prof. Fr.
von Juraschek for the “ Geographiseh-Statistische
Tabellen, 1911.” Of the 10 countries represented on
the diagram, the United States was eighth in 1800,
but during the century its population increased so
rapidly that it passed Spain, Italy, the United King
dom, Austria-Hungary, France, and Germany, and,
at the census of 1880, and since that census, has been
second, standing just below Russia.
INCREASE OF POPULATION.

Although there has been ji great increase during the
hist decade in the population of the United States,
the relative increase, as shown by the per cent of
increase from 1900 to 1910, is much greater west of
the Mississippi River than in the Eastern states.
This was also true in the previous decade, 1890 to
1900, as will be noted on the two maps on Plate No.
17. The high rate of increase in the Western states
shows that the migration which characterized previ
ous decades has continued. The states which show
an increase of more than 50 per cent are in the area
west of the Mississippi River, six of them in the Moun
tain division. The three states with an increase of
more than 100 per cent are Washington, increase 120.4
per cent, in the Pacific division; Oklahoma, increase
109.7 per cent, in the West South Central division;
and Idaho, increase 101.3 per cent, in the Mountain
division. In the states east of the Mississippi which
increased more than 25 per cent most of the increase
is due to foreign immigration, the exception being
Florida, the increase in this state during this decade
being principally due to interstate migration. During
the decade from 1900 to 1910 the only state which
showed a slight decrease in population was Iowa, in
which the decrease was but three-tenths of 1 per cent.
The map on Plate No. 18 is an interesting presen
tation of the increase and decrease of population in
smaller areas during the decade from 1900 to 1910.
In preparing this map the county was used as the
unit and it will be noted that, even in states like
Washington, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Wyoming,
North Dakota, and Oklahoma, with tremendous

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.

increases of population, there are counties in which
the population has actually decreased. In Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, eastern portions of
Kansas and Nebraska, southern Michigan, southern
Minnesota, and southwestern Wisconsin, the white
areas, indicating a decrease in population, are quite
extensive. In fact, during the decade from 1900 to
1910 there were in the United States 709 counties that
decreased in population; the land area of those coun
ties, comprising 472,462 square miles, formed 15.9 per
cent of the land area of the United States. The state
of Iowa had 71 of its 99 counties decrease, embracing
an area of 38,929 square miles, or 70 per cent of the
land area of the state. Missouri also had 71 counties
decrease, which covered an area of 42,937 square
miles, or 62.5 per cent of the land area of the state.
The corresponding percentage for Indiana is 59.7 per
cent, for Illinois 44.7 per cent, and for Ohio 43.5 per
cent. There were only five states— Rhode Island,
Connecticut, Idaho, New Mexico, and Arizona— that
wero without a county showing a decrease in popu
lation.
The maps on Plates Nos. 19 to 66 show the in
crease and decrease in total and rural population by
counties. The rural maps show, of course, the greater
area in decreasing population. In the state of Iowa
(Plate No. 32) there were only 9 of its 99 counties that
reported an increase in rural population. In Missouri
(Plate No. 41), of 115 counties there were only 31 that
showed an increase in rural population, or 72.5 per cent
of the area of Missouri decreased in rural population.
The state of New T ork (Plate No. 48) increased its
population 1,844,720, but in the rural population— that
is, population outsido of incorporated places having
2,500 inhabitants or more—38 counties out of 61
decreased in population. In Ohio (Plate No. 51) there
were only 26 counties out of 88 that increased in rural
population.
DENSITY OF POPULATION.

By density of ]>opulation is meant the number of
persons to each square mile of land area.
( omparing the density of population by geographic
divisions, the Middle Atlantic division had the greatest
density of population (193.2), with the New England
division second (105.7), and the Mountain division
last, having only 3.1 persons per square mile of land
area. Excluding the District of Columbia, Rhode
Island, with 508.5 persons per square mile, is the most
densely populated, closely followed by Massachusetts,
New Jersey, and Connecticut, in the order named, the
only states which had more than 200 persons per
square mile. There were only 10 stutes with a density
in excess of 100 persons per square mile, but there
were 11 with a density of less than 10 persons per
square mile. Nevada, with 0.7 persons per square
mile, or 7 persons to 10 square miles, had the lowest

density. Of the outlying possessions, Porto Rico had
I a density of 325.5 persons per square mile, which was
greater than that of any state of the l nited States,
except Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Jersey;
j Hawaii had a density of 29.8, while Alaska had only 1
person to each 10 square miles of territory.
Table 6 shows that every state has increased in
population and density except Iowa, which decreased
slightly in population and decreased in density 0.2 per
square mile. Excluding the District of Columbia,
| which is a city, the state of Rhode Island shows the
greatest increase in density, having increased from
i 401.6 in 1900 to 508.5 persons per square mile in 1910,
with New Jersey second and Massachusetts third.
T a b le «
DIVISION AND STATE.

Population:

Land area
in square |

PO P U L A T IO N p e r s q u a r e
M ILK .

1910

PN
NI

1890

91.972.266

2.973.890

30 9

25.0

21.2

6,552,081
19,315,892
18,250,621
11,637.921
12,194.895
8,409.901
8,784,534
2,633,517
4,192,304

61,976
100,000
245,564
510,804
269,071
179,509
429,746
859,125
318,095

105. 7
193.2
74.3
22.8
45.3
46.8
20.4
3. 1
13.2

90.2
154.5
65.2
20.3
38. 8
42.0
15.2
1.9
7.6

75.8
127.1
54.9
17.5
32.
35.8
11.0
1.4
5.9

Maine..........................
New Hampshire........
Vermont.....................
Massachusetts............
Uhode Island.............
Connecticut................

742,371
430,572
355,950
3,366,416
542,610
1,114,756

29,895
9,031
9. 124
8,039
1,067
4,820

24.8
47.7
39.0
418.8
508.5
231.3

23.2
45.6
37.7
349.0
401.6
188.5

22. 1
41.7
36. 4
278.5
323.8
154.8

New York...................
New Jersey.................
Pennsylvania.............

9,113,614
2,537,167
7,665,111

47,654
7,514
44,832

191.2
337.7
171.0

152.5
250.7
140.6

126.0
192.3
117.3

Ohio............................
Indiana.......................
Michigan.....................
Wisconsin...................

4,767,121
2,700,876
5,638,501
2,810,173
2,333,860

40,740
34,046
56,043
57,480
55,256

117.0
74.9
100.6
48.9
42.2

102.1
70.1
88.1
42.1
37.4

90. 1
61. 1
68.3
36. 4
30.6

Minnesota...................
Iowa............................
Missouri......................
North Dakota............
South Dakota............
Nebraska....................
Kansas........................

2,075,708
2,224,771
3,293,335
577, UVi
583.888
1,192,214
1,690,949

80.858
55,586
68,727
70,183
76, so*
76, 808
81,774

25.7
40.0
47.9
8.2
7.6
15.5
20.7

21.7
40.2
45.2
4.5
5.2
13.9
18.0

16.2
34.4
39.0
2.7
4.5
13.8
17.5

202,322
1,295.340
331,069
2,061,612
1,221,119
2,206,287
1,515,400
2.609,121
752,619

1,965
9,941
60
40,262
24,022
48,740
30,495
58,725
54,861

103.0
130.3
5,517.8
51.2
50.8
45.3
49.7
44 4
13.7

94.0
119.5
4,645.3
46. 1
39.9
38.9
44.0
37.7
9.6

85.7
104.9
3,972.3
41. 1
31.8
33.2
37.7
31.3
7. I

2,289,905
2 .1H4,789
2,138,093
1,797,114

40,181
41,687
51.279
46,362

57.0
52.4
41.7
38.8

53.4
48.5
T5.7
33.5

46.3
42.4
29.5
27.8

1,574,449
1,656,388
1.657,155
3,896,542

52,525
45,409
69,414
262,398

30.0
36.5
23.9
14.8

25.0
30.4
11.4
11.6

21.5
24.6
3.7
8.5

376,053
325,594
145,965
799,024
327,301
204,354
373,351
81,875

146,201
83,354
97,594
103,65*
122,5(0
113,810
82,1*4
109,821

2.6
3.9
1.5
7.7
2.7
1.8
4.5
0.7

1.7
1.9
0.9
5.2
1.6
1 .1
3.4
0.4

1.1
0.6
4.0
1.3
0 8
2.6
0.4

1,141,990
672,765
2,377,549

66,836
95,607
155,652

17.1
7.0
15.3

7.8
4.3
9.5

5.3
3.3
7.8

CiEO O RAPH IC d i v i s i o n s :

New England..........
Middle A tlantic___
East North Central...........
West North Central
South A tlantic........
East South Central.
West South Central
Mountain.................
Pacific.......................
N ew E ngland :

Middle A tlantic :

E ast North C e n tral :

Illinois..................

W est N orth C e n tral :

South A tlantic :

Delaware.....................
Maryland....................
District of Columbia.
Virginia......................
West Virginia............
North Carolina..............
South Carolina..................
Georgia....................
Florida.....................
E ast South C en tral :

Kentucky................
Tennessee................
Alabama.................
Mississippi..............
W est South C en tral :

Arkansas.................
Louisiana................
Oklahoma •..........

Mountain :
Montana____
Idaho............
W y o m in g ...
C olorad o.. . .
New Mexico.
Arizona........

Utah............

Nevada........
P acific:
Washington.
Oregon.........
California_
_

1 Includes population of Indinn Territory for 19no and 1890.

1.0

POPULATION.
Plato Xo. 97 shows the population por square mile,
by states, in 1910 and 1900. In 1900 there were six
states with a density of population of less than 2 per
sons to the square mile, while in 1910 there were only
three such states—Arizona. Nevada, and Wyoming. A
number of states which show but a slight increase in
their population have advanced to a higher group of
density in 1910. East of the Mississippi River only
five states advanced in their density group. Michigan,
West \ irginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina
having advanced from the IS to 45 group to the 45 to
90 group, and Illinois from the 45 to 90 group to 90
persons per square mile and over. The states of
North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma. Colorado,
New Mexico, Idaho, Montana, and Oregon have also
advanced to a higher group in density.
Plate No. 68 presents the density of population of
the United States in 1910, the county being used as a
unit. The states of Nevada and Montana have the
greatest area not shaded, indicating counties with less
than 2 persons per square mile.
The plates from No. 09 to No. 115 show the density
of population in 1910, total and rural, for each state,
by counties. By comparison of the two maps of each
state the location of the large urban communities is
indicated by the density of population, as, in the total
population, the greatest density is in the counties in
which large cities with populous suburbs are located.
The decrease in density of the population of many
rural communities is strikingly apparent in the states
of Iowa, Missouri. Ohio. Indiana, and Illinois, and the
southern portions of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The population per square mile, 1790 to 1910, is rep
resented in Diagram 1, Plate No. 135. The change in
the length of the bars shows that the increase has not
been regular; for instance, from 1790 to 1800 the popu
lation increased in density, but in 1810, owing to the
large annexations of sparsely settled territory, the
density of the United States as a whole decreased. In
1820, 1830, and 1840 each census showed an increase.
In 1850 a large decrease is noted, due to the annexa
tion of Texas in 1845 and the territory ceded by Mex
ico in 1848. The population, in proportion to the area
annexed, was very small and, consequently, the density
showed a decrease. Since 1850 no decrease in the density
of population of the United States has taken place.
On the contrary it has had an almost uniform increase,
as is indicated by the length of the bars in the diagram.
Diagram 3, Plate No. 135, represents the density of
population of each state for 1910 and 1900. Every
state has increased in density except the state of Iowa,
which decreased slightly from 1900 to 1910. Rhode
Island was the most densely populated state both in
1900 and 1910. The other states following in the
order of their density are Massachusetts, New Jersey,
Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland,

2f.

Ohio, Delaware, and Illinois. These were the only
states that had a population of more than 100 persons
per square mile in 1910, and their rank in density was
the same at both censuses.
(ENTER OF POPULATION.

On the basis of the Thirteenth Census returns the
center of population and the median lines for conti
nental United States have been determined for April
15, 1910.
In these calculations no account is taken
of the territory and |>opulatinn of Alaska ami of other
noncontiguous territory. The location of the center
at the dates of the several censuses, 1790 to 1910, and
the movement of the median |x»int from decade to
decade, are indicated on Plate No. 110. The map
on Plate No. 118 shows the location of the median
parallel of latitude and the median meridian of longi
tude. also the center of area and the center of popula
tion. for 1910.
A somewhat technical significance, different from
that frequently given to it, attaches to the term
“ center of population" as used in census publications.
The center is often understood to be the point of inter
section of a north and south line which divides the
population equally, with an east and west line which
likewise divides it equally. This point of intersection
is, in a certain sense, a center of population; it is here,
however, designated the median (mint to distinguish
it from the point technically defined as the center.
The character of these two joints may be made
clear through a physical analogy. The center of
population may be said to represent the center of
gravity of the population. If the surface of the United
States be considered as a rigid plane without weight,
capable of sustaining the population distributed
thereon, individuals being assumed to be of equal
weight, and each, therefore, to exert a pressure on any
supporting pivotal jaunt directly jiroportional to his
i distance from the point, the pivotal point on which
the plane balances would, of course, be its center of
gravity, and this Is the jaunt referred to by the term
1 “ center of population” as hero used. Continuing
the above analogy, it may be noted that the median
jaunt, which may be described as the numerical center
of jaijndation, is in no sense a center of gravity. In
determining the median point, distance is not taken
into account, and the location of the units of population is considered only in relation to the intersecting
median lines—as being north or south of the median
parallel ami east or west of the median meridian. It
is evident that extensive changes in the geographic
distribution of the jxipulation may take place without
| affecting the position of the median point. In this
respect the median point differs essentially from the
I center of population, which rcsjxmds to the slightest
jxipulation change in any section of the country. To

STA TISTIC A L ATLAS.

illustrate: Since the median point lies east of Minne
sota, a million persons could move from Minnesota
to Oregon without affecting the median point, while
the movement of 500 persons from one town in Indiana
to another, across the north and south line passing
through the median point, would change the location
of the point. On the other hand, a movement of a
million persons from Minnesota to Oregon would have
a very considerable effect on the center of population,
since, in terms of the above analogy, the pressure
exerted by each individual would increase in propor
tion to the distance traveled away from the center.
If all the people in the United States were to be
assembled at one place, the center of population would
be the point which they could reach with the minimum aggregate travel, assuming that they all traveled
in direct lines from their residence to the meeting
place. No such statement holds true of the median
point.
METHOD OF DETERMINING THE CENTER OF POPULATION.

In locating the center of population it is first as
sumed to be approximately at a certain point. Through
this point a parallel and a meridian are drawn crossing
the entire country. In determining the center of popu
lation in 1910, it was assumed to be at the intersection
of the parallel of 39° north latitude with the meridian
of 86° west longitude, which lines were taken as the
axes of moments.
The product of the population of a given area by its
distance from the assumed parallel is called a north
or south moment, and the product of the population
of the area by its distance from the assumed meridian
is called an east or west moment. In calculating
north and south moments the distances are measured
in minutes of arc; in calculating east and west mo
ments it is necessary to use miles, on account of the
unequal length of the degrees and minutes in different
latitudes. The population of the country is grouped
bv square degrees—that is, by areas included between
consecutive parallels and meridians— as they are con
venient units with which to work. The population of
the principal cities is then deducted from that of the
respective square degrees in which they lie and treated
separately. The center of population of each square
degree is assumed to be at its geograpliic center,
except where such an assumption is manifestly incor
rect; in these cases the position of the center of popu
lation of the square degree is estimated as nearly as
possible. I he population of each square degree north
and south of the assumed parallel is multiplied by the
distance of its center from that parallel; a similar cal
culation is made for the principal cities; and the sum
of the north moments and the sum of the south mo
ments are ascertained. The difference between these
two sums, divided by the total population of the

country, gives a correction to the latitude. In a
similar manner the sums of the east and of the west
moments are ascertained and from them the correction
in longitude is made.
CENTER OF POPULATION: 1910.

At the Thirteenth Census the center of population
was in the following position:
L atitude.................................................... 3 9° 10' 1 2 " N .
Longitude................................................. S6° 3 2 ' 2 0 " W .

J This point is in southern Indiana in the western
| part of Bloomington city, Monroe County, as shown
on the map on Plate Xo. 117.
I During the last decade, 1900 to 1910, the center of
population moved west 43' 26", or approximately 39
, miles, while its northward movement was only 36", or
approximately seven-tenths of a mile. The great
increase in the population of New York, Pennsylvania,
and certain other states north of the thirty-ninth
parallel has balanced the increase in Texas, Oklahoma,
and southern California. The advance toward the west
is, to a large extent, due to the increase in the popu
lation of the Pacific Coast states, their distance from
the center giving any increase of population in those
states much greater weight than an equal increase in
the populous states east, which are nearer the center.
For instance, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and
| Sacramento combined, with a population of 906,016,
have as great an influence on the center as Philadel
phia, Boston, and Baltimore combined, with a popula
tion of 2,778,078. The westward movement from 1900
to 1910 was nearly three times as great as from 1890
to 1900, but was less than that for any decade between
1840 and 1890.
LOCATION OF THE CENTER

1790

OF POPULATION:

1900.

In 1790 the center of population was at 39° 16' 3 0 "
north latitude and 76° 11' 12" west longitude, which,
according to the best maps, is a point about 23 miles
east of Baltimore. During the decade from 1790 to
1800 it moved almost due west to a point about 18
miles west of the same city, latitude 39° 16' 6 ", long
itude 76° 56' 30".
From 1800 to 1810 it moved west and slightly south
to a point in the state of Virginia about 40 miles
northwest by west of Washington, latitude 39° 1 1 '3 0 ",
longitude 77° 37' 12". The southward movement
during this decade was due to the annexation of the
territory' of Louisiana, which contained quite extensive
settlements.
Irom 1810 to 1820 the center of population moved
west ami again slightly south to a point about 16 miles
north of Woodstock, Va., latitude 39° 5' 42", long
itude 78 33'. This second southward movement was

POPULATION.

due principally to the extension of settlements in sequent upon the Civil War. and in part to the fact
that the census of 1870 was defective in its enumera
Mississippi, Alabama, and eastern Georgia.
tion of the southern people, especially of the newly
From 1820 to 1830 it again moved west and south
to a point about 19 miles west-southwest of Moorefiehl, enfranchised negro population.
In 1880 the center of population had returned south
in the area now comprising the state of West Virginia,
latitude 38° 57' 54", longitude 79° It" 54". This is to nearly tin* latitude occupied in 1860, being near
the most decided actual southward movement that it Cincinnati, Ohio, just south of the Kentucky bound
ary, in latitude 39° 4' 8 ", longitude 84° 39' 40".
has made during any decade, owing to the annexation
In 1890, owing to the great increase of population
of Florida and the great extension of settlements in
Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas, or in the cities of the Northwest and in the state of Wash
generally, it may be said, in the Southwest. The ington, also in New England, the center moved north
to latitude 39° 11' 56", longitude 85° 32' 53".
movement from 1870 to 1880 was apparently greater,
During the decade from 1890 to 1900 the center of
but this was due chiefly to a defective enumeration in
1870, and can not be considered as an actual change population moved west 16' 1", a little over 14 miles,
to longitude 85° 48' 54", and south 2' 20", a little less
in the distribution of population.
From 1830 to 1840 it continued west, but slightly than 3 miles, to latitude 39° 9' 36". This is the
changed its course to the north, reaching a point 16 smallest movement it has ever shown in a decade,
the great increase in the population of Indian Ter
miles south of Clarksburg, in the area now comprising
ritory, Oklahoma, and Texas being largely offset by
the state of West Virginia, latitude 39° 2', longitude
an increase in the population of the North Atlantic
80° 18'. During this decade population had increased
rapidly in the Prairie states and in the southern por states.
The movement from 1900 to 1910 has already been
tions of Michigan and Wisconsin.
From 1840 to 1850 the center moved west and described.
The closeness with which the center of population
slightly south again, reaching a point about 23 miles
southeast of Parkersburg, in the area now comprising throughout its westward movement has clung to the
the state of West Virginia, latitude 38° 59', longitude thirty-ninth parallel of latitude is remarkable. The
81° 19', the change of direction to the south being most northern point was reached in 1790 and the most
southern point in 1830, but the difference was only
largely due to tlie annexation of Texas.
From 1850 to 1860 it moved west and slightly about 21 miles. In each decade there has been a
north, reaching a point 20 miles a little east of south westward movement. The greatest movement west
of Chillicothe, Ohio, latitude 39° 0' 24", longitude was during the decade from 1850 to 1860, when the
center advanced 81 miles; the least from 1890 to 1900,
82° 48' 48".
From I860 to 1870 it moved west and sharply when it advanced 14 miles. The total westward move
ment since 1790 is 557 miles.
north, reaching a point about 48 miles east by north
The following table and the map on Plate No. 116
of Cincinnati, Ohio, in latitude 39° 12', longitude
83° 35' 42". This northward movement was due in 1 show the location of the center of population and its
part to the waste and destruction in the South con- I westward advance during each decade since 1790.
CENTKU O F POPULATION: 1790 T O 1910.
M O V E M E N T IN MILES.

C ENSUS Y E A R .

North latitude.

39
39
39
39
38
39
38
39
39
39
39
39
39

A P P R O X IM A T E LOCATION’ B Y IM PORTAN T T O W N *.

From point
to |>oint in
direct line.

West.

North.

South.

•

©
1790..............
1800..............
1810..............
1820..............
1830..............
1840..............
1850..............
1860..............
1870..............
1880..............
1890..............
190 0 ..............
1910..............

West longitude.

16 30
6
16
11 30
5 42
57 54
2
0
0
59
0 24
0
12
8
4
11 56
9 36
10 12

76
76
77

78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
85
86

11
56
37
33
16
18
19
48
35
39
32
48
32

12
30
12
0
54
0
0
48
42
40
53
54
20

23 miles east of Ilaltimore, M d .......................................
18 miles west of Ilaltimore, M d ......................................
10 miles northwest by west of Washington, I>. C . .
16 miles north of Woodstock. V a...................................
19 miles west-southwest of Moorefield, W . V a .1____
16 miles south of Clarksburg, W . V a .1.........................
23 miles southeast of Parkersburg, W . V a.1...............
20 miles south by east of Chillicothe, Ohio................
48 miles east by north of Cincinnati, O hio................
8 miles west by south of Cincinnati, O hio.................
20 miles east of Columbus, I n d ......................................
6 miles southeast of Columbus, I n d .............................
In the city of Bloomington. In d ....................................
• West Virginia formed part of Virginia until 1960.

40. 6
36. 9
. 0.5
5
40. 4
55. 0
54.8
NO. 6
44. 1
58. 1
48.6
14.6
39.0

40. 6
36. 5
.50. 1
39.4
54. 8
54. 7
SO. 6
42. 1
57. 4
47. 7
14. 4
38.9

0.5
5.3
6. 7
9.0
4. 7
3.5
1.6
13.3
9.

9.0
2.8
0.8

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

In connection with the location of the center of line, thence passing through Nebraska about 10 miles
population of the United States, it is of interest to north of its southern boundary, and across the northern
note also the position of what may be termed the part of Colorado, passing about 5 miles north of Boul
center of area—that is, the point on which the surface der city. Its location in Utah is about 45 miles south
of continental United States would balance, if it were a I of Salt Lake City near Spanish Fork city. There arc
plane of uniform weight per unit of area. This point no large towns near its course across the northern
is located in northern Kansas, 10 miles north of Smith part of Nevada and California. The western terminus
( ’enter, the county seat of Smith County, approximate of the median parallel is on the Pacific coast, in Hum
latitude 39° 55', longitude 98° 50', and is therefore boldt County, Cal., about 5 miles north of Point
about three-fourths of a degree (51 miles) north and Delgada and 20 miles south of Cape Mendocino, the
12° 15' (057 miles) west of the center of population. Its point of continental United States extending farthest
location is shown on the map on Plate No. 118, desig west.
nating the position of the median lines. This would [
The median meridian starts at Whitefish Point, on
also be the center of population if the population were the northern peninsula of Michigan, near the eastern
distributed evenly over the territory of continental end of Lake Superior, thence passing south through
United States.
the southern peninsula of Michigan about. 25 miles
west of Lansing and through Indiana about 10 miles
MEDIAN LINES.
west of the Indiana-Ohio boundary, and 25 miles west
In connection with the definition of the median of Cincinnati. South of the Ohio River it bisects
point another method of presenting facts with regard
Kentucky about 40 miles east of Louisville, crosses
to the geographic distribution of the population has eastern Tennessee, and leaves the state 20 miles east
been noted, involving the location of median lines. | of Chattanooga. Through Georgia it passes close to
A parallel of latitude is determined which evenly the Georgia-Alabama line, about 2 miles west of Co
divides the population so that the population north
lumbus, Ga., leaving the state near the intersection of
of that parallel Is the same as that south. Similarly,
the Alabama, Georgia, and Florida boundary lines.
a meridian of longitude is determined which divides I It then crosses the northwestern portion of Florida
the population evenly as between east and west. In and terminates in the Gulf of Mexico at the city of
calculating these median lines it is necessary, in the Apalachicola.
case of the square degrees of latitude and longitude
During the last three decades, from 1880 to 1910,
which are traversed by the lines themselves, to assume there has been little change in the location of these
that the population is evenly distributed through
lines—so slight, in fact, that the changes can not bo
these square degrees or to make an estimated adjust- I accurately shown on a small map. For this reason
ment where this is obviously not the case.
the median lines are not drawn on the map on Plate
The eastern terminus of the median parallel, accord- I No. 118 for any years prior to 1910. The median parallel
ing to the census of 1910, is on the New Jersey coast has moved north a distance of 11.3 miles since 1880.
near Seagirt. In its course west this line passes In the same period the median meridian has moved
through central New Jersey, leaving the state near |
west 45.3 miles. Each of the three decades has shown
Burlington and entering Pennsylvania a few miles
a slight movement of the parallel north and of the
north of Philadelphia, thence passing through Norris
meridian west. Between 1900 and 1910, however, the
town and continuing through southern Pennsylvania
northern movement was only 2.3 miles, and the west
and across the northern extremity of West Virginia,
ward only 7.5 miles. The greatest change took place
leaving the latter state at a point a few miles north
in the decade from 1880 to 1890, during which period
of Wheeling. It nearly bisects Ohio, Indiana, and
the median parallel moved north 6.6 miles, and the
Illinois, crossing about 10 miles north of Columbus,
median meridian west 27 miles. The location of these
Ohio,'25 miles north of Indianapolis, Ind., and about
lines at the several censuses, from 1880 to 1910, is
20 miles north of Springfield, 111. Through Missouri
shown in the following table. The location of these
it mns about 30 miles south of the Iowa and Missouri
lines in 1910 is shown on the map on Plate No. 118.

MEDIAN LINES : 1880 TO 1910.
MOVEMENT IN MILES.
CENSUS YEAR.

1 8 8 0 ................
1 8 9 0 ................

19 0 0...
1910..........

Median parallel,
north latitude.

•
i
39 57
40
2
•10
4
40
6

#
#
o
51
22
24

Median meridian,
west longitude.

•

8-1
84
84
84

7
40
51
59

12
1
29
59

Median parallel, Median merid
north.
ian, west.

(i. 0
2 .4
2 .3

27. 0
10. 8
7 .5

POPULATION'.

o
t>

It may he observed that while each median line the median line dividing it equally east and west, disexactly bisects the population as a whole it does not tance of tin* population from the center not being con
at any given point or through any given section of its sidered. As already indicated, the changes in the
course necessarily bisect the population even approxi median point reflect only the difference between tin*
mately. The median parallel does not bisect even growth of population east of the point and the* growth
approximately the population living either west or east west of it and tin* difference between tin* growth north
of the Mississippi River. Similarly,tin* median merid and south of tIn* point. Other differences in relative
ian does not bisect the population either of the north growth do not affect its location.
ern or southern section of the country. Nor does anv ;
In 1910 the median point was located at latitude
one of the four sections into which the intersecting 40° (»' 24“ north and longitude 84° 59' 5 9 " west, prac
median lines divide the country contain one-fourth tically the eighty-fifth meridian. Its location, there
of the total population. It is obvious, however, that
fore, was 3 miles south of Winchester, Randolph
the diagonally opposite sections are necessarily exactly County, Ind.; its westward movement during the decade
equal in population.1 The population of the north was 7.5 mil(*s, and its northward movement 2.3 miles.
eastern section exactly equals the population of the Comparing its movement since 1900 with that of the
southwestern; and, similarly, the population of the center of population, it will be noted that the north
southeastern exactly equals that of the northwestern.
movement of the median point was 1.6 miles more
Tho northeastern and southwestern each contain, in than that of the center, while the center of population
fact, a population of about 27,500,000, while the south moved west 31.5 miles more than tin* median point,
eastern and northwestern sections each contain about showing that tho increase in the population of the
18,500,000.
Pacific coast had a much greater influence on the
MEDIAN POINT.
movement of the center of population than upon the
median point.
What is termed by the Census Bureau the “ median
The exact location of the median point is indicated
point” of the population corresponds, ns already bv the median lines already shown; in the following
stated, to a common conception of tho center of popu table its approximate location with reference to certain
lation— that is, it is the junction of the median line towns is described :
dividing the population equally north and south with
P osition

'T h e mathematical demonstration of this is simple.
If A . It,
C, and 1) represent, respectively, the population of the north
western, northeastern, southeastern, and southwestern sections,
th en :
A + B = J population of l '. S.
B - j - C = i |M>pulation of U. S.
A+B =B+C.
Therefore A = C .
Similarly, it may be proven that 11= 0 .

CENSUS YEAR.

I8S0.........................
1890.........................
1‘M
X).........................
1910......................... !

tub

M edian Po in t : 1880

1010.

APPROXIMATE LOCATION BV IMPORTANT TOWNS.

10 miles nearly due west of Springfield. Ohio.
5 miles southwest of Greenville, Ohio.
In Spartanburv, Ind.
3 miles south of Winchester, Ind.

C E N T E R O F P O P U L A T IO N O F EACH S T A T E : IS80 T o 1910.

APPROXIMATE LOCATION, BY IMPORTANT TOWNS.
STATE.

Census
year.

North lati
tude.

West longi
tude.
County.

Nearest city or town.

MOVEMENT IN MILES.
Actual
dis North. South. East.
tance.

A r k a n sa s ......................

C aliforn ia ....................

ixvi
1*90
1900
1810

32
32
32
32

51 9
51 3*
53 1.3
51 7

80 4.3 16
96 41 40
V. 42 IS
86 42 29

C hilton................... 5.5 miles W . by N. of Clanton, Chilton C o...............
C hilton.................. 3.1 miles S. bv K. of Jemison. i hilton C o................
C h ilton ..............
5.7 miles SSE. of Jemison, Chilton C o ......................
C hilton................... 4.7 miles SSE. of Jemison, Chilton C o ......................

4.3
2.9
1.0

IXV)
1890
1900
1910

AlABAM l........................

33 , 7 30
33 15 51
33 31 29
33 24 1*

111 25 32
lit 25 .39
111 15 58
110 59 :i*

Pinal....................... 18.7 miles N. b y W . of Florence, Pinal C o...............
P in a l...................... b'.ti miles N. bv \ . of Florence, Pinal C o...............
\
Maricopa................ 9.2 miles 8 W . of Roosevelt Dam. Maricopa C o ..
O ia ......................... 12.3 miles W . by N. of filolie, (iiln C o......................

2.6
23 o
19.5

1XS0
1*90
1900
1910

31
31
31
31

55 41
57 .35
56 18
55 10

1XV)
1*90
1900
1910

37
37
37
.36

55
25
It
42

55
35
20
29

1XS0
1S90
1900
1910

39
39
:t9
39

5
9
5
11

1**0
1*99
1900
1910

1
1
11
II
41

92
92
92
92

.30 25
29 41
28 27
25 8

Pulaski..................
Faulkner................
Pulusk i ..................
Faulkner...............

4.8 miles
.3.9 miles
.3.2 miles
3.0 miles

W SW . of Mayflower, Faulkner C o ...
W N W . of Mayflower, Faulkner Co.........
W SW . of Mavflower. Faulkner C o...........
8SW . of Mayflower. Faulkner C o.............

2.3
1.9
3.3

121 27 42
2
121 2 ■ 0
120 5.3 11
130 31 23

San Joaquin_
_
.3.3 miles
Stanislaus.............. 3.1 miles
Merced.................... 6.2 mill's
Fresno.................... 9.5 miles

F.. bv 8. of Moorland. San Joaquin C o ...
NNE. of Crows Landing. Stanislaus C o ..
N F. of Ingomar, Merced C o .............
W SW . of Mendota, Fresno C o ...................

105 32 53
105 14 10
105 10 5
105 11 28

P a rk ......................
Douglas..................
Teller.....................
Douglas..................

32 49
3t 1
1
31 23
30 54

72 40 21
72 4* 0
72 19 6
72 50 20

1.6

New
New
New
New

13.7 miles KNE. of Hartzell, Park Co......................
3.8 miles 5\ N\\ . of \ est Creek, Douglas C o ...
\
6.4 miles W SW . of West Creek, Douglas Co ..
3.6 miles N. by W . of West Creek, Douglas Co.......

Haven........... 2.0 miles F.NE. of Meriden P. O.. New Ilaven Co .
Haven.......... 0.* mile SSE. of Meriden P. O.. New Haven C o .. .
Haven.......... 1.2 miles SSW . of Meriden I*. O.. New Haven C o ..
H aven.......... 2.5 miles St\ . of Meriden P. O., New Haven C o ...

17.6
5.0
8.2

I.U

0.2
2 0

21.2
11.5

9. .3
15.7

1.5
1. 2

11.9
15. 3
41.8

23
52
45
5.3

4.0

West.

0. 1

6.7
L_2
3.1

2.2

.34.9
12. K
3*; 7

23. i
20. 1

5.2

16.8

7. i

4.i

1.9
1.0 : : : : : : :
1.3

1.3
0.3
0.G

— j '7

1 |
l.o
1.1

STATISTICAL ATLAS.
CENTER OF POPULATION OF EACH STATE: 1880 TO 1910—Continued.
MOVEMENT IN MILES.

APPROXIMATE LOCATION, BY IMPORTANT TOWNS.
Census
year.

STATE.

North lati
tude.

West longi
tude.
County.

D ei a w a r e ....................

D istrict <>r Cm

um ria .

1880
I860
190*1
1910
1900
1910

F lorida .........................

G eorgia .........................

I d a h o .............................

ILI IXOH...........................

In d ian a ..........................

Io w a ...............................

K ansas ...........................

K entucky .....................

Lou isian a .....................

Ma in e ....................

Maryland ...................

Massachusetts.......

Michigan ...........

Minnesota ....................

Mississippi.. ..

Missouri

Mo ntan a .......................

•
:»
:io
39
39

9 SO
II
9
II 35
11 49

•
75
75
75
75

.35 .30
15 36
35 9
35 6

Kent.......................

Actual
ins North. South. East.
tance.

Nearest city or town.

West.

3.5 miles W . by N. of Dover, Kent C o......................
i.5
0.6
0.3

78 f . X of 20 ft . W of
II SI., N\V. Ith S t., N w .
159 t. s of 111 ft. K of ..................................1 On No. 927 Fifth Street N W _____________________
K St., N\V. 5th S t.,N W .

1.5
0.5
0. .3

0. 4

0. 1
0. 4

98.3 ft. 743 ft.

643 ft.

1880
l syo
1900
1910

29 43 40
29 29 15
29 28 40
29 19 .30

83 17 0
Lafayette.. .........
*3 .3 28
8.3 7 19 1 Lafayette..............
S3 0 32 1 Levy.......................

1.0 mile SW . of Hines, Iatfavetto C o..........................
7.0 miles N. by W . of Vista, L evy Co........................

1880
1*99
1900
1910

33 o
4
33 0 0
32 50 38
32 54 25

S3
83
81
83

42 0
40 17
.38 24
37 8

Jones......................
Jones...... ................
Jones.......................
Jones ......................

10.2 miles W N W . of Gray, Jones C o ..........................

1880
1890
1900
l?lo

13
41
41
44

59 34
12 41
30 It
30 50

111
III
111
111

24 4
27 33
37 10
47 38

Custer..................... 19.5 miles E. by S. of Pierson, Custer Co..................
Custer..................... 4.8 miles S. by W . of Clayton, Custer Co..................
Lemhi....................
Custer..................... 6.0 miles NE. of Sunbeam, Custer Co.................

15.4
28.3
10.5

15.1
27. 1

ISS0
1890
1900
1910

40
40
40
10

26 47
39 14
40 48
51 29

88
88
SS
88

57 44
41 34
37 12
13 18

McLean.................. 2.8 miles SE. of Bloomington, McLean C o...............
McLean.................. 2.0 miles E. by N. of l^xington, McLean Co...........
Livingston............. 1.5 miles N. b y E. of Weston. Mcl-ean C o ...............
Livingston............. 4.0 miles SE. of Pontiac. Livingston C o...................

18.4
10.8
6.4

14. .3
8.7
5.4

11.6
6.4
3. 1

iw e
1*90
1900
1910

39
39
39
39

51
52
54
50

80
80
S
O
86

13 36
14 16
14 3
15 47

Marion....................
Marion....................
Marion...................
Boone.............. .......

2.0
0.5
2.0
0.3

1.7
2.0
2.9

1.5
2.0
2.5

0.2

1880
1*90
1900
1910

41
41
41
41

51 40
50 2
55 45
57 4.3

92 VI .5!
92 58 43
93 15 11
93 15 18

Marshall.................
Marshall.................
Storv......................
Storv......................

1.8 miles S. of Laurel, Marshall Co.......
2.9 miles N\\ . of Laurel, Marshall Co.........

1880
1890
1900
1910

38
38
38
38

36 11
33
1
32 25
29 31

Morris..................... 3.3 miles SSW. of Wilsev, Morris Co...........
90 41
97 8 0 1 Marion.............
1.7 miles E. of Tampa, Marion C o ...
90 43 21 1 Morris..................... 7.2 miles SSW. of \ ilsev, Morris Co.........
\
90 49 41 1 Marion.................... 7.0 miles E. by S. of Litieolnville, Marion C o ..........

1880
1890
1900
1910

37
37
37
37

42
42
42
42

40
40
15
29

85
85
85
85

30 Nelson...............
1.7 miles N. by W . of Holycross. Marion C o ............
52 1 Washington........... 1.0 mile E. of Blincoe, Washington Co
40 Marion...............
2.0 miles KNE. of Holvcross, Marion Co.......
29 1 Washington........... 1.4 miles E. by S. of Blincoe, Washington Co

4.2
2.7
3.0

0.1

1880
1*90
1900
1910

30
30
30
30

49
.VI
48
48

29
40
V.
47

91 21 8
West F elician ai... 4.3 miles N N E .o f Bayou Sara, West Feliciana Par.
91 29 24
West F elician a'... 4.0miles SSL. of Brandon, West Feliciana P a r ....
91 .3 16 Pointe Coupee*. . . 2.4 miles NE. of Haecourci, Pointe Coupee P a r .. . .
1
91 :« V) 1 Pointe Coupee*.. . 1.0 mile N. by E. of Raecourci, Pointe Coupee Par.

1.4

1880
1890
1900
1910

8.3
3.0
2.0

44
44
44
44

55 10
57 3
57 52
47 2

ESE. of Athens P. O., Somerset Co
E. of Athens P. (>., Somerset Co
hN K . of Athens P. <)., Somerset Co ...
K. by S. of Canaan P. O., Somerset C o . ..

2.2
1.0
12.8

2.2
0.9

SE. of Harmaas. Anne Arundel C o . .
E. of Harmans, Anne Arundel Co
W . b y N . of Hannuas, Anne Arundei C o..
N W . of Harinaas, Anne Arundel Co

0.5
0.8
0.6

0.5
0.1
0.5

2 9 m nS W
« of,5 U:!!,,lrv E -O ., Middlesex Co..
2.9 miles W by 8. of Sudbury P.O., Middlesex C o . .
na
,°1 ®“ ? burZ P- ° , Middlesex C o ...
0.5 mile SSW . of Sudbury P.O ., Middlesex Co

6. i
0.2
2.6

0.1

13
53
36
49

26
21
24
21

Som erset...............
Som erset___
S om erset ......
S om erset.......

4.8 miles
4.7 miles
4.3 miles
2..I miles
0.8 mile
0 .5 mile
0.4 mile
0.9 mile

76
76
76
76

41 17
41 a
42 15
42 36

Anne
Anne
Anne
Anne

1880
1890
1900
1910

42
42
42
42

71
71
71
71

28
28
28
25

M iddlesex ...........

1880
1890
1900
1910

43 3 29
43 15 24
43 21 0
43 19 55
44 47 13
45 5 42
45 15 29
45 22 23

84
84
84
84

15
10
*
8

38 36
4.3 38
40 19
45 0

93 44 41
93 V) 36
93 50 M
93 51 29

1880
1890
1900
1910

33 2 50
32 50 52
32 55 .37
32 54 7

80
80
89
80

1880
1890
1900
1910

38
38
38
38

92 25 s
92 27 67
92 25 55
92 18 25

1880
1890
1900
1910

46
4ft
40
40

42 32
38 19
36 11
13 0
23 5
31 45
34 45
41 31

4.8 mili>s SE. of’Colo, Story C o .. .

32 46
32 36
33 5
29 49

39 9 4
39 9 32
39 9 30
39 10 1

1880
1*90
1900
1910

miles SE. of New Augusta, Marion C o ...............
mile X . of New Augusta. Marion Co .
miles N. by E. of New Augusta, Marion C o___
mile W . by N. of Zionsville, Boone C o ...........

09
09
oo
00

1880
1*90
1900
1910

22 30
22 30
22 19
22 23

2.9
4.3
2.8

111
111
111
110

42 6
43 26
44 46
45 22

43 16
51 33
36 is
50 49

A ru n del___
A run del _
_
A ru n del __
A ru n d el __

Clinton..........
<I rut lot ..
Carver........

5.8 mi|es N N W . of St. Johas, Clinton C o........
5.5 miles N . by W . of Middleton, Gratiot Co
9.2 miles W NW . of Ithaca, Gratiot Co.
7.7 m ills
N\V . of Ithaca, <>rutiot Co

.V?1 (}«* ENE. 0f America, Roseau C o . .
,1
aaSflS \ Nbv v M
f
0MrT - . ' V ,il ('°
,riK
........
U m Q » S of Becker, Sherburne C o.. Vo.........
1.virtuesM e . E n r L L i ' 0 ^

A tta la ......
A tta la .

13.5

1.7
1.8
1.2

6.8

2.9
8.1
8.5

6.2

0.7
1.5

5.2
5.0
14.1
2.3 "*2.'3
24.6
22.3
6.G

............

3.6
0.7
3.3

24.3
5.7
4.2
2.6
2.9
8.2
2.3
2.0

2.0
0.2
0. 1

0.4
' i'2. 5

2. 7
0.1
0.8
0.3

0.2

0.1
0.03
2.6

1.2

1.1

13.7
6.4

21.4
13.3
1<X2

1.6
14.1
0.1

22. .3

0.6
0.3

14.3
6.8
1.6

” ':i.’ 8

20.9
11.2
7.9

4.2
2.2

4.8
7.2
6.4

4.0 miles ENE. of Sallis. Attala Co
7 '0 m f l2 s P
.............................
hs mites S hv E. M
V ” ? r°
S SSS 8. by V of Sallis, Attala*Co ..................
.0

16.6
0.7
10.5
2.4
3.9
2.5

21.4
3.9 ............
12.5

Moniteau .

C o le .......
Cole ...

0 6 mSeSW''of°rin.nt^rtow " - V ’1 ( ’° ...................
''
0.5 miles W SW . of Jefferson City, Cole Co

Broadwater ......
Jefferson ..
Broadwater ..
Meagher........

3.4
4.9
1.7

&4
3.1

4.8
2.5
3.7

1.3
1.3
0.6

N W . Of Marion. Cole C o .........

o V m K s F?• ° f Helena, Lewisand Clark Co..........
10
p
and Clark
bv S. of Helena. Lew h a n d Clark Co
9 Meagher C o.^

1 Parish.

3.6
5.1
1.8

' Vh,t«

8ulphur

8prinK ’
S’

7.7
11.0
12.5
30.0

10.0
3.4
7.8

2.5
1.8
6.H

12.0
29.0

6.4

POPULATION.
('ENTER OF POPULATION OF EACH STATE: 1SS0 TO 1910 Continued.
Arrmoxn
jrrATr..

Census
year.

North lati
tude.

M O V E M E N T IN WILKS.

West longi
tude.
Nn u n l oily
’

County.

N eh raska ......................

N EVADA..........................

N ew H ampshire .........

N ew J e r sey ..................

1880
18*m
1900
1910

40 57 47
1
1 5 54
.1
4
1 S 4
41 11 13

1880
1800
1900
1910

39 41 (1
39 31 55
39 51 36
39 16 48

1880
1800
1000
1910

43
43
43
43

1880
1890
1900

40 25 48
40 37 19
40 27 54

26 25
2>
.
1
26
1
.8
21 1

»
43
34
10
17

Seward
Polk......................
Polk....... .........
Merrick.. .

4 7 miles
J.5 in Ufa
(1.2 miles
1.7 m U p s

117 .50 22
IIS
1 46
117 49 Zt
117 33 18

Churchill.............
t him hill
Churchill
1-ander.................

13.8 miles S. b y W . of Hover, Churchill C o..............
13.3 miles NK. of Hover. Churchill C o ......................

97 21
97 43
97 42
97 SO

35 VI
35 Zt
31 41
32 10

Itolk na p ...............
Merrimack............
Merrimack............
Merrimack .........

1
74 .3
1
74 30 II
74 29 37
74 26 20

35 9 35
31 58 19
H 55 u
I
34 49 5

106 to 15
106 9
1
|
|(I6 « 41
105 43 8

1880
1N90

4
42 0
41 54 51

74 54 50
74 51 56

Sullivan...........

1000
1910

41 48 0
41 39 29

74 45 51
74 51 V)

Sullivan...............
S ullivan...............

1880
1800
1900
1910

35
35
35
35

1880
1800
1900
1910

47 2 3
47 28 35
47 31 lo
47 30 32

1880
1890
1900
1910

40
40
40
40

1890
1900
1910

35 18 58
35 30 25
35 28 19

1880
1890
1000
1910

44 39 37
44 46 13
44 55 58
44 52 12

1880
1890
1900
1910

.....................

40 29 24

IvN
O
1890
|'*M
I
1910

40 19 55
.8
40 19 1
40 18 0
40 17 35

38 35
38 22
;is 13
37 24

20 17
22 59
24 12
28 48

N. hv K. of Utica. Seward C o..
K N K of Polk, Polk C o..............
W N W . of Strom burg, Polk Co
S. of Chirks. Merrick Co.............

79
79
7V
79

18 37
25 11
28 37
29 49

98 9 37
98 20 25
98 42 27
99 39 47
82
82
S2
82

53 48
53 56
54 45
48 25

1
96 28
96 57 32
97 5 28
122 IS
122 0
121 56
122 12
77
77

0
9
0
4

11 2
13 53
16 3
19 37

71 27

Middlesex

...........

Santa Fe
T omuice
Torrance..............

3.0 miles XtV. by W . of Crnigrolare. Sullivan Co .
1.8 miles W . by N . of Livingston Manor. Sulllvun
Co.
1.2 miles SW . of Liberty, Sullivan C o.......................
0.7 mile N\V. by W . of Kormtine. Sullivan Co.......

2.0 miles S\V.
Griggs..................... 7.2 mHrs SW .
Foster. . .
6.6 miles SW .
W ells....................
3.5 miles NK.
miles
miles
miles
miles

of Matleson, Hornes Co.
of J e o lt, Griggs Co........
of McHenry, rooter Co.
of Howdon, WelLs C o ...

Delaware
Morrow ..
M orrow .............
Morrow .

3.7
4.0
5.4
1.5

K. bv N. of Killtoume, Delaware Co.
W SW . of Marengo, Morrow Co...........
W . of Marengo, Morrow Co..................
E. by N. of Fulton, Marrow Co_____

Seminote..............
Lincoln..................
Lincoln..................

5.0 miles W SW . of Heorden, Okfuskee C o........
3.3 miles W . of Meeker, Lincoln C o....................
3.0 miles NNK. of Mclxnid. Pottawatomie Co.

Linn........................ 0.1 miles W SW . of Detroit. Marion Co.........
Marion.................... 7.8 miles KNK. of Detroit. Marion C o ..........
Clackamas............. Ih.O miles NK. by N. of I>etroit, Marion Co.
10.8 miles N S W . of Detroit, Ma/inn Co.......
Marion..................
0.8
3.2
3.3
3.4

mile W N W . of Shermans Dale, Perry Co___
miles W . by S. of Shermans Dale. Perry Co.
miles SK. o’f Landishurg, Perry Co.................
mites SSW . of Landishurg, Perry Co.............

Providence............ 4.1 miles J3W. by 8. of Providence P. O., Provi
dence Co.
Providence........... 3.7 mites 8 W . of Providence P. O., Providence Co.
3.4 mites SW . of Providence P. O., Providence C o ..
Providence .........
3.1 miles SW . by W . of Providence P. O., Provi
I*rovidence
dence Co.

71 27 49
71 27 42
71 27 40

1880
1890
1900
1910

33 58
33 59
34 0
34 2

47
12
|8
2

M 58 46
)
M 58 SO
l
M 59 40
i
1
81
4

H ichland.........
H ichland.........
Hichland . . . .

3.4 mites
3.2 mites
1.3 miles
3.3 mites

1880
1W
J0
1900
1910

43 59 28
44 16 52
44 21 20
44 19 48

98 IS 4
98 24 26
98 25 9
98 50 6

Sanlsim ..........
Headte...............
Headlo .
H and...........

5.0 mites SSW . of Woonsocket, Sanl»orn Co............
1.5 mites 8. by K. of Virgil. Headte Co......................
10.0 mites W . bv 8. of Huron, Headte C o.................
0.9 mite NK. of’ Dan forth, Hand C o..........................

1880
1890
1900
1910

35 50
35 50
35 50
35 49

86
M
i
K6
86

38
35 58
36 19
33 47

W illiamson...........
Rutherford...
Hutherford
Rutherford .

4.6
5.4
5.6
4.5

miles
milts
miles
mites

SK. of Arrington. Williamson Co.............
N W . bv N. of Hockvale, Hutherford Co.
NW . of Hockvale, Hutherford C o............
W . of Overall, Hutherford C o...................

1.880
1890
1900
1910
U t a h ...............................

31
31
31
31

20 50
26 11
28 35
31 23

96 38 30
96 .VI 52
96 52 26
97 15 14

Lim estone.............
Fait*........................
F a lls.................
McLennan........

6.4
3.0
4.5
7.0

mites
mites
mites
mites

SW . of
W SW .
NNW.
W SW .

1880
1890
1900
1910

40
40
40
40

13 56
IS .V
i
16 2
23 6

111 54 .30
111 46 47
ill 45 2.*
ill 47 46

Utah.......................
1 t a h ......................
1 t a h ......................
U t a h ......................

1880
1890
1900
1910

44
41
44
44

1 45
2 38
3 IS
3 0

72
72
72
72

43 5
42 48
39
1
44 56 !

W ashington...........
W ashington.........
<(range....................
Washington...........

2. V

II. 4 ........... i 11.2
H I

II. 0
0.4
0.5

a &
5.8

.V4

2. I

10.8

3.4

0.7
U5

1.7

............
5.0 miles SK. of San Pedm. Santa Ke Co.................. j|
6.4 miles W. b y S. of Murtarty, Torrance C o .........
13.1
3.8
7.5 miles W SW . of Moriartv. Tom uice Co............
10.5 miles KNK. of Kstancla, Tomuii'e Co.............
»>.0

41 46 40
41 47 5
41 47 24

3
7

3.2

13.2

1.880

9
7
6
16

West.

9.3

10.8

sex Co.
First ward of New Brunswick. Middlesex Co.

1890
1900
1910
S outh Car olin a ...........

22.0
.3.4
7.7

an
2.2 miles NK. of Canterbury P. O., Merrimack C o...

2.2 miles N S W , of Collision, Chut ham C o.............
mile. S nf Ml \ «rin>ii Springs, ( liatliam « o
Chatham .............
4.2 tnlteaSW. of ML Venion Springs. Chat liain Co.
Chatham
Chatham . . ......... 3.3 miles KNK. of Cheeks, Randolph Co................

Perrv......................
Perrv................
P errv...
. .
Perry......................

Actual
dLs- North. South. Kast.
lance.

14.2

Middlesex
Somerset................
Middlesex..

71
71
71
71

1910
N ew M e x ic o .................

town.

SK. by K. of Columbia, Hichland Co___
KSK. of Columbia, Hichland C o..............
K. by N. of Columbia. HichUfnd C o.......
N W . of Columbia, Hichland C o................

Thornton, Limestone Co.
of Otto, Falls C o................
of Otto, Falls C o................
of W aco, McLennan C o...

13.0
3.8

25. I

7.9
9.8

5.2

2.5

6.5
0.5
II .0

n
.2

3.1
1.6

1.0

6.2
3.2
1
.1

1.3

8.4
17.2
44.7

30. 5
3.5

0I
.

3 .1

5.3
30.7
7.9
16.5

ii ;

13.9

0.4
0. 4

0.5

1
.6

4.5

20.7
5. I

2 .6
0

1 .7
4

7.6

3.4

13.2
0.7
1.5
0.5

0.6
0.4
0. 4

2.5
1.9
3. 1

0 .1

01
.

0.02

0.5
1.3

0. 1
0.9
4.0

2.0

20.0

5.3

0.6

5. I

20.5
a 03

2.5

0.02

2.6

13.7
3.2

0.7

27.

11.2

2.5
0.3

22.6

5.6

13.2

2.6
2. 4
3. 1

0.6

5.1

0.2
0.2

3.2
1.5

31.6
17.6
44.7

1.5

6 .8

1 it"
.0

6.2
2.8

12.2
1.5
22. 4

3.2

. b y S. of Provo, Utah Co.
8 9
3.5
8.3

1.0

3.2
4.9

.........

6.8

3.3

1.1
2.0

1.0
0.8

........ 0.2 ...........
........ 3. I ...........
0.3 ...........
4.9

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

CENTER OF POPULATION OF EACH STATE: 1880 TO 1010—Continued.
MOVEMENT IN

approxim ate i.ocation , by im portant to w n s .

Census
year.

.STATE.

North lati
tude.

West longi
tude.

1880
1S J
>0
umo
mio

e st

ir g in ia

....................

W isconsin......................

y o m in o

.................................

1880
1890
1900
1910

47 5 32
47 15 44
47 19 50
47 23 6

120 36 29
l.ii 52 30
120 46 35
4 16
121

1880
ls'JO
1900

38 53 20
38 4 9 59
38 48

80 37 47
80 41 26
80
41 22

1910

W ashington .................

•
37 29 34
37 28 31
37 26 19
5
37 2 ',

.
78
78
78
78

45 32

84)

1880
1880
1900
1910

43
43
4
.3
43

44
53
57
56

89
89

1880
lH
'JO
1900
1910

42 10 48
42 24 46
42 32 11
42 42 0

57
27
29
53

831

29
.33
32
34

51
29
54
58

Actual
dis North. South.
tance.

Nearest city or town.

Country.

3.2 miles
2.9 miles
1.9 miles
3.5 miles

Buckingham.........

M IL K S .

N N E. of Arcanum. Buckingham C o........
N W . of Arcanum, Buckingham Co...........
W . b y S. of Arcanum. Buckingham C o ..
SW. of Arcanum, Buckingham C o............

Kittitas..................
Kittitas..................

1.2
2.5
1. 4

3.5
2.5
1. 7
17.2
6.6
12.0

Kittitas..................

East. West.

0.5

3.3
1.6

11.7
4.7
3.8

12.6
4.6
11. 4

5. 1
3.3

3.9
2 .1

3.3
2.6

49 12

Braxton.................. 2.5 miles NNE. of Burnsville, Braxton Co...............
B ra xton ................ 2.7 miles SW . of Burnsville, Braxton Co..................
B ra xton .................
Braxton Co.
B raxton................ 1 .8 miles N W . of Chapel, Braxton C o........................

5. 2

3.0

4.3

17 6
18 22
18 43
14 10

Marquette..............
M arquette.............
Marq'uette.............
M arquette.............

9.9
4.6
3.9

1. s
1
4.6

16. 3
16.3
12.9

16. i
8. 6
11.2

106 39 11
106 36 27
106 52 39
107 0 7

2.3 miles

W .

of Germania. Marquette C o..................

2.2 miles SW . of Neshkoro, Marquette C o................

Carlwm....................
Carbon....................
Natrona..................
Natrona.................. 6.8 miles SE. of OO city, Natrona C o......................

i. i

0.3
3. 8

0. 7

2. 4
i3 .8

6.4

LARGEST MOVEMENT.

M O V E M E N T IN D E G R E E S .
STATE.

M O V E M E N T IN M tl.E S .

DECADE.

North.

•
California....................
Oklahoma...............

1880 to 1890.........................
I8I>0 to 1900..........................

North Dakota.....................
California....................

South.

1900 to 1910.....................
1880 to 1910...........................

O f

East.

0 30 20
0

Actual
distance.

West.

North.

South.

East.

West.

„

0 25 22

34.9

11 27

23.1

13.2
0

1 13 26

0 57 20
0 56

99.1

44.7

84.4

51.9

0.2

0. 1
158 ft.

S M A LLEST M OVEM EN T.
•
Massachusetts..................
Massachusetts............
Delaware...................
Rhode Island.............

•

0
0

5
2

1880 to 1890..............
1890 to 1900............
1900 to 1910.......................
1880 to 1910....................

»
0
0

0 14
1 10

ft
0.1

0.2
0.3

0.3

211 ft.

1.3

L A R G E S T V A R IA T IO N S .
«
Arizona.................

1890 to 1900............
1900 to 1910............
1880 to 1910..........
Kansas............

f t !

18 29

7 42

1880 to 1800..

0
0

1880 to 1890. . .
IM to 1900___
JO

1880 to 1800. .

0
0

0 0
7
9 41 ........................ !
16 20

0 25 54
3

0 36
2 54
6 40

1
0
1

0
0
0

1890 to 1900...
1900 to 1910___
1880 to 1910. . .

New Jersey..

1900 to 1910............
1880 to 1910............

Nevaila..............

1 45

9 46

19 41

0 26 53
0 24 39

2.0
23.2
19.5
26.4

11.5
8.9

24.6

24.3

8 34

10.9

77 .................
‘

5 20 1

tt.

11.4

11.2

0 34 48
0 24 53

25.1
42.4
36.8

22.6

1890 to 19Q0.. . .
1900 to 1910. ..

1 30

1880 to 1910. ..

3 36

24.9

22.3

0 2 43
0 16 5
0 26 4
0
0

0 47
0 37

1X2
10. 8

1X2

0
0

3 17
4 41

3.4
5.8

11 31
9 25

0.1

2.0
21.2

28.6

10.8
4.1

22.3
5. t

2.1

POPULATION.

County, and in 1910, 9.5 miles west southwest of Mendota, Fresno County. It. is well also to note those
The center of population of each of the states has states in which the least change occurml in the loca
never been computed or published by the Census tion of the center. The center of population of MassaBureau at any census, but, in response to numerous chusetts from 1880 to 1890 advanced one-tenth of a
requests for such data, the location of the center of mile east; there was no north or south movement;
population of each state has been computed, com from 1890 to 19(H) there was a south movement of
two-tenths of a mile and a movement east of 158 feet.
mencing with the Tenth Census, 18S0. The direction
In Delaware, from 19(H) to 1910, the movement was
of the movement of the population of each state is
shown during the last 30 years, with the exception of three-tenths of a mile north ami 211 feet west. The
the state of Oklahoma. The territory which now smallest change in the location of the center made
during the period from 1880 to 1910 was in Rhode
comprises this state was not open to settlement by
the whites in 1880, but was allotted to the Indians Island; its center of population during the 30 years
and known as the Indian Territory; no returns were moved 1.3 miles directly north. The center of popu
made of its population at the Tenth Census, so that it lation of this state in 1880 was located 4.1 miles south
is not possible to compute the center of its population west by south of Providence and in 1910 it was 3.1
for that date, hut the centers have been figured for miles southwest by west of Providence.
1890, 1900, and 1910 for Oklahoma and the Indian
The center of population of New York state in 1880
was 3 miles northwest by west of Craigeclarc, Sullivan
Territory combined.
Plates Nos. 119 to 132 are made up of a series of County, and in 1910 it was seven-tenths of a mile
small sketch maps showing the location of tin* center northwest by west of Fores tine, in the same county.
of population in each state. Its movement, therefore, The distance traversed was 6.5 miles from 1880 to
can be readily followed on the map and its geographic
1890 ; 9.5 miles from 1890 to 1900; and 11 miles from
location in relation to the nearest towns and railroad
1900 to 1910. The movement was south and east
centers can be ascertained.
from 1880 to 1890 and from 1890 to 19(H), and from
From 1900 to 1910 the center of population of the
1900 to 1910, south and west.
United States, exclusive of its outlying possessions,
Although Texas has the greatest area of any state,
moved west and north. A comparison of the move the movements of the center were not large, as the
ments of the centers of population of the states during development in all parts of the state has been uni
the same decade brings out the fact that the centers form. The center in 1880 was located 6.4 miles south
of 20 states moved north, ami for 28 states the move west of Thornton, Limestone County; in the 30 years,
ment was south. The centers o f population of 22 to 1910, it had shifted to 7 miles west-southwest of
of these states moved east and of 26 moved west. Waco, McLennan County. The movement from 1880
The movement of the center of population of each
to 1890 was 13.7 miles; from 1890 to 19(H), 3.2 miles;
state does not, therefore, coincide with the movement and from 19(H) to 1910, 22.6 miles, the advance being
of the center of population of the entire l nited States. north and west at each census.
As an analysis of the movement of the center of pop
The states which show the greatest variation in the
location of the center are Arizona, Kansas, Nevada,
ulation for each state was deemod impracticable, only
a brief description is given of the movement for a few of ami New Jersey. For Arizona the movement shown
the statos in which the variation of the movement of in 1890 was 2 miles south and 1 mile west; from 1890
the centor presents some exceptional features. The to 1900 it reversed the direction to 21.2 miles north
center of population of California from 1880 to 1890 and 9.3 miles east, an actual distance of 23.2 miles.
advanced 34.9 miles south and 23.1 miles east, an During the decade from 1900 to 1910 it moved 11.5
actual distance of 41.9 miles; this was the greatest ad miles south and 15.7 miles east, the entire movement
vance made during that decade in any state. Okla from 1880 to 1910 being 8.9 miles north and 24.9 miles
homa held this distinction when the movement of the east. For Kansas, while the movement was south at
center from 1890 to 1900 was 30.7 miles, the north each census, from 1880 to 1890 it advanced westward
24.3 miles; from 1890 to 1900, 22.3 miles east; while
movement 13.2 miles, and the west movement 2/.7
miles. The greatest movement from 1900 to 1910 was from 1900 to 1910 the direction again changed to west,
made in North Dakota, the distance the center moved 5.7 miles, a net movement during the 30 years of 7.7
being 44.7 miles, made up of a south movement of 1.3 miles south and 7.7 miles west. From 1880 to 1890
the movement in Nevada was south 11.2 miles and
miles and a west movement of 44.7 miles.
west 2.1 miles; from 1890 to 1900 it changed, going
The greatest distance the center of population of any
state advanced during the 30 years from 1880 to 1910 north 22.6 miles and east 11 miles. The development
was in California. The center moved in a southeasterly of the mines between 1900 and 1910 in the southeastern
direction 99.1 miles, the point in 1880 being located portion of the state again changed the direction and
3.3 miles east by south of Moorland, San Joaquin produced the greatest advance at any decade, the
CENTER OF POPULATION OF STATES.

28546°— 14-------3

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

movement being 40 miles south and 14.2 miles east, an
actual distaneeof 42.4 miles; during the 30 years from
1880 to 1910 the net movement was 36.8 miles south
and east. New Jersey has also shown considerable
change in the direction of the movement of its center
of population. From 1880 to 1890 it was 13.2 miles
north and seven-tenths of a mile east; in the next
decade, from 1890 to 1900, the movement was 10.8
miles south and five-tenths of a mile east; from 1900
to 1910 it again moved north 1.7 miles and east 2.9
miles. Its entire movement from 18S0 to 1910 was
4.1 miles both north and east.
The movement of the center of population of Ala
bama has varied in direction at each decade. From
18S0 to 1890 it moved 4 miles north and 1.5 miles west;
from 1890 to 1900, 1.6 miles south and 2.4 miles east;
and from 1900 to 1910, 1 mile north and two-tenths of
a mile west. Connecticut shows a steady movement
south and west, the distance from 1880 to 1890 being
1.9 miles; from 1890 to 1900, 1 mile; and from 1900
to 1910, 1.3 miles.
In Illinois the effect of the growth of Chicago on the
center of population is evident from its northeast
movement at each census, the actual distance from
1880 to 1890 being 18.4 miles; from 1890 to 1900, 10.8
miles; and from 1900 to 1910, 6.4 miles.
There were only 12 states in which the center of
population moved in the same general direction at each
census from 1880 to 1910. These states are as follows:
In the state of Illinois it moved north and east; for
California, Georgia, and New Hampshire the move
ment was south and east; for Connecticut, Mississippi,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia the
movement was south and west; and for Maryland,
South Carolina, and Texas the movement was north
and west.
It is a matter of interest to study the movement of
the center of population of the states in each geographic
division, which reveals the fact that in not a single
division was the movement of the center in the same
general direction, showing that local conditions in
each state affect the movement of population. In
the New England division the centers of two states
moved north and east, two moved south and east,
and two moved south and west. In the Middle At
lantic division the center of population of New Jer
sey moved north and east, while for New York and
Pennsylvania the movement was south and west. Of
the five states in the East North Central division two
moved north and east, two moved south and east, and
one moved north and west. In the West North Cen
tral division the center of one state moved north and
east, one moved south and east, three moved south
and west, and two moved north and west. In the
South Atlantic division the centers of two states moved
south and east, three moved south and west, and three
moved north and west. Of the four states in the East

South Central division one moved north and east, one
moved south and east, one moved south and west, and
one moved north and west. Of the West South Cen
tral division the center of population of one state
moved south and east, of two, south and west, and of
one, north and west. In the Mountain division the
centers of two states moved north and east, in three
it moved south and east, in one, south and west, and
in two it moved north and west. In the Pacific divi
sion the center of one state moved south and east, for
one it moved south and west, and for one it moved
north and west.
A comparison of the maps on which are located the
centers of population of the states will bring to our at
tention the fact that in only nine states are the centers
of population near the state capitals. The nine states
are Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, Montana,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and
Vermont. As the center of population is the point
from which all the population is supposed to be equi
distant, if it were necessary to assemble all the inhabit
ants of a state at one place, each individual to travel
in a direct line from his residence to the meeting place,
the center of population is the jH>int they could all
reach with the minimum aggregate of travel.
C E N T E R O F FO R EIO N -B O R N P O PU L A T IO N .

The movement of the center of the total population
from census to census is the result of all migration,
both interstate and foreign. In view of the change in
the character of the foreign immigration and the large
proportion of immigrants who are settling in the cities,
the location of the center of foreign-bom population
and its movement from decade to decade is a matter of
great interest.
On the map on Plate No. 133 the position of the cen
ter of total population at each census from 1790 to
1910 is indicated, also the location o f the center of the
foreign-born population from 1880 to 1910. The loca
tion of the center of population and the median point
were discussed on pages 26 and 29. For the first timo
in a census report the center of the foreign-bom popu
lation has been computed and located on a map.
In 1880 the center of the foreign-born population
was located in latitude 41° 49' 5 2 ", longitude 83° 44'
17", in Monroe County, Michigan, approximately 15.5
miles northwest of Toledo, Ohio.
In 1890 the center had advanced almost two degrees
to the west. The opening of Oklahoma and the in
crease in the population of Texas drew the point to the
south, when it was located in latitude 41° 22' 05",
longitude 85° 23' 17", in Noble County, Indiana, ap
proximately 54.5 miles southeast of South Bend.
The falling n ff in the class of immigrants who s e ttle d
in the far Western state's is indicated by the change in
the direction of the movement from 1890 to 1900, for
in 1900 the center of the foreign-bom population was

POPULATION.
locate*! in Defiance County, Ohio, 18 miles northwest
of Defiance, being in latitude 41° 22' 48", almost the
same latitude as in 1890, and longitude 84° 43' 21",
nearly a degree further east. The eastern movement
was due, as previously stated, to the newer immigration
that settled principally in the large cities of the East.
In 1910 the center of foreign-bom population was
again located in Defiance County, Ohio, about 10.5
miles southwest of Defiance, in latitude 41° 17' 24",
showing a decided movement south, and in longitude

84° 36' 7 ", showing a further advance toward the
east, but not nearly as great as during the previous
decade. This was undoubtedly due to the increase
in the foreign-bom population in Washington, Oregon,
and California, which, on account of the great distance
from the center, have relatively a much greater weight
than the foreign l>orii of the Eastern and Middle states.
The following table gives the location of the center of
foreign-born population at each census, and its move
ment in miles, also the location in relation to a city:

CENTER OF FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION: IsSO T o 1910.
North latitude.

CE N SU S Y E A R

1880.....................
1890.....................
1!HM>...............................

1910.....................

41
41
41
41

41>
22
22
17

52
05
48
24

Approximate locution by important town*.

West longitude.
/

S3
85
84
84

44
23
43
3<i

17
17
21
07

Movement in miles.

In
In
In
In

Monroe Count v , M ich., 15.5 milt's northwest of Toledo, < th in ...
Noble County, In d ., 54.5 mileM southeast of South Rend, I n d . . . 93 mile* west-southwest.
Defiance County, Ohio. IS mile* northwest of Defiance. < )h io .. . 34.5 mile* east.
Defiance County, Ohio, 10.5 milea southwest of Defiance, O hio. 8.5 milt** southeast.

C E N T ER O F NEGRO PO PU LA TIO N .

The question of negro migration has always been one
of great interest, and on the map, Plate No. 134, the
location of the center of negro imputation of conti
nental United States is indicated by a star. The center
of negro |x>pulation was computed for 1790 and for
each census from 1880 to 1910, no computations being
made for the censuses from 1800 to 1870, inclusive.
The movement of the center of negro population is an
accurate index of the direction of negro migration.
In 1790 the center of negro population was located in
Dinwiddie County, Virginia, 25 miles west-southwest
of Petersburg, in latitude 37° 4' 8 " north, and longi
tude 77° 51' 2 1 " west. In 1880 the center was
located in northwestern Georgia, 10.4 miles east of
Lafayette, in the eastern part of Walker County, lati
tude 34° 42' 14" north, longitude 85° 6' 56" west,
showing a movement in a southwesterly direction
across North Carolina and a part of Georgia of approxi
mately 443 miles, or an average of 49 miles for each
decade. From 1SS0 to 1890 the southwesterly move
ment of the center was continued, and it advanced
20.5 miles, to a point in Walker County, Georgia, 15.7
miles west-southwest of Lafayette, latitude 34° 36' 18"
north, longitude 85° 26' 4 9 " west, about 4 miles east

of the Alabama line. From 1890 to 1900 its move
ment was greatly retarded, and it advanced only 9.5
miles southwest, across the Alahama-Goorgia state
line into Dekalb County, Alabama, 10.7 miles north
east of Fort Payne, in northeastern Alabama, alxmt
4 miles west of the Georgia line, latitude 34° 31' 16"
north,longitude 85° 34' 35" west. In 1910 the center
of negro [>opulution was located 5.4 miles northnortheast of Fort Payne, Dekalb County, Alabama,
in latitude 34° 30' 0 " north, and longitude 85° 40' 43"
west, its movement for the decade being 5.8 mih*s
west-southwest. Its movement south has evidently
been greatly retarded by the migration of the negroes
to the Northern and Eastern states. A study of the
movement from 1790 to 1910 shows a steady advance
in a southwesterly direction, but the distance covered
at each decade is much smaller than the movement at
the previous decade; if this decrease continues during
the next decade, it is probable that the direction will
be reversed and that the center in 1920 will retrograde
toward the North and East. In the following table
is given the latitude and longitude of the centers of
negro population at each census, also the distance
moved during the decade, and the location of the
center relative to a city or town:

C E N T E R O F N E G R O P O P U L A T IO N : 17!K> A N D 1880 T O 1910.

C E N SU S Y E A R .

North latitude.

West longitude.

Approximate location by important towns.

1790.....................

25 mile* west-south went of Petersburg. Dinwiddie County, Yir-

1880

34
34
34
34

42
36
31
30

14
18
16
0

85
85
85
85

6
26
34
40

56
49
35
43

10.4 mile* east of Lafayette, Walker County, G eorgia.......................
15.7 miles southwest of I^ifayette, Walker County, Georgia............
10.7 mile* northeast of Fort l ’avne. Dekalb Countv, Alabam a____
5.4 mile* north-northeast of Fort Payne, Dekalb County, A labam a.

Movement in miles.

1S!X>. .
1900
1910......................

1 Movement from 1790 to 1880.

443 miles southwest.1
20.5 miles southwest.
9.5 miles southwest.
5.8 miles west-southwest.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.
it was 30,797,185; and in 1910, 42,623,383 persons
were in municipalities, forming 46.3 per cent of the
On Piute No. 133, in addition to the centers of total population of the United States.
total ami foreign-born population, are indicated the
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 135 compares the per cent
location of the centers of urban and rural population
urban in the total population, by states, for 1910 and
in 1910. The center of urban population has never
1900, every state showing an increase. The states
been computed at any previous census and it was with the greatest per cent of increase are Oklahoma
deemed of interest to do so in 1910. Not only was and Idaho, each increasing over 200 per cent.
the center of urban population located, but the center
Two maps on Plate No. 136 indicate t he per cent
of the rural population was also ascertained— that is,
which the urban forms of the total population of each
the population excluding all places with 2,500 or more |
state in 1910 and 1900, the increase being especially
inhabitants in 1910, as well as the New England
noticeable in all parts of the country, no state showing
towns of that size. The center of urban population
a decrease in the urban element.
is located in latitude 40° 10' 12" and longitude 83°
The diagram on Plate No. 137 gives the per cent of
59' 2 2" in Champaign County, Ohio, 15.3 miles north
urban in the total population of each state, from 1880
east of Piqua, Miami County, Ohio.
to 1910. There were 14 states in 1910 in which more
The center of rural population is located in latitude ,
than half the population was living in territory classi
38° 12' 3 6 " and longitude 88° 39' 3 " in Hamilton j
fied as urban. The greatest per cent urban in any
County, Illinois, 16.7 miles southeast of Mount \ ernon,
state was in Rhode Island, which had 96.7 per cent,
Jefferson County, Illinois.
while North Dakota, with 11 percent, had the smallest
As the centers of urban and rural population were
proportion of its people in urban communities.
not computed for previous censuses, no statement can
Maps 1 and 2 on Plate No. 138 show the per cent of
be made as to the distance or direction in which
increase in urban and rural population, by states, from
these centers moved from 1900 to 1910, or during
1900 to 1910. The greatest per cent of increase in
any previous decade.
both classes is in the states west of the Mississippi
The location of these centers shows strikingly the
River. This is especially true of the increase in rural
preponderance of urban population in the north
population.
eastern portion of the United States, the center of
Plate No. 139 indicates, by the length of the bars,
urban population being approximately 145 miles north
the growth in population of 30 of the largest cities in
ami 250 miles east of the center of rural population.
In a direct line the center of urban population is 289 the United States from 1790 to 1910, or, in the case
of a number of the cities, from the earliest censuses at
miles northeast from the center of rural population.
which they were returned. The cities are arranged
URBAN AND RURAL POPULATION.
in the order of their population as returned at the
The change in classification of urban population from Thirteenth Consus. The diagram brings out strik
census to census renders it impossible to make a fair ingly the rapid growth of all the cities represented.
comparison of the growth from 1790 to 1910, as no Tho phenomenal growth of New York, Chicago, and
tables have been made giving the population of the Philadelphia is especially noticeable. The popula
United States at each enumeration outside of cities tion in 1910 of these 36 cities formed 20.3 per cent of
with 2,500 or more inhabitants, including New England
the total population of the United States, and, if tho
towns of that size. The Census Bureau classified as rate of growth in both the United States and these
urban population in 1910, that part of the population cities continues until another enumeration, the prob
in municipal corporations, including New England abilities are that the population of these large cities
towns, with 2,500 or more inhabitants. At previous will be about 25 per cent of tho population of the
censuses the urban element was considered as that entire United States.
residing in places with 8,000 or more inhabitants, not
Plate No. 140 represents, by tho difference in the
including New England towns of that size. The dia shade fines, tho proportion of the population in each
gram comparing the increase in urban population from county in municipalities with 2,500 or more inhabitants
1790 to 1910 is made on the basis of 8,000 inhabitants in 1910. The towns in New England with 2,500 or
or more, and is shown as Diagram 1, Plate No. 141.
more inhabitants were considered as urban and classed
Diagram 5 on Plate No. 135, urban and rural popu with the urban population. A t previous censuses,
lation, 1880 to 1910, represents the proportion of in computing the urlmn population, the Now England
urban population in plaees of 2,500 or more inhabit towns were excluded anil counted as rural. Tho
ants, including New England towns of that size, at darkest shade represents those counties in which 75
each census from 1880 to 1910. In 1880, of the total per cent or more of the population was urban, and are
population of the I nited States, there were in munici found principally in New England, with a few scat
palities with 2,500 or more population 14,772,438; in
tered areas near the large cities in other states. Massa
1890 this element had grown to 22,720,223; in 1900 chusetts is almost entirely covered, showing that there

CENTERS OF URBAN’

AXI>

RURAL POPULATION:

1910.

POPULATION.
are but few counties in that state in which the urban
element does not form more than 75 per cent of the
population. Connecticut and Rhode Island also fall in
tho highest group. The small areas of this highest
shade indicate the location of the counties in which are
found the principal cities. The heavy shading of the
New England and Middle Atlantic states shows tin*
large proportion of the urban population in these divi
sions. The white area, representing no urban population, covers practically one-third of the land surface of
tho I nited States, indicating that farming is still the
leading industry.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 141 shows the population
in 1910 and 19(H) of cities having, in 1910, 100,000
inhabitants or more. The groat population of New
^ ork, Chicago, and Philadelphia, as compared with
the other cities, is well brought out by tho difference
in the length of the bars. The total population of
all the cities with 100,000 population in 1910 was
-0,302,138, and of New York, Chicago, and Pliiladelphia, 8,501,174, or 41.9 per cent of the t o t a l for the 50
cities. Every city of this class reported an increase
in population from 1900 to 1910, New York having
the largest numerical increase and Rirmingham the
highest percentage of increase.
COLOR OR RACE, NATIVITY, AND PARENTAGE.

The composition of the population of the United
States is of vital importance and Diagram 2 on Plate
No. 141 is of great interest, as it shows the principal
elements of the population in lx»th urban and rural
communities, by geographic divisions, in 1910.
On Plato No. 142 tho population of the United
States is represented by circles, proportionate to the
number returned at each census, from 1850 to 1910,
tho divisions of the circle indicating tho proportion
of tho population in each of tho principal classes.
Tho great increase in tho foreign element, including
both foreign born and tho native of foreign parentage,
is brought out very clearly. Tho proportion of col
ored population is practically tho same at each
enumeration, but tho proportion of tho native white
of native parentage has steadily decreased.
Diagram 1 on Plato No. 143, at tho first glance,
appears rather complicated but, on closer inspection,
one can readily comprehend tho actual proportions
of tho various elements of population in each of
tho geographic divisions in 1910. Tho heavy black
portion shown in tho South Atlantic, East South
Central, and West South Central divisions represents
their negro population, which forms 33.7 per cent in
tho South Atlantic, 31.5 per cent in tho East South
Central, and 22.6 per cent in tho West South Central
division. In tho New England, Middle Atlantic, East
North Central, and West North Central divisions the
foreign element, shown by tho heavy black and whito
portion of tho bars, is much in evidence. Where tho

negro element is large the foreign element is small,
and where the negro element is small the foreign
element usually forms a considerable portion of tho
population. It is evident, therefore, that tho foreign
element docs not locate in that portion of the country
in which negroes form a large proportion of the |x*pulation. Considering the natives of foreign or mixed
parentage and the foreign l>orn together, more than
half of the New England and Middle Atlantic divi
sions are of foreign stock, the percentage in the
Middle Atlantic division being 53.9 and in the New
England division 59; in the East North Central divi
sion it is 44.8 per cent; in the West North Central,
41.5 per cent; in the Mountain division, 40 per cent;
and in the Pacific division, 45.6 per cent. The negro
and native white of native parents together form more
than 88 per cent of the total population in tho follow
ing divisions: In the South Atlantic division, 93.9 per
cent; in the East South Central division, 96.3 per cent;
and in the West South Central division, 88.3 per cent.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 143 shows, by states, the
distribution of the foreign-born population in 1910
and 1900. New York with 2,729,272 loads, Pennsyl
vania with 1,438,719 is second, Illinois with 1,202,560
is third, and Massachusetts with 1,051,050 is fourth.
Tho diagram brings out the small proportion of the
foreign element in the southern portion of tho country,
as compared with the northern portion.
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 141 presents the color or
race, nativity, and parentage, of the population in
those states having a fair proportion of their population
Chinese, Japanese, and Indians in 1910 and 1900.
Arizona had a larger per cent of Indians in its popu
lation than any other state, both in 1900 and in 1910.
Although Oklahoma had a larger number, the Indians
in Arizona formed a larger percentage of its popula
tion than the Indians did in any other state both in
1900 and in 1910. There were in 1910 a larger num
ber of Chinese and Japanese in California, Oregon, and
Washington than in any of the other states, although
in Nevada they formed as large a proportion of the
population as they did in Washington, but their num
bers were comparatively small.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 143 shows, by geographic
divisions, the principal elements of the population
in 1910 and 1900. The foreign-born whites formed
a larger proportion of the population in 1910 than in
1900 in the New England, Middle Atlantic, East
North Central, South Atlantic, and Pacific divisions,
but a smaller proportion in tho West North Central,
East South Central, and Mountain divisions. The
slight changes in the small percentages of foreign-born
whites in tho southern divisions, however, are not
specially significant. The increase in the proportion
of foreign-born whites was most marked in the Middle
Atlantic division (from 21.4 per cent in 1900 to 25
per cent in 1910). The proportion was, however,

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

even higher in New England, although tho increase
from 1900 to 1910 (from 25.7 to 27.7 per cent), was less.
On Plate No. 144 the two diagrams represent the
per cent of the population by principal elements,
for each state, in 1910 and 1900. The great proportion
of tho foreign-born white element and the native whites
of foreign or mixed parentage in a number of states,
at both censuses, is brought out; it will also bo noted
that the proportion has decreased from 1900 to 1910
in a number of the states. In 1910 Rhode Island, with
32.8 per cent of its white population foreign horn,
leads in the proportion of that element. Combining
the foreign horn and native white of foreign or mixed
parentage, Minnesota has the greatest proportion of
the combined elements, with North Dakota second,
the combination representing over 70 per cent of the
population of those states at the Thirteenth Census.
The state showing tho smallest proportion of the
foreign element both in 1900 and 1910 is North
Carolina, closely followed by South Carolina, Georgia,
and Mississippi.
The two diagrams on Plate No. 145 show the color
or race, nativity, and parentage of the population in
cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants for 1910 and
1900. In 1910 the city of Fall River, Mass., led with
the largest proportion (86.3 percent) of its population
made up of foreign born and natives of foreign or mixed
parentage; Lowell, Mass. (80.4 percent), was second;
and New York and Milwaukee third (each with 78.0
per cent). In 1900 Fall River had the greatest pro
portion (85.9 per cent) of the foreign element; Mil
waukee (82.7 per cent) was second; and Lowell (77.9
per cent) third.
The cities with the greatest proportion of negroes,
in 1910, were Memphis, Tenn. (40 per cent); Birming
ham, Ala. (39.4 per cent); and Richmond, Va. (36.6
per cent), in the order named. In 1900 Memphis had
the greatest proportion of negroes (48.S per cent);
with Washington, I). C. (31.1 per cent), second;
and New Orleans (27.1 per cent), third. The city with
the greatest proportion of native whites of native
parentage in 1910 was Indianapolis, Ind. (64.5 per
cent); with Columbus, Ohio (64.4 per cent), second;
and Dayton, Ohio (62 per cent), third. In 1900
St. Joseph, Mo., had tho greatest proportion of native
whites of native parentage (66.9 per cent); with Colum
bus, Ohio (59.8 per cent), second; and Indianapolis,
Ind. (57.8 per cont), third.
Plate No. 146 has two maps showing, by states,
the per cent of native whites of native parentage in
the white population, and the per cent of foreignborn whites in the total population, in 1910.
In the Southern states the white population is nearly
all native of native parentage. In 1910 this clement
formed over 95 per cent of tho population in eight of
the states North ( arolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, and Arkan

sas—North Carolina leading with 99 per cent, prac
tically all of its white population being native of
native parentage.
The lower percentages o f native white o f native
parentage are found in the New England and North
western states. In 1910 Minnesota had onlv 27.9
per cent, North Dakota 28.5 per cent, and Wisconsin
32.9 per cent. In the New England states, Rhode
Island had only 30 per cent of the white population
native of native parentage, Massachusetts 33.2 per
cent, and Connecticut and Newr York exactly the
same proportion, 3(5 per cent. In these states less
than two-fifths of the white population wrere native of
native parentage. In addition, there are nine other
states of the class where the natives of native parent
age were less than half of the white population.
Map 2 show’s tho per cent of foreign-bom whites
in the total population in 1910. In Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and North
Dakota the proportion of foreign or mixed parentage
exceeded the proportion of native whites of native
parentage. In Rhode Island the foreign-born whites
outnumbered the native whites of native parentage.
The Southern states, which had the largest proportion
of tho population native white of native parentage,
show the low’est proportion of foreign birth and of
foreign or mixed parentage.
Map 1 on Plate No. 147 indicates in eight groups,
by the character of the shading, the percentage of the
native whites of foreign o r mixed parentage in the
total population in 1910. The heavy shading in
dicates the groups from 35 to 50 per cent, Minnesota
having 45.3 per cent, Wisconsin 44.8 per cent, North
Dakota 43.5 per cent, South Dakota 37.2 per cent,
Rhode Island 35.9 per cent, and Utah 35.2 per cent
of that clement of tlie population. The states having
the smallest proportion of native whites of foreign or
mixed parentage are North Carolina, with 0.4 per cent,
and South Carolina, with 0.7 per cent. The Southern
states, with few’ exceptions, fall within the group
with less than 5 per cent.
Map 2 indicates, in eight groups, by the character of
the shading, the percentage of foreign-born whites and
native whites of foreign or mixed parentage combined in
the total population in 1910. The solid black, indicat
ing 50 per cent or more, covers 13 states, while the next
group, 35 to 50 per cent, also covers 13 states, and indi
cates that for 26 states 35 per cent or more of the popu
lation is of foreign birth or parentage. These 26 states
have 53.3 per cent of the total population of the
I nited States. The state with the lowT percent ago
est
is North Carolina, which has less than 1 percent. All
the states of the South Atlantic and East South
Central divisions, except Delaware, Maryland, West
Virginia, Florida, and Kentucky, also the District of
Columbia, have less than 5 per cent of the foreignborn element in their population.

POPULATION*.

Plate No. 14S is shaded to indicate the counties ,
Plates Nos. 155 to IM comprise a seri«*s of maps,
having a higher percentage of native whites of native two for each state, except the Southern states, showing
parentage to the total population in 1910 than in 1900; for each county the per cent of the foreign-born white
74 per cent of the total number of counties had a larger in the total population and the per cent of native
percentage of native white of native parentage in 1910 white of foreign or mixed parentage in the total popu
than in 1900.
lation in 1910. The North Central states of Minnesota,
The map on Plate No. 149 also shows, by counties, Wisconsin, and North Dakota show* the highest percent
the per cent of native whites of foreign or mixed of both the foreign-born white population and the
parentage in the total population in 1910, the counties native white of foreign or mixed parentage. As the
being shaded in groups, from less than 1 per cent, to foreign element was small, no maps were prepared for
the highest group, 50 per cent and over. The shaded the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida,
areas on the map indicate where this element of the Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi,
population is of importance. The highest group, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee,
50 per cent and over, is found principally in Michigan, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South
NEGRO POPULATION.
Dakota. In three-fourths of the counties west of the
The per cent of increase in the total population,
Mississippi River the proportion of native whites
of foreign or mixed parentage is over 15 per cent white, and negro, from 1790 to 1910, is graphically
of the total population. As indicated on the state presented on Diagram 2, Plate No. 135. The al>map, the county map shows that there are very few normal increase shown in the negro population from
1S70 to 1880 is due, in a great measure, to the omission
counties in the Southern states, east of the Mississippi
at the census of 1S70 of a number of negroes in the
River, which have more than 1 percent of their popula
tion native white of foreign or mixed parentage, with South; in fact, the entire census of the South at the
the exception of Florida, and there are only a dozen enumeration of the Ninth Census was defective, and
counties in the entire area— that is, the states east of | this diagram points out the defect. The large de
the Mississippi and south of the Ohio River and the crease indicated from 1860 to 1870 is therefore not all
states of Virginia and West Virginia—where the for accounted for by the loss during the Civil War, but
eign element forms 5 per cent or more of their popu is partly due to the defective census of 1870.
The map on Plate No. 185 presents, by states, the
lation.
p e r cent distribution of the negroes in 1910, in seven
The map on Plate No. 150 is shaded to indicate the
counties which had a higher percentage of native groups,shaded as indicated in the legend. Mississippi
whites of foreign or mixed parentage to the total and South Carolina have the highest per cent of
population in 1910 than in 1900. The shaded areas negroes and are the only states with more than 50 per
on this map indicate that 29.9 per cent of the counties cent of their population negroes. The negroes form a
in the United States had a higher proportion of this very small per cent of the population, except in the
South Atlantic, East South Central, and West South
element of the population in 1910 than in 1900.
Central divisions, as indicated by the heavy shading.
The map on Plate No. 151 may be considered as
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 185 indicates, by the length
indicating the proportion of the foreign element in 1910,
of the bars, the number of negroes in each state at
as it includes not only the foreign-born whites but the
native whites of foreign or mixed parentage. The the Twelfth and Thirteenth Censuses. Georgia leads,
densely shaded areas indicate the counties in which with 1,176,987, followed closely by Mississippi, with
1,009,487; Alabama being third, with 908,282; and
the foreign element forms more than 50 per cent of
South Carolina fourth, with 835,843, these states re
the population, such areas covering all of North
Dakota and Connecticut and nearly the entire states taining their respective rank since 1900.
Diagram 3, on the same plate, shows the number of
of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Min
negroes in 1900 and 1910 in cities having 100,000 or
nesota. The absence of shading in the Southern j
states, except Florida and Texas, shows the small more population in 1910. Washington leads, with
94,446; New York is second, with 91,709; New Orleans
proportion of the foreign element in that section.
The map on Plate No. 152 is shaded to indicate the third, with 89,262; Baltimore fourth, with 84,749; and
Philadelphia fifth, with 84,459; Memphis, with 52,441,
per cent of foreign-born whites in total population, by
Birmingham, with 52,305, and Atlanta, with 51,902,
counties, in 1910. The groups of shading are the same
as on the previous map and the areas covered by the follow in order; these are the only cities in the United
States with more than 50,000 negroes in 1910.
heaviest shade are almost in the same position. The
The per cent distribution of negroes in the total pop
absence of shaded areas in nearly all of the Southern
ulation in 1910, by counties, is indicated on the map
states indicates, as on the previous map, that the pro
on Plate No. 186, in eight groups, shaded according to
portion of foreign population in that part of the <ountry
the legend. The highest percentage is in the cotton*
is very small.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

producing sections of the South. South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi have the largest
number of counties in which negroes form more than
.50 per cent of the population.
Plate No. 1S7 indicates, by shading, the counties
having at least 1,000 negroes in 1910, in which there
was a higher per cent of negroes in the total popu
lation in 1910 than in 1900. With the exception of a
few widely scattered counties in the Northern states,
the increase in negro population is confined almost
entirely to the South Central and South Atlantic states.
The diagram on Plate No. INS represents the propor
tion of negroes in the total population in each of the
Southern states, from 1790 to 1910, or for each census
at which they were returned. South Carolina had a
larger proportion of negro population than any other
state at each census from 1790 to 1890, but in 1900
the number of negroes in Mississippi had increased to
58.5 percent, while in South Carolina the per cent had
fallen to 58.4. In 1910 Mississippi had the highest per
cent age, 56.2, and South Carolina was second, wit h 55.2.
On the four maps on Plate No. 189 the light shading
indicates the counties in the Southern states having at
least 50 per cent of their population negroes in 1860,
18S0, 1900, and 1910. The heavier shaded area indi
cates the counties having 75 per cent or more of their
population negroes. The only states having counties
so shaded are South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama,
Florida, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas.
The per cent of negroes in the total population, by
counties, in each of the Southern states in 1910, is
indicated in seven groups, by the different shading,
on Plates Nos. 190 to 200. The states having the
greatest proportion of negroes in their population are
Mississippi, 56.2 per cent, and South Carolina, 55.2
per cent. These states also have the counties with
the largest percentage of negroes, Mississippi being
first with 17 counties having more than 75 per cent
negro, and 21 counties with 50 to 75 per cent negro;
and South Carolina second, with 4 counties having over
75 percent negro, and 29 counties with 50 to 75 per
cent. Issaquena County, Mississippi, with 94.2 per
cent, has the greatest proportion of negroes in any
county in the United States, while Beaufort County,
South Carolina, with 86.9 percent negro, has the highest
percentage in that state. There are also a number of
counties in North Carolina, Alabama, and I^ouisiana
that have a high percentage of negroes. Georgia has
66 counties in which this element forms more than 50
per cent of the population.
There were in the United States in 1910,53 counties
with 75 per cent and over of their population negro
and 211 counties with 50 to 75 per cent of their
population negro.
INDIAN POPULATION.

Map 1 on Plate No. 201 shows the distribution of the
Indian population of the United States, by states, in

1910, and Map 2 the proportion of full-bloods in the
Indian population in 1910. The state of Oklahoma
has the greatest number of Indians, as it comprises
the area formerly known as the Indian Territory, and,
while the proportion of the Indians to the total popu
lation is not as great as in a few counties in other
state's, it is due to the fact that the reservations were
thrown open to settlement after the Indian lands were
allotted and all available land occupied by white
settlers. The growth of the white population from
172,554 in 1890 to 1.444,531 in 1910 is an evidence of
the most rapid settlement of a territory in the history
of the United States.
SEX DISTRIBUTION.

Plate No. 202, map of the United States, presents,
by the different shading, the proportion of males to
females in 1910, by counties— that is, the county is
taken as the unit. Females were in excess in a num
ber of counties in the Eastern states, also in a few
counties in the West, two in Utah, two in South
Dakota, one in Kansas, and seven in Texas. Every
state east of the Mississippi River, with the exception
of Delaware, had one or more counties in which the
females were in excess, while west of the Mississippi
River there were only seven states that had any
counties in which the females exceeded the males.
In the states of Montana, Wyoming, and Nevada, in
ever}* county the males were in excess at least 20 per
cent. This map is of great interest, as it indicates
those portions of the country in which the males are
in excess, also the states in which the females exceed
the males.
Plate No. 203, Map 1, indicates the proportion of
males to females in the total population at the Thir
teenth Census, by states. The females are in excess
in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, District
of Columbia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. In
1910 the states having the greatest proportion of
males to females were Nevada, with 179.2, Wyoming
with 168.8, and Montana with 152.1 males to each
100 females. The proportion for the United States is
106 males to each 100 females. The excess of males
is due principally to the large foreign immigration, in
which the males largely outnumber the females. The
map brings out the fact that no geographic division
east of the Mississippi River had, in 1910, more than
106 males to 100 females, the l nited States average,
but in all of the western divisions the proportion is
much higher, the Pacific division reaching a total of
129 males to 100 females. This is, undoubtedly, due
to the migration of the native male population from
the Eastern states to ( alifomia, Oregon, and Washing
ton. The sections which have been recently settled
in that part of the country give more opportunity for
the labor of men than of women.
Plate No. 204, Diagram 1, shows the number of males
to 100 females in urban and rural communities in 1910,

POPUI ATIOX.
by geographic divisions. The large proportion of
males to females in the rural section of the Mountain
and Pacific divisions is well brought out. In the Xcw
England, South Atlantic, and East South Central
divisions, the females in urban areas, especially adja
cent to the large cities, exceed the males, but in all
divisions the males are in excess in the rural areas.

the Chinese have the smallest proportion. In the 25
to 44 group the Japanese have the largest proportion
ami the Indians the smallest. O f tin* ages 45 to 64
the Chinese have tin* largest proportion and tin* Japa
nese the smallest. O f the group 65 and over the
foreign-bom white have the largest proportion and
the Japanese the smallest.
The influence of immigration on the age com|>osition
AGE DISTRIBUTION.
of the native population is evident, as compared with
Diagram 2, on Plate No. 203, distribution by age the native white of native parentage. The age dis
and sex of the total population by single years of ago,
tribution of the native white is affected indirectly by
presents very strikingly the irregularity in the pro immigration, but the extent to which it is affected
portion of the ages of the population as returned in is hard to determine. A comparison of the bars for
1910. A normal diagram should form a perfect pyra the various elements of the population with that of
mid, each bar representing an age period being the total population shows that the abnormal number
smaller than the one below it. The sexes arc nearly in certain age periods is due to the foreign immigra
equally divided, but the abnormal length of the bars,
tion; if immigration were to cease for a number of
especially for the periods ending in zero or in 5, stand years, the proportion of children below 15 years of
out in the diagram. These irregularities are due age, as compared with the adults, would be much
almost entirely to errors in the returns, and it will bo greater, as the age distribution of the foreign born
noted on the diagram, particularly the length of the affects materially that of the entire population.
bar indicating 30 years of age (for both males and
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 204, distribution by ago
females), ns compared with the bars for 29 and 31
periods of the native white, native negro, and foreignyears of age. The same disproportion or irregularity born white population in 1910, shows in millions the
is shown for the ages 40, 50, 60, and 70 years. After total number in each ago period and delineates very
70 years of age the pyramid becomes nearly normal, clearly the excess of foreign born in the age groups above
ami after SO there is apparently no tendency to con
15 and below 50. The gradual reduction of the negroes
centrate on certain ages. The disproportion in the and the native white of native parentage shows that in
ages below 50 years can not be charged entirely to
these two classes the number of persons in each age
errors in the returns, however, as the foreign immi period is nearly normal. The native white of foreigngration contains a large proportion of male adults born or mixed parentage more closely approaches the
and increases the proportion in the ages above 15.
normal but is somewhat affected by the other two
Plate No. 204, Diagram 2, distribution of the total classes.
population in 1910, by age periods and by each class,
There are certain errors in the statement of the ages
shows the large proportion of adults among the Chi of young children, especially noticeable among negroes
nese, Japanese, and foreign-bora white population.
under 5 aind from 5 to 9. It is a well-grounded principle
The heavy line in the center marked zero is the line that the largest proportion of the population in any age
of 15 years of age, and there are two groups to the left group is in the youngest age, the bar, therefore, pre
and four to the right of the line. The groups below senting 0 to 5 should be much larger than 5 to 9, and
15 (under 5, and 5 to 14) are on the left. The re the bars should gradually lessen for each of the higher
mainder of the bar to the right of the heavy black age groups. The bars should form an almost perfect
line represents the four age groups, from 15 to 24, 25 pyramid and the differences in length be noarlv uni
form, so far as the negro population and the native
to 44, 45 to 64, and 65 and over.
Taking up the groups under 15 years of age, in the white of native parentage are concerned. The differ
under 5 group the smallest proportion is shown (omit ences in the other two classes are due to the dispro
ting the “ all other” class), in the foreign-bora white, portionate number of the foreign born in the higher
the next lowest proportion being in the Chinese, due age groups. The departures from the normal in the
to the fact that practically all of the Chinese immigra first two classes are due to misstatements of the ages
tion is made up of males of adult age. The Japanese of the children and the tendency to return the age in
also have a low proportion, ranking next to, but a a number ending with a zero or 5.
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 204 shows the distribution
trifle above, the Chinese. The largest proportion of
children under 5 are among the Indians. The greatest , by age periods of the total population and each princi
number of children from 5 to 14 will be noted in the pal class in 1910, 1900, and 1K90. This diagram pre
native white of mixed parentage. In the age groups sents very clearly the abnormal number of the foreign
above 15 the largest proportion of the 15 to 24 group born in the older age groups, and that the same condi
is noted in the native white of mixed parentage, while j tion has existed at the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Tliir-

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

teenth Censuses. The proportions can therefore again i of the principal classes, and, as no two of the diagrams
be considered as practically the same at each of are identical in form, it is evident that the diagram
the enumerations. The greatest change shown since that is not affected by the abnormal grouping of the
1890 is the change in the age distribution of the native foreign-born white population is that representing the
whites of foreign or mixed parentage; this difference negro population, although the diagram ol the native
is probably due to the variation in the volume of immi white of native parents is but slightly affected by this
factor. The abnormal differences between the lengths
gration during the different decades.
In Diagram 1 on Plate Xo. 205, the distribution by of the bars for certain age groups of the foreign-born
age periods of the total population by geographic white population, as compared with the same ages on
divisions in 1910, it will be noticed that the three the other diagrams, clearly indicates the excess of the
southern divisions had a very high proportion in the males over the females, and the preponderance of the
age groups below 25 years, especially in the West South ages from 20 to 40 years. The diagrams for the native
Central division. In the West South Central division white of native parentage and the negro should show
59.4 per cent and in the East South Central division the same proportion in each age group, but the differ
58.5 per cent of the population was under 25 years of ence is, undoubtedly, due to the erroneous statements
age, as compared with 45.5 per cent in the New Eng in the ages of the negroes, especially for the children
in the two groups under 5 and from 5 to 9.
land division and 42.9 per cent in the Pacific division.
This is, undoubtedly, due to the large number of
M ARITAL CONDITION.
negroes and small number of the foreign born in the
South.
Diagram 1 on Plate Xo. 207 presents the marital con
Diagram 2 on Plate Xo. 205 shows the distribution
dition of the total population 15 years of age and over,
by ago periods and sex of total population for 1910. by geographic divisions, in 1910. This diagram shows
The percentages which this diagram represents are the proportion of the single, married, and widowed or
based upon the total population. The diagram also divorced in the total number of persons 15 years of
brings out very clearly the effect of the abnormal age age and over, classified by sex. In the New England
periods of the foreign-born population, especially in division there were a larger number of males reported
the groups from 10 to 25 years of age, and particularly
married than females, and a larger number of females
for males.
reported as widowed or divorced than males. In each
Diagram 3 on Plate Xo. 205 shows, by age periods,
division and in the United States total more males than
the distribution of the urban and rural population in females were reported as single, while in every division
1910, by geographic divisions. Only three age periods
the number returned as widowed or divorced was
are given—under 15, 15 to 44, and 45 and over. The greater for the females than for the males; for every
larger proportion of the population in rural com division, except New England, there were more females
munities in the lower age group, under 15, will be than males reported as married, the percentage re
noted in the South Atlantic, East South Central, and ported as married in the Middle Atlantic division being
West South Central divisions. The Pacific division exactly the same for both sexes. In the Mountain
has the largest proportion of its population over 15 division the proportion of females reported as married
years of age in the urban class, a higher percentage was 15 per cent more than that of the males; in this
than in any other division.
same division there were 20 per cent more males re
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 205 shows the distribution,
ported as single than females. The East South Cen
by age periods and sex, of the total population and of
tral division had the highest proportion of widowed
each principal class in 1910. The abnormal number
for both male and female, 5.1 and 11.8 per cent, respec
of persons in the age groups above 15 years is shown
tively, the proportion in the New England division is
for the foreign-born white, both male and female, the
a little lower for the females, being 11.5 per cent, and
proportion in the female being slightly less than in the the males 5.1 per cent, exactly the same.
male. For the other elements the males and females
Diagram 2, on the same plate, shows the marital
for the age group 25 to 44 are almost identical in their
condition of principal classes of the population, by age
proportion of the population in the four age groups.
periods, in 1910. The periods used in the preparation
The distribution of the principal elements of the
of this diagram may be termed1 broad age periods," as
1
population by ago periods and sex is graphically pre
there are only three groups— 15 to 24 years, 25 to 44
sented on Plate No. 206.
years, and 45 years of age and over. These broad age
Diagram 1 illustrates the proportion of the native
groups are entirely satisfactory for the purpose of
white of native parentage; Diagram 2, the native white
measuring the differences in the four classes by sex.
of foreign or mixed parentage; Diagram 3, the foreignTheheavy line marked “ zero" separates the diagram into
boni white; and Diagram 4, the negro.
two parts, the left section representing the single and
A comparison of these four diagrams directs the
t e section on the right of the line the married and
attention to the wide differences in the age distribution
wi owe d or divorced. The classification used is native

POPULATION.

white of native parentage, native white of foreign or California, Texas, Louisiana, and Florida have the
mixed parentage, foreign-horn white, and negro. Each smallest percentage of the population bom in these
class was divided into single, married, and widowed states who are living in other states, while New Hamp
or divorced, and, as indicated on the previous diagram, shire. Vermont. Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Wyoming,
each age period included in group 15 to 24 contained and Nevada have the largest percentage of the popu
a large proportion of both males and females who were i lation horn in the state living in other states.
single, the per cent of males in each of the four classes
On Map 2, per cent of tin* native population living
being higher than for the females. On the right of the in each state born in other states, it will be noticed
line the proportion ol the married and the widowed or that most of the stat»*s east of the Mississippi were in
divorced females exceed the males in each class. In the low percentage groups, with the exception of
the next group, 25 to 44, a marked decline in the num Florida, this state having the highest percentage of the
ber of single persons in each class and a huge increase native population living in the state born in other
in the number of married and widowed or divorced states. The Western states, almost without exception,
will be noted, the single males outnumbering the single have a large proportion of the native population living
females and the married females outnumbering the in the state who were born in other states. The marked
married males for each of the four classes; this is also exception is Utah, which has a smaller proportion of
true of the widowed or divorced. In the third age its population born in other states who are living in
group, 45 years and over, the difference between the the state than any other state west of the Mississippi,
percentage of the single males and females is greatly except Louisiana.
On Diagram 1, Plate No. 209, is shown the aggre
reduced, and in the first class, native white of native
parentage, the proportion of both sexes is nearly equal, gate migration of the native population from and to
that of the females being a little larger than that of the each state, as reported at the Thirteenth Census. The
states are arranged in geographic order and, on the
males.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 207 shows the marital con left of the diagram, the number of persons bom in
dition of the adult population for 1010, in eight age peri the state who are living in other states is shown. On
ods, by sex. The diagram is divided into sections by the the opposite side appears the number of persons living
heavy line under the zero. The percentages for single in the state who were born in other states. It is
persons are on the left, and for the married and wid especially noticeable that for New York 1,317,398
owed or divorced on the right. The ages considered persons were born in the state and are living in other
were for adults 15 years and over. In the lower group, state's, and but 686,616 living in the state who were
15 to 10, a very small proportion of the males was re bom in other states; in other words, New York has lost
ported as married, the females showing a much larger through interstate migrationover600,000natives. Illi
percentage. The proportion of females married and nois also has lost through interstate migration, as there
widowed or divorced is liighcr than for males in all the are 1,308,085 natives of the state living in other state's.
age periods below 65 years and over. In this group The Western states, especially those in the Mountain
the percentage of single males and females is almost and Pacific divisions, have gained through interstate
the same; in the married class the males show almost migration. The state of Oklahoma, with 1,092,844
double the percentage of the females, while for wid persons who were* born in either state's, has a larger
owed or divorced the percentage for females is more number of that class of immigrants than any other
than double that of the males. In all the age groups state, not excepting the more populous states of
below 65 years, for those who were returned as single, New York, Pennsylvania, and Illinois. Illinois, with
the males form a larger percentage than the females, 997,189, ranks next to Oklahoma; Texas, with 907,908
the difference being greatest in the age group 20 to 24, residents who were born in other states, is third; these
with a gradual reduction in the higher ages to the age three states have lost a comparatively small number
group 65 and over. The proportion married among through migration to other states.
In Diagram 2 on Plate No. 209 net gain or net loss
the males increased from the low group to the age
through interstate migration in 1910 is represented.
group 45 to 54. For the higher age groups, 55 to 64
and 65 and over, the proportion decreased rapidly. The only state in the West South Central division which
The married and widowed or divorced combined shows a net loss through interstate migration is Louisi
showed an increase in percentage at each age period ana; the loss, however, was small. In the Mountain
above 15 to 19 years. The diagram brings out very division Utah shows a slight loss through interstate
clearly the prevailing difference between men and migration. In the Pacific division all the states made
great gains through interstate migration. New York,
women as to age at marriage.
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennes
INTERSTATE MIGRATION.
see lost heavily through interstate migration. Exclud
Map 1 on Plate No. 208, per cent of the population ing the District of Columbia, 23 states lost by inter
bom in each state, living in other states, in 1910. state migration and 25 gained.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 210 shows the per cent dis
tribution of the natives of each state, as living in the
state or living in other states, in 1910. California and
Florida have the smallest percentage of persons born
in the state who are living in other states, while Ne
vada and Vermont have the largest proportion born in
the state and living in other states. There were only
seven states— New Hampshire, Kansas, Vermont, Dela
ware, Iowa, Wyoming, and Nevada—in which the pro
portion of the population born in the state and living
in the state is less than 70 percent, and in 41 of the 48
states more than seven-tenths of the native popula
tion born in the state is living in the state.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 210 is interesting in indicat
ing the proportion of the population of each state as
bom in the state, born in other states, or foreign bom,
as returned at the Thirteenth Census. When the
foreign born is considered in connection with persons
born in the state, the states of Wyoming and Wash
ington have less than 25 per cent of their total popu
lation born in the state of residence. The highest
proportions of foreign-born population appear in
Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and Con
necticut, in the order named. The states which
had over 75 per cent of the total population of each
state born in the state are Maine, Indiana, Maryland,
Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Caro
lina. Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Missis
sippi, and Louisiana.
The small map (3) on Plate No. 210 indicates for 1910,
by the shaded lines, the states which lost through inter
state migration, the unshaded states having gained.
The small map (4) on Plate No. 210 shows the states
having gained or lost through all migration in 1910.
Some of the states which lost through interstate migra
tion have gained, when the foreign element is also con
sidered. The gain for these states, therefore, is entirely
due to the foreign-born population.
FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 211 indicates, by the length
of the bars, the number of natives of each of the
principal foreign countries that were returned at each
census, from 1850 to 1910. The countries are ranked
according to the number returned in 1910, the country
with the largest number appearing first. The dia
gram presents most strikingly the change that has taken
place in the character of the foreign-born population
since 1850. The natives of Germany increased in num
bers from 1850 to 1900, but in 1910 there was a falling
off. There was a comparatively small number of
natives of Russia and Finland and Austria-Hungary
returned at the censuses prior to 1900. Increasing
numbers of Irish are found at each census from 1850 to
1890, when the highest mark was reached; since then the
number has steadily decreased. The natives of Italy,

like those of Austria-Hungary, came in great numbers
to this country between 1890 and 1900, and especially
between 1900 and 1910. Norway, Sweden, and Den
mark combined have had a constant increase at each
census since 1850, the largest number having been
enumerated in 1910. Natives of England, Scotland,
and Wales increased from 1850 to and including 1890;
1900 showed a slight decrease from the previous
enumeration, but in 1910 an increase over the 1900
census was reported. The natives o f Canada and New
foundland increased at each enumeration from 1850
to 1910, although the increase from 1900 to 1910 was
small.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 211 shows the increase and
decrease from 1900 to 1910, or the net result of the im
migration from these countries. As previously stated,
Germany leads at both enumerations, but shows a de
crease from 1900 to 1910. Russia and Finland shows a
large increase, as does Austria-Hungary. In 1900 Ire
land was second in point of the number of its natives
returned in the United States, but in 1910 it had fallen
to the fourth place, and the number enumerated was
less than in 1900. Italy, which had in 1900 the smallest
returns of the eight countries shown on the diagram,
was fifth in rank in 1910. England, Scotland, and
Wales showed a slight increase, as did Canada and
Newfoundland. Norway, Sweden, and Denmark oc
cupied fifth place in 1900 and sixth in 1910.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 211 indicates, by the length of
the bars, the number of natives returned at the census
of 1910, from each of the foreign countries that were
tabulated separately, the countries being arranged in
the order of the total number returned by the enumera
tors at the Thirteenth Census. As in the previous
diagrams, Germany has the largest number. There
were 2,501,333 natives of Germany returned in 1910;
this was over three-quarters of a million more than was
returned from any other country. The smallest num
ber returned for any country which was tabulated
separately was 1,736, from Central America.
Plate No. 212, Diagram 1. The four circles are
proportionate in size to the total foreign-born popula
tion returned at the censuses of 1850, 1870, 1890, and
1910. The divisions of each circle present the per
centage of distribution of the foreign-born population
1 \ principal countries of birth at each of the censuses
>
specified.
In 1850 the natives of Ireland (42.8 per cent), Ger
main (26 per cent), and Great Britain (16.9 per
cent) formed 85.7 per cent of the foreign-born popu
lation. In 1870 the same countries fu r n ish e d 77.5 per
cent of our foreign born. Germany increased its pro
I
portion of the foreign-born population and was nearly
equal to the Irish, the percentage being 33.3 for
Ireland against 30.4 for Germany. In^ 1S00 the
1
Germans outnumbered the Irish at the rate of

POPUL ATION.
30.1 to 20.2 ]>or cent of the total foreign bom. In
1910 Germany was again the country furnishing a
larger porportion than any other, with 18.5 percent;
Russia and Finland, with 12.8 per cent, and AustriaHungary, with 12.4 per cent, were second and third,
respectively, Ireland having fallen to the fourth place,
with 10 per cent. The circles present graphically
the great change that has taken place in the composition of our foreign-born population since 1850.
In Diagram 2 the two circles are in proportion to
the total foreign-horn population returned in 1910 and
1900. They also indicate, by the size of the divisions,
the proportion the foreign element from each of the
principal countries of birth forms of the total. In
1900 Germany ranked first, with 27.2 per cent; Ireland
was second, with 15.0 per cent; Canada and New
foundland third, with 11.4 per cent; Great Britain
fourth, with 11.3 percent; Norway, Sweden, and Den
mark combined fifth, with 10.4 per cent; AustriaHungary sixth, with 0.2 per cent; Russia and Finland
seventh, with 0.2 per cent; and Italy eighth, with 4.7
percent. In 1910 Germany ranked first in the num
ber of foreign horn; Russia and Finland had advanced
from the seventh place to the second; Austria-Hungary
had advanced from sixth to third; Ireland had
dropped from the second to the fourth place; Italy
had advanced from eighth to fifth; Norway, Sweden,
and Denmark dropped from fifth to sixth place; and
Great Britain had fallen from fourth place to the
seventh.
The series of circles on Plate No. 213 represent the
foreign-horn population of each geographic division,
and the sectors of the circles indicate the proportion
the natives of each of the principal countries of birth
form of the total foreign born of the geographic divi
sion. For instance, in the New England division
the Germans form the smallest proportion, while the
natives of Ireland and Canada and Newfoundland
form large proportions of the foreign element. In the
Middle Atlantic division, Russia and Finland, AustriaHungary, Italy, and Germany have the largest sectors.
In the East North Central division the Germans far
exceed all others, the natives of Austria-Hungary
ranking next in order. In the West North Central
division, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark combined
rank first and Germany second. The Germans lead
in the South Atlantic, the East South Central, and the
West South Central divisions. Thenatives of England,
Scotland, and Wales combined rank fiist in the Moun
tain division, and the Scandinavians rank first in the
Pacific division. The countries are arranged in the
same order on all the circles.
Plate No. 214 is made up of nine small diagrams,
each diagram showing, by the length of the bars, t e
number of the natives of the principal foreign countries
in that geographic division, in 1910 and 1900.
e

I countries are ranked according to the number of
natives returned in 1910.
In the New England division the natives of Canada
and Newfoundland led in the number returned at
I both censuses. The natives of Russia and Finland
were most numerous in the Middle Atlantic division
in 1910, hut in 1900 the Germans were first. In the
j East North Central division tin* Germans led in both
1910 and 1900, hut their number had decreased.
In
I the West North Central division the natives of Nor
way, Sweden, and Denmark combined led in 1910,
hut in 1900 Germany ranked first. For the South
Atlantic and East South Central divisions the Ger
mans led at both censuses. In the West South Cent rid
division the natives of Mexico led at both censuses.
In the Mountain division native's of England, Scot
land, and Wales combined were in the lead in both
1910 and 1900. The natives of Norway, Sweden, and
Denmark ranked first in the Pacific division in 1910, hut
in 1900 the Germans were the most numerous. Com
paring all the diagrams, the largest number of the
natives of Russia ami Finland were found in the
Middle Atlantic division, while the largest number of
Germans were returned in the East North Central
division. The natives of Canada and Newfoundland
were most numerous in New England, and the natives
of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark were most prom
inent in the West North Central division. The largest
number of the natives of England. Scotland, and
Walt*s was found in the Middle Atlantic division, and
the largest number of Italians was returned in the
Middle Atlantic division. There were more natives of
Ireland returned in the Middle Atlantic division than
in any other.
Plates Nos. 215 and 210 are composed of four
diagrams each, showing, for 1910 and 1900, by double
bars, the natives of certain foreign countries, by states,
the states being ranked according to the number re
turned, with the largest first. Diagram 1 on Plate
No. 215 presents the natives of Germany; Diagram 2,
natives of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark; Diagram 3,
Ireland; and Diagram 4, Austria-Hungary. Diagram
1 on Plate No. 210 shows the natives of Russia and
Finland; Diagram 2, Italy; Diagram 3, Canada and
Newfoundland; and Diagram 4, England, Scotland,
and Wall's.
A comparison of the eight diagrams on these plates,
as to the states leading in the number of foreign horn
of each country returned in 1910, brings into relief the
composition of the foreign population of those states
which receive large numbers of immigrants.
New York has the greatest number of natives of
Germany, Ireland, Russia and Finland, Italy, and of
England, Scotland, and Wales. This state is second
in the number of natives of Austria-Hungary, third in
the number of natives of Canada and Newfoundland,

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

and fourth in the number of natives of Norway,
Sweden, and Denmark. Pennsylvania leads in the
number of natives of Austria-IIungary; is second in
the number of natives of Russia and Finland, Ital%
\,
and England, Scotland, and Wales; is third in the
number of natives of Ireland; and fourth in the num
ber of Germans. Minnesota leads in the number of
natives of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark; Illinois is
second, and Wisconsin third. In fact, of the eight
countries shown, New ^ ork leads in five; Minnesota
in one (number of natives from Norway, Sweden, and
Denmark); Pennsylvania in one (natives of AustriaHungary); and Massachusetts in one (the number of
natives of Canada ami Newfoundland). The diagrams
bring out clearly the decrease in the number of natives
of Germany and Ireland in the various states from
1900 to 1910, also the great increase in the number of
natives of Austria-IIungary and of Russia and Fin
land from 1900 to 1910. In fact, the natives of
Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Russia and Finland in
the states of New York and Pennsylvania have more
than doubled in the 10 years since 1900.
Plate No. 217 is composed of six small maps, pre
senting graphically the percentage of the population
of each state, at the Thirteenth Census, born in the
foreign countries specified, and locates geographically
the states that returned the greatest proportion of
the natives of (1) Germany, (2) Russia and Finland,
(3) Austria-Hungary, (4) Ireland, (5) Italy, and (6)
Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. Considering the
proportion, and not the number of persons re
turned, the Germans form a larger proportion of
the total population of Wisconsin (10 per cent)
and Illinois (5.7 per cent) than of any other state.
New York (6.2 per cent) and North Dakota (5.7
per cent) have the highest percentage of natives
of Russia and Finland. The greatest number of
natives of Austria-Hungary, also the highest per
centage (4.9), is found in Pennsylvania. The highest
percentage of natives of Ireland is found in Massa
chusetts (6.6 per cent) and Rhode Island (5.5 per
cent). The greatest number of Italians, also the
highest percentage, are found in New York (5.2 per
cent). The largest percentage of the natives of
Norway, Sweden, and Denmark combined is found
in Minnesota (11.8 per cent), with North Dakota (11
per cent), South Dakota (6.4 per cent), and Wash
ington (6 per cent) ranking in the order named. The
natives of England, Scotland, and Wales, as presented
by Map 1, Plate 218, are widely distributed, the high
est percentage being found in Rhode Island (6.3 per
cent), and the next largest proportion in Utah (6 per
cent). The natives of Canada and Newfoundland form
the largest proportion in the New England states of
New Hampshire (13.5 per cent) and Maine (10.3 per
cent), as shown on Map 2 of the same plate.

Diagram 4, Plate No. 218, is made up of two small
diagrams, the one on the left representing the distri
bution of the Japanese in 1910 and 1900 in the cities
having the largest number of that element of the
population, and the diagram on the right giving simi
lar data for the Chinese. The bars are arranged with
the city having the largest number in 1910 at the
top, the others following in order. As the Japanese
and Chinese are largely distributed through the great
cities, it is deemed advisable to simply show the pop
ulation for these cities in which the Japanese and
Chinese formed a fair proportion of the population.
The first diagram, the Japanese, shows that Seattle
had the largest number, followed by San Francisco,
Los Angeles, Oakland, Portland, and Sacramento, in
the order named. These were the only cities having
more than 1,200 Japanese at the Thirteenth Census.
It will be noted from the shaded bar, representing
1900, that the number of Japanese in each of these
cities has increased largely since that date, Los Angeles
showing the highest percentage of increase of the cities
mentioned.
On the diagram representing the Chinese, San Fran
cisco led, with Portland, New York, Oakland, Los
Angeles, and Chicago, the only cities reporting over
1,200 Chinese in 1910, following in the order named.
It will be noted from the difference in the length of
the bars that the number of Chinese in San Francisco,
Portland, New York, and Los Angeles has decreased
since 1900, while in Oakland and Chicago the number
has increased.
The Japanese population in the 12 cities shown in
the diagram formed 33.1 per cent of the total Japanese
population of the United States, and the Chinese
shown in the dozen cities listed formed 47.6 per cent
of the total Chinese population of the United States
in 1910.
FOREIGN WHITE STOCK.

Great interest is taken, not only in the number of
natives of foreign countries residing in the United
States, but also in the number of persons born in the
United States of foreign parentage. For brevity the
term “ foreign white stock” is used to indicate the
combined total of tliree classes— the foreign-born
whites, the native whites of foreign parentage, and the
native whites of mixed parentage that is, one parent
foreign born and one parent native. The term “ coun
try of origin " is used not only to signify the country of
birth of the person enumerated, but also the country
of birth of the foreign-born parent or parents.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 218 presents the foreign
white stock by principal countries of origin, for 1910, in
the three classes just described. The largest number
were from Germany, the bar being shaded to indicate
first the number born in Germany; second, the number

POPULATION.

horn in this country, both parents born in Germany;
and third, the native with one parent born in Germany
and tlie other in the l nited States. The same designa
tions are carried out through all the bars. One pecu
liarity will be noticed in the bars for the countries which
have only recently begun to send large numbers of their
natives to the United States. Of Germany, Ireland,
Canada, and England, the foreign white stock includes
a large number of one parent bora in the specified
country and one in the United States. The bar for
Russia and Finland, as well as those for Italy, Austria,
and Hungary, have a very small proportion in this
class. In other words, the Russians, Italians, and
Austro-Ilungarians are not intermarrying with natives
of the United States to such an extent as the Germans,
Irish, Canadians, and English.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 219 presents the percentage
of foreign white stock, by eight principal countries of
origin, in 1910. Germany leads with 25.7 per cent of
the total, followed, in order of percentage, by Ireland,
with 14 per cent; England, Scotland, and Wales
combined, with 10 per cent; Canada, with 8.0 per
cent; and Russia and Finland, with 8.5 per cent.
These are the only countries forming 8.5 per cent or
more of the foreign white stock. These five coun
tries are followed by Austria-IIungary and Norway,
Sweden, and Denmark, with 8.4 per cent. The three
countries of Germany, Ireland, and England, Scotland,
and Wales combined, form 49.7 per cent, practically
50 per cent, of the total foreign white stock.

those for the circle indicating the native of foreign
stock.
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 219 shows the foreign white
stock, by principal mother tongues, in 1910. The
English and Celtic is the most largely represented of
the foreign white stock in the United States, there
being over 10,000,000 people in that group; it is
closely followed by the Germans, with a little less
than 9,000,000. The other mother tongues are mueh
smaller, the Italians having a little over 2,000,000,
followed by Polish, Yiddish and Hebrew, Swedish,
French, ami Norwegian, each of these having in its
group more than 1,000,000 people, the total for all
mother tongues being 32,243,382. The English and
Celtic and Germans together contribute more than
one-half of tin* total.
Diagram 5 on the same plate represents, by the
different shading of tin' bars, the three elements of the
foreign white stock, by principal mother tongues, in
1910, each bar being divided into foreign-born white;
native white, both parents foreign born; and native*
white, one parent foreign bora and one native. This
diagram brings out the difference in the proportion of
the above described elements especially the native
white, one parent foreign born and one native. This
element has a much larger proportion in the groups of
English and Celtic and Germanic than in any of the
others. The Swedish, French, and Norwegian show a
much larger proportion of this element than do the
Italians, Polish, and Yiddish and Hebrew.

MOTHER TONGUE.

IMMIGRATION.

Plate No. 220 presents, by the length of the bars,
The census act of July 2, 1909, was amended bv
the immigration of the foreign-bora population in
Public Resolution No. 23, approved March 24, 1910,
to include an inquiry as to the nationality or mother two divisions— those arriving in the United States
tongue. The Thirteenth Census was therefore the I before January 1, 1901, and those arriving after Jan
first enumeration to include an inquiry as to the mother uary 1, 1901, in each state and territory, arranged by
geographic divisions.
tongue of the foreign-bora population.
The difference in the length of the two bars indi
The circle, Diagram 2, Plate No. 219, indicates, by
the size of the sectors, the per cent of the foreign white cates strikingly the large proportion of the immigra
stock in each of the linguistic groups or mother tongues tion in certain states that has arrived in this country
in 1910. The English and Celtic are the most preva since January 1, 1901. This is especially noticeable
in the New England and Middle Atlantic states. In
lent, forming 31.1 per cent; with Germanic second,
28.5 percen t; Latin and Greek third, 13.3 per cent; the West North Central division the contrary will be
noted—that is, that the bars representing the arrivals
and Slavic and Lettic fourth, 10.1 per cent.
The circles in Diagram 3 represent for 1910 the total before January 1, 1901, are much longer than the bars
foreign born (on the left), and the total native of for representing the arrivals after January 1, 1901. The
large number of the foreign born who were returned
eign stock (on the right), by linguistic groups. Each
circle is divided into sectors proportional to the size of from the state of New York, as compared with the
the group. Comparing the circle for the foreign bora other states, is also indicated by the length of the bars
with that for the native of foreign stock, the difference on the diagram. The large number of immigrants in
in size of the sectors of the two circles shows that the the first four geographic divisions, as compared with
the last five divisions on the diagram, is especially
English and Celtic and the Germanic elements are much
larger in the total native of foreign stock than in tlie noticeable. The states of West Virginia, Wyoming,
foreign born. For tho other elements, Slavic and Let- and Arizona are the only states in which the number
tic, Latin and Greek, and Scandinavian, the sectors for of immigrants arriving after January 1, 1901, exceeds
the circle indicating the foreign born are larger than the number arriving before that date.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

VOTING AGE, MILITIA AGE, AND NATURALIZATION.

Tin* two diagrams on Plato No. 221 show the dis
tribution of the males 21 years of age and over, bj
color or race, nativity, and parentage, for the several
states, at the censuses of 1910 and 1900. The propor
tion in each state is almost the same as on the diagram
for the total population. The largest proportion of
native wliito of native parents at both censuses was
found in West Virginia, with Kentucky second and
Oklahoma third in 1910, and Oklahoma second and
Kentucky third in 1900. Minnesota led in the num
ber of foreign-born white, with Rhode Island second,
and North Dakota third, in 1910; in 1900, North
Dakota was first, Minnesota second, Wisconsin third,
and Rhode Island fourth. In the proportion of native
white of foreign or mixed parentage W isconsin led
both in 1910 and 1900, with Utah second at both cen
suses. The large proportion of negroes in the states
of the South Atlantic and East South Central divisions
is indicated by the black portion of the bars, the pro
portions being practically the same for both 1910 ami
1900. The foreign element was small in these same
divisions and formed about the same proportion of the
population at each census.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 222 shows the color or race,
nativity, and parentage of males 21 years of age and
over in urban and rural communities, by geographic
divisions, in 1910. The large proportion of the foreignborn white males 21 years of age and over in the urban
communities, as compared with the rural communities,
is shown for all the divisions except the Mountain and
Pacific. In the Mountain division only do the rural
communities have a larger proportion of the foreignbom white than the urban; in the Pacific division
the proportion is almost the same in both com
munities. In every geographic division, with the ex
ception of the West North Central, the proportion
of native wliite of foreign or mixed parentage is
larger in the urban communities than in the rural,
and, conversely, the proportion of natives of native
parentage is much larger in the rural communities
than in the urban. The New England division with
69.1 per cent, has the largest proportion of native
white of native parentage in the rural communities,
closely followed by the East South Central (67.3 per
cent), the West South Central (65.8 per cent), and
the South Atlantic (63.1 per cent). In each of these
divisions over 60 per cent of the male population
21 years of age and over in rural areas is native white
of native parentage.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 222, presenting the propor
tion of foreign-bom white males 21 years of age ami
over, by citizenship and country of birth, in 1910, is
divided into two parts by a heavy black line in the cen
ter, the left side indicating the percentage of the foreignbom white males who are naturalized, have taken out

first papers, or the status of whose naturalization was
not reported. On the light side of the diagram is in
dicated the percentage of the population who are alien.
The width of the bars, representing each of the prin
cipal foreign countries, is in accordance with the num
ber returned in 1910, arranged with the country
having the highest percentage of foreign-born white
males at the bottom. The percentage alien was
highest among the natives of Bulgaria, Servia, Mon
tenegro, etc., and lowest for the natives of Germany.
The European countries having over 45 per cent
aliens were countries of southern or eastern Europe;
in the remaining European countries, except Belgium
and Luxemburg, France, and Scotland, the proportion
of aliens was less than 20 per cent of the total number
reported. The percentage alien for natives of Mexico
was 66.6, that of Cuba and other West Indies 44.2, and
for Canada and Newfoundland together 28.3, while
among the French Canadians it was 40.2. The large
proportion of the bars on the left side of the diagram
is due to the large percentage of male immigrants from
certain countries who have become naturalized or
have taken out their first papers.
f

SCHOOL ATTENDANCE.

Diagram 3 on Plate No. 222 indicates, by the rise
and fall of the curve, the percentage for single years of
age of the population of school age (6 to 20 years),
attending school during the school year of 1909-10.
The curve, beginning at 52.1 per cent, at the age of 6,
rises rapidly and reaches its highest point, 91.2 per
cent, at the age of 11 years, decreasing slightly to 14,
then rapidly at each age, until at 20 years of age the
per cent is 8.4. The curve shows that among children
from the ages of 6 to 16, more than 50 percent are at
tending school.
The four curved lines on Diagram 4 on Plate No. 222
indicate the per cent attending school in the total
population and in certain classes at each year from 6 to
20 years of ago, during the school year 1909-10. The
classes presented are the total population, native white,
foreign-born white, and negro. The solid line repre
sents the total population, the broken line the native
white population, the dash and dot the foreign-born
white, and the dash and cross the negro. The native
white at each age has a higher proportion attending
school than the foreign-born w
’hite, the negro, or the
total population. The foreign-bom whites have a higher
proportion attending school at the ages from 6 to 12
than the total population, but after 12 years of ago the
percentage of the foreign bom attending school de
creases rapidly until between the ages of 14 and 15 it
falLs below* the curve representing the negro school at
tendance. The curve representing the percentage of
negroes attending school is much lower than the other
classes from the ages of 6 to 14, but, after the age of
14, they have a higher school attendance than the for-

POPULATION.
eipn bora. The legal age for employment in many
states being 14 probably accounts for the rapid falling
off in the school attendance in all classes and is strik
ingly apparent among the foreign-born children.
ILLITERACY.

Map 1 on Plate No. 22.1 presents graphically in
seven groups, by states, the percentage of illiterates in
the population 10 years of age and over in 1910. The
highest percentage group, 25 per cent and over, applies
to the states of South Carolina and Louisiana. The
Southern states have a heavy rate of illiteracy for the
total population, as do New Mexico and Arizona.
The states of Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas,
Idaho, l tab, Washington, and Oregon have the lowest
rate, from 1 to 3 per cent, illiterate. No state shows
for its total population a percentage of illiteracy of less
than 1 percent.
The percentage of illiterates among the native
whites of native parentage is indicated on Map 2,
Plate No. 223. For this element of the population
nearly all the states in the West North Central and
Mountain divisions have less than 1 per cent illiterates.
In the N ew England division there are only two states,
Maine and Vermont, which have more than 1 per cent
illiterate. In the Middle Atlantic division New York
is the only state whose illiteracy among the native
white of native parentage is less than 1 per cent. In
the East North Central division there is only one state,
Wisconsin, with a rate of illiteracy among the native
white of native parentage of less than 1 per cent. In
the West North Central division all the states, except
Missouri, have a rate of illiteracy of less than 1 per cent.
In the Mountain division there are only three states—
Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona— that have a rate
of illiteracy of over 1 per cent. In the Pacific division
all the states have a rate of illiteracy of less than 1 per
cent among the native white of native parentage.
Map 1 on Plate No. 224 shows, for 1910, by states,
the per cent of illiterates in the population 10 years of
age ami over among the foreign-born whites. Three
states—Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas— have the
highest percentage of illiteracy, 25 per cent and over.
In the next group, 15 to 25 per cent, are found the
states of Louisiana, West Virginia, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Mississippi.
In general, it will be noted that the illiteracy among the
foreign-born whites is lowest in the West North Cen
tral and Pacific divisions. •The state of
ashington
has the smallest percentage of illiterates among the
foreign horn.
Map 2 on Plate No. 224 shows the percentage of
negro illiterates in the population 10 years of age and
over at the Thirteenth Census. In every state in the
East South Central division more than 25 per cent of
the negroes 10 years of age and over were illiterate.
28546°— 14------4

ILouisiana had the highest rate of negro illiteracy, 4N.4
per cent, and Alabama was second, with 40.1 per cent.
In the South Atlantic division every state, with the
exception of West Virginia, with 20.3 per cent, and
Maryland, with 23.4 percent, had more than 25 percent
of the negro<>s illiterate. In the states in the far North,
where the negro population was small, the lowest per
centage of negro illiteracy was found, that of Oregon
and Minnesota being hut 3.4 per cent.
The four diagrams on Plate No. 225 show for (1)
all classes, (2) native whites of native parentage, (3)
foreign-horn whites, and (4) negroes, the percentage
of illiterates in the population 10 years of age and
over, in each state, for 1910 and 1900 compared.
Nearly all the states show a considerable reduction in
the percentage of illiterates in all the elements since
1900. The reduction is especially prominent among
negroes, as indicated on Diagram 4. In “ all classes,”
Diagram 1, the proportion decreased in all the states,
except New \ork, whose* percentage (5.5) was the
same at both censuses, and Connecticut, which had a
slight increase in the percentage of illiterates, from 5.9
per cent in 1900 to < per cent in 1910. In the native
»
whites of native parentage, Diagram 2, no state shows
an increase in the per cent of illiterates. Among the
foreign-born whites, Diagram 3, 24 states, including
the District of Columbia, show an increase* in the per
centage of illiterates, but not a single state shows an
increase in the percentage of illiterates among the
negroes. The highest per cent of decrease in negro
illiteracy during the decade was in Nevada. With this
exception, the great«*st decreases in the percentage of
negro illiteracy were in the Southern states.
INABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH.

Plate No. 220 represents, by the length of the bars,
the foreign-bom white population 10 years of age and
over unable to speak English, in 1910 and 1900, males
and females. It will be noted that the diagram is
not symmetrical— that is, there are a larger number of
males who can not speak English than females in 1910;
this was not true, however, in 1900, the bars being a
little longer for the females, with almost the same pro
portions existing in regard to inability to speak Eng
lish between the males and females in 1910 as in 1900.
New York and Pennsylvania, with the longest bars for
1910, have a considerable preponderance of the males
over the females in this class. In 1900 it will be noted
that there were more females than males in New York
who could not speak English, while in Pennsylvania the
reverse was true. In Illinois, in 1900, there were more
females than males who could not speak English; this
was also true of Wisconsin and Minnesota. In fact,
in a majority of the states the females unable to speak
English outnumbered the males in 1900. In 1910 in
all the states, except Maine, Rhode Island, Wisconsin,

STATISTIC AL ATLAS.

North Dakota, and South Dakota, there was a larger
number of mules who could not speak English than
females. The difference in the length of the bars shows
the large number of the foreign-born population in
New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, and New Jer
sey, as compared with the small number of this element
in other states, who could not speak English. In the
United States the number of males who could not
speak English, 1,683,949, exceeded the number of
females, 1,269,062, by 414,887. West Virginia, in
proportion to the size of the state and the number of
foreign born, had in 1910 a larger proportion of males
who could not speak English than any other state,
closely followed by New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas,
in the order named, each with over 50 per cent, while
Arizona had the largest proportion of females (63.8
per cent), followed by Texas and New Mexico in
order, each exceeding 50 per cent.
D W E L L IN G S A N D F A M IL IE S P E R S Q U A R E M IL E .

The two maps on Plate No. 227 show, by states, the
number of dwellings per square mile of the total land
area, and the number of families per square mile of the
total land area, at the Thirteenth Census. The states
taken as the unit, and the number of families, also
the number of dwellings, divided by the total land
area in square miles, presents what might bo called
the map showing the density of dwellings and the
density of families. The maps bring out very strik
ingly the peculiar fact that in the entire western half
of the United States there are less than live dwellings
to a square mile, also less than five families, taking
the state as the unit. It would therefore seem that
there is still considerable room for settlement in the
M est. Such states as Maine, Vermont, Wisconsin,
and Iowa, with most of the Southern states, fall in the
class from 5 to 10 dwellings per square mile, also the
same number of families, 5 to 10 per square mile.
The maj)s also bring out very clearly the fact that the
number of families are only slightly in excess of the
number of dwellings; as compared with the total area
of the stato, the most densely populated states have,
of course, the greatest difference between the number
of families and the number of dwellings. A compari
son of those maps with the maps showing the densitv
of population shows that the density of families anil
dwellings and the density of population aro closelv
related.
O W N E R S H IP O F H O M E S.

On Plate No. 228, Diagram 1 illustrates the propor
tion of all homes owned free, owned encumbered, and
rented, in 1910, by states. Excluding the District of
Columbia, the largest proportion of rentod homes is in
tho state of Rhode Island, with 71.7 per cent; the next
states in order are Georgia, South Carolina, and New

York, each with over 69 per cent. The smallest per
centage of rented homes (24.9) is shown in the state
of North Dakota, and the largest proportion (66.3 per
cent) of homes owned free in the state of New Mexico;
this state also has the smallest proportion (4 per
cent) of homes encumbered and is next to North
Dakota in tho small proportion of rented homes (29.7
per cent).
Diagram 2 on the sample plate shows the same dis
tribution of farm homes, owned free, owned encum
bered, and rented, at tho Thirteenth Census. Maine
has the smallest proportion of its farms rented, while
Mississippi has the highest percentage of farms rented,
followed by Georgia and South Carolina. The highest
percentage of farms owned free is in New Mexico
(88.9 per cent), with Arizona second, and Utah, Mon
tana, Wyoming, and Maine following, each having
over 70 per cent of their farm homes owned free.
The percentage owned encumbered is highest in Wis
consin; Vermont is second, closely followed by North
Dakota, Michigan, and Connecticut, in the order
named. By comparing the two diagrams, it will be
noted that, except for the Southern states, the states
having a large proportion of urban population have
tho highest percentage of rented homes, while among
tho farm homes the Southern states, in which the
tenant system Is followed, have the largest proportion
of rented farms.
O C C U P A T IO N S .

Plate No. 229, proportion of population 10 years of
age and over engaged in gainful occupations for both
sexes in 1910 and 1900, and for each sex in 1910, bv
states, is divided into two parts. The bars on the left
represent the per cent of the total population 10 years
of age and over— that is, both sexes, engaged in gainful
occupations, in each state, in 1910 and 1900, the states
being arranged in order of tho percentages for 1910,
with tho highest percentage at tho top. The length
of tho black bar, as compared with tho shaded bar,
shows tho increase of the percentage of 1910 over that
of 1900. In 1900 Wyoming had tho highest percent
age, with South Carolina second and Mont ana third.
In 1910 Mississippi was in the lead, with South Caro
lina second, Alabama third, Nevada fourth, and W yo
ming fifth. The bar for Mississippi indicates that 68
per cent of tho population 10 years of ago and over was
engaged in gainful occupations in 1910. Tho bars on
tho right compare tho percentage of males with that
of the females engaged in gainful occupations in 1910,
the black bar representing tho males and the shaded
bar the females. Alabama leads in the proportion of
males engaged in gainful occupations, 88.3 per cent,
and is third in rank for the females (40.9 per cont).
Mississippi, which is second in the percentage of males
employed, has a larger proportion of females employed
(47.6 per cent) than Alabama (40.9 per cent). South

POPULATION.
Carolina, which is sixth in rank in the percentage of
males employed, lias a larger proportion of females
employed (49 per cent) than any other state. Iowa
has the lowest percentage employed for both sexes
and for the males, while Idaho has the lowest per
centage of females employed in gainful occupations
(12.8 per cent).
Plate No. 230 presents the proportion of males and
females 10 years of age and over engaged in gainful
occupations, by states, in 1010 and 1000. The length
of the liars indicates that Wyoming leads in the percent
age of males employed in 1010, also in 1000, the pro
portion being higher in 1000 than in 1010. There are
only two states—Arizona and Nevada— that show a
larger proportion of males employed in gainful occu
pations in 1010 than in 1000. South Carolina has the
lowest percentage of males employed in 1010 (63.2 per
cent), also in 1000 (68.2 per cent), with the exception
of the District of Columbia, which had, in 1900, 67.6
per cent. The column on the right indicates the pro
portion of females 10 years of age and over engaged in
gainful occupations for 1010 and 1000, the states being
arranged in the same order jus for the males. Com
paring the bars for the males with those representing
the females, it will be noted that those states which
have the largest proportion of males employed have
the smallest proportion of females. This is, of course,
true for both 1000 and 1010. Wyoming, leading in
the proportion of males employed, has the snudlcst
proportion of females.
Plate No. 231 shows the proportion of nudes and
females 10 to 13, also 14 and 15 years of age engaged in
gainful occupations, by states, in 1010. This diagram
is of groat interest, in view of the agitation in regard to
restricting child labor. The large proportion of chil
dren, both male and female, 10 to 13 years of age en
gaged in gainful occupations in the Southern state's is,
undoubtedly, due to the inclusion of all children em
ployed in agriculture. Mississippi leads in the propor
tion of mules (56.1 percent) and South Carolina in the
proportion of female workers 10 to 13 years of age (39.5
per cent), while New York has the lowest percentage
of males (1.1 percent) and Massachusetts of females
(0.3 per cent). The diagram on the right shows the
percentage of males and females 14 and 15 years of age
engaged in gainful occupations. The states of Missis
sippi, Alabama, South Carolina, and North Carolina
have the largest proportion of males and females for
these ages, and rank in the same order as for the
ages 10 to 13 years. The District of Columbia has
the smallest number of nudes (15.5 per cent) and
the state of Idaho the smallest number of females
14 and 15 years of age (3 per cent) employed in gain
ful occupations.
Plate No. 232 is made up of two maps, Map 1 showing, by states, the percentage of males 10 to 13 years

of aigo engaged in gainful occupations in 1910. and Map
2 presenting similar data for males 14 and 15 years of
age.
Map 1. for males 10 to 13 years of age. presents, bv the
dilFerent shading, seven groups of percentages. The
lowest group, unshaded, is less than 1 percent; the next
group. 1 to 5 per cent,covers the Pacific Coast states, all
the New England and Middle Atlantic states, and all of
the Hast North Central stat«*s. except Indiana, showing
that but a small proportion of those young boys are at
work. The highest percentage group is shaded a solid
black,and indicates that South Carolina, Alabama.and
Mississippi are the only states in which 50 per cent or
more of the males 10 to 13 years of age are gainful work
ers. The next group, 35 t o 50 percent, applies to the
states of North Carolina, (ioorgiu, Arkansas, and Texas.
Florida falls in the next lower group, 25 to 35 per cent,
as dot's Kentucky and Tennessee. The map brings
out strikingly the high percentage of males 10 to 13
years of age who are employed in gainful occupations
in the southern part of the United States.
Map 2. for the ages of 14 and 15 years, 14 years being
the lawful age of employment in most of the states,
shows a much higher percentage of boys of these two
ages employed. The highest percentages are found
in the Southern states. The entire Mountain division,
except New Mexico, and the Pacific division, except
Washington, fall in the class of 15 to 25 per cent. The
two lower groups, which cover a considerable portion
of the preceding map, do not appear on this map.
except in the case of Washington, which is the only
state that has less than 15 per cent of the males 14 and
15 years of age employed in gainful occupations. All
the states in the East South Central division and the
West South Central division, with the exception of
Oklahoma, are in the highest group, showing that more
than 50 per cent of the bovs 14 and 15 years of age are
at work. Mississippi and Alabama lead, with more
than 75 per cent of their youths engaged in gainful
occupations. The states of Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, of the South
Atlantic division, are also in the class of 50 per cent
and over.
Plate No. 233 is made up of two maps covering the
same data for the females that were shown for the
malt's on Plate No. 232. Map 1 indicates, by the seven
groups of shading, the percentage of females 10 to 13
years of age engaged in gainful occupations in 1910.
The uncolored area, principally in the North and West,
indicates the states hi which less than 1 per cent of the
females of this class are engaged in gainful occupations.
The light shade, indicating the states in which 1 to 5
per cent of the females of this class are employed,
together with the unshaded area, covers three-fourths
of the states. The highest percentages, indicated by
the dark shades, are found in the South Atlantic, East

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

South Central, and West South Central divisions.
Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina are in the
group from 35 to 50 per cent; North Carolina,
Georgia, and Arkansas fall in the next lower group, 25
to 35 per rent; Texas is in the group 15 to 25 per cent;
Virginia, Tennessee, Florida, Louisiana, and Okla
homa are in the group 5 to 15 per cent; all the remain
der of the United States has less than 5 per cent of the
females 10 to 13 years of age engaged in gainful
occupations.
Map 2 indicates, by the seven groups of shading, the
percentage of females 14 and 15 years of ago engaged
in gainful occupations in 1910. As in the preceding
illustration, the highest percentages are found in the
Southern states. South Carolina and Mississippi are
the only states that have 50 per cent or more of the
females of the ages specified engaged in gainful occu
pations. The next group, 35 to 50 per cent, covers
North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, ami
Rhode Island, the latter being the only Northern state
to fall in this class. The next lower group, 25 to 35
per cent, applies to the states of Louisiana and Texas
only. All the Northern and Western states, with the
exception of Rhode Island, fall in the groups below 25
j>er cent. Nebraska, Kansas, Montana, Wyoming,
Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington have
less than 5 per cent of the females 14 and 15 years of
age engaged in gainful occupations. Taking up the
number of states below and above 15 per cent, we find
that, excluding the District of Columbia, there are 28
states that have less than 15 per cent, and 20 states
that have 15 per cent or more of the females 14 and 15
years of age gainfully employed.
Plate No. 234 shows the proportion of males and
females 10 years of age and over engaged in certain
gainful occupations in 1910, the black portion of the
bar representing the male workers and the unshaded
part the female. The long black bars indicate the
occupations in which males preponderate. The occu
pations in each grand group having the largest propor
tion of male workers are as follows: Stock herders,
drovers, and feeders; shoemakers and cobblers (not in
factory); mail carriers; commercial travelers; labor
ers (public service); physicians and surgeons; saloon
kcejiers; and agents, canvassers, and collectors.
Where the black bar is the smallest female workers
preponderate, as in the case of laundresses (not in
laundries); milliners and millinery dealers; trained
nurses; housekeepers and stewards; and telephone
operators. The preponderance of the black bar over
the white indicates that there is a larger proportion of
males engaged in that occupation than of females.
Plate No. 235 shows graphically for each state
the proportion of persons engaged in each of the nine
general divisions of occupations at the Thirteenth
Census, 1910. The states are ranked in the order of
the percentage of persons employed in agriculture,

forestry, and animal husbandry, the state with the
highest percentage being first. Mississippi has the
highest percentage of persons employed in the first
general division of occupations. South Carolina,
Arkansas, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia
follow in order, each having more than 60 per cent of
the population 10 years of age and over engaged in
agriculture, forestry, and animal husbandry. 1he
states having the smallest proportion of persons
employed in this general division of occupations are
Massachusetts, with 4.9 per cent, and Rhode Island,
with 5 per cent, all other states having more than 5
per cent of their gainful workers engaged in the first
general division of occupations. The diagram shows
strikingly the fact that where manufacturing and
mechanical industries predominate, farming is unim
portant, and, conversely, where agriculture predomi
nates, manufacturing is of small importance. The
clerical occupations, the hist on the bar, are largely in
those states which have manufactures and trade.
The states having the hugest number of persons
employed in the second division of occupations, extrac
tion of minerals, are Nevada (21.9 per cent), Arizona
(17.7 per cent), West Virginia (14.4 per cent), and
Montana (10.9 per cent), Wyoming and Pennsylvania
having the same percentage, 10.5 each.
The states leading in the proportion of persons
engaged in manufacturing and mechanical industries
are as follows: Rhode Island (56.3 per cent ), Connecti
cut (52.8 per cent), Massachusetts (50.6 per cent), and
New Hampshire (49.4 per cent).
The states having the largest proportion of their
population engaged in the fourth general division of
occupations, transportation, are as follows: Wyoming
(14.7 per cent), Montana (13.4 per cent), Washington
(11.6 per cent), Oregon (11.5 per cent), and Nevada
(11.4 per cent). These are the only state's which have
more than 10 per cent of their workers in this general
division of occupations.
In the next group, trade, California leads (13.7 per
cent); excluding the District of Columbia (13 per
cent), New ^ ork follows (13.6 per cent), with Illinois
third (12.4 per cent), New Jersey fourth (12.1 per
cent), and Massachusetts fifth (12 per cent).
In public service, Wyoming leads with 6.2 per cent,
and, excluding the District of Columbia (4.7 per cent),
this state is followed bv Rhode Island with 2.8 per
cent; ( alifomia and Washington are the next states
in order, each having 2.2 per cent employed in this
group.
In the group of professional service, excluding the
District of ( olunibia with 8 per cent, California leads
I with 6.3 percent, ami Colorado is second with 6.2 per
cent, followed by Iowa and Utah, each having 6 per
cent.
In the next group, clerical occupations, the states,
excluding the District of Columbia (15.3 per cent), are
ranked in the following order: New York (8.3 per cent),

POPUL ATIOX.

Now Jersey (8 per cent), Illinois (7.3 per cent), anti portion than the* males; but in the* last two age* groups,
Massachusetts (7.1 percent).
21 to 44 and 45 years and over, the males have a
In the last group, domestic ami personal service, large*r proportion than the female's. The two groups,
excluding the District of Columbia with 25.7 per cent, 21 to 44 and 45 ye'ars and over, include 80.5 pe*r ce'iit of
Maryland leads with 14.6 per cent, followed by New “ both se‘Xe*s" eragaged in gainful occupations; in the*
York with 13.4 per cent, Virginia with 12.9 percent, same groups the male's form S3.6 p«*r e*e*n of the* numt
and California, Florida, and Nevada, each with 12.7 be*r of male workers, and the fc*malc*s form 69.3 per
per cent.
cent of the* number of female workers.
The diagram shows that in all the states, except
Diagram 3 presents the* proportion of each princi
Arizona, California, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New pal class of population 10 years of age* and over, both
^ ork, and W yoming, agriculture and manufacturing se*xe*s, male's, and fe*m
ale*s, engages! in gainful occupaf
•
combined include more than 50 per cent of the gainful tions in 1910. For “ all classes,” 53.3 pe*r cent e>
both se*xe*s are* e*ngage*d in gainful occupations; f«»r the
workers.
Plate No. 236, Diagram 1, gives the proportion of males, 81.3 pe*r ce*nt are workers; and of the* females,
males and females 10 years of age and over engaged 23.4 percent. Of the four classes of population shown
*s
in each general division of occupations in 1910, the light on the diagram, the ne*greH have the large*st propor
shading on the left representing the males and the tion of both scxc*s engage'd in gainful occupations
(71.0 per cent), also of the fe*inale*s (54.7 per ce*nt).
cross-hatched portion the females. The males have
The native white of native parentage has the low’e*st
the largest proportion of the workers in the following
per ce*nt of both sexes (48.4 pe*r cent), and of female's
occupations: Extraction of minerals, public service
(17.1 per cent). The foreign-born white has the high
(not elsewhere classified), and transportation. The
est percent of male's (90 percent), and is slightly in
only division in which the females exceed the males
excess of the' ne*groe*s (87.4 pe*r cent). Of the fe*m
ale*s
is the division of domestic and personal service, of
in these two classes, the ne'groes, with 54.7 |a*r cent,
which they form 67.1 per cent of the total. In the
far exceed the proportion of female's in the foreignremaining divisions the males form more than 50 per born white, which is 21.7 pe*r ce*nt.
cent of the gainful workers.
Diagram 4 presents the* proportion e>f nude*s ami
In Diagram 2 the proportion which gainful workers, female's of each of five age* groups engaged in gainful
both sexes, males, and females, of each specifics 1 age | occupatiems in 1910. In the first age group, 16 to 13
group constituted of all gainful workers in 1910, is years of age*, the proportion e»f male's is more* than
indicated. The group 21 to 44 years has a larger pro double that e»f the* females. In fact, the* proportion of
portion of “ both sexes” and of male's and females males exceeds that of the* female's in every age group.
than any of the other age groups. The first group, 10 In the age* group 21 to 44 years 96.7 per ce*nt of the?
to 13 years of age, show’s a slightly smaller number for male's are workers. In this same gre>up the propor
“ both sexes” and those for males and female's than tion of the* female's at work is only 26.3 pe*r cent. The
f
the next group, 14 and 15 years. The age group 16 to largest pre>pe»rtie»n e> females in any age group is in the'
f
f
20 years has a much larger proportion employed than group e> 16 te> 26 years e> age*, in which 39.9 pe*r ce*nt
f
the lower age' groups. It will be' noted for the first e> the* female's 10 years of age ami over are* employed in
three age* groups that the females have a large*r pro gainful occupations.

AGRICULTURE.
F A R M S AN’ II FARM P R O P E R T Y .

Tlie enumerators of the Thirteenth Census returned
at the date of the census enumeration 6,361,502 farms,
containing 878,798,325 acres, of which 478,451,750
acres were improved, the remaining 400,346,575 acres
comprising the acreage of woodland and other unim
proved land in farms.
On Plate No. 237 the seven circles indicate, by the size
of their sectors, the relative proportion of improved
and unimproved land area in farms to the total land
area of the United States at each census from IS50
to 1910. The rapid decrease in the area not in farms
will be noted, also the increase in the proportion im
proved to the unimproved; the circle for 1910 indi
cates that a greater proportion of the total area was
improved in 1910 than at any previous census, but
that less than 50 per cent of the total is in farms.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 238 represents, by the
length of the bars and the shading, the total land
area and the area of improved and unimproved land
in farms, in 1910 and 1900,in each state. The diagram
presents, in an effective manner, the relative size of
all the states, as well as the large proportion that the
land in farms and the improved land in farms forms
of the total area in Iowa, Ohio, Indiana, and Illi
nois, where over 90 per cent of the total land area is
in farms, and the small proportion of the land area in
farms in the states of Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and
Idaho, each being under 10 per cent. The great dilTerenee between the land area of Texas as compared with
Rhode Island is strikingly presented by the difference
in the length of the bars representing the two states.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 238 represents, by the
length of the bars, the total land area and the improved
and unimproved acreage in farms, from 1850 to 1910.
This diagram illustrates, in a slightly different form,
the same data graphically presented by the circles on
Plate No. 237. In 1850 a little over one-third (38.5
per cent) of the land in farms was improved. In 1910
over half (54.4 per cent) of the farm land was im
proved; the increase in the proportion of improved
land to the total land area in farms and the increased
proportion of the total land area that is in farms are
more readily calculated from this diagram than from
Plate No. 237.
In Diagram 3 o n Plate No. 238 the in crea se in the
n u m b e r of fa r m s ,fr o m 1850 to 1910, is in d ica te d b y the

length of the bars.
(54)

The number of farms increased

more rapidly than the acreage of land in farms, re
sulting in a material decrease in the average size of
farms.
The map on Plate No. 239 shows, by counties, the
percentage land in farms formed of the total land
area in 1910. The heavy black shade, which indi
cates that 95 per cent and over of the land in the
county was in farms, covers a large proportion of the
area of Iowa, the eastern part of Kansas and Ne
braska, the northern part of Missouri, and portions of
Ohio. The unshaded area of the arid states indicates
the small proportion of the total land area that is in
farms.
The average acreage of all land per farm, by coun
ties, in 1910, is presented in Plate No. 240. The aver
age for the United States was 138.1 acres of land per
farm. The seven designations on the map indicate
groups from loss than SO acres to 640 acres and over;
the darkest three shades indicate the counties having
an average of 240 acres or more: practically all of
those shades were found west of the Mississippi River,
except a few counties in Florida, Virginia, and southern
Georgia, proving that the large ranches in some of the
Western states have not been materially reduced in
size.
Map 1 on Plate No. 241 gives the proportion of im
proved land in farms to the total land area, by states,
and Map 2 the average number of acres of all farm
land per farm, by states, in 1910. A study of Map 1
shows that the states of Iowa and Illinois have the
highest proportion (over 75 per cent) of improved land
to the total land area. The next group, 50 to 75 per
cent, covers a wider area and includes the states of
Maryland, Delaware, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Mis
souri, and Kansas. All the states in the Mountain
division, together with the states of Oregon and Flor
ida, have less than 10 per cent of their land area
improved.
As indicated on Map 2, the states of Nevada and
Wyoming have the hugest farms, the state average
being over 640 acres per farm. The next group, from
320 to 640 acres, covers the states of Montana, North
Dakota, and South Dakota. Arkansas and Louisiana
are the only states west of the Mississippi River with
an average of less than 120 acres per farm. In the
eastern part of the United States the average size of
the farm is much smaller than in the West, New
Hampshire, ^ ermont, and Illinois being the only

AGRICULTURE.
states with an average of 120 to 100 acres. The states
for which the average is less than SO acres are Massa
chusetts. New Jersey, South Carolina, Alabama, and
Mississippi.
The map on Plate No. 242 indicates, in seven shades,
the percentage improved land in farms formed of the
total land area, by counties, in 1910. The counties
with the highest proportion, 75 percent and over, are
solid black and cover nearly the entire state of Iowa,
three-fourths of the state of Illinois, and considerable
portions of Ohio, Indiana, Nebraska, Minnesota, North
Dakota, South Dakota. Missouri, and Kansas, the land
in these counties being practically all under cultiva
tion. The unshaded areas, indicating that less than
1 -i per cent, or one-eighth, of the county is under
cultivation, are found principally in the states of the
Mountain and Pacific divisions.
On Plate No. 243 the map of the United States shows,
hv the number of dots, the improved land in farms
at the Thirteenth Census, each dot representing 10,000
acres. The sparsely settled areas of Arizona, New
Mexico, Utah, Nevada, and southeastern California
stand out very strongly, as well as the northeastern
part of Minnesota and the southwestern part of Texas
and along the Rio Grande.
Plato No. 244 illustrates the average acreage of
improved land per farm, by counties, in 1910, and, as
the largest farms are in the Western states, nearly all
the higher grades from 160 to 200 acres, and from 200
acres and over, are in that section, the state of Nevada,
with its large ranches, being especially prominent.
North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas
also show a very high average acreage of improved
land per farm.
Plate No. 245 consists of two maps, Map 1 showing
the per cent of increase in number of acres of improved
land in farms, by states, from 1900 to 1910, and Map 2,
the per cent of increase in number of acres of improved
land in farms, by states, from 1S90 to 1900. The
states having the greatest increase from 1890 to 1900
were all w e s t of the Mississippi River. Tho unshaded
area, indicating states in which the number of acres of
improved land in farms decreased during the decade,
covers all of tho New England and Middle Atlantic
divisions, also Delaware, Texas, Nevada, Oregon, and
California.
As indicated by the map for 1900 to 1910, there was a
{Treat change in the per cent of increase or decrease in
the number of acres of improved land in farms. Iowa
and California in the West decreased, also all of the
New England and Middle Atlantic states, as well as
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and Ohio. Tho states
reporting an increase of 50 per cent and o 'e r were
North Dakota, Oklahoma, Montana, Idaho, Washing
ton, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico. Texas,
which decreased from 1890 to 1 9 0 0 , reported an increase
of between 25 and 50 per cent from 1900 to 1910.

The five maps on Plates Nos. 246 to 250 show the
number of farms of spivifusl sizes in 1910.
Plate No. 246 indicates, by tho dots, tho numlier of
farms with from 3 to 9 acres at the Thirteenth Census,
each dot representing 10 farms. The groups of dots
in the Eastern states show’ that the greater number of
1 small farms are in that part of the country.
The next map, on Plate No. 247, indieates the num
ber of farms of from 20 to 49 acres in 1910, each dot
I standing for 40 farms. The dense groups of dots are
| almost entirely in tho South and in thestates bordering
on the Gulf of Mexieo, where tho largest number of
such farms are located.
Plate No. 24S represents the number of farms of
from 100 to 174 acres, at the same date, with 40 farms
to each dot. Tho dense groups of dots, indirut ing
where such farms are most numerous, are in the Mid
dle Atlantic, East North Central, and West North Cen
tral divisions.
Plate No. 249 indicates the number of farms of from
260 to 499 acres in 1910, each dot representing 10 farms
of the acreage specified. Tho dense groups of dots are
found in the states of Minnesota, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska. Kansas, and Oklahoma.
Plate No. 250 shows, by the dots, the number of
farms of 1,000 acres and over in 1910. The heaviest
grouping of farms of this class is noted in Texas, west
ern Nebraska, Kansas, California, ami eastern Wash
ington. In Texas the dense groups are due princi
pally to the large cattle ranchos.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 251 indicates, by the length
of the bars, tho average size of farms in each state, in
1910 and 1900—that is, the average number of acres of
all farm land per farm. The diagram shows that, with
the exception of 13 states— Rhode Island, New York,
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minne
sota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, and
Kansas the size decreased from IIM ) to 1910, striking
K
decreases being shown in the states of Nevada, Wyo
ming, Montana, and Arizona. North Dakota and Ne
braska are the only states which showed a fair increase
in the average size of farms.
In Diagram 3 the average size of farms in the l nited
States at each decade from 1S50 to 1910 is shown by
the length of the bars, and the gradual decrease from
1850 to 1880, and increase from 1880 to ltM ), will be
H
noted.
Diagram 2 shows the proportion of value of each
class of farm property to tho total value of farm prop
erty in 1910. Farm land forms the greater proportion
of the value of farm property. In California and
Washington the value of farm land forms over SO per
cent of the total value of farm property. In Oregon,
South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Illinois the
value of farm land forms over 75 per cent of the total
value of farm property. In fact, it is only in tho states
0f the New England ami Middle Atlantic divisions,

STATISTIC AL ATLAS.

except Pennsylvania, that t-lie value of buildings, im | per cent. It will be noted that for this decade de
plements ami machinery, and live stock forms more creases were reported from New Hampshire, Massa
than 50 per cent of the total value of farm property. chusetts, and Rhode Island; all the South Atlantic
Diagrams 4, 5, and 6 show, at each census from 1S50 division, except Delaware; the East South Central
to 1910 the value of implements and machinery on states; and the West South Central, except Okla
farms; the value of live stock, including domestic ani homa, as indicated by the solid black shading. The
mals, poultry, and bet's on farms; and the average decreases were due principally to the ravages dining
value of farm land and buildings per acre. The value the Civil War.
Map 1 on Plate No. 254, the per cent of increase in
of implements ami machinery and live stock, etc., shows
a steady increase. The value of farm land and build value of all farm property from 1870 to 1880, has only
ings per acre shows a slight variation, as it increased one state—Oklahoma, which at that date was known as
steadily from 1850 to 1890, the value in 1890 being the Indian Territory—from which no farm values were
$21.31 per acre; in 1900 the value had decreased to reported. On this map there are only three states
$19.81 ]>er acre; during the next 10 years the value of showing decreases in the value of farm property—Ver
farm land increased so rapidly that for 1910 the aver mont, New Jersey, and Delaware. New York and
age value per acre was $39.60, or double the value in Louisiana show the smallest increases— less than 10
per cent. Aside from Oklahoma, every state west of
1900.
On Diagram 1. Plate No. 252, the total value in each the Mississippi River reported increases of 100 per cent
state of all farm property, by each class of farm prop and over, except Iowa, Missouri, Louisiana, and Cali
erty in 1910, is indicated by the division of the bars, by fornia. Iowa and California increased from 50 to 100
shade lines to agree with the proportion in each class per cent, Missouri from 10 to 25 per cent, and Louisiana
of farm property. Illinois, with a total value of farm loss than 10 per cent. Florida was the only state east
property of $3,905,321,075, ranks first; Iowa is second, of the Mississippi River that reported an increase of
100 per cent or more.
with $3,745,860,544; while Rhode Island is last, with
Map 2 on Plate No. 254 presents the increase from
$32 ,990,739. The states of Illinois ami Iowa far exceed
1880 to 1890. Every state west of the Mississippi
the other states in the value of their farm property.
Texas, the state ranking third, has $1,686,675,911 less River showed an increase of 50 per cent or more, with
in value of its farm property than Illinois, and the exception of Louisiana, which increased from 25
$1,527,215,380 loss than Iowa.
to 50 per cent. The states in the Mountain division,
Diagram 2 represents, by the length of the bars, the with the exception of the state of Nevada, all showed
average value of all farm property per farm, at each increases of 100 per cent or more. Florida was again
census, from 1850 to 1910. The average value in the only state east of the Mississippi that reported an
creased from 1850 to 1860, decreased to 1870, and increase of 100 per cent and over. The New England
further decreased to 1880; in 1890 there was an in and Middle Atlantic states, also Ohio, reported
crease and from 1890 to 1900 a very slight increase, decreases.
but from 1900 to 1910 the average value of farm prop
Map 1 on Plate No. 255, the increase in value from
erty per farm almost doubled.
1890 to 1900, shows that the great increases in the
Diagram 3 on the same plate shows a steadv in value of farm property reported for the previous decade
crease in the value of farm land and buildings, from were not continued, although the New England states
1850 to 1910. For the last 10 years, from 1900 to all reported small increases of less than 10 per cent,
1910, it more than doubled.
except Massachusetts, which increased 10 to 25 per
A series of United States maps on Plates Nos. 253 cent. The only states reporting an increase of 100 per
to 255 show, in seven shades, the per cent of increase cent and over were North Dakota, South Dakota,
in the value of farm property, by states, at each cen Idaho, and Oklahoma. Four states, all in the E a s t sus from 1850 to 1910.
New \ ork, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Florida— re
On Map 1, Plate No. 253, the per cent of increase in port'd decreases in the value of farm property.
the value of all farm property from 1850 to 1860, the
Map 2 presents the increase from 1900 to 1910, the
white areas indicate the states from which no increases greatest increase ever shown for the entire United
in value were reported. All the other states reported States. Not a state reported a decrease and everv
increases, 19 states showing increases of 100 per cent state west of the Mississippi River, with the exception
or more; 9 states, 50 to 100 per cent; 6 states, 25 to of Mimiesota, Missouri, and Louisiana, reported an
50 per cent; and only 1 state— Massachusetts— 10 to increase of 100 per cent and over. The three states
25 per cent.
excepted increased from 50 to 100 per cent. The
Map 2, the per cent of increase from I860 to 1870. j states of the South Atlantic division also showed
has only 6 states without report. Minnesota, Iowa!
increases of 100 per cent or more, except Virginia, West
North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas!
\ irginia, and Delaware, w hich reported increases of 50
Nevada, and California reported increases of over 100
to 100 per cent each, and Maryland, with an increase

AGRICULTURE.

of 25 to 50 per cent. Two state's in the East South ties in the states of Washington, Oregon, California,
Central division— Alabama and Mississippi— also Idaho, Coh >rado, Kansas, and Missouri, in the West;
showed increases of 100 per cent or more. Florida, and Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
which decreased at the previous decade, reported an New ^ ork, and New Jersey, in the Fast, Illinois having
increase of over 100 per cent. Not a single state re the greatest numbor of counties with an average value
ported an increase of less than 10 per cent. The of $125 and over per acre. Considerable areas in a
smallest increases reported were for New Hampshire,
number of the states are left unshaded, indicating an
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania— 10 average value of less than $10 ]>er acre.
to 25 per cent. There were only 4 states that re
The map on Plate No. 259 shows, by counties, the
ported increases of less than 25 per cent, and 25 that
|>er cent of increase in the average value of farm land
reported increases of over 100 per cent.
j»er acre from 1900 to 1910. The j>er cent of increase
Plate No. 256 presents, by counties, the percentage for the United States as a whole was 108.1, but a ma
of increase in value of all farm property, from 1900 to jority of the counties reported increases of over 125
1910. The black shade, which covers the greater part )>er cont. The areas shown in black indicate the
of some of the Western states, indicates an increase of counties for which the increase was 2(H) per cent and
200 per cent and over. The states having the largest over. A number of counties east of the Mississippi
of such areas are North Dakota, South Dakota,
River, in the Southern states, are in the highest group,
Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana,
Idaho, and Washington. A number of counties in 1 over 200 per cent are in states west of the Mississippi
some of the Southern states— South Carolina, Georgia,
River. The dark area covers nearly all of South
and Florida— also reported increases of over 200 per
Dakota and Idaho, and a largo part of North Dakota,
cent, as well as a number of counties in the Northern Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Montana, and
states of Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Washington. One singular fact brought out in this
The white areas, indicating an increase of loss than 25 map is that white areas, indicating counties with an
per cent, are widely scattered, except in the states of increase of less than 25 percent, are, in many instances,
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New adjacent to counties in which the increase is 200 per
York, and Pennsylvania, the latter state showing a ! cent and over. The largest white areas are in Now
York and Pennsylvania.
larger unshaded area than any other state.
The map on Plate No. 260 indicates, bydots, the value
Plate No. 257 contains two maps indicating the aver
age value of farm land per acre, by states, in 1910 and of farm land in 1910, each dot representing $1,000,000.
1900. From a comparison of the two maps the remark The dense groups in Illinois and Iowa indicate the ex
able increase in the average value of farm land per tensive areas of high valuation in those states.
Plate No. 261, a map similar to the map on Plate No.
acre, from 1900 to 1910, will be noted, especially in the
following named states, each having increased more 260, shows the value of farm buildings, at the same
than 200 per cent: Arizona, 475.S per cent; Washing date, each dot on this map representing $200,000.
ton, 278.3 per cent; Montana, 276.2 per cent; Idaho, The dense groups of dots, indicating where the value of
276.1 per cent; Wyoming, 261.5 per cent; South farm buildings is the highest, are in New York, Now
Dakota, 249.7 per cent; Oklahoma, 246 per cent; Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and
Oregon, 213.7 per cent; Texas, 209.1 per cent; and Wisconsin. The highest values of farm buildings are
Utah, 200.3 per cent. The states of North Carolina, not all located in the same areas as the highlit values
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Iowa, North Dakota, of farm land.
Plate No. 262 indicates the value of farm imploNebraska, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada
also reported large increases, although the proportion ments and machinery at the Thirteenth Census, each
ate increase was not as high as for the states previously dot representing $30,000. The dense groups of dots,
mentioned. Not a single state showed a decrease in indicating the highest valuation of farm implements
the value of farm land per acre; the smallest increases and machinery, are found in practically the same areas
were reported for Pennsylvania, 14.2 per cent, and as the highest values of farm buildings.
Plates Nos. 263 to 312 comprise a series of maps
Rhode Island, 14.9 per cent. In 1900 Illinois was the
only state that reported a value of over $40 per acre. arranged in pairs for each state, one map showing the
In 1910 there were 11 states that reported an average per cent of land area in farms and the other the aver
value of farm land of over $40 per acre. New Mexico age value of farm land per acre, by counties, in 1910.
was the only state in 1910 that reported an average On the first map the counties are shaded to indicate in
which of the seven groups of percentages, as specified
value of less than $10 per acre.
in the legend, they fall. The lowest group, less than
T1ic map on Plate No. 258 presents for the United
States, by counties, the average value of land in farms 20 per cent, is unshaded: the highest group. 95 to 100
per acre in 1910. The group with the highest valua per cent, is solid black. The second map shows, for
tion, $125 and over per acre, is confined to a few coun | counties, by the seven groups of shading, the average

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

value of the farm land per acre. Comparison of the I centage of the number of farms owned is Mississippi,
two maps will reveal that the counties that have the and, conversely, the largest proportion of tenants,
highest percentage of land in farms are not always while Alabama, with 0.2 per cent, has the smallest
the counties with the highest value of farm land per proportion of farms operated by managers. Maine
acre. The data from which this series of maps were has the smallest proportion of tenants, with New
prepared will bo found in the Report on Agriculture,
Mexico secom i, N ew Hampshire third, and Utah
Volumes VI and VII of the Thirteenth Census Reports. fourth. Excluding the District of Columbia, which
In preparing these maps the entire county was used as is considered as a city, Nevada has the largest pro
a unit, although in many of the Western states, where portion of the number of farms operated by managers.
irrigation is necessary, it is undoubtedly a little mis Considered by geographic divisions, New England
leading to have the entire county shaded to indicate and the Mountain and Pacific divisions have the
a high value of farm land per acre when the actual largest proportion of the number of farms owned,
area in farms forms a very small part of the county,
while the East South Central and West South Central
and a huge portion of tho county is of very little value.
divisions have the smallest proportion of the number
For instance, in the state of California it will he noted
of farms owned and the highest percentage of forma
that Sun Bernardino County is shaded to show a valua rented.
tion of $125 and over ]>er acre; this value is true for
Plate No. 315, acreage of all land in farms, classified
only a very small part of its area. The same conditions
by character of tenure of operator, in 1910, arranged
exist in a number of other states, especially in tho arid geographically by states, is similar to the previous
and semiarid regions, where tho raising of crops and
diagram, although their percentages vary. The high
the farm values depond upon the water supply and are est percentage of the acreage of all land in farms
duo almost entirely to irrigation. Small areas, there operated by owners is in Maine, with New Hampshire
fore, have a high valuation per acre, while adjacent second, Utah third, and Idaho fourth. The lowest
areas that can not be irrigated are practically of no
percentage of the acreage of all land in farms operated
value.
by owners is in Nevada, but this state has the highest
FARM T E N U R E .
percentage of the acreage of land in farms operated
Plate No. 313 is composed of two United States
by managers, Wyoming being second, and New
maps, the first showing the proportion of farms Mexico third. The states having the smallest pro
owned to all farms, by states, in 1910, and the second,
portion of acreage operated by managers are Iowa
similar data for 1900. At the Twelfth Census the and Kentucky. The highest percentage of acreage
densely shaded area, showing 90 per cent and over of of all land in farms operated by tenants is found in
farms owned to all farms, covered the states of Maine, Delaware, with Illinois second, Oklahoma third, and
New Hampshire, and North Dakota. In 1910 Maine Georgia fourth. The lowest percentage of the acreage
and New Hampshire were still in the highest class, but of all land in farms operated by tenants is found in
North Dakota had dropped to the class 75 to 90 per Maine, with New Hampshire second, Utah third, and
cent, while New Mexico and Utah had advanced to
Nevada fourth.
the highest class, 90 per cent and over. There were
Plate No. 316 indicates the number of farms oper
10 states that changed their grouping from 1900, as ated by owners and part owners April 15, 1910;
compared with 1910: New Mexico and Utah advanced
Platt' No. 317 is a similar map showing the number of
from the 75 to 90 per cent group to the group 90 per farms operated by tenants at the same date; Plate
cent and over; New York, Colorado, and California
No. 318 shows the number of farms operated by share
from group 50 to 75 per cent to group 75 to 90 per
tenants in 1910; and Plate No. 319, the number of
cent; Delaware from the less than 50 per cent group
farms operated by cash tenants in 1910. T he dis
to the 50 to 75 per cent group; North Dakota
tribution of the several kinds of tenure is shown by
dropped from the 90 per cent and over group to the
dots, each dot representing 50 farms. The heavy
75 to 90 per cent group; South Dakota dropped
shading in the northern part of the United States,
from group 75 to 90 per cent to group 50 to 75 p,T
east of the Mississippi Kiver, shows the areas in which
cent; Oklahoma and Arkansas also decreased, drop
the farms operated by owners are most numerous.
ping from group 50 to 75 to group less than 50 per cent.
I he heavy shading in the southern part of tho counPlate No. 314 presents the number of farms, classi
ti^ on Plate No. 31/ indicates the great number of
fied by character of tenure of operator, in 1910, for
farms operated by tenants in that portion of the
each state arranged geographically. In this diagram
United States. On Plate No. 318, the number of
each bar represents 100 per cent, and the different
farms operated by share tenants, the dense groups of
shades indicate the proportion in the three classes—
dots are found in the Southern stab's and in Ohio and
owners, managers, and tenants. Maine leads with
Indiana, while on Plate No. 319, number of farms
the highest percentage of the number of farms owned
operated by cash tenants in 1910, the dense shading
New Mexico is second, Utah third, and New Hamp
is found in the stab's of the South Atlantic und East
shire fourth. The state having the smallest per
South Central divisions.

AGRICULTURE.

On Map 1, Plato Xo. 320, per cent of number of fied by color and nativity of operator, in 1910. The
farms operated by tenants, by states, in 1010, the bars are shaded to indicate the proportion of the native
heavy shaded areas, indicating the highest percent white, foreign-born white, and negro and other nonages, are all in the southern portion of the United I white. The native white has the largest proportion of
States, while on Map 2, per cent of all land in farms the number of farms in every state, except four—Min
operated by tenants, by states, at the Thirteenth nesota, Xorth Dakota, South Carolina, anil Mississippi.
Census, only three states— Illinois, Georgia, and Okla
In the first two the foreign-bom whites operate over
homa— fall in the class 40 to 50 per cent, and but one
50 per cent of the farms, and in South Carolina and
Delaware—in the highest class reported, 5 0 to GO per Mississippi the negroes operate over 50 per cent. In
cent.
West Virginia the native whites operate 98.4 per cent
Plate Xo. 321 presents the per cent of farms I of the number of farms: Indiana is second, with 95.1
operated by tenants, by counties, in 1010. This map per cent. In Missouri (93.5 per cent), Pennsylvania
gives a comprehensive idea of the condition of the
(93.4 per cent), Ohio (92.9 per cent), and Kentucky
United States as related to farm tenants. The
(94.7 per cent), a little less than 95 per cent of the
darkest shaded areas, indicating 75 per cent and over farms are under control of native white operators.
of the farms operated by tenants, are found in South West Virginia shows the smallest proportion of the
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, number of farms operated by foreign-bom whites and
Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. For the states negroes, less than 2 per cent of the farms being op
west of the one hundred and first meridian the greater erated by these two classes combined.
portion of this entire area shows less than 20 percent 1 Diagram 2 compares, by the length of the bars, for
the stati*s in the South Atlantic, East South Central,
of the farms operated by tenants.
The dense shading on the map on Plate Xo. 322, and West South Central divisions, the average value
per cent of improved land in farms operated by of farm property per acre for white and colored farm
tenants, by states, in 1910, indicates that five states— ers, in 1910, the black bar representing the value of
Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and property operated by colored farmers. The average
Mississippi—have between 5 0 and GO per cent of the value of farm property per acre lor white farmers in
improved land in farms operated by tenants. The Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Lmisiana, and
next group, from 40 to 50 per cent, covers the states Oklahoma, is higher than for colored farmers in 1910.
In the remaining 10 states shown in this diagram the
of Maryland, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Texas.
average value of farm property per acre for the colored
FARM M ORTGAGES.
farmers is higher than that of the white. Delaware
Diagram 2 on Plate Xo. 322 shows the number of has the highest average value of farm property per
farms operated by their owners free from mortgage and acre for the whites and Kentucky the highest for the
mortgaged in 1010. The solid black part of the bar colored.
Diagram 3 presents similar data for 1900, for the
represents the farms free from mortgage and the light
same states. In 1900 the average value of farm prop
shaded portion the mortgaged. It will be noted that,
with a few exceptions, the states of the New England, erty per acre for both white and colored farmers was
Middle Atlantic, and East and West Xorth Central much lower than in 1910. The states of Xorth Caro
divisions have the highest proportion of their number lina and Oklahoma show a decided change. In 1900
of farms mortgaged. The states showing the lowest the average value of fa mi property per acre in Okla
per cent of mortgaged farms are in the South Atlantic homa for the colored farmer was larger than for the
white, while in 1910 the reverse was true. In Xorth
and Mountain divisions.
Carolina the value for the white fanner was greater
Plate Xo. 323 shows, by dots, the distribution of the |
mortgaged farms, by counties, for the same date, each i than for the colored in 1900, but the value for the
dot representing 50 farms. The dense groups of dots, colored exceeded that of the white farmer in 1910.
Diagrams 4 and 5 show the average value of farm
indicating the greatest number of mortgaged farms,
property per farm for white and colored farmers in
are found in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Vermont |
of the New England division; New \ork, New Jersey, the same 16 states for 1910 and 1900, respectively.
and Pennsylvania, comprising the Middle Atlantic In every instance the average value of the farm prop
division; Michigan and Wisconsin, of the East North erty per farm of the white farmers far exceeds that of
Central division; and Missouri of the West North Cen the colored farmers both for 1910 and 1900.
Plate X o. 325 indicates, by the length of the bars,
tral division.
the total number of acres in farms of white and col
ored farmers in 1910 and 1900, by states, ranked ac
S T A T I S T I C S O F F A R M S , C L A S S IF IE D B Y R A C E . N A
T IV IT Y . A N D T E N U R E O F FARM ER S.
cording to the number of acres in farms, with the
greatest number first. Texas has by far the greatest
Plate X o. 324 is made up of five diagrams, Diagram
urea in farms, but the number of acres has decreased
1 showing the per cent of the number of farms, classi

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

Map 2 presents the per cent of number of farms of
since 1000; decreases are also shown for 24 other states,
white fanners operated by white managers, in 1910, for
North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma,
and New Mexico showing the greatest increase in the j the Southern states only. There arc only five states
in which the white managers operate over 1 percent of
total number of acres in farms of white farmers.
the farms of white farmers. Florida has the highest
Map 1 on Plate No. 326 shows, by states, in eight
per cent, appearing in the group 3 to 4 per cent.
groups of shading, the per cent of the number of farms
of white fanners operated by white owners in the | On Plate No. 329 the dots indicate the number of
Southern states in 1910. The solid black shade indi farms in the United States operated bv colored owners
cates the states in which 70 per cent and over of the and part owners, at the Thirteenth Census, each dot
representing 50 farms. The map shows that the
number of farms are operated by white owners and
colored owners are scattered all over the l nited
covers the states of Florida, Virginia, and West Vir
ginia. Georgia and Oklahoma have the lowest percent States, every state having one or more dots, except
age, 40 to 50 per cent, of farms operated by white own Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island.
ers; Delaware, South Carolina, Alabama, and Texas The greatest density of this character of ownership is
found in the Southern states, Virginia and South Caro
are in the group with 50 to 00 per cent, while the re
lina having the greatest number.
mainder of the Southern states—Maryland, North
Plate No. 330 indicates, by the dots, the number of
Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas,
farms operated by colored tenants, in 1910. A com
and Louisiana—are in the group 00 to 70 per cent.
Map 2 on the same plate, per cent of the number parison with the map showing the counties in the
of farms of colored farmers operated by colored own Southern states having 50 per cent or more of their
population colored will coincide almost exactly with
ers, for the Southern states only, presents similar data
the heavy groups of dots on this map. In other
to Map 1. The only state showing over 70 per cent
words, the number of farms operated by colored tenof the farms of colored farmers operated by colored
owners is West Virginia. Maryland and Virginia are 1 ants are more numerous where the density of the colin the group from 60 to 70 percent. All other South ! ored population is highest. The states of South Caro
ern states, with the exception of Kentucky and Okla lina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and
homa, with 50 to 60 per cent, fall in the groups having Louisiana have the largest areas most densely shaded.
For the remainder of the United States, outside of the
less than 50 per cent.
Map 1 on Plate No. 327 presents the per cent of ] Southern states, the number of the colored tenants is
number of farms of white farmers operated by white very small.
Map 1 on Plate No. 331 indicates the percentage of
tenants, in 1910, for the Southern states only. The j
all land in farms of white farmers operated by white
states of Georgia and Oklahoma have the highest per
centage reported, between 50 and (it) per cent, all other owners, in 1910, for the Southern states only. Almost
the entire area of the Southern states is solid black,
Southern states having less than 50 per cent.
indicating that in these states 70 per cent and over of
On Map 2, the per cent of number of farms of colored
the land of the white farmers was operated by white
farmers operated by colored tenants, for the Southern
states only, at the same date, seven states are colored i owners. Only five states have smaller percentages—
solid black, indicating that colored tenants operate 70 Georgia and Texas, with 60 to 70 per cent; Maryland
per cent and over of the farms of colored fanners in and Oklahoma, with 50 to 60 percent; and Delaware,
the cotton-producing states of South Carolina, Georgia, ' with 40 to 50 per cent. In other words, the map
Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Loui shows that in the Southern states more than 50 per
siana. The next group, 60 to 70 per cent, includes cent of the land in farms of white farmers is owned.
North Carolina and Texas; Delaware is the only state
Map 2, per cent of all land in farms of colored fann
in the group 50 to 60 per cent; Florida, Kentucky, and ers operated by colored owners, in the Southern states,
Oklahoma are in the group 40 to 50 per cent, the re in 1910, shows that 70 per cent of all land in farms of
mainder of the states having less than 40 per eent of colored farmers is operated by colored owners in West
the colored farmers as tenants.
Virginia and Oklahoma. In Virginia colored owners
Map 1 on Plate No. 328 shows the per cent of num operated from 60 to 70 per cent of the land in farms of
ber of all farms operated by colored farmers, in 1910, colored farmers; in Kentucky and Florida, from 50 to
for the Southern states only. The shading indicates 60 per cent: and in Arkansas and Texas, from 40 to 50
that Mississippi is the only state in which the colored
per cent. All the other states have less than 40 per
farmers form 60 per cent and over of the number cent of land in farms of colored farmers operated by
of all farmers. South Carolina is in the group 50 to colored owners.
60 per cent; the states of Georgia, Alabama, and
Plate No. 332 consists of two maps, the first being
Louisiana are in the group 40 to 50 per cent; the re per cent of all land in farms of white farmers operated
maining Southern states are in the groups below 30 by white managers, for the Southern stat<*s only, and
per cent.
Map 2, per cent of all land in farms of colored farmers

AG KICI JLTUKK.
operated by colored managers, also for the Southern
states, at the Thirteenth Census. A comparison of
the two maps shows that the white managers operate
a larger proportion of the acreage of the farms of
white farmers than colored managers operate of the
farms of colored farmers.
Plate Xo. 333 comprises two maps, Map 1, per cent
of all land in farms of white farmers operated by white
tenants, for the Southern states, in 1910, and Map 2,
percent of all land in farms of colored fanners operated
by colored tenants, for the same states, at the same
date. These maps indicate that the white tenancy in
the Southern states operates a smaller proportion of
the acreage of the land of white farmers than the
colored tenants operate of the land of colored farmers.
Map 1 on Plate No. 334 gives the per cent of all land
in farms operated by colored farmers in 1910, for the
Southern state's only. The highest per cent of all land
operated by colored farmers is shown for Mississippi,
which appears in the group 30 to 40 per cent. The
states of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and
Louisiana are in the group 20 to 30 per cent, while
all other states have less than 20 percent of all land
in farms operated by colored farmers.
Map 2 presents the per cent of improved hfnd in
farms operated by colored farmers in 1910, for the
Southern states only. The colored farmers operated
from 40 to 50 per cent of the improved land in Mis
sissippi and South Carolina, and from 30 to 40 per
cent in Georgia and Alabama. For the other states
less than 30 per cent of the improved land in farms
was operated by colored farmers.
S E L E C T E D P L A N T A T IO N A R E A .

The Census Bureau made an investigation, for a
selected area, of the plantations in 1910, the first that
had ever been made by the bureau, and in its conduct
of this investigation a special plantation schedule was
used in addition to the regular agricultural schedule.
The selected area comprised 325 counties in the state's
of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas,
Louisiana, and Texas.
The sketch map of a portion of the United State's
on Plate No. 335 is shaded to inelicate the selected
plantation area, also the limit of cotton production,
as well as the counties in wliich ne'groes fe>rmed 50
per cent or more of the population in 1910. It will be
noted that the selectee! plantation area covers a large
proportion of the counties in which the negroes pre
dominate. The cross-hatched area indicates the conntit's selected for the special investigation: the dotted
area indicates those counties in which the negroes
formed 50 per cent or more of the population; a num
ber of such counties are shown outside of the planta
tion areas, but the dots within the cross-hatching
indicate the counties within the selected area that

| had a majority of the population negroes. The dis| cussion of the subject of the selected plantation area
will be found on pages N77 to N90 of the Report, on
Agriculture, Volume V, Reports of the Thirteenth
i Census.
L IV E STIM’ K.

On Plate Xo. 330 t he value of domestic animals on
farms and ranges in 1910 is indicated by dots, each
dot representing animals valued at $100,000. The
dense groups of dots indicate the areas from which
I the domestic animals having the highest value were
reported.
On Plate Xo. 337 the number of neat cattle on
farms and ranges in 1910 is represented bv dots.
Each dot represents 1,000 head of cattle and indicates
the density of neat cattle in proportion to the area.
The dense groups of dots in Wisconsin, Iowa, Minne
sota, Illinois, Nebraska, Kansas, and New York indi
cate the areas from which the greatest number of cat
tle were reported.
On Plate No. 338, cattle on farms in 1910 and 1900,
the length of the bar indicates the number of cattle
on farms in each state. The states are ranked in tho
order of the number of cattle reported in 1910, with
the largest number first. Texas was first, Iowa second,
Kansas third, Nebraska fourth, Wisconsin fifth, ami
Missouri sixth in 1910, the first 4 states appearing in
the same order in 1900. For 24 of the states a decrease
in the number of cattle was reported in 1910. The
largest decreases from 1900 to 1910 were in Texas,
Iowa, Kansas, Illinois, and Oklahoma, while California
and Minnesota reported the largest increases in the
number of cattle on farms from 1900 to 1910.
Map 1 on Plate No. 339 shows, by the number of
dots, the number of cattle on farms in 1910, by
states, each dot representing 200,000 cattle.
Map 2 illustrates, by the dots, the number of dairy
cows on farms in 1910, by states, each dot representing
200.000 dairy cows. A comparison of the two maps
shows that a number of the states having large num
bers of cattle reported a small number of dairy cows.
Texas ranked first in the number of cattle but was
sixth in the number of dairy cows; Iowa was second
in the number of cattle and third in the number of
dairy cow s: New York, leading in the number of
dairy cows on farms, ranked eighth in the number of
cattle; Pennsylvania, seventh in the number of dairy
cows, ranked thirteenth in the number of cattle.
Plate No. 340 shows, by dots, each dot representing
1.000 dairy cows, the distribution of dairy cows on
farms and ranges, by counties, in 1910. The dense
groups of dots locate the counties in which dairy cows
are most numerous. In Wisconsin the dense groups
of dots in the southern part of the state locate the
great dairy farming district; central New ^ ork is
also marked as a dairy farming district: southeastern
Pennsylvania, near Pliiladelphia, also has un area

STATISTICAL ATLAS.
closely covered bv dots, indicating a large number of
dairy cows.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 841 presents the number of
sheep on farms in 1910 and 1900, the length of the
bars showing the number of sheep at both censuses.
In 1900 Montana had the largest number of sheep,
but in 1910 Wyoming was slightly in the lead, Mon
tana showing a large decrease in the number of sheep
from 1900 to 1910. The arrangement of the bars on
tins diagram presents strikingly the decreases in the
number of sheep reported from 36 of the 48 states.
Utah, New Mexico, New York, Montana, Wisconsin,
Pennsylvania, Colorado, Washington, Michigan, In
diana, North Dakota, and Oregon reported the largest
decreases in the number of sheep returned in 1910, as
compared with 1900. The total number of sheep re
ported at the census of 1910 showed a decrease, over the
number returned in 1900, of 9,055,852, or 14.7 percent.
In Diagram 2, horses, mules, and asses and burros
in 1910 and 1900, Texas leads in the number reported,
closely followed by Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas,
Nebraska, and Oklahoma, each of these states report
ing over 1,000,000 of such animals. The number of
horses increased 1,566,093 over the number reported
in 1900; the number of mules increased 945,154, ami
for the horses, mules, and asses and burros combined,
from 1900 to 1910, tho number increased 2,522,780,
or 11.7 per cent.
On Map 1, Plate No. 342, number of horses, mules,
ami asses and burros on farms in 1910, by states, the
number of dots indicates the number of animals, each
dot representing 200,000.
The number of sheep on farms in 1910 is shown on
Map 2, by states, each dot representing 200,000 sheep.
Plate No. 343 indicates the number of horses and
mules on farms and ranges at the Thirteenth Census.
Each dot on this map represents 1.000 animals, and
the density of the dots indicates where the largest
number of the animals were found.
Plate No. 344 presents similar data for sheep, each
dot representing 2,500 sheep. The dense groups of
dots in Ohio, Michigan, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana
are especially prominent, locating the counties report
ing a largo number of these animals.
Plate No. 345 gives the number of swine on farms
in 1910 and 1900, by states, arranged in order of the
number reported in 1910, with the largest first. Iowa
leads, with 7,545,853, and Illinois is second, with
4,686,362. The black bars represent the number re
turned in 1910 and the open bars the number in 1900.
The bars for the states producing the largest number
of swine indicate a decrease from 1900 to 1910,25 states
reporting fewer swine in 1910 than in 1900: Oklahoma
is the state showing the largest increase from 1900 to
1910. The total number of swine reported in 1910 was
58,185,676, or 4,682,365 less than the number reported
in 1900.

Plate No. 346 shows the distribution of swine on
farms and ranges, by counties, in 1910, each dot repre
senting 2,500. As indicated on the diagram on Plate
No. 345, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, Indiana, Nebraska,
and Ohio returned the largest number of swine.
Map 1 on Plate No. 347 also shows the number of
swine on farms in 1910, by states, each dot repre
senting 200,000 swine, and Map 2 the number of
fowls on farms, by states, in 1910, each dot repre
senting 1,000,000 fowls. The increase in the total
number of fowls in the 10 years was 1S.1 per cent.
Iowa leads, with 23,482,880; Illinois is second, with
21,409,835; and Missouri third, with 20,897,208.
Plate No. 348 illustrates, by means of the dots, the
distribution of poultry on farms and ranges in 1910,
each dot representing 10,000 fowls. The dense groups
of dots indicate that Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri have
the largest numbers, and are the only st ates reporting
over 20,000,000 fowls at the Thirteenth Census.
Plate No. 349 shows, by the length o f the bars, the
value of fow ls raised in 1909 and 1899, by states,
arranged in geographic divisions. Illinois reported
the highest values at both the Twelfth and the Thir
teenth Censuses. Large increases were reported for
every state in 1909, as compared with 1899.
Plate No. 350 shows, by the length of the bars, the
value of eggs produced in 1909 and 1899. Though
Illinois led in the value of fowls raised, Ohio led in the
value of eggs produced, followed by Missouri, Iowa,
Illinois, and New York, in the order named, each
producing eggs valued at over $17,000,000. The value
of eggs in 1909 for Illinois and Missouri was more than
double the value reported for 1899.
On Plate No. 351 the production of wool in pounds
in 1909 and 1899 is indicated by the length of the bars.
Although the number of sheep w as reduced from 1900
to 1910, the production of wool in Wyoming, Montana,
and Ohio, the leading states, showed a fair increase.
Although 31 of the states reported decreases, the total
production of wool increased. The estimate of the
number of pounds produced shows that the increase
amounted to 12,852,393 pounds, or 4.6 per cent. The
value of the wool clipped was $45,670,053 in 1899, and
S65.472.82s in 1909, an increase of S19.so2.275. or
43.4 per cent.
S U M M A R Y FOR A L L CROPS.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 352 shows the value of all
farm crops in 1909 and 1899. Illinois was first at
both enumerations, closely followed by Iowa, Texas,
and Ohio, in the order named. New York, wliich
was fifth in 1899, had dropped to eighth in 1909,
Georgia having advanced to fifth place, Missouri to
sixth, and Kansas to seventh. The value of crops in
the United States increased 83 per cent during the
decade and the diagram shows for individual states
the valuation at the Twelfth and Thirteenth Censuses,

AGKICULTUKE.
the difference in the length of t lie bars showing approx
imately 1he increase.
Diagram 2, proportion of land in farms, improved
and in crops, with acreage reports, to total land
area in 1910. The white, or unshaded, portion of
the bar represents the per cent of the total land
area that is not in farms. The heavily shaded part
indicates the land in farms that is unimproved, the
other two shades representing, first, the land in crops,
and, second, by the cross-hatching, the other improved
land. It will be noted that for the New England and
Middle Atlantic states more than 50 per cent of the
land is unimproved and not in farms. In the East
North Central division only two states—Mulligan and
Wisconsin—show 50 per cent of the land unimproved
and not in farms. In the West North Central division
North and South Dakota, Minnesota, and Nebraska
have less than 50 per cent of the land improved. In the
states of the South Atlantic division, excluding the Dis
trict of Columbia, which is a city, Florida shows the
greatest proportion of unimproved land and land not
in farms— 94.6 percent. In the states of the EastSouth
Central division the proportion of the land in crops
and other improved land varies, only one state—Ken
tucky— having over 50 per cent of its land improved.
In the West South Central division Texas, with the
greatest total area, has the lowest per cent improved.
The Mountain division has the smallest area improved
and the states all show the lowest percentage's of land
improved of any in the United States. Arizona has
the greatest proportion of unimproved area and the
greatest percentage of land not in farms. The states
composing the Pacific division also have very low
percentages of land improved and in crops. There
are only nine states in the United States that have
over 50 per cent of their total area improved.
On Plate No. 353, the proportion which the value of
specified crops formed of the value of all crops in 1909,
the total length of the bar represents the value of all
crops in each state, the shaded portions indicating the
proportionate value of the seven crops specified, and
the unshaded portion the value of all other crops.
The hay and forage crop in the states of the New
England and Mountain divisions is the most valuable.
Cereals are the predominating crop in Pennsylvania
and all the states of the East North Central and West
North Central divisions, also in Maryland, Delaware.
Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Montana, Idaho, Washington, and
Oregon. Cotton is the most valuable crop in the
southern part of the South Atlantic division, and in
Mississippi and Alabama of the East South Central
division, and in the W est South Central division, ex
cept the state of Oklahoma, in which cereals form
more than 50 per cent of the value of all crops, and in
Louisiana, where cereals are the leading crop. \egetable crops are important in the New England and

Middle Atlantic divisions. Fruits and nuts and for
est products are of small importance as eompured
with the other crops specified.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 354, average value per acre
of crops with acreage reports, 1909 and 1899, indicates
that the New England states of Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, and ( onnecticut reported the highest values,
in the order named. The only state's reporting values
in excess of $25 per acre were Massachusetts, with an
average of $41.33 per acre; Rhode Island, with $40.50
per acre; Connecticut, with $35.84; New Jersey, with
$33.19; South Carolina, with $26.45; and Arizona,
with $25.97 per acre. The last state named on the
diagram is South Dakota, which had a value of $10.17
per acre. All of the state's, except New Mexico,
showed large increases in the average value of farm
crops per acre from 1899 to 1909, New Mexico, the only
state that decreased, reporting an average value of
farm crops per acre of $14.27 in 1899 and $12.70 in
1909.
In Diagram 2, average value of farm crops per farm,
1909 and 1899. North Dakota leads with a valuation of
$2,429 per farm; Nevada issecond, with $2,203 per farm;
California third, with $1,730; South Dakota fourth,
with $1,616; and Nebraska fifth, with $1,512 per farm.
These were the only stall's reporting an average value
of farm crops per farm of more than $1,500. The
state reporting the smallest value is New Mexico, with
$250 per farm in 1909 and $249 in 1899, the reports at
each census being nearly equal. Not a single state on
the entire list showed a decrease in the average value of
farm crops per farm in 1909, as compared with 1899,
and, with a few exceptions, the proportionate increase
for each state was large.
The small map (3), at the bottom of the plate, indi
cates, by means of dots, the geographic distribution
of the value of all farm crops, by states, in 1909,
each dot representing a value of $8,000,000. It will he
noted that the dots are closely grouped in the states
of Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, hut nearly all the
Eastern and Southern states returned higher valua
tions. The Mountain states reported the lowest val
uations. New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada being the
lowest. The Pacific states, while not as heavily
shaded as the states in the East, reported farm crops
of large value.
Plate No. 355 shows the distribution of the value
of all crops in 1909, each dot representing a value of
$100,000. Illinois leads, with $372,270,470: Iowa is
second, with $314,666,298; Texas third, with $298,133,466; and Ohio fourth, with $230,337,981.
The map on Plate No. 356 represents, by dots, the
expenditures by farmers for labor in 1909, each dot
representing $15,000. The dense groups of dots show
the counties having the greatest expenditures for
labor anti are nearly all counties located near great
cities.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

On Map 1, Plate No. 302, changes in yield of com
crop per acre, by states, from 1899 to 1909, the states
unshaded, or left white, increased their yield in 1909.
Oklahoma and Kansas showed the greatest decrease,
8 bushels and over per acre, while the corn crop of
Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Nebraska, and Texas de
creased 4 to 8 bushels; and Maryland, Mississippi,
Iowa, New Mexico, and California reported a decrease
of 2 to 4 bushels per acre in their corn crop.
Map 2, corn— acreage, by states, in 1909, shows that
the states having more than 5,000,000 acres in corn
were, in order of size of acreage, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas,
Nebraska, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas; Illinois,
with 10,045,839 acres in corn, reported the largest
acreage in 1909.
Plate No. 304 consists of six diagrams, relating to
the production of corn, wheat, and oats. In Diagram
I N D I V I D U A L C R O P S.
1, production of corn in 1909 and 1899, Illinois, with
Plate No. 300 shows the changes in the acreage of 390,218,676 bushels, ranked first; Iowa was second,
all cereals from 1899 to 1909, for each state, arranged with 341,750,460 bushels; Indiana was third, with
by geographic divisions. The black bars on the left
195,490,433 bushels; and Missouri fourth, with 191,of the central line show the decrease in acreage and 427,087 bushels. Comparing the bars for the two
the bars on the right of the central line indicate the years, it will he noted that in 10 of the 28 states shown
increase. Decreases in 27 states are indicated and the production was less in 1909 than in 1899.
increases in 21 states. California shows the greatest
Diagram 4, Plate No. 304, shows the production of
decrease, 2,033,762 acres; Iowa was second in decrease corn at each census from 1849 to 1909. The increase
of acreage, with 1,879,050 acres; Minnesota was third, was small from 1849 to 1859; it decreased from 1859
with 1,007,219 acres; ami Tennessee fourth, with
to 1869; the crop more than doubled from 1809 to
918,681 acres. The states showing the greatest in
1879; the increase was regular from 1879 to 1889 and
creases in acreage are North Dakota, with 6,276,707 from 1889 to 1899, but a slight decrease was reported
acres; Oklahoma second, with 3,810,834 acres; and in 1909.
Kansas, with 2,311,729; South Dakota, with 1,992,296;
Plate No. 305 represents, by dots, the production of
and Washington, with 1,240,685 acres, following in the corn in 1909; each dot equals 100,000 bushels. The
order named. The total increase in acreage in cereals dense groups of dots in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, and
was 6,413,743 acres, or 3.5 per cent. The acreage east
Nebraska are almost solid black, indicating a tremen
of the Mississippi River decreased over 6,000,000 acres,
dous production in these states. The scattering dots
while that west of the Mississippi increased over i in other states show the relative importance of the
12.000. 000 acres.
grain crop in these states.
Map 1 on Plate No. 361 indicates, by states, in six
Map 1 on Plate No. 363, wheat— acreage, by states, in
groups, the changes in acreage of all cereals from 1899
1909, indicates that North Dakota, with 8,188,782
to 1909. The highest group, with an increase of acres, had the largest area in wheat in 1909. Kansas
2,500,000 acres and over, includes North Dakota and was second, with 5,973,785 acres; Minnesota, with
Oklahoma; the group 1,000,000 to 2,500,000 includes 3,276,911 acres, was third; and South Dakota, with
South Dakota, Kansas, and Washington. The de 3,217,255 acres, was fourth.
creases shown on the map are all in the states east of
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 304, production of wheat
the ninety-seventh meridian, with the exception of in 1909 and 1899, shows that North Dakota was first
Texas and California. The only states east of the Mis in 1909, with a crop of 110,781,880 bushels; Kansas
sissippi River increasing their acreage of cereals were second, with 77,577,115 bushels; Minnesota third, with
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Indiana,
57,094,412 bushels; and Nebraska fourth, with 47,685,and Florida.
745 bushels. There were 13 of the 24 states repre
Map 2 on Plate No. 301 shows the acreage, by states, sented on the diagram that reported a smaller produc
of all cereals in 1909, each dot representing 400,000 tion in 1909 than in 1899.
acres. Illinois has the greatest acreage, closely followed
Diagram 5, Plate No. 304, production of wheat at
by Kansas and Iowa, each of these states having over each census from 1849 to 1909, indicates that the wheat
15.000. 000 acres; Nebraska, North Dakota, Missouri, crop increased at each census; the increase over the
and Minnesota, in addition to those named, are the previous census from 1879 to 1889 and from 1899 to
only states having over 10.000,000 acres each in cereals. ! 1909 was very small.
Plate No. 457 represents, by dots, the expenditures
of farmers for feed for live stoek in 1909, each dot
equaling $50,000. The Eastern states show the most
densely shaded areas ami indicate the greatest ex
penditures for feed for live stoek.
Plate No. 358 shows the expenditures of farmers for
fertilizer in 1909. Each dot represents $5,000 and
the dense groups are almost entirely in states on the
Atlantic coast. The small number of dots in the
states west of the Mississippi River presents strikingly
the small amount expended for fertilizer.
Plate No. 359 shows, by dots, the value of the re
ceipts from sale of feedable crops in 1909, each dot
representing $50,000. The dense groups in the coun
ties in the northern half of Illinois indicate the great
est receipts from the sale of feedable crops in 1909.

AGRICULTURE.
Plate No. 366 represents, by dots, the production of
wheat in 1909. The dense groups in North Dakota,
South Dakota, and parts of Nebraska and Kansas indi
cate the counties in which the production was greatest.
Map 2, Plato No. 363, oats—acreage, by states, in
1909, shows that Iowa bail the largest area in oats,
with an acreage of 4,655,154; Illinois being second,
with 4,176,485 acres; and Minnesota third, with
2,977,258 acres.
Diagram 3, Plato No. 364, shows the production of
oats in 1909 and 1899. Illinois was first, with a pro
duction of 150,386,074 bushels; Iowa was second, with
128,198,055 bushels; Minnesota third, with 93,897,717
bushels; and Wisconsin fourth, with 71,349,038 bushels.
These states had almost the same rank in 1899, except
that Minnesota and Wisconsin changed places. Of the
26 states represented on the diagram, 9 reported a
smaller production in 1909 than in 1899.
Diagram 6, Plate No. 364, production of oats at each
census from 1849 to 1909, indicates that the oats crop
showed a steady increase at each enumeration, the
largest increase being shown from 1879 to 1889.
Plate No. 367 presents, by dots, the production of
oats in 1909, each dot representing 100,000 bushels.
Illinois and Iowa led in the production of this cereal and
the dense groups of dots in the northern part of
Illinois indicate where the greatest production was
reported in 1909.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 368 shows the production
of barley for the 15 principal producing states in
1909 and 1899. The acreage of barley increased
3,228,510 acres and the production 53,709,335 bushels.
Minnesota reported the largest crop at the last enu
meration, 34,927,773 bushels; California was second,
with a production of 26,441,954 bushels; North Dakota
third, with 26,365,758 bushels; South Dakota fourth,
with 22,396,130 bushels; and Wisconsin fifth, with
22,156,041 bushels. Iowa, the state ranking fourth
in 1899, reported a decrease of over 7,000,000 bushels
in its crop for 1909.
Diagram 2 gives the production of rye in 1909 and
1899 for the 12 principal producing states. Michigan,
with a crop of 5,814,394 bushels, was first in produc
tion; Wisconsin second, with 4,797,775 bushels;
Minnesota third, with 4,426,028 bushels; and Penn
sylvania fourth, with 3,496,603 bushels. r
Ihe crop of
1909 was less than that reported in 1899 for 6 of the
12 states represen ted on the diagram. The increase
for the entire United States was 3,951,832 bushels.
The increase in the states of Michigan and Minnesota
was 6,243,402 bushels. The greatest decrease reported
by any state was from Nebraska, a decrease of
1,241,189 bushels for 1909.
In Diagram 3, production of buckwheat for 1909
and 1899, New’ York leads, with a crop of 5,691,745
bushels; Pennsylvania being second, with 4,797,350
28546°— 14------- 5

bushels; Michigan third, with 958,119 bushels: and
West Virginia fourth, with 533,670 bushels. These
were the only states reporting over 5(H),(MM) bushels.
The three states of the Middle Atlantic division pro
duced 10,701,643 o f the 14,849,332 bushels reported for
the entire United States.
The m
a|>s on Plates Nos. 369 to 371 show the distri
bution of the production of barley, rye, and buckwheat,
respectively, in 1909. Each dot represents 50.(M )
M
bushels and the dense groups of dots locate the prin
cipal producing areas of these crops.
Diagram 4, Plate No. 368, presents the production of
tobacco in 1909 and 1899. Kentucky was the leading
state, with a production of 398,482,301 pounds; North
Carolina, with a production of 138,813,163 pounds,
was second; and Virginia third, with a production of
132,979,390 pounds. These were the only states
producing over 1(M).(M>0,0(M) pounds.
Plate No. 372 represents, by the dots, the tobacco
production in 1909, each dot equaling 4(M),(MM) pounds.
The dense groups of dots are locuted in Kentucky,
North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin,
Pennsylvania, and Connecticut. The acreage devoted
to the tobacco crop is small; only 1,294,911 acres
were reported in 1909. The dots indicate that the
areas in Pennsylvania and Connecticut are very small
and the crop is cultivated in comparatively few
counties. Kentucky, the state leading in its produc
tion, has the greatest number of counties producing
tobacco.
The fifth illustration on Plate No. 368 is a map of
the United States presenting the acreage of hay and
forage in 1909, each dot representing 400,(MK) acres.
Iowa, with 5,046,185 acres, was the leading state, New
York following closely, with 5,043,373 acres: Nebraska
was third, with 4,520,034 acres; Kansas fourth, with
3,957,745 acres; and Minnesota fifth, with 3,946,072
acres. The total acreage reported was 72,280,776, an
increase since 1899 of 10,589,707 acres, or 17.2 percent.
Only 10 states reported a decrease in acreage in this
crop.
Plate No. 373 shows the production of hay and
forage in 1909. Tills Is one of the leading agri
cultural crops of the United States and its distribu
tion Is indicated by the dots, each dot representing
2,000 tons. The dense groups of dots are in the
counties where the crop is of the greatest importance.
Each state has a number of dots, showing that it is
a crop of wide range and one of importance in nearly
every state. The dots are most numerous in the
Northern states, especially in the Middle Atlantic and
East and West North Central divisions, where are
found the areas producing the heaviest crop of hay
and forage.
On plate No. 374 the production of alfalfa in 1909
is indicated. The dots on this map show that the

STATISTICAL ATLAS.
crop Is unimportant oust of tho Mississippi River, !
but in the Western states, especially in Nebraska,
Kansas, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, and California, the I
crop, while a minor one, Is of considerable value.
Plate No. 375 consists of four diagrams. In Diagram
1 , production of potatoes in 1909 and 1899, New York
state leads for both 1899 and 1909. In 1899 it
reported 38,060,471 bushels, while the crop of 1909
was 48,597,701 bushels. Michigan, the second state
in point of production, reported 38,243,828 bushels in
1909; Wisconsin, the third state, reported 31,968,195
bushels; Maine, with 28,556,837 bushels, was fourth;
Minnesota, with 26,802,948 bushels, was fifth; Penn
sylvania, with 21,740,611 bushels, was sixth; and
Ohio, with 20,322,984 bushels, was seventh. Each of
these states reported a production of more than
20,000,000 bushels in 1909. The total production
increased from 273,318,167 bushels to 389,194,965
bushels, an increase of 115,876,798 bushels, or 42.4
per cent.
Plate No. 376 gives the production of potatoes in
1909, each dot representing 100,000 bushels. The
dots, indicating the distribution of the crop, are most
dense in Maine, New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, and
Minnesota, showing that these states lead in the pro
duction of potatoes. The dense groups of dots in
the northern part of Maine locate important produc
ing comities of the state in 1909.
For the production of sweet potatoes and yams in
1909 and 1899, as indicated in Diagram 2, Plate No.
375, North Carolina was the leading state in both 1899
and 1909, reporting, at the Twelfth Census, 5,781,587
bushels, and at the Thirteenth Census, 8,493,283 bushels.
Georgia was second in 1909, with 7,426,131 bushels;
Alabama third, with 5,314,857 bushels; and Virginia
fourth, with 5,270,202 bushels. The total produc
tion reported in 1899 was 42,517,412 bushels, as com
pared with 59,232,070 bushels in 1909, an increase of
16,714,658 bushels, or 39.3 per cent. Of the states
appearing on the diagram, there were but four report
ing a smaller production for 1909 than for 1899. Texas
reported the largest decrease, the 1909 crop being
569,052 bushels less than that of 1899. H ie reports
of 15 states for 1909 indicated decreases in the number
of bushels produced, as compared with the production
for 1899.
On Plate No. 377 the production of sweet potatoes
and yams in 1909 is shown, the distribution of the
crop being indicated by the dots, each dot represent
ing 100,000 bushels. The area of production is prin
cipally confined to the states of tho South Atlantic
and East and West South Central divisions. The
states leading in the production are all Southern
states. The total production in 1909 was 59,232,070
bushels, 29,628,153 bushels of which were produced
in the South Atlantic division, 13,573,580 bushels in

the East South Central division, and 9,025,928 bushels
in the West South Central division. Over 52,000,000
of the 59,000,000 bushels were produced in these
three divisions.
Diagram 4 on Plate No. 375 presents the production
of cotton in 1909 and 1899. The total production in
bales was 9,534,707 in 1899 and 10,649,268 in 1909,
an increase of 11.7 per cent. Texas was the state
leading in production at both censuses, with 2,506,212
bales in 1899 and 2,455,174 in 1909, a decrease of
51,038 bales. Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama,
and Mississippi follow in the order named and
were the only states each reporting over 1,000,000
bales.
Diagram 3, on the same plate, production of cotton
at each census from 1849 to 1909, indicates that the
production increased each year, except in 1869, at
which date there was a reduction in the crop of over
2,000,000 bales from the amount returned in 1859.
The production in 1879 was larger than that of 1869
by more than 2,500,000 bales.
Plate No. 383 represents, by dots, the distribution
of the cotton crop in 1909, each dot ccpialing 1,000
bales. This crop is confined to the Southern states,
and the dense groups of dots indicate the principal
producing areas in the states of North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas,
and Texas.
On Map 1, Plate No. 384, cotton— acreage, by states,
each dot represents 400,000 acres. The Southern
states are the only states in which solid black dots
are found. Texas is the lead big state in both acreage
and production, reporting 9,930,179 acres in cotton.
Georgia is second, with 4,883,304 acres; Alabama
third, with 3,730,482 acres; and Mississippi fourth,
with 3,400,210 acres.
On Plate No. 378 the production of dried peas and
beans in 1909 is indicated by the dots, each dot rep
resenting 10,000 bushels. The thickly shaded areas
in Michigan and New York indicate that these states
lead in the production of dried peas and beans. The
crop is unimportant in other portions of the country,
as indicated by the small number of dots shown in
other states.
Plate No. 379, production of rice in 1909, indicates
the areas in which this crop is produced, each dot
representing
50,000
bushels. Louisiana,
with
10,839,973 bushels; Texas, with 8,991,745 bushels;
and Arkansas, with 1,282,830 bushels, produced
21,114,548 bushels, the remaining states producing
only 723,972 bushels. South Carolina produced
541,570 bushels in 1909. The states of Virginia,
North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and
Mississippi also reported small amounts. The states
mentioned are the only states from which rice was
reported.

AGRICULTURE.

r>:

The map on Plate No. 380 represents, by tlie dots, I On Plate No. 387, production of grapes in 1909, the
the distribution of the production of sugar beets in distribution and density of production are indicated by
HUM), each dot equaling 5 ,000 tons. The report indi
dots, each dot representing 1.000,000 pounds. Cali
cates that every state in the United States, except fornia produced 77 percent of the 1,979,686,525-pound
Connecticut, produced sugar beets in 1900. The total crop, and the dense grouj>s of dots locate the counties
production was 3 ,9 3 2 ,8 5 7 tons. The states leading in which this crop was produced. New York, with a
in the production were Colorado (1,231,712 tons), production of 253.006.361 pounds, and Michigan, with
California (845,191 tons), Michigan (707,639 tons),
120,695,997 pounds, rank next to California. The pn>Utah (4 1 3,946 tons), Idaho (179,661 tons), Wiscon duction in some counties of New York and Michigan is
sin (1 2 7,526 tons), and Montana (109,434 tons). very large, ju indicated by the solid black area.
s
These were the only state's reporting a production of
Plate No. 388 presents the centers relating to farms,
more than 100,000 tons each, most of the remaining agricultural products, and population, for U M and
M)
1910. This map of a section of the United States hits
states reporting small quantities. The dots locate
the counties in the states from which this crop was indicated thereon, by various symbols, the location of
reported, and it will be noted that the area from ten centers. The first, indicated by stars, are the cen
which sugar beets were reported is very small, as com ters of population in 1900 and 1910, the center of ]x»j>pared with the area of other crops. The total acreage ulation moving almost directly west during the decade.
reported in 1909 was only 364,093 acres.
The second, the heavy rimmed circles, indicates the
Plate No. 381 indicates, by the distribution of the location of the centers of the number of farnus in 1900
dots, the production of flaxseed in 1909, each dot and 1910. The center of the numl>cr of farnus moved
representing 10,000 bushels. The heavily dotted
west and south, the movement being about 30 miles
areas are found principally in North Dakota, South southwest for the 10 years. The centers of improved
Dakota, and Minnesota, with a few scattered dots in acreage in 1900 ami 1910 Jire indicated by two trianMontana, Kansas, Missouri, and Iowa. These states gles. This center during the decade moved west j u u I
together reported 19,328,129 bushels of the total north about 35 miles. The center of the production of
cereals in both 1900 ami 1910 is indicated by a cross
(1 9 ,5 1 2 ,7 6 5 ).
The map on Plate No. 382 represents, bv the dots, inscribed in a circle. As this crop wius largely pro
the distribution of the production of hops in 1909. duced in the Northwest, the change was in that direction, the center moving a little west of north about 12
This crop is one of importance in only four states—
miles. The centers of farm values are indicated by the
Oregon, California, Washington, and New York—
black blocks with the white center. The center of
the other states reporting small quantities of hops.
Map 2 on Plate No. 384 represents the distribution farm values had the largest movement of any of the
of the value of fruits and nuts reported in 1909. The centers during the decade, moving almost directly west
value of the fruits and nuts produced at that date in about 65 miles.
California was more than half the total value rej>orted
In general, agricultural production has followed the
for the entire United States. New York was second movement of population— that Is, they all moved in
in the value of the fruit production and Texas in the a westerly direction, although not in a parallel line, as
three of the centers had a decided movement north,
value of nuts produced.
Plate No. 385 represents the production of small while that for the number of farms was in the oppo
fruits in 1909. The producing areas are indicated by site direction. The south movement of the center of
the dots, each dot representing 100,000 quarts. Mas number of farms was due to the hirge number of
sachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware, and Michigan have tenant fjirnus reported in the South.
The table following indicates the latitude and lon
dense groups of dots, indicating the portions of these
states in which this crop is produced. New York, gitude in 1900 and 1910, the distance each of the cen
Maryland, Missouri, and California also have quite an ters moved during the decade, and the location of the
extended area of this crop, although not as concen center in relation to a prominent city. Of the ten cen
ters shown on the map, two, those of population, jire in
trated as in the states referred to above.
Indiana, five in Illinois, two in Missouri, and one inlowa.
Plate No. 386 presents the production of orchard
The center of number of farms for 1900 and 1910,
fruits in 1909, the density of the production l>eing in
also the center of production of cereals for 1900, the
dicated by the dots, each dot representing 25,000 bush
els. The dense groups of dots, indicating the counties center of improved acreage for 1900, and the center of
farm values in 1900 are in Illinois. The centers of farm
with the greatest production, are found in New York.
California, and Michigan. Orchard fruits are widely
distributed over all parts of the country, except in the while the center of production of cereals for 1910 falls
in Iowa.
Mountain and West North Central divisions.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

C E N T E R S OF P O P U L A T IO N A N D A G R IC U L T U R E : 1900 A N D 1910.
-

1 '

CENSUS TEAR.

North latitude.

Wart lonjrtt'i'le-

M O V E M E N T FRO M

A PFK O X IU A TE LOCATION BV IM PO R TA N T T O W N S .

Distance In
miles.

IM
OO T o 1910.

Direction.

CEN'TKR OK POPULATION: 1900 AND 1910.

o
1900.....................
1910.....................

39
39

9
10

30
12

85
80

48
32

54
20

0 miles southeast of Columbus, Inti........................................................ |
In the city of Bloomington, In d ..............................................................

W est.

3 9 .0

CENTER OF NUMBER OF FARMS: 1900 AND 1910.

1900.....................
1910.....................

38
38

17
4

00
12

88
88

12
57

30
33

11.2 miles southeast of Fairfield, W avne County, HI...................... |
0.0 miles north-northwest of Benton, Franklin County, 111.........

4 3 .9

1
\

W’est-southwest.

CENTER OF IMPROVED ACREAGE: 1900 AND 1910.
O
1900.....................
1910.....................

/
31

90
91

39
52

20
13

In Greene County. III.,00 miles north-northwest of St.IiOiiis. M o. J
9.2 miles east-northeast of Paris, Monroe County, M o....................

6 8 .2

(

W est by
north.

CENTER OF PRODUCTION OF CEREALS: 1900 AND 1910.
O
loan
1910.....................

40
40

16
37

13
48

91
91

25
41

10
30

28 miles north of Quincv, 111..................................................................... |
19.1 miles west of Fort Madison, Lee Countv, Iowa........................

2 8 .7

f North-northeast.

CENTER OF FARM VALUES: 1900 AND 1910.
o
1900 ..................
1910.....................

39
39

57
57

48
0

90
92

21
18

35
30

39 miles west-northwest of Spriturfield, in Cass Countv, 111.........
|
14 miles south-southwest of fcdina, Knox Countv, M o ..................

105.4

per cent, one county has between 50 and 75 per cent,
five counties have from 25 to 50 per cent, and the re
Plate No. 389 is a reproduction of the map prepared maining counties of Apache, Navajo, and Coconino
by the United States Weather Bureau, Department have less than one-fourth of the farms irrigated.
of Agriculture, on which the normal annual precipi Pinal County has the largest proportion of farms irri
tation from 1870 to 1901 is indicated by the curved gated, 92.8 per cent, and Graham County ranks second,
red lines. This map is of value in studying the areas with 86.1 per cent.
in which irrigation is necessary, owing to the low
The first map of California, on Plate No. 391, shows
precipitation. In the 11 states forming what is that Kings County, with 25.7 per cent, was the only
known as the arid region, the line marking the annual county in the state with more than 15 per cent of its
precipitation of less than 20 inches practically outlines area irrigated in 1909. Del Norte was the only county
the boundaries of the region where irrigation is com in the state reporting no area irrigated. The map
monly practiced.
for the per cent of the farms irrigated shows that in
The per cent of total land area irrigated and per Inyo and Imperial Counties more than 90 per cent
cent of number of farms irrigated in 1909 are pre of the farms were irrigated. Imperial County had
sented, by counties, for those states where irrigation the highest per cent of farms irrigated, 94.6 per cent,
was used to any extent, on Plates Nos. 390 to 400.
and Inyo was second, with 93.2 per cent. The greatest
Plate No. 390 treats of irrigation in Arizona and the proportion of the number of farms irrigated was re
map at the left shows that Maricopa County, which ported from the counties in the southern part of the
had 3.5 per cent of its area irrigated, is the only state.
county with more than 1 per cent of the total land
In the case of Colorado, Plate No. 392, the counties
area irrigated in 1909. The map at the right L
s with the highest proportion of land irrigated are
shaded to show, in groups, the proportion of farms Boulder, 23.1 per cent, and Weld, 15.4 per cent, in
irrigated. One county, Pinal, has over 90 per cent the north; and Rio Grande, 18.7 per cent, and Cone
of its farms irrigated, three counties have 75 to 90 jos, 15.6 per cent, in the south— the only counties with

IRRIGATION.

AGRICULTURE.

more than 15 per cent of their area irrigated. The only 0.6 per cent. As indicated bv the map at the
map for per cent of number of farms irrigated shows
right, three counties in the state rej>orted more than
only three counties— Phillips, Clear Creek, and San 90 per cent of their farms irrigated, these counties
Juan—as having no land under irrigation. Fortybeing Rio Arriba, with 96.4 percent; Taos, with 96.2
one of the 60 counties of the state reported that more percent; and Dona Ana, with 91.4 per cent.
than half the farms were irrigated. Rio Grande
Plate No. 397, for Oregon, shows only one county in
County, with 99.6 per cent, had the highest propor the state, Baker, with 6.6 per cent, as having more
tion of irrigated farms, hut there were 17 other than 5 per cent of the total land area irrigated. The
counties with more than 90 per cent of the farms
per cent for the entire state was only 1.1. The per
irrigated, all being located in the western part of the cent of the number of farms irrigated, illustrated on
state.
the lower map, shows two counties in the eastern
On Plate No. 398, Idaho, Canyon County, with 16.2 extremity of the state—Baker, with 80.6 per cent,
per cent, was the only county in the state reporting and Malheur, with 77.7 per ce n t-a s the only counties
more than 15 per cent of its area under irrigation.
having more than 75 per cent of the number of farms
One county, Latah, was without an irrigated farm.
irrigated. In Hood River County the number of farms
The map at the right shows that two counties—Twin
irrigated formed 62.4 per cent of the total.
Falls (92.9 per cent) and Lincoln (91.5 per cent)—had
On Plate No. 398, Utah, the map for the per cent of
the largest number of farms irrigated, reporting more total land area irrigated in 1909 shows that only one
than 90 per cent of the whole number of farms under county, Salt Lake, with 17.1 per cent, reported more
irrigation. Four counties—Ada, with 87.5 per cent;
than 15 per cent of its land area under irrigation. The
Custer, with 87.9 per cent; Lemhi, with 87.3 per cent; map at the right indicates that every county in the
and Bear Lake, with 86.7 per cent—reported more state reported more than 50 per cent of its farms as
than 85 per cent of their farms irrigated. Irrigation
irrigated, the lowest proportion being 65.7 per cent.
of importance in Idaho is confined to the southern part For 17 of the 27 counties at least 90 per cent of the
of the state. Eighty-nine per cent of the land under farms were irrigated, and for 7. from 75 to 90 per cent,
irrigation in the entire state is found in the valley of while in only 3 counties was the percentage of farms
the Snake River, which extends across the state from irrigated less than 75. The highest percentage shown
east to west.
for any county was 99.7 for Emery. Ten other
Plate No. 394 shows that not a county in Montana counties reported 95 per cent or more of the number
had more than 10 per cent of its area irrigated. Gal of farms as irrigated; these were Morgan (99.2 per
latin County, with 7.9 per cent, had a larger propor cent), Carbon (98.8 per cent), Beaver ami Wasatch
tion than any other county. The lower map, per (98.1 per cent), Sevier (97.6 per cent), Piute (97.5 per
cent of the number of farms irrigated, shows that cent), Rich (96.8 per cent), Sanpete (96.6 per cent),
Wayne (95.5 per cent), and Washington (95 per cent).
Deer Lodge County, with 99.4 per cent, had the largest
Plate No. 399, Washington. The Cascade Moun
percentage of farms irrigated, and Ravalli, with 92.4
tains extend north and south, crossing the state of
per cent, was second. Only two other counties—
Beaverhead, with 89.6 per cent, and Madison, with Washington and dividing it into two parts. West of
81.1 per cent—had more than 75 per cent of the num the Cascades, the rainfall is heavy, while east of the
mountains very few’ crops mature without irrigation,
ber of farms under irrigation.
Plate No. 395, for Nevada, indicates that only two ami most of the irrigated area, therefore, lies east of
counties— Douglas (6.9 per cent) and Lyon (6.4 per the Cascades. The report for 1910 shows that 9S.6
cent)—had more than 5 per cent of their area irri per cent of the total acreage irrigated was in the eastgated. The counties in Nevada are very large ami the I ern part of the state. The two maps on the plate
farm area irrigated forms only a small proportion indicate, by the different shading, the counties which
(1 per cent) of the total area, but practically all the had the largest proportion of irrigated land, also those
farms are irrigated, as 89.5 per cent of the total num having the highest percentage of the number of farms
ber of farms in the state were reported as being under | irrigated. The irrigated area in the state of Wash
irrigation. In 8 of the 15 counties the per cent of ington formed only 0.8 per cent of its total area, the
the number of farms irrigated is over 90, while in the map showing for each county the percentage of the
remaining counties it is over 80. In Douglas County total land area irrigated. There is not a single county
eveiyr farm was reported as irrigated, and in Clark in the state that reported more than 5 per cent of its
and Lander Counties only one farm in each county area under irrigation in 1909. Kittitas and Yakima
was reported as not under irrigation. The county Counties, each with 4.6 per cent, reported the highest
which had the least proportion of its farms irrigated percentage. The lower map shows that Yakima, with
88.3 per cent, had the highest percentage of farms irri
was White Pine, the percentage being 80.8.
For New Mexico, Plate No. 396, not a single county gated. Of the 38 counties in the state, 5 reported no
had more than 2.9 per cent of its total land area irri irrigated area and from 13 others the amount of irrigated. The proportion irrigated for the state was | gated area reported was so small that they have been

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

grouped as “ all other;” this leaves 20 counties which
reported a portion of their farms as irrigated, 10
of thewe having less than 10 per cent of their farms
irrigated.
The upper map of Wyoming, on Plate No. 400,
shows that only two counties Sheridan, with 5.< per
cent, and Albany, with 5.4 per cent— had over 5 per
cent of their total land area under irrigation. The
proportion for the entire state was 1.8 per cent of the
total land area irrigated. The per cent of the number
of farms irrigated, as indicated on the lower map,
shows that in three counties over 90 per cent of the
number of farms were irrigated: these are Park
County, with 96.5 per cent; Big Horn County, with
94.4 per cent; ami Carbon County, with 90.9 per cent.
AREA IN IRRIGATION PROJECTS.

Plates Nos. 401 to 408, inclusive, comprise a series
of maps of the states covered by the special census of
irrigation; each map shows the approximate location
and extent of the laud included in irrigation projects
in 1910. On each state map a shaded square is drawn
to the scale of the map and represents the area irri
gated in 1909, in proportion to tho total area of the
state us represented by tho map.
Plate No. 401, Map 1, of Wyoming, shows the loca
tion of the water courses and the approximate area of
the irrigation projects along these courses. The shaded
square in the lower left-hand corner is drawn to scale
and represents the irrigated area jus compared with tho
total area of the state. In the number of acres irri
gated, Wyoming, with 1,133,302 acres, is fifth; Colo
rado, with 2,792,032 acres; California, with 2,664,104
acres; Montana, with 1,679,084 acres; and Idaho,
with 1,430,848 acres, being the only states with a
greater area irrigated.
The shaded square at the upper right-hand corner
of the map of Colorado (No. 2) show’s the 2,792,032
acres of irrigated area in Colorado, as compared with
tho total area of the state. The returns of the Thir
teenth Census reported that Colorado had more acros
irrigated than any other state.
Tho irrigated area of Arizona, as shown on Map 1
on Plate No. 402, is very small as compared with the
total area of the state. In New Mexico, Map 2, the
area irrigated is slightly larger than that of Arizona.
The shading on the map indicates that a large propor
tion of the areas under irrigation are along tho Rio
Grande.
On Plate No. 403, approximate location of the irri
gated areas of Idaho and Montana, Map 1, of Idaho,
shows that practically all the irrigated area is in the
southern part of the state and a large proportion in
the Snake River \ alley. The shaded square is drawn
on the same scale as the map of the state and repre
sents the 1,430,848 acres, in proportion to the size of

the state. Map 2, of Montana, shows the approximate
location of the irrigated areas and that they are found
in all parts of the state. In fact, every county in the
state reported irrigated acreage. The shaded square
represents the 1,679,084 acres of irrigated area, as
compared with the total area of the state.
On the map o f Nevada, Plate No. 404, the approxi
mate location of the irrigated areas is indicated by the
shade lines and, like Montana, the areius are in every
county in the state. The proportion of the irrigated
area, 701,833 acres, to the total area o f the state is
indicated by tho shaded square in the lower left-hand
corner of the map. Map 2 shows, by the shade lines,
the location of the irrigated areas in Utah, which, as in
Nevada, are found in even’ county. The shaded
square in the upper right-hand corner, representing
999,410 acres, is in proportion to the total a rea of the
state.
The map of Washington on Plate No. 405 show’s,
by the shaded areas, that the irrigated area L in the
s
eastern portion of the state; the small shaded square
in the lower left-hand corner represents the 334,378
acres irrigated in proportion to the total area of the
state.
The shaded areas on the map of Oregon (on tho
same plate) indicate that the irrigated areas are in the
eastern and southern parts of the state, also that the
irrigation projects are numerous but the individual
projects are small. The total irrigated area of 686,129
acres is compared with the total area of the state by
the shaded square in the upper left-hand corner of the
map.
On Plate No. 406 the map of California appears
with an irrigated area of 2,664,104 acres and the
shaded areas locate tho projects. The total area of
California is very large, therefore, although the irri
gated area is larger than that of any other state except
Colorado, the relative proportion of the irrigated area
to the total area of the state is small, as shown by the
shaded square in the upper right-hand corner, com
pared with the map of the entire state.
Plate No. 407, the maps of North and South Dakota,
locates the irrigation projects in these states. North
Dakota has a very small irrigated area, practically all
found in the counties of McKenzie and Williams.
South Dakota has a rather small area under irriga
tion, although it L much larger than that of North
s
Dakota. It L all in tho extreme western portion of
s
the state.
Plate No. 408 consLsts of maps on which are located
the irrigated areas of Nebraska and Kansas. The
greater portion of the irrigated areas in Nebraska are
found along the Platte River and its tributaries. The
irrigated area in Kansas is small and L practically all
s
located along tho Arkansas River, in the western por
tion of the state, and nearly all in five counties.

MANUFACTURES.
The Thirteenth Census returned n total value of
products of manufactures ot $20,672,051,870 for the
your 1909. The special census of manufactures for
the year 1904 returned a total value of products of
$14,/93,902,563, and the Twelfth Census, for the year
1899, a total value of products of $11,406,926,701.
The three circles on Plato No. 409 represent the total
value of products of manufactures returned at the
censuses specified, the circles being proportionate in
size to the total value of products of manufactures as
reported, the sectors representing the per cent each of
the geographic divisions reported of the total. The
geographic divisions, ranked according to the total
value of manufactures returned in 1909, 1904, and
1899, are as follows: Middle' Atlantic first, then East
North Central, New England, West North Central,
South Atlantic, Pacific, East South Central, West
South Central, and Mountain. The divisions have
the same relative position at each of the three censuses
specified.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 410 indicates, by the length
of the bars, the value of the products of manufacturing
industries, by states, in 1909 and 1899, the black bars
representing the amount returned for 1909 and the
shaded bars that for 1899. The states are arranged
in the order of the value of manufactures, the state
with the greatest value being first. Every state pre
sented an increase in the value of its manufactures for
1909 over the returns for 1899. New York w
’as first,
with the greatest numerical increase in the value of
products from 1899 to 1909, $1,497,659,320, or an in
crease of 80 per cent. Pennsylvania was second,
with an increase of $976,859,654; Illinois third, with
$798,408,286; Ohio fourth, with $689,264,962; and
New Jersey fifth, with an increase in its products of
$592,523,392. Wyoming, the state with the smallest
increase in the value of products, reported an increase
of $2,980,523. The greatest per cent of increase re
ported (842.7 per cent) was from Nevada, although
this state stood tliird from the last in the value of
products.
On Diagram 2, Plate No. 410, average number of
wage earners, by states, 1909, New ^ ork state Is first,
with 1,003,981; Pennsylvania, with 877,543; Massa
chusetts, with 584,559; Illinois, with 465,764; Ohio,
with 446,934; and New Jersey, with 326.223, follow in
the order named. A comparison with Diagram 1

shows that the states do not rank in tin* same order
for the average number of wage earners as they do in
the value of products. Massachusetts, which was
fourth in the value of products, is thin! in the average
number of wage earners, while Illinois, third in the
value of products, is fourth in wage earners. Connecticut, which was twelfth in the value of products,
Is eighth in the average numlter of wage earners. Of
the other states, Wisconsin, which was eighth in the
value of products, Is tenth in the average numl>er of
wage earners. Indiana has the same position in Inith
diagrams, while Missouri, which was tenth in the value
of products, Is eleventh in the average number of wage
earners. The same differences in rank will 1 * noticed
m
in the states having small value of products and a
small number of wage earners. Nevada, which is last
in the average number of wage earners, was third from
the last in the value of products, while Wyoming,
which was last in the value of products, is third from
the last in the numlM*r of wage earners.
Diagram 1 on Platt* No. 411 arranges the value of
manufactured products for 48 leading citi«*s, in 1909,
according to the value of their products. New York
City was first, with products valued at $2,029,692,576;
Chicago, the second city, returned products valued at
$1,281,171,181; Philadelphia was the third city, with
$746,075,659; St. Louis fourth, with $328,495,313;
and Cleveland fifth, with $271,960,833. The fortyeighth city shown on the diagram was Waterbury,
Conn., which returned, in 1909, products valued at
$50,349,816. The per cent of increase from 1899 to
1909 for New York City was 73.1; for Chicago, 60.6; for
Philadelphia, 43.5; for St. Louis, 69.6; and for Cleve
land, 95.2. Each of the 21 leading cities shown on the
diagram returned products valued at over $100,000,000.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 411, average number of wage
earners for 48 cities leading in value of products in
1909, shows that New York leads, with 554,002, Chi
cago being the second city, with 293,977. All the
cities do not have the same rank in regard to the
number of wage earners as in the value of products,
but the first six cities on both diagrams an* the
same. Pittsburgh, which was seventh in value of
products, was ninth in number of wage earners; Bal
timore, seventh in wage earners, was thirteenth in
value of products; Minneapolis, fourteenth in value
of pn>ducts, was twenty-fifth in average number of

(71)

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

boots and shoes, including cut stock and findings,
»»«(• cariH-rs; Waterbury, forty-eighth in value of I ninth. These nine industries were the only industries
products, was thirty-second in wage earners.
reporting values of products exceeding $500,000,000
On plate No. 412, value added by manufacture in ;
in 1909. Not one of these industries reported a value
1900, by states, the length of the bar indicates the |
in 1899 of $800,000,000. Of the nine industries speci
value added by manufacture in each state, the states
fied printing ami publishing had the highest per
being ranked in order, with the state having the
centage of increase from 1899 to 1909, 86.7 per cent;
greatest value at the top. New York is the lead
cotton goods, 85.3 per cent; boots and shoes, 76.8 per
ing state, followed by Pennsylvania, Illinois, Massa- ,
cent; flour-mill and gristmill products, 76.2 per cent;
chusetts, and Ohio, in the order named, each of these
and men’s clothing, including shirts, 75.4 per cent.
states reporting value added by manufacture of o'ei
Only three of the nine leading industries specified re
$600,000,000. The states do not rank in the total value
added by manufacture (Plate No. 412) in the same order ported increases of less than 75 per cent.
Diagram 2 represents, by the length of the bars, the
as in Diagram 1 on Plate No. 410, value of products.
percentage of the total value of products reported for
The first seven states, however, are in the same order;
the leading industries in 1909. Slaughtering and meat
the remaining states changed their rank, showing that
packing, with 6.6 per cent, had the largest proportion
the value added by manufacture is not always pro
of the total value of products; foundry and machineportionate to the total value of products returned.
Nevada, which is last in the value added by manufac shop products was second, with 5.9 per cent, and lum
ture, is, excluding the District of Columbia, forty- ber and timber products third, with 5.6 per cent.
sixth in the total value of products. \ yoming, which These were the only industries with a value of products
\
Is last in the total value of products, is next to the last forming more than 5 per cent of the total value of all
products.
in the value added by manufacture.
Plate No. 416, average number of wage earners, by
Plate No. 413 presents the value of all manufactured
states, in 1909 and 1899, represents, by the length of
products and proportional value of each group re
turned in 1009, 1904, and 1899. The area of each the black bar, the number of wage earners in 1909 and,
circle is in proportion to the value returned at each by the shaded bar, the number in 1899, the state hav
census, and the circles are divided into fourteen sec ing the largest average number being placed first.
tors, proportionate to the value of each of the prin New York leads, with 1,003,981; Pennsylvania is sec
cipal groin** of manufactures, the groups having the ond, with 877,543; ami Massachusetts third, with
same relative importance at each of the enumerations. 584,559; Illinois, Ohio, and New Jersey follow in the
Food and kindred products was the leading group at order named, being the only states reporting an aver
each census, iron and steel and their products ranked age number of wage earners of over 250,000 for 1909.
second, and textiles third, these three groups having ' The difference between the length of the black and
almost 50 per cent of the value of all manufactured shaded bar indicates the increase in each state in the
number of wage earners in 1909 over the number
products at each of the censuses specified.
Plate No. 414, value of products for groups of indus employed in 1899.
On Plate No. 417, average number of wage earners,
tries for 1909, 1904, ami 1899, represents, by the length
of the bars, the value of products for the 14 gen by industries employing over 40,000 wage earners in
eral groin** ° f industries, arranged in order of the
1909, the bars are arranged in the order of the number
value of their products in 1909. The three bars are of wage earners returned, the largest being first. The
shaded to indicate the value of products in 1909, 1904, lumber and timber industry leads in the averago num
and 1899, in the order in which they appear on the ber of wage earners, followed by the foundry and
diagram. Each of the groups increased at each of the machine-shop industry, second; cotton goods, third;
enumerations, food and kindred products showing the cars and general shop construction and repairs, fourth;
greatest increase.
and printing and publishing, fifth. These are the only
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 415, value of products for industries each reporting over 250,000 wage earners in
leading industries in 1909 and 1899, is arranged in the 1909.
order of the value of their products in 1909, the length
Plate No. 418 consists of five diagrams, showing the
of the bar being in proportion to the value of the value of products in 1909 and 1899 for states leading
product. Slaughtering and meat packing leads, with in each industry specified. In Diagram 1 the length
foundry and machine-shop products second, and lum- of the bars represents the value of products for boots
l>er and timber third, each of these industries having and shoes, including cut stock and findings, for 1909
products valued at over one billion dollars; iron and and 1899, in the 14 states leading in this industry.
steel, steel works and rolling mills are fourth; flour Massachusetts was first, with products valued at $236,mill and gristmill products fifth; printing and publish 342,915, the second state in order being Missouri, with
ing sixth; cotton goods, including cotton small wares, $48,751,235, Massachusetts reporting products with
seventh; clothing, men’s, including shirts, eighth; and a valuation nearly five times that of the second state.

MANUFACTURES.
Now York was third, with $48,185,914, and Now
Hampshire fourth, with $39,439,554. The only states
reporting values in excess of $20,000,000, in addition
to those above cited, were Ohio, with $31,550,957, and
Pennsylvania, with $20,218,784.
In the value of products for leather, tanned, cur
ried, and finished, represented in Diagram 2, Pennsyl
vania was the leading state, with a value of products
of $77,926,321; Wisconsin was second, with $44,667,676; and Massachusetts third, with $40,002,079, fol
lowed by New Jersey, with $28,430,955, and New
^ ork, with $27,642,383. These are the only states
which reported a value of products for this industry in
excess of $20,000,000.
In the value of products of woolen, worsted, and
felt goods, and wool hats (Diagram 3), Massachusetts
led, with $141,966,882; Pennsylvania was second, with
$77,446,996; Rhode Island third, with $74,600,240;
New Jersey fourth, with $33,938,637; and New York
fifth, with $23,739,421, the only states reporting a
value of products in excess of $20,000,000.
In Diagram 4, women’s clothing, New York leads,
with a total value reported of $272,517,792, nearly
nine times that reported by Pennsylvania— the sec
ond state— $32,837,424. New York and Pennsylvania
were the only states reporting products valued in excess
of $20,000,000.
In Diagram 5, men’s clothing, including shirts, New
York leads, with $266,075,427; Illinois is second, with
$89,472,755; Pennsylvania third, with $39,681,760;
Maryland fourth, with $36,921,294; and Ohio fifth,
with $24,869,437, the only states reporting products
valued at more than $20,000,000 in 1909. A compari
son of the bars for 1909 with those for 1899 shows that
New York, which led in the production of men’s cloth
ing at both censuses, nearly doubled its value of
products in 1909.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 419 presents the value of
products of cotton goods, including cotton small wares,
for the leading states in 1909 and 1899. In 1909 Massa
chusetts led in this industry, with a value of products
of $186,462,313. The state second in rank was North
Carolina, with $72,680,385; South Carolina was third,
with $65,929,585; Rhode Island fourth, with $50,312,597; and Georgia fifth, with $48,036,817. These were
the oidv states reporting values in excess of $40,000,000.
Each of the states represented on the diagram, with
the exception of Maryland, reported large increases
in the value of products from 1899 to 1909.
The map on Plate No. 419, cotton goods, including
cotton small wares, value of products in 1909, shows,
by dots, the location of the cotton goods industry.
Each dot represents a production valued at $10,000,000.
This industry is confined principally to the states
touching the Atlantic coast, and Alabama on the Gulf
of Mexico. The state with the greatest production is,
of course, Massachusetts. The sketch on the lower j

right-hand corner shows, on a large scale, the distribu
tion in the states of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and
Uliode Island, as it could not be indicated on the map.
I*our states Massachusetts, Kliode Eland. North
Carolina, and South Carolina produced 59.7 per cent
of the value of the total production reported for this
industry in 1909.
Diagram 2, Plate No. 419, represents, by the bars,
the value of products of silk ami silk gixals, including
throwsters, for 1909 ami 1899. The states presented
on the diagram rank in the same order at l>oth cen
suses, New* Jersey leading, with Pennsylvania second,
New York third, and Connecticut fourth, each of these
states reporting products valued at more than $10,000,000 in both 1909 and 1899. The industry, as indicated
by the states represented on the diagram, is confined
almost entirely to the New England and Middle states,
as almost nine-tenths of the total value of products
were reported by the four states of New Jersey, Penn
sylvania. New York, and Connecticut at the Thirteenth
Census.
Plate No. 420 treats of the value of products of
hosiery and knit goods for 1909 and 1899. Diagram
1 shows that New York leads at both censuses,
with $67,130,296 in 1909; Pennsylvania being next,
with $49,657,506; and Massachusetts third, with
$14,736,025. These are the only states that reported
products for this industry vtdued at more than
$ 10,000 ,000 .

The map, the second illustration on the plate,
shows, by the dots, the geographical distribution of the
industry and that it is practically localized in the
states of New York. Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania.
Diagram 1 on Plato No. 421 presents the value of
products of merchant flour mills and gristmills for
leading states in 1909 and 1899. Minnesota leads,
with $139,136,129; New York stands second, with
$69,802,278; Kansas third, with $68,476,410; Illinois
fourth, with $51,110,681; Ohio fifth, with $48,093,353;
and Pennsylvania sixth, with $44,782,558; closely fol
lowed bv Missouri, with $44,508,106, and Indiana,
with $40,541,422. These are the only states that
reported products valued at more than $40,000,000.
The snudl map (2) accompanying this diagram pre
sents graphically the distribution of flour-mill and
gristmill products in 1909, by states, and indicates
that the industry is of wide distribution, as well as one
of importance in two-thirds of the states.
Diagram 3, bread and other bakery products for the
leading states in 1909 and 1899, shows that for this
industry New York returned the greatest value of
products, $86,232,985. Pennsylvania was second,
with $45,850,070; Illinois third, with $36,117,986;
Massachusetts fourth, with $26,146,044: Ohio fifth, with
$23,007,131; and New Jersey sixth, with $20,085,629.
These were the only states reporting products in excess
of $20,000,000. Each of these states, except Massa
chusetts, increased from 1899 to 1909 over 100 percent.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

Diagram I on Pluto No. 422 presents the value of
products of butter, cheese, and condensed nnlk in
1 9 0 9 and 1899. Wisconsin led in the value of pro
ducts, with $53,843,249; New York was next, with
$42,458,345; Iowa third, with $25,849,866; and Min
nesota fourth, with $25,287,462, being the only states
reporting value of products in excess of $20,000,000.
All the states represented on the diagram show large
increases in the returns of 1909 over 1899, Michigan,
California, Nebraska, Washington, Oregon, Indiana,
Missouri, and Colorado each increasing over 200 per
cent, ami three of them—Washington, Oregon, and
Missouri—increasing over 500 per cent.
Map 2 shows, geographically, the distribution of the
value of products of butter, cheese, and condensed
milk, by means of dots, each dot equaling $2,000,000.
The number of dots indicates the states in which the
value of products was highest, Wisconsin and New
York being practically covered. Iowa, Minnesota,
and Illinois also have a large number of dots. This
industry is of importance in only 18 states, all in the
North ami West.
In Diagram 1 on Plate No. 423, canning and pre
serving—value of products for leading states in 1909
and 1899, California leads, with a production in 1909
of $32,914,829; New York is second, with $19,039,735;
and Maryland third, with $13,709,449. These are the
only states reporting products valued at more than
$10,000,0(H) in 1909. During the decade Wisconsin,
Colorado, Kentucky, and Minnesota each increased its
value of products over 200 per cent, and California
and Indiana over 1(H percent. The majority of the
)
states shown in the diagram had satisfactory increases
in the value of their products, although in the case of
Maryland a slight decrease was reported.
In Diagram 2, oil, cottonseed, and cake—value of
products for leading states in 1909 and 1899, Texas
leads, with products valued at $29,915,772; Georgia
is second, with $23,640,779; Mississippi third, with
$15,965,543; Louisiana fourth, with $13,084,586; and
South Carolina fifth, with $10,902,935. These are the
only states in which the value of the products ex
ceeded $10,000.(MM). All the states shown on the dia
gram increased the value of their products with the
exception of Kentucky, which showed a slight de
crease in the value reported for 1909.
In the value of products of food preparations (Dia
gram 3) New York leads, with a product valued at
$17,324,076; Michigan comes next, with $11,491,660;
Ohio third, with $10,836,735; and Illinois fourth,
with $10,402,669; these are the only states which re
la te d products valued at over $10,000,000 in 1909.
All the states represented on the diagram, with the
exception of Massachusetts, show exceptionally large
increases, the increases for Michigan, Georgia, Louisi
ana, Texas, Tennessee, Maryland, Kansas, and Ken
tucky being over 500 per cent.

On Diagram 4. confectionery— value of products
for leading states in 1909 and 1899, New York was
first, with products valued at $25,540,394, Massachu
setts was second, with $15,266,453; Pennsylvania third,
with $13,541,759; and Illinois fourth, with $12,798,077;
these were the only states reporting values of products
in excess of $10,000,000 in 1909. All other states on
the diagram also show large increases in the value of
the products returned in 1909 over the returns of
1 8 9 9 , New Jersey increasing 1,059.4 percent; Oregon,
481.3 per cent; and Washington, Utah, and Nebraska
each over 300 per cent.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 424 illustrates the value of
products of the slaughtering and meat-packing in
dustry for leading states in 1909 and 1899. Illinois
returned the greatest value of products, $389,594,906,
the second state was Kansas, with $165,360,516;
New York was third, with $127,130,051; Nebraska
fourth, with $92,305,484; and Missouri fifth, with
$79,581,294. These arc the only states which re
ported products valued at more than $75,000,000 in
1909. Of all the states shown on the diagram, Kan
sas, New Y
rork, Iowa. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, New
Jersey, California, Maryland, and Michigan reported
increases of more than 100 percent in 1909. At both
censuses Illinois reported products more than twice
as large as the second state, Kansas.
The map (2) on this plate shows the distribution of
the same industry, geographically, by means of dots,
each dot representing $10,000,000. Illinois, Kansas,
New York, and Nebraska are the states with the
greatest production.
As indicated on Diagram 1 on Plate No. 425,
Georgia led in the value of products of fertilizers, with
a valuation of $16,800,301; Maryland was second,
with $9,672,786: South Carolina third, with $9,024900; Virginia fourth, with $8,034,543; New Jersey
fifth, with $7,671,859; Pennsylvania sixth, with
$6,542,844; Alabama seventh, with $6,423,233; and
North Carolina eighth, with $6,316,485. These are
the only states which reported products valued at
more than $5,000,000. All the states named on the
diagram show large increases, especially Florida,
with 675.6 per cent; Georgia, with 399 per cent;
Mississippi, with 331 per cent; North Carolina, with
321.6 per cent; and Connecticut, with 302.3 per cent.
The small map (2) at the bottom of the plate shows the
distribution of the value of products of fertilizers in
1909, and that the industry7 is of importance in the
states bordering on the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of
Mexico, the production in the other parts of the
l nited States, with few exceptions, being of small
value.
In Diagram 1 on Plate No. 426, gas, illuminating and
heating value of products for leading states, in 1909
and 1899, New York led, with a production of $42,346,726; Illinois was second, with $21,052,100; Penn-

MANUFACTURES.
sylvania third, with $15,839,612; and Massachusetts
fourth, with $11,074,354. These were the only states
reporting products in excess of $10,000,000 in 1909.
All the states named on the diagram, except Ohio,
which reported a decrease in value of products in 1909,
showed large increases in 1909 over 1899.
In the value of products of turpentine and rosin (Dia
gram 2) Florida led, with a production of $11,937,518;
Georgia was second, with $6,938,957; Alabama third,
with $2,471,999; Mississippi fourth, with §1,474,629;
and Louisiana fifth, with §1,173,848. These were the
only states reporting value of products in excess of
$ 1,000 ,000 .
Diagram 3, chemicals—value of products for leading
states in 1909 and 1899, indicates that New York led,
with a production of §35,346,072; New Jersey was
second, with $22,824,140; Pennsylvania third, with
§15,978,162; and Michigan fourth, with $12,890,206;
these being the oidy states reporting products in ex
cess of $10,000,000 in 1909. All the states named on
the diagram, except Maryland, show huge increases in
the returns in this industry over 1899, California,
however, showing a decided decrease in the value
reported for 1909 from that of 1899.
In foundry and machine-shop products for 1909
and 1899, as found on Diagram 1, Plate No. 427,
Pennsylvania was first, with $210,746,257; New York
second, with $154,370,346; Ohio third, with $145,836,648; and Illinois fourth, with §138,578,993; these
were the only states reporting value of products in
excess of §100,000,000 for 1909. All the states on
the diagram show increases for 1909 over 1899.
On Diagram 2, copper, tin, and sheet-iron products,
New York is first, with $38,452,127; Illinois second,
with §22,822,810; Oliio tliird, with §19,086,462; Penn
sylvania fourth, with §17,197,057; Maryland fifth,
with §16,909,447; and New Jersey sixth, with §11,113,644, the only states reporting products valued at
over §10,000,000. Every state on the diagram shows
a huge percentage of increase in value of products from
1899 to 1909.
In Diagram 3, brass and bronze products—value of
products for leading states in 1909 and 1899, Connecti
cut was first, with products valued at §66,932,969;
New York second, with §22,184,189; and Michigan
third, with §13,890,220. These are the only states
reporting products valued at more than §10,000.000.
Increases for all the states are large, indicating a rapid
growth in the industry.
Plate No. 428, blast furnaces—location of establish
ments in 1909, is a sketch map of the eastern portion
of the United States on which the location of blast
furnace plants is indicated, approximately, by the dots.
Pennsylvania had the largest number, 66; Ohio was
second, with 40; Alabama third, with 19; Virginia
fourth, with 14; Tennessee fifth, with 13; and Michi
gan sixth, with 11.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 429, pig-iron production for
leading states, 1909 ami 1899. Pennsylvania led, with
a production of 10,911,676 torts; Ohio was second, with
5,446,971 tons; Illinois third, with 2.468,772 tons;
Alabama fourth, with 1,764,544 tons; and New York
fifth, with 1.717,091 torts. These are the only states
which reported a production of over 1.000,000 tons in
1909. The diagram shows that in most of the states
represented the production of pig iron increased
largely from 1899 to 1909. Two states, however—
\ irginia and Tennessee—show decreases. There was
no report for Indiana in 1899.
The small map (2) shows the geographical distribu
tion of the pig-iron production in 1909, by states, by
means of dots, each representing 400,000 tons. The
concentration in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Illinois, New York, and Alabama Is strikingly pre
sented.
The location of establishments of stool works and
rolling mills in 1909 Is shown on a sketch map o f the
eastern part of the United States, Plate No. 430.
T110 approximate location of each establishment is in
dicated by a dot, and the concentration of the industry
in a few states is clearly represented. Pennsylvania,
Ohio, New \ ork, Illinois, Indiana, West Virginia, New
Jersey, and Wisconsin, in the order named, have the
largest number of these plants. There are a small
number o f establishments, however, in a few' of the
other states. Steel works are nearly all located near
largo cities; and wherever the dots are grouped, there
cities of importance in manufactures and population
will be found. The grouping of the dots in Penn
sylvania indicates the large number in the vicinity
of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia; in Ohio, in and around
Cleveland and Youngstown; in Illinois the dense group
is in and around Chicago; in Wisconsin, adjacent to
Milwaukee; and in Alabama the dots indicate the
establishments in the vicinity of the city of Birming
ham. The counties having the largest numl>er of steel
w
’orks and rolling mills are Allegheny County, Pa., with
55; Westmoreland County, Pa., with 15; Cuyahoga
County, Ohio, with 15; Milwaukee County, W is., with
’
12; Mercer County, Pa., with 11; Cook County, III.,
with 11; and Berks County, Pa., with 10.
The nine states shown on Diagram 1, Plate No. 431,
steel production, 1909 and 1899, are the only states in
which steel production is an industry of any impor
tance. According to the returns for 1909, Penn
sylvania led, with a total of 12,206,608 tons, an in
crease over 1899 of 89.8 per cent; Oliio was second,
with 4,713,869 tons; Illinois third, with 2,671,087 tons;
and New York fourth, with 1,115,250 tons. These
were the only states showing a production of over
1,000,000 tons. All the states represented on the
diagram increased their product in 1909 over the
returns of 1899 from 25 to over 1,000 per cent. For
New' York the per cent of increase was over 4,700.5.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

In Diagram 2, finished rolled products and forcings, $16,831,283; Now York fourth, with $13,292,531;
1909 and 1899, Pennsylvania, with 9,903,162 tons, Pennsylvania fifth, with $12,748,383; and Michigan
loads in the production reported; Ohio, with 3,097,426 I sixth, with $10,158,883. These w'ere the only states
tons, is second; and Illinois, with 2,086,120 tons, is reporting products valued at more than $10,000,000
third. Those were the only states reporting a pro- | in 1909. The value of products reported in 1909 indi
ducti«»n of more than 1,000,000 tons. Each of the 10 cated a decrease from the returns of 1899 for the states
states represented on the diagram increased their re of Ohio, New York, and Michigan. The states of New
turns from 1S99 to 1909 over .50 per cent, there being Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut each reported
but 4 states with an increase of less than 1(H percent— a much smaller value of product in 1909 than in 1899.
)
Tho map (2) shows the distribution, bv states, of
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Maryland, and Wisconsin. The
increases reported by the other states on the diagram the carriage and wagon industry in 1909, each dot
vary from over 100 to over 500 per cent, the increase representing products valued at $1,000,000. The
in production of New York for 1909 over that of 1899. groups of dots in the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,
The first 4 states ranked in the same order in 1899 as New York, Pennsylvania, and Michigan indicate high
they did in 1909. Pennsylvania reported 51.4 per cent values in these states. The map also indicates that
this industry is of importance in only a small number
of the total production; Ohio, 16.1 percent; Illinois,
10.8 per cent; and Indiana, 5 per cent, these 4 states of states and in a limited area.
Plate No. 434 presents the value of products of auto
reporting 83.3 per cent of the total production.
Plato No. 432 presents tho value of products in 1909 mobiles. Diagram 1 compares the value for 1909 and
1904 in 13 states in which this industry is of importance.
and 1899, for states lea*ling in the industries specified.
In Diagram 1, electrical machinery, apparatus, and Michigan, the state leading in this industry in 1909,
supplies, New York led in 1909, with a value of prod was not reported separately in 1899, but was so re
ucts of .$49,289,815; Pennsylvania was second, with ported in 1904, therefore the diagram has been made
$31,351,312; Now Jorsey third, with $28,365,377; to show the returns for the censuses of 1904 and 1909,
Massachusetts fourth, with $28,142,889; Illinois fifth, instead of 1899 and 1909. For a majority of the
with $26,826,177; and Ohio sixth, with $18,776,769, states shown on the diagram the industry was not of
the only states having a production valued in excess enough importance to be tabulated separately in 1899.
of $10,000,0(M in 1909. Each of the states repre Michigan reported the value of automobiles manufac
)
sented on the diagram reported a large increase over tured in 1909 as $96,651,451; Ohio was second, with
the return for 1899.
products valued at $38,838,754; Newr York third, with
In Diagram 2, cars and general shop construction $30,979,527; and Indiana fourth, with $23,764,070.
and repairs by steam-railroad companies, Pennsylvania These were the only states reporting products valued
led in 1909, with a value of products of $76,035,180; at more than $20,000,000 in 1909. The diagram
Illinois followed, with $32,229,243; Ohio w
’as third,
presents very clearly, by the difference between the
with $28,690,287; and New York fourth, with length of the black bar and the shaded bar, the
$21,726,491, these being tho only states reporting over tremendous increase in this industry in each of the
$20,000,000 in 1909 in value of products. Each of states in which it was of importance.
the states on tho diagram reported a considerable in
I he map (2) indicates, by means of the dots, the geo
crease in the returns for 1909 over 1899.
graphic location of the state's in which this industry is
In Diagram 3, brick and tile, Illinois was first in
prominent, each dot representing a value of $3,000,000.
value of products, with $9,765,051; Ohio was second,
As shown in the comparative diagram, Michigan (con
with $9,357,730; Pennsylvania third, with $9,225,204;
fined to southern peninsula), Ohio, New York, and
and New York fourth, with $8,432,804. These were
Indiana are the states leading in this industry and
tho only states reporting products valued at over
together reported 76.3 per cent of the total value
$5,000,000 in 1909. A majority of the states named returned in 1909.
on the diagram show fair increases over the returns
Plate No. 435 indicates the value of products of the
of 1899, Washington, Oklahoma, Utah, Colorado,
lumber industry. The diagram (1) shows, for 1909 and
California, and Kansas, each with more than 200 i>er
1899,^ the value of production in the states leading
cent, leading in the percentage of increase. For
in this industry, Washington appearing first in 1909,
Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and New Ilampsliire the
with a production valued at $89,154,820; New York
value of products decreased.
was second, with $72,529,813; Louisiana third, with
Plate No. 433 presents the value of products of the
the carnage and wagon industry. Diagram 1 gives $62,837,912; Michigan fourth, with $61,513,560; Wis
the comparative figures for 1909 and 1899, and shows consin jifth, with $57,969,170; and Pennsylvania sixth,
with $57,453,583. These were the states each of which
that the states leading in this industry were Ohio
with products valued at $21,949,459, closely followed reported products valued at more than $50,000,000 in
130.). A comparison of the bars shows that there has
by Indiana, with $21,655,440; Illinois third, with
H n a " r< change in the production of the loading
i
‘&t

MANUFACTURES.
states since 1890. Michigan, which led in 1899, was
fourth in 1909; Wisconsin, second in 1899, was fifth in
1909; Washington, seventh in 1899, was first in 1909;
and New York, fourth in 1899, was second in 1909. Of
the 32 states listed on the diagram, 5 reported a de
crease in their value of production in 1909. The total
value of lumber products increased greatly from 1899
to 1909, due principally to the increase in the value of
lumber.
The small map (2) shows, by the dots, the geographic
distribution of the lumber and timber industry and
directs attention to the fact that this industry was of
importance in every state east of the one hundred and
first meridian; in other words, it is a flourishing in
dustry in all parts of the United States, except in the
states of the Mountain division and North Dakota,
South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma.
Plate No. 436 is made up of small outline maps on
which are indicated the boundaries of Richmond, Ya.,
Columbus, Ohio, and Pueblo, Colo., the three maps
forming a striking illustration of the tendency on the
part of huge manufacturing plants to locate adjacent
to, but just outside of, the city boundary. A great
majority of the employees live in the city and, as the
plants enter largely into the business activities, are
really part of the city, hut, in making any statement
of the manufactures of the city, these plants must he
counted in the territory outside— in other words, in
the county; consequently, many cities do not receive
full credit for the manufacturing industries that
should be included in any statement of then manu
factures. There are other cities in which the same
conditions exist, but the most striking examples that
could be found are in the three cities specified.
METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS.

In enumerating the population of cities and an
nouncing the results of the enumeration, the Bureau
of the Census must necessarily deal with the popu
lation contained within the corporate boundaries of
each city. In many instances these boundaries do
not give an adequate idea of the population grouped
about the urban center, and many cities have suburban
districts with dense population lying just outside the

city limits. These suburban areas really form a part
of the city, hut are not under the jurisdiction of the
municipal government. The condition in regard to
population applies with even greater force to the col
lection of statistics of manufactures, for many large
industrial plants lie just outside of the rorporat ion lines.
An example of this is shown on Plato No. 436, previ
ously referred to.
In order that the magnitude of each of the principal
urban centers taken as a whole might he shown, sta
tistics were compiled comprising the population of tin*
city and the adjacent suburbs, such areas l>eing
designated as metropolitan districts. In outlining
the metropolitan districts the population of the civil
divisions located within 10 miles of tin* city boundaries
was considered, and, if one-half the area or one-half
the imputation of a civil division lying partly within
and partly without such a 10-mile limit was within the
10-mile limit, the entire civil division was considered
as within the metropolitan district. State boundaries
were disregarded so that, in some cases, the metro
politan district lies partly within two states.
The 13 maps on Plates Nos. 437 to 449, inclusive,
show the extent of the metropolitan districts used for
both population and manufactures. These districts
are identical with the metropolitan districts given in
the bulletin entitled “ Population of Cities,” and de
scribed on page 61 of the Abstract of the Thirteenth
Census. The maps are presented in the order of the
importance of the districts as manufacturing centers,
and not of population, as follows: Plate No. 437, New
York: Plate No. 138, Chicago; Plate No. 139, Phila
delphia; Plate No. 440, Pittsburgh; Plate No. 441,
Boston; Plate No. 442, St. Louis; Plate No. 443, Cleve
land; Plate No. 444, Buffalo; Plate No. 445, Detroit;
Plate No. 446, Cincinnati; Plate No. 447, Baltimore;
Plate No. 448, Minneapolis-St. Paul; Plate No. 449,
San Francisco-Oakland.
The statistical data compiled for each of these
districts, presented on pages 903 to 975 of the Report
on Manufactures, Volume X of the Thirteenth Census
Reports, comprise the following items: 1. Territory
included; 2. Summary for district; 3. Comparison
with earlier censuses; 4. Loading industries; and
5. Comparative summary, by industries.

MINES AND QUARRIES.
The census of mines and quarries, taken in con
nection with the Thirteenth Census, covered the
United States proper, also Alaska, Hawaii, and Porto
Rico, and included all classes of mines, quarries, and
petroleum and gas wells that were in operation during
any portion of the year 1909. This was the first
census at which a general canvass of the operation of
petroleum and gas wells was made by census agents,
covering both producing enterprises and those whoso
operations wero confined to developing. Mines, quar
ries, or wells that were idle during the entire year
of 1000 were omitted from the canvass. The returns
relate to the calendar year 1000, or the business year
which corresponded most nearly to that calendar year.
Plate No. 450 presents the value of products of
mining industries. Diagram 1 show's, by states, the
value of products for 1000 and 1002, and is based on
Table 2, page 318, of the Report on Mines and Quar
ries, 1909, but the figures differ slightly from the other
tables; see explanation on page 24 of the report.
Pennsylvania led, with $331,376,718, which formed
28.2 per cent, or more than one-fourth, of the total
value of products reported in 1000. No other state
approached it in importance. Illinois was second, with
products valued at 877,214,343; West Virginia third,
with $73,452,935; Michigan fourth, with $64,956,200;
Ohio fifth, with $50,031,837; California sixth, with
$50,012,946; and Minnesota seventh, with $58,075,781.
Those are the only states named on the diagram which
reported products valued at more than 850,000 000
in 1000.
The circle accompanying the diagram indicates, by
tho size of the sectors, the per cent distribution by
geographic divisions for 1000, the Middle Atlantic
division leading, with 20.0 per cent of the total, and
tho East North Central, with 10.2 per cent, the two
divisions having almost one-half of the entire pro
duction. Tho Mountain division was third, with
10.6 percent, while the New* England division reported
the smallest production, forming only 1.4 per cent of
the total production in 1000.
Tho map (2) on the lower half of the plate sho1
the geographic distribution of the value of produc
as indicated by the dots, each dot represent!
products valued at $10,000,000. Pennsylvania
c v re with these dots; the second state in poj
oe d
of production is Illinois; the third, West Virgin
the fourth, Michigan; the fifth, Ohio; and the slxl
(78)

California. The wide distribution of the dots indicates
the extensive area covered by the mining industry,
every state except Mississippi reporting products, but
in only a dozen states is this industry of importance.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 451 shows the value of
products of tho principal mining industries for 1901)
and 1902, based on the following table:
T w b le 1

V A L U K OK PROD UCTS.

1909

All industries.................................. $1,175,475,001

Petroleum and natural gas.....................
Precious metals........................................
Lead and line...................... .
Quicksilver..................................
(irnnite and traprock........................
Sandstone_ *..................
_
Marble..........................................
S l a t e ....................
C lay.....................................
Ovpsum .......................................
Phosphate rock................... ..........
Sulphur and pyrite......................
Talc and soapstone............

1908

Per cent
of in
crease.1

$771,486,926

52.4

366,642.015
76,173.586
290,468,429
102,034,590
65,460,985
51,178,036
82,482,062
77,154, 326
5,327,726
14,600,177
1,550,090
30,278,877
18,012,943
10,954,634
5,044, 182
5,606,051
2,061,072
2,089,341
4,922,943
947,089
1,138,167

50.2
95.8
38.2
72.0
63.4
94.4
6.3
0.4
92.2
95.7
- 4 4 .0
57.8
36.2
-1 5 .2
23.7
6.3
42.9
178.2
119.0
439. 4
3.2

550,513,866
119, ISO,471
401,333,395
175,527,S07
106,917,082
99,493,799
87|671,553
77,434.301
10,237,252
28,568,547
80S, 45.8
47,784,479
24,576,293
9/290,829
6,239,120
6,054,174
2,945,949
5,812,810
10,781,192
5,109,050
1,174,516

1 A minus sign ( —) denotes decrease.

Bituminous coal was the leatling industry in point
of value of products, with $401,333,395; petroleum
and natural gas was second, w ith $175,527,807;
T
anthracite coal third, with $149,180,471; iron fourth,
with $106,947,082; copper fifth, with $99,493,799;
and precious metals sixth, with $87,671,553. These
are the only industries which returned products
valued in excess of $50,000,000. Tho black bars
represent the value of these products for 1909 and
the shaded bars for 1902. The difference in the
length of tho bars indicates that each of tho industries
listed on the diagram have increased in value of
products, except sandstone and quicksilver. Tho
increase in the precious metals is very small, com
pared with the increase in othor leading industries.
The series of diagrams, 2 to 9, present graphically
the value of products for selected industries in the
principal states in 1909. Anthracite coal, as showni in
Diagram 2, is produced almost exclusively in a comparativcly small area in eastern Pennsylvania, the
value of the product reported in 1909 from this state
being $148,957,894. The value of product of anthra
cite coal reported from other states was $222,577.

MINES AND QUARRIES.
Diagram 3 gives the value of products of bituminous
coal for the leading states in 1909. Pennsylvania
leads, with a value of products of $147,466,417;
Illinois second, with $53,030,545; West Virginia third,
with $46,929,592; Ohio fourth, with $27,353,663;
Alabama fifth, with $18,459,433; Colorado sixth,
with $15,782,197; and Indiana seventh, with
$15,018,123. These were the only states that reported
products valued at over $15,000,000 in 1909.
In the value of copper for the leading states, 1909
(Diagram 4), Montana leads, with $45,960,517; Ari
zona second, with $31,614,116; Michigan third, with
$30,165,443; California fourth, with $10,104,373; and
Utah fifth, with a product of $8,432,099.
Diagram 5 shows the states leading in the valu of
e
products of precious metals from deep mines in 1909.
Colorado was first, with $27,325,847, Nevada being
second, with $17,807,945. California, Utah, Idaho, and
South Dakota followed, in the order named, each state
reporting products valued at less than $10,000,000.
Diagram 6 presents the value of products of lead
and zinc at the same date. Missouri produced 71.9
per cent of the United States total, the value of its
product being $22,565,528 of the $31,363,094 reported
from all states. Wisconsin, Kansas, and Oklahoma
also produce these metals.
Diagram 7 gives the value of the products of lime
stone as reported for 1909.
Pennsylvania leads,
with $4,733,819; Illinois is second, with $3,977,359;
Indiana third, with $3,616,696; Ohio fourth, with
$3,363,149; New York fifth, with $2,656,142; and
Missouri sixth, with $2,027,902.
Diagram 8, value of products of granite, for 1909,
shows that Vermont leads with 82,829,522; Massa
chusetts second, with 82,185,986; Maine third, with
$1,761,801; California fourth, with $1,518,916; Wis
consin fifth, with $1,433,105; and New Hampshire
sixth, with $1,205,811.
Only three states made returns in 1909 for the value
of products of phosphate rock, as indicated in Diagram
9. Florida led, with products valued at $8,488,801;
Tennessee being second, with $1,395,942; and South
Carolina third, with $862,409.
Plate No. 452 is an outline map on which the coal
mining fields in the United States in 1909 are indicated
by the shaded areas. The large areas in which the
bituminous and subbituminous and lignite are found,
as compared with the small, solid black areas for
anthracite in eastern Pennsylvania, give an idea of
the very small area of the anthracite field, as compared
with the bituminous, though the value of the anthra
cite coal product was more than one-fourth (25.8 per
cent) of the total value of coal mined.
The location and approximate extent of the anthra
cite coal fields of Pennsylvania for 1909 are indicated
by the solid black areas on Map 1, Plate No. 453.

Map 2 on the same plate shows the relative produc
tion of bituminous coal, by states, in 1909. Pennsyl
vania is also the largest producer of bituminous coal,
which, unlike anthracite coal, is found in a number of
states, as it is an important industry in 17 states.
The distribution of the production of coal is indicated
by the dots, as descril»ed in the legend.
The United States map on Plate No. 454 is shaded
to indicate approximately the location and area of the
petroleum and natural gas fields in 1909, the propor
tion of production in each field being indicated on the
circle, Diagram 2 on Plate No. 455.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 455 indicates, by the rise
and fall of the four lines, the production of iron ore in
the principal producing regions each year, from 1889
to 1909, compared with the United States total. The
Lake Superior region includes the states of Michigan,
Minnesota, and Wisconsin, and the Southern the
states of Alabama ami Tennessee; the “ all other” in
cludes the remaining states. It will be noted that the
line representing the United States is practically par
allel with that of the Lake Superior region and just a
little above it, and the marked increase and decrease
in the Lake Superior region are also shown in the line
representing the total production of the United States.
As the Lake Superior region product's more than threefourths (81 per cent) of all the iron ore reported, a
change in its production was reflected in the United
State's total. The productions for the Southern region
and for the “ all other” states were very close each
year, as indicated by the lines crossing each other
several times. This diagram presents strikingly the
fluctuation from year to year and the falling off of
the production in the periods of financial depression,
especially in the years 1904 ami 1908. The tremendous
increase in 1907 Is also indicated.
In Diagram 2 on the same plate the entire area of
the circle represents the total production of petroleum,
by fields, in 1909, and the sectors the portion produced
in each field. The Mid-Continent field produced 49,000,000 barrels, more than one-fourth of the total
production. The California San Joaquin \ alley field
produced 41,000,000 barrels, these two fields reporting
more than half of the product in 1909. The Illinois
field was third in point of production, with 29,000,000
barrels; the Appalachian fourth, with 27,000,000 bar
rels; followed by the California Coastal and Southern,
with 11.000,000 barrels; and the Gulf and LimaIndiana fields, with 10,000,000 and 5,000,000 barrels,
respectively.
In Diagram 3, production of natural gas for 1909,
Pennsylvania led, with over one hundred and eightyseven billions of cubic feet; West Virginia was second,
with one hundred and fifty-six billions of cubic feet;
Ohio third, with ninety-eight billions; and Kansas
fourth, with sixty-nine billions. These were the only

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

states producing more than liffcy billions of cubic feet | decreased steadily with each decade and in 1909
it was the sixth state in production, having less than
in 1909.
In Diagram 4, value of products of petroleum and the state of New York. Alabama, the third state
natural gas, by states, in 1909, Pennsylvania led, with in 1909, had a very small production in 1879, but
product valued at $39,197,475; Ohio was second, the increase has been regular at each census. New
with $29,620,959; California third, with $29,310,335; York, the fourth state in 1909, is shown by the
and West Virginia fourth, with $28,188,087. These diagram as having had a great decrease in the produc
were the only states reporting value of products in tion from 1889 to 1899, but in 1909 the output had
increased and was about equal to that of 1889, the
excess of $20,000,000.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 456 presents the production production at each of the three enumerations, 1879,
1889, and 1909, being almost the same.
of iron ore, bv principal states in 1909, 1899, 1889, and
Diagram 2 compares, by the length of the bars, the
1
879.
Minnesota, which made its first report on the pro value of products of iron ore in 1909, in the states
duction of iron ore in 1889, led in the production of which ranked liighest in the value of their production.
this metal in 1909. The growth of the industry during
The circle diagram (3) indicates, by the sectors, the
each 10 yean was remarkable, the increase from 1899 per cent of production of iron ore in each state, Min
to 1909 being more than 250 per cent, and from 1889 nesota leading, with 56.1 per cent of the total product,
to 1899 over 840 per cent. In both 1889 and 1899 and Michigan standing second, with 23.1 per cent.
Michigan led in the production of iron, but in 1909, These two states represent 79.2 per cent, or more
was second to Minnesota, in 1879 Pennsylvania was than three-fourths, of all iron ore production reported
the leading state, hut the production of iron on* has in 1909.

ANNUM. AND SPECIAL REPORTS.
Plates Nos. 457 to 501 include a series of illustra
tions, divided us follows:
Cotton- Plates Nos. 457 to 469.
Financial statistics of cities—Plates Nos. 470 to 475.
Vital statistics Plates Nos. 476 to 478.
Religious bodies Plates Nos. 479 to 492.
Marriage and divorce —
Plates Nos. 493 to 498.
Insane in hospitals —Plates Nos. 499 to 503.

These diagrams and maps were used to illustrate
the annual reports of the Census Bureau, comprising
statistics relating to the production and ginning of
cotton in the United States, financial statistics of cities,
and mortality statistics, and for the special reports
covering statistics of religious bodies, us returned in
1906, marriage und divorce, for the same date, also
the insane in hospitals as enumerated January 1, 1910.

COTTON.
The left-hand circle in Diagram 1 on Plate No. 457 shading separating the counties producing sea-island
shows, by the size of the sectors, the proportion of cotton from the others. The location of the center
the world’s mill supply of cotton contributed by each of cotton production in 1859, 1879, 1899, 1906, 1908,
country (growth of 1913). The United States pro
1910, 1911, 1912, and 1913 is indicated by the stars.
duced 60.9 per cent of the total: India, 17.1 per The limit of the region infested by the Ixdl weevil
cent; and Egypt, 6.6 per cent, these three countries each year, from 1909 to 1913, is indicated by lines
contributing more than four-fifths of the world's supply. differing in character for each year. These lines
The circle on the right of the diagram represents the indicate the northern limit of the advance made
distribution of the total consumption, by countries by this pest from year to year.
(year ending August 31, 1913). The United States
The small circle in the southeast corner of the map
consumed the largest proportion, 26.9 per cent; the shows, by the size of the sectors, the percentage of
United Kingdom, with 20.6 per cent, was second, the cotton crop of 1913 grown in each state. Texas
these two countries reporting nearly one-half of the was the leading state, with 27.9 per cent of the total;
world’s consumption; Germany was third; British Georgia was second, with 16.4 per cent; and Ala
India, fourth; Russia, fifth; and Japan, sixth.
bama third, with 10.6 per cent, the other states fol
Diagram 2, at the bottom of the plate, indicates, by lowing in the order of size of their cotton crop, as
the length of the bars, the cotton production in speci indicated in the circle. Two states, Texas and Geor
fied years, from 1790 to 1913, the dilFerence in the gia, produced 44.3 per cent o f the crop o f 1913.
Plates Nos. 459 to 467 comprise maps of 11 cottonlength of the bars showing in the years numed, up
to 1904, an increase in cotton production. In 1904 producing states, classifying each county in those
a huge increase was shown over the production of states, according to the production of cotton in 1913.
1900, but in 1907 the cotton crop showed a decrease The unshaded areas indicate that no cotton was reof over 2,000,000 bales. The crop of 1908 was nearly I ported. The classification of counties is based on
as large as that of 1904, but a reduction was reported the amount of cotton ginned, as follows: Less than
in 1909 of over 3,000.000 bales. In 1910 an increase 5,000 bales, 5,000 to 10.000 bales, 10,000 to 15,000
was shown over 1909, and in 1911 the crop was the | bales, 15.000 to 25,000 bales, 25,000 to 40,000 bales,
largest that had ever been reported for the United and 40,000 bales and over. Those counties that re
Stab's, a gain of over 4,000,000 bales over the crop of ported 40.000 or more bales of cotton ginned in 1913
1910 being shown. In 1912 the crop was reduced are indicated by the solid black. There were 62
from 15,692,701 to 13,703,421 bales, a reduction of counties that reported 40,000 or more bales ginned
nearly 2,000,000 bales. In 1913 an increase of over from the crop of 1913, distributed, by states, as
follows: Texas, 29 counties; South Carolina. 10;
450,000 bales was reported.
Georgia and Mississippi, each 6; Arkansas, 4; Ala
Plate No. 458 is a sketch map of a section of the
United States, oil which the cotton-producing coun bama, 3 counties; and Ijouisiana, North Carolina,
ties in 1913 have boon shaded, the difference in the Oklahoma, and Tennessee 1 county each.
28646°— 14----- 6

(81)

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 4CS shows the proportion in 1013. From the states marked with a star no con
of the total supply of cotton in the United States for sumption of cotton was reported, and those which
the year ending August 31, 101.3, consumed, held in consumed loss than 10,000 bales are unshaded. The
stocks, at the end of the year, and exported, with the heaviest consumption, of 500,000 bales and over, was
distribution of exports by countries to which exported. in Massachusetts and Rhode Island in the North
The ( nited States consumed 35.0 per cent, while 0.0 and North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia in
per cent was held in stocks and 54.2 per cent was the South. These are the state's which have the
exported, the largest proportion of the amount ex greatest number of spindles. The next group, with
ported, 21.0 per cent, going to the United Kingdom; from 200,000 to 500,000 bales consumed, includes
14.8 per cent, to Germany; 6.3 percent, to France; 3.1
the states of New Hampshire, New York, and Ala
percent, to Italy; und 2.3 percent, to Japan, the other bama.
Texas, which produced the largest amount
countries receiving but a small proportion.
of cotton, only consumed from 50,000 to 100,000
Diagram 2 represents, for a series of years, by the bales.
length of the bars, the exports o f domestic cotton
The map on Plate No. 469 shows the classification
from 1.830 to 1013. The exports vary almost with of counties according to the number of cotton spin
the size of the cotton crop, but a tremendous increase j dles in 1913. It indicates the localization of the
in the exports o f cotton from the United States from cotton industry, there being very few spindles shown
1830, when it was less than 1,000,000 bales o f 500 j west of the Mississippi River, except in the state of
pounds each, to 1012, when it was nearly 11,000,000 Texas. The heavy shading in the New England
bales of 500 pounds each, is brought out by the dif- *
states indicates the large number of cotton factories
fercnce in length of the bars.
in that area. North Carolina, South Carolina, ami
The map (3) shows the classification of states ac Georgia, also show a heavily shaded area, indicating
cording to the quantity of cotton and linters consumed
the location of numerous factories in those states.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIHS.
The Bureau of the Census collects annually the
the difference in the length of the bars on this dia
financial statistics of cities having an estimated pop gram, that the per capita revenue receipts are larg<**t
ulation of 30,000 or more. The eleventh annual iu the first group (more than 40 percent), and that
report for the fiscal year 1912 was issued in June.
they are larger in the fourth group (10 to 20 per cent)
1014. The maps and diagrams used to present graph than in any other group except the first. Expenses and
ically some of the statistical tables are reproduced
interest are larger in the fourth group than in any
on Plates Xos. 470 to 475.
Plate No. 470, map other. Per capita outlays are largest in the first group
of the United States on which is located each of the and smallest in the fifth group.
195 cities having an estimated population of 30,000
Diagram 4 presents the net revenue receipts and net
or more on July 1, 1912, shows the cities for which governmental cost payments of 146 cities, from 1002
the statistics were collected that year.
to 1012, the bars for the latter being subdivided, by
On Diagram 1, Plate No. 471, the total length of different shading, into expenses, interest, and outlays.
the bar represents the total population at each census, The comparison is confined to 146 cities for the rea
from 1700 to 1010, and the estimated population for son that statistics could not be secured for 11 years
the years 1011 and 1012. The solid black portion of for more than 146 of the 105 cities to which the vol
the bar represents the population in cities with 30.000
ume relates for the year 1912. The 49 cities for
inhabitants or more, and the part of the bar shaded
which comparative statistics are not given are listed on
with broad black and white lines represents the popu
page 17 of thcKe|>ort on Financial Statistics of Cities.
lation in cities with 8,000 to 30,000 inhabitants. In A comparatively small increase for net governmental
other words, the diagram indicates the population in cost payments was shown each year from 1002 to
cities of the two classes— 8,000 to 30,000 ami 30,000 1906, but from 1006 to 1007 the increase was much
and over also the population outsidesuch cities. The larger than during any previous year. From 1007
rapid increase in the population of our cities has been to 1908 the increase was almost as great as for the
previous year, but from 1908 to 1909 it was practi
discussed fully in the report on population.
Diagram 2 represents, by the different shading, the cally the same, showing no increase. The increase
percentage of the population in cities with 30,000 or each year since 1909 has been almost uniform. The in
more population, the percentage in cities with 8,000 crease in net revenue receipts was regular, being nearly
the same each year. The difference in length of bars,
to 30,000 population, and the percentage of popula
between 1902 and 1912, measures the enormous increase
tion outside such cities. It will be noted that, based
in both, the receipts and governmental cost payments
on the estimates of population for 1912, 39.5 per cent
of the population is in cities with 8,000 or more having practically doubled in the 11 years.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 472 presents the net govern
inhabitants. At the census of 1010 there was re
mental cost payments of the United States and of
ported in such cities 38.8 per cent of the population,
146 cities for each year from 1002 to 1012. The bar
and at the First Census, in 1700, the percentage was
3.3. In 1012, 30.7 per cent of the estimated popu representing the cost payments of the United States is
lation was in cities with more than 30,000 population, divided by different shading into two parts, one rej>while in 1700 there was but one city in that class, resenting pensions and the remainder of the bar other
purposes. It will be noted, by comparing the length
which formed only 0.8 percent of the total population.
The increasing importance of the cities with over of the bars, that the cost payments of the United States
decreased from 1004 to 1905, also from 1900 to 1010.
30,000 population is apparent.
Diagram 3 presents graphically, for the 195 cities The payments for 146 cities indicate a uniform increase,
and for the five groups, the per capita revenue re with the exception of 1908 and 1909, the expenditure's
ceipts and the per capita payments for expenses and for these years being practically the same. In 1902 the
interest, and for outlays, in five groups of cities with cost payments for the United States exceeded those of
specified excess of revenue receipts over payments for the 146 cities by $220,817,044, but in 1912 the cost pay
ments of the cities had increased more rapidly than
expenses and interest, in 1012. It will be noted, by

(83)

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

those of the United States, and there was only a differ indebtedness of the 146 cities, until in 1912 it reached
ence of $58,276,351, the cost payments for the United $156.57, having more than doubled in the 11 years,
while the per capita debt of the 146 cities bad in
States being greater by that amount.
Diagram 2 on this plate sets forth the net payments creased 59.5 per cent, and that for the United States
for outlays for the United Static and New York city had shown a slight decrease. The per capita debt of
from 1902 to 1912. In 1902 the outlays for New York New York city in 1912 was more than double the per
city were double those for the United States, but the capita debt for the 146 cities.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 473 shows the per capita
increase in the outlays of tin* United States was very
rapid from 1903 to 1904, when they exceeded the out net revenue receipts and governmental cost payments
lays for New York city by more than $15,000,000. for groups of cities with specified population in 1912.
In 1905 the outlays for both the United States and The five groups of cities are from 30,000 to 50,000
New York had decreased, but in that year the outlays population, 50,000 to 100,000, 100,000 bi 300,000,
of New York city exceeded those of the United States 300.000 b> 500,000, and 500,000 and over. The cost
by more than $20,000,000. Both increased rapidly un payments and net revenue receipts both increase regu
til 1908, when they were very nearly equal, the outlay larly from the lowest group (30,000 to 50,000 popu
for Now York city being slightly larger than that for lation) to the highest group (500,000 and over), the
the l nited States. In 1909 the outlays of the United per capita in the highest population group being al
States were more than $10,000,000 larger than t he out most double that of the smallest group. This proves
lays for New York city. Since that date the outlays that the per capita governmental cost payments in
for the United Stab's havo increased gradually each large cities is far higher than in smaller cities.
year, while in New York city the outlays for 1911 were
Per capita net revenue receipts and governmental
much larger than for 1912.
cost payments for cities with highest and lowest per
Diagram 3, Plate No. 472, compares the following capita governmental cost payments, in groups of
items: Net indebtedness of 146 cities, the United cities with specified population, in 1912, are presented
States, and New York city, for 11 years, 1902 to 1912, in Diagram 2. The diagram shows for each population
the bars being shaded to represent the not indebted group the difference between the highest and lowest
ness for each of the three divisions.
cities in each group, the comparison being specially
In 1902 the net indebtedness of New York city was noticeable in the group 50,000 b> 100,000 population
much less than that of the United Stab's or the 146 by comparing the bar for Johnsbiwn, having the lowest
cities, the United States having a larger debt than the per capita in that class, with that for Tacoma. The
146 cities. In 1903 the debt of New York city had difference between the pair of cities with the smallest
grown slightly, the indebtedness of the United States population, Quincy and San Diego, is much greater
had decreased, and the indebtedness of the 146 cities than between the pair of large cities, New York and
luul increased, so t hat the 146 citit's had a greater debt Philadelphia, the difference between the latter cities
than the I nited Stab's; the bar representing the net being less than between the highest ami lowest cities
debt of the 146 cities increased steadily each year in any other population group.
from 1902 until 1912, when it was $1,932,547,533. The
In Diagram 3, per capita net payments for the
net indebtedness for New York city also increased
principal governmental costs of 146 cities from 1902
steadily until in 1912 it was $792,927,021. The net in
b> 1912, the length of the bars shows the total per
debtedness of the United States decreased from 1902
capita, and the shaded portions represent four dif
to 1903 and from 1905 to 1907, increased gradually to
ferent items of expense. The black part of the bar,
1910, and decreased from 1910 to 1911, but showed
indicating the largest item, represents the expenses
rt slight increase in 1912, at which date it was
of general departments; the next largest item was
$1,027,574,697.
outlays, with interest next, expenses of public service
Diagram 4 on the same plate is of great inb'rest as
enterprises having the smallest proportion. The total
it presents the per capita net indebtedness for the
length of the bars on the diagram show’s that the
same units for which the total net indebtedness was
shown ,,, Diagram 3. The por capita debt of the increases from year b> year are not regular; for instance,
1-104 and 1905 show practically the same length of
l nited States did not in any year, from 1902 to 1912
bar. while from 1908 b> 1909 there is a marked
exceed $13, the highi'st per capita being $12.24 for the
year 1902. The per capita net indebtedness of the 146 decrease, a decrease being indicated for each of the
items making up the total.
f)n^ Diagram 4, per cupita net receipts from the
y ar until in 1912 it had reached *70 47 The
principal revenues from 1902 b> 1912, the bars are
| capita net indebtedness of New York city far exht
eroded that of both the United Stab's and the 146 cities divided into sections representing eight different items.
e argest item of the net receipts w the general
ras
combined. f„ 1902 it was $70.45. and fro,,, tin,, date
property tax, the second was for public service enter
,t increased much more rapidly than the per capita
prises, special assessments were third; tuxes on liquor

rrr

tu
h

FINANCIAL ST AT ISTICS OF CITIES.
tiaflic "ere fourth; while tlu*smallest amount received
from license taxes other than liquor. The differences in the length of the bars show that there was a
gradual increase each year, except from 1908 to 1909,
when a slight decrease was reported.
Diagram 5 presents the per capita net payments for
specified general departmental expenses of cities with
the highest and lowest per capita, by groups of cities
with specified population in 1912. In the lowest class
of cities, with from 30,000 to 50,000 population, New
ton, Mass., and Charlotte, X. C., are compared, the
net payments of Newton ($25.29) being practically
four times as large as those of Charlotte ($0.44). In
the class 50,000 to 100,000 population the per capita
for Springfield, Mass. ($20.51), is more than three*
times as large as that for Allentown, Pa. ($6.47). In
the class 100,000 to 300,000 the per capita for Denver
($20.13) is more than double that of Birmingham
($8.64). In the class of 300,000 to 500,000 the per
capita for Washington is practically double that of New
Orleans, the former having a per capita of $25.43 and
the latter of $12.79. In the highest class of cities—
those over 500,000— Boston, with a per capita of
$28.06, and Baltimore, with $15.14, are compared,
Boston’s per capita exceeding that of Baltimore by
nearly $13.
Diagram 6 illustrates the increase in the per capita
payment for the principal general departmental ex
penses, from 1902 to 1912, for the 146 cities covered
by the different census reports for the 11 years. The
differences in the length of the bars indicate the
gradual increase in the per capita payments for the
seven items indicated in the legend. The increase
from $13.02 in 1902 to $17.34 in 1912 is a gain during
the 11 years of 33.2 per cent. Each per capita gains
slightly over the previous year, except for 1908
and 1909, when a slight decrease is shown.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 474 shows the per cent dis
tribution of principal general departmentid expenses,
from 1902 to 1912, of 146 cities. Each bar represents
100 per cent, and the difference in the shading for each
division indicates the percentage in each of the eight
items specified, the shading indicating that the items
have varied very little from year to year, the propor
tion in each of these groups being nearly the same.
Diagram 2 on the same plate, revenue receipts and
payments for expenses of the water-supply systems of
146 cities from 1902 to 1912, presents graphically two
items and indicates that the revenue receipts were
much in excess of the payments for expenses. A regu
lar increase is shown from year to year in the revenue
receipts. The payments for expenses show a slight
decrease from 1904 to 1905, but an increase for each
of the other years, although the increase from 1908 to
1909 was very small.
Diagram 3, Plate No. 474, per capita increases in net
indebtedness and net payments for interest by 146
cities from 1902 to 1912, is a double diagram, the
m us

upper diagram representing net indebtedness and the
lower, net payments for interest, for a seri»*s of 11 years.
A study of the diagrams shows that the increase in
net indebtedness and in net payments for interest has
been steady, the length of the bars indicating that
in even' year the per capita net indebtedness increased,
but in the lower diagram it will be noted that the
net pavments for interest decreased front 1908 to 1909,
all other years having steadily increased.
Diagram 4 on this plate presents the increase of per
capita indebtedness with increase in size of cities in
1912. The lower bar in each group represents the net
debt, while the upper bar is shaded to indicate the
indebtedness for general departments and municipal
sendee, also public service. The per capita indebted
ness is smallest for the cities with the least population
and the debt increases, group by group, to that of the
cities with the largest number of inhabitants. As has
been shown on all the other diagrams, the per capita
net debt increases as the size of the city increases.
Diagram 5, Plate No. 474, per capita net indebtedness
of cities with highest and lowest per capita, in groups of
cities with specified population, in 1912, strikingly pre
sents, by the difference in the length of the bars, the tre
mendous difference between the lowest and high<*st
per capita indebtedness in the cities in each group.
The greatest disparity is shown between the per
capita debt of Springfield, Mo. ($3.75), and that of
Galveston, Teat ($113.24), in the group with the small
est population. In the group over 500,000 the per
capita net debt of Detroit ($18.09) is compared with
that for New York ($156.57).
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 475 shows the increase of
property tax levies, with increase in size of cities, in
1912. The per capita for the group with the great<*st
population was $23.42, nearly twice that of the group
with the smallest population, $11.93.
Diagram 2 on the same plate presents the averages per
100 inhabitants of tiie expenses of stated kinds of schooLs,
in groups of cities with specified population, in 1912.
Thedifference in the length of the bars shows the gradual
increase of the expenses for the four items ami indicates
that the increase is gradual from the group with
50.000 to 100,000 population to the group with the
greatest population, the two lower groups, 30,000 to
50.000 and 50,000 to 100,000 population, being nearly
equal. The expenses vary but little in the several
groups, the elementary day schools having the high
est average as well as the greatest increase from the
lowest population group to the highest.
Diagram 3 on this plategives the per cent distribution
of theexpenses of schools for stated objects, in groupsof
cities with specified population, in 1912. The per
centages for the operation of school plants and general
administration exhibit a number of differences and
indicate that in these items the expense is greater in
the small cities than in the large cities, the other items
showing very slight differences.

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

The map (6) on Plate No. 475indicates, by the dif
Diagram 4, Plato No. 475, averages per 100 inhabit
ants of the expenses for stated objects of the schools, ferent shading, the percentage of the total estimated
in groups of cities with specified population, in 1012. population of each of the states living in cities with
or more inhabitants in 1912. The percentages
The length of the bars and shaded divisions repre 30,000
senting the five items are practically the same for the are based on the estimated population of the cities and
cities in the two groups until the smallest population. of the United States for 1912. The dark shade marks
The averages in each group follow the general trend the states which have a great preponderance of this
of other diagrams, increasing with the size of the city. urban element. Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New
Instruction shows a greater proportional increase than York, and New Jersey are the states which have more
any other item and forms the greatest portion of the than 50 percent of their population in cities with 30,000
or more inhabitants. In the next group, 40 to 50 per
total expense.
Diagram 5 on this plate represents the per cent cent, we find a wide range geographically; Connecticut,
distribution of the expenses of three kinds of schools l Delaware, Maryland, and Illinois in the East and Cali
in groups of cities with specified population in 1912. fornia in the West are all in this class. There are nine
The bars are the same length and each represents 100 states without a city of 30,000 inhabitants— two east of
per cent, the shading indicating the proportion for the Mississippi River— Vermont and Mississippi— and
each kind of school. The percentage for the secondary seven west of this river— North Dakota, South Dakota,
day schools reverses the usual procedure, and is higher Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and Idaho.
in the cities until the smaller population and forms a There are four states— Maine, West Virginia, North
smaller proportion of the total in the cities with the Carolina, and South Carolina—east of the Mississippi
largest population. The elementary day schools are River with less than 10 per cent of their population in
practically the same. The percentages for night cities of 30,000 or more inhabitants, and two states
schools and all other schools increase from the small west of the Mississippi River in this class— Arkansas
cities to the large.
and Oklahoma.

VITAL STATISTICS.
I ho act of March 2, 1902, established a permanent
Census Office and provided for an annual report on
mortality statistics. I nder tlie terms of the law the
statistics were restricted to state's having adequate
registration laws. The act providing for the Thir
teenth Census, approved July 2, 1909, made no pro
vision for the collection of mortality data by the
enumerators, as at the previous censuses.
The four small maps on Plate No. 470 represent, by
shading, the growth of the registration area for deaths
from 1880 to 191.3. The two small circles in the lower
left corner of each map indicate the per cent of the
population in the registration area and the proportion of
the total area included in the registration area at. the
dates specified.
In 1SS0 the population in what are termed the
registration states formed only 17 per cent of the total
population, while the area of the states included in the
registration area was only 0.(5 per cent of the total area
of the I nited States. In 1880 only two states were
included in the registration area—Massachusetts ami
New Jersey.
In 1890 the registration area had been extended to
include— in addition to Massachusetts and New
Jersey—New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut,
Rhode Island, New York, and Delaware, and included
31.4 per cent of the total population and 3 per cent of
the total area of the United States.
In 1900 the registration area was enlarged and
included 40.5 per cent of the total population and 7.1
per cent of the area, Maine, Michigan, and Indiana
having been added and Delaware dropped.
In 1913 the registration area had expanded to in
clude 65.1 per cent of the total population and a little
more than one-third of the total land area— that is,
38.6 per cent. In 1913 the collection of mortality
statistics from registration states included the follow
ing states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana,
Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin,
also the District of Columbia. In addition to these
states the registration area included 41 cities in
nonregistration states, and all municipalities in North
Carolina having a population of 1,000 or more in
1900.
Plate No. 477 compares the death rate of the United
States for the registration area with those of certain
foreign countries for each year from 1900 to 1911.
The countries of New Zealand, Australia, and Sweden
each had a lower death rate than the United States
from 1900 to 1911, except in 1908, when the death
rate for the United States was 14.8 and that of Sweden

14.9. England and Wales in the earlier periods had
a higher death rate than that reported for the United
States, but in 1903, and in later periods until 1908, its
death rate was slightly below that of the United
State's. In 1908 they were the same, the lines
crossing again shortly after 1909, and again cross
ing just before 1911. All the other countries
show a higher death rate than that of the United
States, that of ('bile being especially marked as having
the highest death rate of all the countries reported.
Hungary and Spain are the next in order, their lint's
crossing at five different periods. The death rate of
Austria is below both that of Hungary and Spain but
above that of Italy, except in 1908, when it fell
below the Italian death rate; for subsequent years a
higher death rate was reported, .lapan is represented
from 1900 to 1909 only. Its death rate is below that
of Italy, except in 1909, but above that of France,
except in 1900 and 1906, when it was slightly lower.
For the early years, from 1900 to 1905, the French
and German death rates were very close but after 1905
the German death rate was below that of France at
every year reported. The general death rate of Ire
land was below that of Germany, except between 1909
and 1911, and above that of England and Wales and
the United States.
Plate No. 478 represents, by the rise and fall of
the lines, the death rates from important causes of
death in the registration area of the United States
for each of the years from 1900 to and including
1912. The heavy black line, representing the death
rate from tuberculosis, indicates a striking decrease
from 1900 to 1912, and in the latter year was slightly
below that of organic heart disease. The death rate
from pneumonia was second from 1900 to 1907;
between 1907 and 1908 it fell below the death rate
from heart disease. Organic heart disease has shown
a startling increase and in 1912 was higher than
tuberculosis or pneumonia; it was third in rank in
the death rates from 1900 to 1907; between 1907 and
1908 it. crossed the pneumonia death rate line and
continued above that cause of death until in 1912 it
was highest among the causes of death. One peculiar
fact brought out in the diagram is the closeness with
which the lines representing the death rates from
cerebral hemorrhage, apoplexy, and cancer approach*
each other from 1903 to 1912. The three lines
indicating the lowest death rates shown on the
diagram, those of measles, whooping cough, and
scarlet fever, are very close and cross and recross
each other from 1900 to 1912; for the latter year,
scarlet fever had the lowest death rate of the three,
whooping cough the highest, and measles just be
tween the two.
(87)

RELIGIOUS BODIES.
Th<* Census Bureau collected in the year 1906 sta
tistics of religious bodies in continental l nited States,
no effort being made to include statistics of organiza
tions in any portion of the outlying territory. Although
the report was not printed until 1910, the data relate
to the close of the year 1906. This report contained
many illustrations and it has been deemed advisable
to include them in this volume as Platt's Nos. 479 to
492.
Wherever the designation “ not church members’ ’
has been list'd it represents the difference between the
number reported as communicants, or members, anti
the total population. It embraces, therefore, children
too young to become church members, as well as that
proportion of the population eligible to church mem
bership, although not affiliated with any religious
denomination.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 479 shows the proportion
of the population reported as Protestant, Roman
Catholic, and “ all other” church members, and the
proportion not reported as church members, in 1890
and 1906. The areas of the two circles are in propor
tion to the total population returned in 1890 and 1906,
the circles being divided into sectors in proportion to
the four classes specified. The Roman Catholic and
Protestant bodies include nearly all of the church
membership, the “ all other” religious denominations
being a very small proportion of the total population
of the United States. The large proportion in the
class “ not church members” is due to the inclusion of
all persons, including children, not reported as church
members. (See note at head of diagram.)
In Diagram 2 on Plate No.479, distribution of com
municants or memljere, by principal families or de
nominations, in 1890 and 1906, the areas of the two
circles are in proportion to the number of communi
cants or members returned at the dates specified.
The sectors of the circles indicate the proportion each
of the principal denominations formed of the total.
In 1890 the Roman Catholic was first, Methodist
second, Baptist third, Presbyterian fourth, and
Lutheran fifth; in 1906 the Catholic, Methodist,
and Baptist occupied the same places, but the Luth
eran was fourth and the Presbyterian fifth, the
Lutheran having increased more rapidly than the
Presbyterian. The other denominations had prac
tically the same proportions at each census.
Plates Nos. 480 to 483 each consist of a series of
twelve circles, each circle representing a state, ar( 88)

ranged in alphabetical order; each circle is divided
into sectors in the proportion each of the princi
pal denominations bears to the total number of
communicants, or members, of all religious bodies in
the state. The Roman Catholic denomination leads
in 30 states, is second in 6 states, third in 7 states, and
fourth in 2 states, there being only 3 st.ati's— North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee— in which it
did not appear as fourth or higher. The Baptist leads
in 11 states, is second in 6 states, third in 4 states,
and fourth in 8 states. The Methodist leads in 5
states, is second in 25 states, third in 9 states, and
fourth in 8 states. The Latter-day Saints is the only
other denomination leading in any state, being fust
in 2 (Idaho and Utah), second in 2, and third in 1.
The Lutheran is second in 4 states, third in 5 states,
and fourth in 5 st.ati's, while the Presbyterian is third
in 16 states and fourth in 9 states. The next denomi
nation in importance is the Congregationalist, which
is second in 4 states, third in 1 state, and fourth in 3
states.
Tattle I

PERCENTAGE OP TOTAL POPULATION* REPRE
SENTED IN 1908 BT MEM HERS OP—

STATE OR TERRITORY.

All reli
gious
Isxlies.
New Mexico....................................
Uta h ................................................
Louisiana........................................
Connect icut....................................
South Carolina...............................
District of Columbia......................
Wisconsin.....................................
New Hampshire...........................
Pennsylvania..................................
Vermont......................................
Minnesota......................................
Virginia...........................................
North Carolina..........................

«3.3
54.6
.54.0
51.3
50.6
50.0
45.8
44.4
44.3
44.0
43.7
43.0
42.1
42.0
41.2
40.8
40.2
40.0

Protestant
bodies.
6.7
2.6
13.1
14.8
19.4
19.5
45.0
29.7
21.7
14.9
15.0
24.8
41.2
18.2
22.2
38.5
38.6
39.8

Homan
Catholic
Church.
5 6 .2
2.6
40.0
35.5
31.0
29.8
0.7
14.2
22.3
27.7
27.8
17.5
0.8
23.5
18.7
2.1
1.5
0.2

AII ot her
I nk lifts.

0.1
19.4
0.9

1.1
0.1
0.7

0.1

0.5
0.2

0.8
0.7
0.1
0.3
0.3

0.2
0.1
0 1

On Plate No. 484, proportion of the population
reported as Protestant, Roman Catholic, and “ all
other” church members, and proportion not reported
as church members, for each state anil territory in
1906, the highest percentage of Protestant church
members was found in South Carolina (45 per cent),
and the lowest percentage in Utah (2.6 per cent). The
highest percentage of Roman Catholic Church mem
bers was found in New Mexico (56.2 per cent), and the
lowest percentage in North Carolina (0.2 per cent).
The “ all other” religious bodies had the largest pro-

R E L IG IO U S B O D IE S .
portion (largely comprising latter-day Saints) in
L tali ami the smallest proportion (less than onetenth of 1 per cent) in North Carolina. New Mexico
shows the largest proportion (63.3 per cent) of its
population reported as communicants, or church
members; t tali the next largest proportion (54.6 per
cent); Rhode Island third (54 per cent); while Okla
homa had the lowest per cent (18.2) of its population
reported as church members, and the highest per cent
(81.8) reported as not church members.
Plates Nos. 485 and 486 consist of a series of 12
small maps which show the number of communicants,
or members, per thousand of the population for 12
principal families, or denominations, for each state
and territory, in 1906. In the states left unshaded
none of the denominations specified are reported.
The states are shaded in groups, as follows: The first
group, less than 10 per thousand of population; the
second group, 10 to 25 per thousand; the third group,
25 to 50 per thousand; the fourth group, 50 to 100
per thousand; and the fifth and last group, 100 or
over to each thousand of population.
The first map shows the proportion of Roman
Catholics to the total population of each state. The
states covered with black have 100 persons and over
of this denomination in each thousand of population.
A comparison of the 12 maps reveals the fact that
the Roman Catholics have the largest number of com
municants, or members, of any of the denominations.
On Map 2, Methodist bodies, the solid black shading
in the South indicates the states in which the Metho
dists are most prominent.
The Baptists are more numerous in a larger number
of the Southern states than the Methodists, as is shown
by the solid black covering the states indicated on
Map 3.
The Lutheran bodies are strongest in the North
west, as indicated by the solid black areas on Map 4,
due to the large number of Scandinavians and Ger
mans in the states of North Dakota, Minnesota, and
Wisconsin. The uncolored areas in Arizona and New
Mexico indicate no churches of this denomination.
The Presbyterian bodies, as shown on Map 5, are
scattered and do not show any proportion above the
group 25 to 50 per thousand in any state.
Map 6 indicates that the largest proportion of Dis
ciple's, or Christians, is found in the state of Kentucky.
Map 1 on Plate No. 486 presents the distribution of
the Protestant Episcopal bodies. Only 4 states—
Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Nevada
ure shaded to fall in the group 25 to 50 per thousand.
On Map 2, distribution ot the Congregationalists,
the shading indicates that Coimeeticut and Vermont
had the highest proportion of this element. The map
also shows 7 state's unshaded, indicating that no
churches of Congregationalists were reported.

As indicated on Map .1 , for Reformed bodies, about
half the state's are unshaded, indicating that unchurches
of this denomination we»ro rcportexl. Pennsylvania
was the state reporting the highest proportion of this
denomination.
On Map 4, United Brethren, all the states reported
are in the class less than 25 pe'r thousand, more than
one-lialf of the states be'ing unshaded, indicating no
churches reported for this elcnomination.
On Map 5, German Evangelical Synod of North
America, 26 states in New England, the South, and
the far West have no churches of this religious denomi
nation. In only 2 states— Illinois and Missouri—are
they reported with from 10 to 25 communicants per
thousand of population.
The Latter-day Saints (Map 6) have churches re
ported from 29 of the states, but the highest proportion of members is in the states of Idaho and Utah,
these states reporting over 100 per thousand of popu
lation. Wyoming, with 50 to K ) per thousand, and
M
Nevada and Arizona, with 25 to 50 per thousand, are
the only states reporting more than 10 per thousand
of population. Nineteen states are unshaded, indicat
ing no churches of this denomination.
Plates Nos. 487 and 488 consist of 12 diagrams,
giving the number of communicants, or members, per
thousand population, arranged according to propor
tional strength for twelve principal families or denomi
nations, for each state and territory, in 1906. The
length of the bar represents the number of communi
cants of tliat body per thousand in each state, arranged
in order, with the highest proportion first.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 487, Roman Catholic, illus
trates the fact that New Mexico has the largest pro
portion of Roman Catholics, followed by Rhode Island,
Massachusetts, Louisiana, ami Connecticut, in order.
The smallest proportion of Roman Catholics indicated
on the diagram was reported from South Carolina.
Diagram 2, Baptist, indicates that they are strong
est in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi,
and Virginia: in fact, the leading states for this de
nomination are Southern states. The smallest pro
portion indicated on this diagram was for Montana.
Diagram 3, Lutheran, shows that the largest pro
portion of this denomination was found in Minnesota,
with North Dakota, Wisconsin, and South Dakota fol
lowing in the order named. The smallest proportion
reported from the states represented on the dia
gram is for Rhode Island.
The largest proportion of United Brethren, as shown
on Diagram 4, appears in Indiana, followed bv West
Virginia, Ohio, Kansas, and Pennsylvania, in the order
named.
In Diagram 5, Reformed Bodies, Pennsylvania leads,
with New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan, and Maryland fol
lowing in the order named. This, like the United

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

Brethren, is, in numbers, one of the smaller religious
denominations.
Plate No. 488 is comprised of seven diagrams. On
Diagram 1, Methodist, South Carolina had the highest
proportion, followed by Delaware, Georgia, North
Carolina, and Florida, in the order named. The
smallest proportion among the states represented on
the diagram is shown for Utah.
In Diagram 2, Disciples, the largest proportion shown
Is for the state of Kentucky; Missouri, Indiana,
Kansas, and Iowa follow. Of the states listed on
the diagram, New Mexico reported the smallest pro
portion.
The state leading in Presbyterians, as shown in
Diagram 3, was Pennsylvania. Tennessee was second,
New Jersey third, Ohio fourth, and Colorado fifth.
The state with the lowest proportion represented on
the diagram was Vermont.
In Diagram 4, Protestant Episcopal communicants,
the District of Columbia reported the highest propor
tion of members; Connecticut was second, Rhode
Island third, Nevada fourth, and Maryland fifth. Of
the states shown on the diagram, North Dakota had
the lowest proportion.
The New England states ied in the proportion of
CongregationalLsts, as indicated on Diagram 5. Con
necticut was first, Vermont second, New Hampshire
third, Massachusetts fourth, Maine fifth, and Rhode
Island sixth. New York reported the lowest pro
portion.
The German Evangelical Synod is one of tho smaller
denominations in number, as shown on Diagram 6.
Illinois had the highest proportion, Missouri was
second, Wisconsin third, and Indiana fourth.
Latter-day Saints are of importance in only the 5
states indicated on Diagram 7. Utah had by far the
highest proportion of any state. Idaho was the state
second in the proportion of members, with Wyoming
third, Arizona fourth, and Nevada fifth.
On Plate No. 489, distribution of communicants, or
members, in each principal family or denomination, for
cities of 25,(K ) inhabitants or more in 1900 (arranged
M
in four classes), and outside of cities, in 1906, each
bar represents, first, cities with 300,000 inhabitants
and over; second, cities with 100,000 to 300,000 in
habitants; third, cities with *50.000 to 100,000 inhabit
ants; fourth, cities with 25,000 to 50,000 inhabitants;
and outside cities with 25,000 inhabitants or more!
The Jewish Congregations led with 88.7 per cent of
their communicants in cities with 25,000 inhabitants

or more; they also had 57.5 per cent in cities with
300,000 inhabitants or more. The smallest per cent
outside of cities (11.3) was also reported for Jewish
Congregations. The Church of Christ, Scientist, also
shows an exceptionally large proportion (61.1 percent)
in cities of 300,000 and over, and a very small propor
tion (17.4 per cent) outside of cities of 25,000 inhab
itants and over. The Eastern Orthodox is next in
proportion of members in cities of 25,000 or more, and
a large proportion of this membership (34.1 per cent)
is in cities of 300,000 and over. The Roman Catholic
shows that 52.2 per cent of the members are in cities
of 25,000 and over. The Protestant Episcopal shows
that the membership is about evenly divided, 51.2 per
cent being in cities of 25,000 and over and 48.8 per
cent being outside. All the other denominations
show less than half their members in cities of 25,000
inhabitants or more, the Mennonitcs showing the
smallest proportion in this class, only 2.1 per cent.
Plates Nos. 490 and 491 are made up of a series of
twenty-four circles representing 24 of the principal
cities of the United States, arranged in alphabetical
order, each circle being divided to show the distri
bution of the communicants, or members, of the princi
pal families or denomination in 1906. The Roman
Catholic Church has the larg(*st number of communi
cants, or members, in each of the cities shown, with the
Methodists next in rank, as the latter arc second in
6 cities, third in 14, and fourth in 1, there being only
3 cities of the 24— Providence, Buffalo, and Boston
where they do not appear among the iirst four. The
Lutherans are next in rank, being second in 7 cities,
followed by the Baptists and Presbyterians.
Plate No. 492 presents the per cent of the popular
tion reported as Protestant, Roman Catholic, and
“ all other” church members, and the per cent not
reported as church members, for 35 principal cities, in
1906, arranged in order of the proportion of Protes
tants, the city with tho highest per cent being first.
The highest per cent of Protestants was reported for
\ ashington, D. C., with Louisville, K y., and Memphis,
\
I enn., following in order. The smallest proportion of
Protestants is shown for Fall River, Mass. The largest
proportion of Roman Catholics is found in Fall River,
with I rovidence second, New Orleans third, and Bos
ton fourth. Worcester, Pittsburgh, Providence, and
Omaha reported the largest percentages for “ all other ”
bodies. St. Joseph, Mo., shows the largest proportion
«> persons not attending church, with Omaha, Nebr.,
f
second, and Toledo, Ohio, third.

MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE.
In 1909 tlu* Census Bureau published a special report
on marriage and divorce. The report presented the
results of two Federal investigations into these sub
jects; the first, made by the Bureau of Labor, covered
the period from 1867 to 1886, while the second, made
by the Bureau of the Census, covered the period from
1S87 to 1906, As the report made by the Bureau of
Labor was out of print, the Census Bureau’s report
was compiled to cover a period of 40 years, from 1867
to 1906.
It is deemed a matter of interest to reproduce in
the Statistical Atlas the maps and diagrams used for
illustrating the statistics on marriage and divorce for
the period covered by the report.
M ARRIAG E.

The statistics on marriage, for the period from 1887
to 1906, gave the total number of marriages recorded
in the counties covered by the investigation as
12,832,044. The number recorded for each year, with
the increase, as compared with the preceding year, is
shown in the following table, and the data graphically
presented in Diagram 1 on Plate No. 493:

and declining after a commercial crisis. Kspcciallv
noticeable is the small increase shown fo r the year
1893, and the actual decrease in the succeeding year,
1894. The panic prior to 1904 was not as severe as
that of 1893; the decrease for 1901, therefore, was not
as great as the decrease from 1893 to 1891.
Diagram 2 indicates, by the curves, the number of
marriages per 10,000 estimated population for geo
graphic divisions, by single years, from 1887 to 1906.
As this diagram is reproduced from the Census Report
on Marriage and Divorce for 1906, the geographic, di
visions used do not coincide with the geographic
divisions at the Thirteenth Census; they are, there
fore. listed below:
North Atlantic division*
Maine.
New Ham|*<him.

M A RRIAG ES.

M ARRIAGES.

YEAR.

Number.

Increase
over
preoeUinc
year.

IQOft

im
HXV4

ion
H
I02
Him...................
1898......................

853.200
804,787
781,145
786,132
746,733
716,621
685,281
650,610
625,655

Nunilter.

48,508
23,642
i 4,087
39,399
30,112
31.337
34,674
24,955
3,305

, , ,
year.

1897....................

12. 832,044

Increase

YEAR.

UBS..................
1891....................
1893....................
1S92....................
1891....................
1890....................
1889....................

1888.................

1887....................

622.350
8,477
613,873
15,018
598,855
32, fiO
l
566,101
'12,512
578,673
803
577,870
15,458
562.412
19,875
542,537
11,080
531,457
26,927
501,530
21,461
483,069 ..................

i l>ecTeasc.

Diagram 1 on Plate No. 493 illustrates, by the length
of the bars, the annual number of marriages for 20
years, from 1887 to 1906, the number having increased
from 483,069 in 1887 to 853,290 in 1906. The greatest
increase (48,503) shown in one year was that from 190.)
to 1906. The two years 1894 and 1904 reported adocrease in the number of marriages, compared with the
number during the previous years, proving that the
number of marriages depends, to some extent, on eco
nomic conditions, increasing in periods of prosperity

Coiitd.

North Dakota.

Vermont.
Massachusetts.

South Dakota.
Nebraska,
Kansas.

Rhode Island.
Connecticut.
New York.
New Jersey.
Pennsylvania.
South Atlantic division:

T a b le 1

North Central division
Missouri.

South Central division:

Kentucky.
Tennessee.
Alabama.
Mississippi.

Delaware.
Maryland.
District of Columbia.

Louisiana.
Arkansas.

Virginia.
West Virginia.

( iklahnmn.
Texas.

North Carolina.
South Carolina.
Georgia.
Florida.
North Central division:

Indian Territory.

Western division:
Montana.
Idaho.
Wyoming.
Colorado.

Ohio.

New Mexico.

Indiana.
Illinois.

Arizona.

Michigan.

L'tah.
Nevada.

Minnesota.

Washington.
( )reg»n.

Iowa.

California.

Wisconsin.

These marriage rates are based on estimated popula
tion for geographic divisions for all years, except the
census years. As will be observed from the lines on
the diagram, the average number of marriages in the
South Central division was larger than for any other
division, except for the year 1906, for which year the
Western division reported a higher proportion. The

OR)

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

lines in 111U13' places cross eai*h other, showing that the
I
marriage rates for tho different divisions are not con
stant from vear to year. Some of the fluctuations in
tho lines arc due to the fact that the estimated popu
lation was not a true statement of the population of
each of the divisions; several of the geographic divi
sions grew more rapidly during the period from 1000
to 1906 than they did during the decade from 1890 to
1900. The growth in the divisions was computed on
the same basis, but the actual growth was not uni
form. the Western division evidently, having a more
rapid growth than estimated. 'Hie Western division
shows the most striking change, the number of marri
ages per 1 0 ,0 0 0 population starting at the lowest
point in 1887 and ending in 1900 with the highest
number. This, in a measure, is due to an underesti
mate of the population. The heavy black line repre
sents the average for the entire United States. The
average for tho South Central division is above the
United States average at each year; the North Cen
tral division average is above tho United States aver
age from 1887 to 1895, after which year it is below,
but follows closely the average for the United States.
The South Atlantic division, from 1887 to 1896, was
below the United States average, but after the year
1896 it reported more marriages per 1 0 .0 0 0 population
than the United States.
The Western division, referred to above, hail the
lowest average in 1887, with 71 marriages per 10.000 of
population, but rapidly increased its average to 1891,
when it reached 90 per 10,000; its average decreased to
1894. In fact, the lines of every division, except the
South Atlantic and South Central, showed a decrease in
1S94, as compared with the previous year, being affected
by the unsatisfactory economic conditions. From 1894
the average for the Western division increased raj>idly, except for a decrease reported in 1896, until be
tween 1901 and 1902 it crossed tho line of the United
States average, and, in 1906, reached an average of
127 marriages per 1 0 ,0 0 0 population, the highest aver
age of any division. This was due to the rapid increase
in the population and the fact that a large proportion
of the migration, both interstate and foreign, was of
adults of inarriagoahlo age.
There is a peculiarity about the increase for the dif
ferent divisions as shown for the years 1903 and 1904.
The average for the North Atlantic division, the North
Central division, the United States, and the South
Atlantic division all decreased from 1903 to 1904; the
the Western division returned the same average; the
South Central division increased from 1903 to 1904,
but reported a decided decrease for the next year, 1904
to 1905, at the time when all the other divisions re
ported increases, the Western division especially hav

ing a very large increase front 1904 to 1905 and from
1905 to 1906.
Diagram 3, average annual number of marriages
per 1 0 ,0 0 0 adult unmarried population, for states
and territories, in 1900. The Indian Territory, which
is now a part of Oklahoma, led, with 555 per 1 0 ,0 0 0 ,
I and is first on the diagram. Arkansas was second,
I with an average of 544 marriages to each 10,000
unmarried adults; Texas third, Florida fourth, and
Oklahoma, exclusive of the Indian Territory, fifth
The average for California was the lowest, with 228
per 1 0 ,0 0 0 unmarried adults, and Connecticut was just
above California, with an average of 232 per 10,000.
The first illustration on Plate No. 494 is a small map
showing the average annual number of marriages per
1 0 .0 0 0 adult unmarried population, for the states and
territories, in 1900. The solid black areas indicate
the states that averaged 450 or more marriages per
1 0 .0 0 0 unmarried adults. Florida, Mississippi, Ar
kansas, Oklahoma and Indian Territory (now Okla
homa), and Texas are the only states in this group.
The next group, with an average of 350 to 450, in! eludes the states of West Virginia, Indiana, Tennessee,
Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Kansas, Utah, and
Nevada. Six states, excluding South Carolina,
which had no marriage records, reported averages of
less than 250 marriages per 10,000 adult unmarried
population. Geographically the states were almost
equally divided, three of them—Montana, Wyoming,
and California—in the West; and Connecticut, Mas
sachusetts. and Delaware in the East. As South Caro
lina had no marriage records, it should not be included
with any class.
DIVORCE.

The data concerning divorce, which were secured
from the court records, fall into three main classes.
The first class consists of the number of divorces
granted; the second class consists of the statistics in
regard to the legal proceedings, and embraces the data
concerning the party, whether husband or wife, to
whom the divorce was granted, the cause, the facts ns
to contest, the residence of the libellee, the form of
service of notice, and the question of alimony; the
third class comprises the figures in regard to the
character of the marriage dissolved and embraces
the subjects of the plat e of marriage, the duration of
marriage, the condition as to children, and the occu
pation of the parties.
For tlie 2 0 years from 1887 to 1906, 945,625 di| vorces were granted. The number from 1867 to 1886
was 328,716, hardly more than one-third of the num
ber reported for the second 2 0 years. Every five-year
I period since 1867 witnessed a marked increase in

M A R R IA G E A N D D IV O R C E .
tlio number of divorces, us shown in the following
table:
T

h b le

i > o r o :s .
iv

IncT(\Ls*> over prrcedini: Are-year

PKRIOI* OK Y E A R S .

Totul
numlx-r.

period.

Number. I’er cent.
15**2 lo
1X97 to
1*92 to
1887 to
1883 to
1S77 to
1872 to
1867 to

190*>___
1901........................
1896............................
1891...................................
1880...... ................
1881...............................
1870............................................
1871............................................................

157,324
117,311
89.2*1
68,547
S3,S74

14^973

27.9

Tho enormous increase in divorces is shown by the
figures in tho following table, which supplies the
total number reported for each year from 1867 to
1906:
T

h lilc*3

DIVORCES.

YEAR.
Total
number.

190*i. . .
190.5.......
15*01........
15*03.......
15*02.......
1901.. .
15*00.......
1899.......
185*8.......
1*5*7... .
185*6.......
1*95.......
1*5*4.......
1*5*3.......
1892........
1*5*1........
1890.......
1889.......
1888........
1887........

72.00*
67,5*76
66,199
64.925
61,480
00.5*84
55.751
51.437
47,849
44,65*5*
42,987
4*1.387
37.56*
37.46*
36,579
85,540
33.461
31,735
28.669
27,5*19

IHVORCE*.

Xuml)cr
Increase
per
over
100.000 of
preceding estimated
year.
popula
tion.
4,086
1,777
1,274
.3.445
4*
1 *i
5.233
4,314
3.588
3,1.50
1,762
2,550
2.819
14
*0
889
1,039
2.079
1.726
3.06*i
7.50
2,384

84
81
8*1
80
t i

78
71
69
65
02
61
58
55
56
.V,
55
53
.5!
47
47

YEAR.

1886....
18V,___
1884___
1883....
1882... .
1881....
18*0....
1 * 7 9 ...
1 *7*....
1*77....
1*76.. .
1*75....
1*74....
1*73....
1*72....
1 * 7 1 ...
1 * 7 0 ...
1*69___
1 *6*....
1*67....

1
S um tier
Increase
per
Total
over
100.000 of
number. preceding estimated
year.
Jiopulatlon.
25,545
23,472
22,994
23,1!**
22,112
‘20.762
19,663
17,083
16,089
1.5, *4*7
14.*00
14.212
13.5*89
13,156
12,390
11,586
10.962
10.5*39
10.150
9.937

2,063
478
• 204
1,08*4
1.350
1,099
2.580
994
4*4
2
887
.5*8
223
84.3
706
804
624
23
789
213

44
41
42
43
42
40
39
35
34
34
32
32
32
31
30
29
28
29
27
27

1Decrease.
Plate No. 496 presents graphically the divorces per
100.000 estimated population for geographic divisions,
by single years, from 1867 to 1906. The Western
division reported the largest number of divorces per
100.000 of population, and presents a striking series of
increases and decreases, tho lino for this division being
the most irregular of any on the diagram. Except in
1S6S, 1870, and 1871, tho average increased each year
up to 1877, when the rate reached 126 per 100,000.
There was a sharp decline in 1878 to 85 per 100,000,
and in 1879 the average was 78 per 100,000. A con
tinuous rise is shown to 1883, after which, except for
1886, there was a decrease to 82 per 100,000 in 1887;
1892, with an average of 117, was another high year,
followed by a decrease to 1893, then a gradual in
crease to 1902, when it reached 142 per 100,000; a
slight decrease for two years was followed by a rapid
increase until 1906, when it reached 168 per 100,000;
this average was the highest shown for any year bv
any division. This rate was more than four times

that reported from the North Atlantic division (41),
and almost four times that reported from the South
Atlantic division (43).
The South Central division, the North Central
division, and the Western division, since 1884, have all
shown a larger number of divorces per 100,000 popu
lation than the United States, the North Atlantic
division and the South Atlantic division being below
the number for the United States. All the divisions,
however, show an alarming increase from 1867 to 1906.
The ratio for the South Atlantic division was the
lowest at each year until 1905 and 1906, when it passed
the North Atlantic division, after which they were very
close together, the vSouth Atlantic having a ratio of 43
and the North Atlantic a ratio of 41 per 100,000. The
divisions in the West, therefore, show a much higher
divorce rate ami a more rapid increase in the divorce
rate than do the North Atlantic and the South Atlantic
divisions.
Map 2 on Plato No. 494, average annual number
of divorces per 100,000 married population, for states
and territories, in 1900. The map is shaded in four
groups—under 100 per 100,000 married population;
100 to 200; 200 to 300; 300 to 400; and 400 and over,
the highest group. The three states falling in the
group 400 and over are Washington, Montana, and
Colorado. Tho next group, 300 to 400 divorces per
100,000 married population, comprises Oregon. Idaho,
Wyoming, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, In
dian Territory, Arkansas, and Indiana. The unshaded
areas, indicating states having a rate under 100 per
100,000, include New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey,
Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 495, average annual num
ber of divorces per 100,000 married population, for
states and territories, in 1900. The states and terri
tories, arranged in the order of their average annual
number, with the largest first, show a wide variation
geographically. Washington leads, with 513 divorces
per 100,000 married population; Montana is second,
with 497; Colorado third, with 409; Arkansas fourth,
with 399; Texas fifth, with 391; Oregon sixth, with
368; Wyoming seventh, with 361; and Indiana eighth,
with 355. These 8 states each have an annual aver
age of more than 350 divorces per 100,000 married
population
The state with the lowest average, excluding South
Carolina, in which state all law’s permitting divorces
were repealed in 1878, is Delaware, with 43 per 100,000.
New York and New Jersey are very close, each with
60 per 100,000. It L very difficult to explain why
s
there should he such a wide disparity between the
average annual number of divorces in the state of
Wasliington and that of Delaware.
In Diagram 2 on Plate No. 495, annual number of
divorces in the United States from 1867 to 1906, the
increase is strikingly shown by the gradual increase in

STATISTIC AL ATLAS.

tin* length of the bare for each year, the advance being
from 9,937 in 1867 to 72,062 in 1906, or more than
seven times the number reported for 1867. The popu
lation of the United States from 1870 to 1900 (almost
the same period) had increased only 97.1 per cent,
while the number of divorces increased 408.6 per cent,
showing that the divorces are increasing much more
rapidly than the population.
Diagram 3 compares the average annual number of
divorces per 100,000 population for the United States
until the averages for certain specified foreign coun
tries. The United States average of 73 is more than
double that of the next country, Switzerland, with 32,
followed in order by France, with 23; Denmark, with
17; and Germany, with 15, the only countries which
reported an average annual number of 15 or more
divorces per 100,000 of population. Ireland had the
smallest average of the countries presented in the
diagram —loss than 1 per 100,000 of population.
Plate No. 497 consists of four small United States
maps on which the states are shaded to show, in five
groups, the average annual number of divorces per
100,000 population, for states and territories, for 1870,
1880, 1890, and 1900. A comparison of the four maps
brings out the rapid increase in the average annual
number of divorces, as indicated bv the increased
number of states with the darker shadings; the differ
ence between the shading on the map for 1870 and
that of 1900 is most striking. In 1870 a large number
of states were unshaded, falling in the group under 25,
but in 1900 there were only five states in that group,

all in the East. The Western states, with the excep
tion of New Mexico, are all in the highest groups, with
averages of 75 to 100 and 100 and over. With a few
exceptions, the states east of the Mississippi River are
in the lower groups, those having less than 75 divorces
per 100,000 of population.
On Plate No. 498, number of divorces granted for
certain specified causes, from 1867 to 1906, the lines
indicate the number granted each year for each of the
specified causes. The most prevalent cause was di
vorce to the wife for desertion. The rapid increase
shown in this cause is startling. The next most im
portant cause was divorce grunted to the wife for
cruelty on the part of the husband; the third cause
represents the number of divorces granted to the
husband for desertion. The line representing the
number of divorces to the husband for cruelty on
the part of the wife shows the smallest number of
divorces from 1S67 to 1896. Of the eight causes
represented on the diagram, five represent divorces
granted to the w
’ife and three to the husband, in
dicating that the wives secure more divorces than
the husbands. The rapid increase in the number of
divorces granted to the wnfe for desertion and for
cruelty, and to the husband for desertion, is strikingly
illustrated on the diagram, the first cause having
increased from 2,012 divorces in 1867 to 15,895 in 1906.
The next cause, to the wife for cruelty, advanced from
994 in 1867 to 14,368 in 1906. The number of divorces
to the husband for desertion advanced from 1,382 in
1867 to 11,512 in 1906.

INSANE IN HOSPITALS.
The Census Buroau issued in 1014 a special report
based on the returns of the insane in hospitals in 1910.

The following table presents a summary of the results
by classes:

T a b le 1

IXSA.VK in hospitals :

Knumerated

Total
|K>pulation:
1910.

RACK AND NATIVITY.

Numlier.

Total..................................................

174,221

68, 3m ;, 0 2
13,345,545

115,402
54,09).
4,72r>

9, *27.763
412,546

Negro........................................................
Otfier colored............................................................

12,910
.167

The total number of inmates reported in insane
asylums on January 1, 1910, was 187,791, of which
number 28.8 per cent were whites of foreign birth,
and of the 60,769 persons admitted to institutions
during the year 1910, 25.5 per cent were of the same
class.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 499, number of insane ad
mitted during 1910 and number enumerated January
1, 1910, by age periods, is bused on the billowing
table:
INSANK IN hospitals:

Kiituneruied Jan. 1.

Numlier.

Under 15 years...........................
15 to 10 years.....................................
20 to 24 years...............................
25 to 2 9 years................................... .
30 to 34 years...................................
35 to 39 years...................................
40 to 44 years.....................................
45 to 49 years....................................
50 to 54 years........................... .
55 to 59 years.....................................
tit) to 64 years.....................................
65 to 69 years.....................................
70 to 74 years.....................................
75 to 79 years..................................
*0 years and ov er............................

I87,7yi

1’er cent
distribution.
................

1*4,557

......................

100.0

3(1
2,312
7. K I
O
14.0S3
19,091
22,866
23.321
22,874
20, *85
16,383
12,729
9..>45
6,263
3,596
2,477

Numlier.

Per rent
distribu
tion.

60,769
r

0.2 1
1.3
4.2
7.6
10.3
12.4 1
12.6 1
12.4 |
11.3 1
8.9
6.9
5.2 1
3.4
1.9 |
1.3

3,234 ................

1910.

Admitted during
the year.

AUK G R O U P .

T otal........................................

59.812

100.0

327
2,539
5.701
7.027
7,296
7.495
6,469
5.0*1
4,877
3,368
2,872
2.191
1,776
1,180
1.014

0.5
4.2
9.5
11.7
12.2
12.5
10.8
9.5
8.2
0.6
4.8
3.7
3.0

2.0
1.7

957

The bars on the left of the central line represent the
number of insane enumerated January 1, 1910, and
the bars on the right of the central line represent the

Nuinlier.

Per loo.nm
population.

Total
imputa
tion:
1910.

Insane in hospitals:
1910.
Fnnnuw
Admitted
ittod Jan. 1. during ibe
year.

66.1

81,731,957

N ative........................................................
Foreign born........................................................
Nativity unknown.............................................

Age reported.....

1'er 100,000
imputation.

r n t ct . n t h i s t r i h c t i o n .

Admitted < urlng tlit*
1
yeor.

91,972. 2m ;

W hite.....................................................

T a l»l<* 2

Jitn. 1.

1910.

100.0

213.2

56,1*2

O .7
K

KK.9

92.* |

92.5

405.3

39. 629
15,523
1,030

57.9
110.3

74.4
14.6

01.5
»**

05.2
25.5
1.7

4,3*4

44.0
49.2

10.7
a4

11*1.0

2.5 ,
0.9

as, •

100.0

7.2

a.i

insane admitted during 1910. The longest of the
bars, representing the number enumerated January 1,
1910, 23,321, is that for the age period 40 to 44
years. The age period 45 to 49 years, with 22,874,
ranks second in jxiint of numbers. The shortest bar
represents the number under 15 years of age, for
which only 341 wore returned, and for the highest
age period, SO years and over, there were 2,477
enumerated January 1, 1910. The bars on the right
of the diagram represent the numl>er of insane ad
mitted during the year, the longest bar indicating the
7,495 insane reported for the age period 35 to 39
years. The period 30 to 34 years is next in p<»int
of number returned, with 7,295. The shortest bar is
shown for the age period under 15 years, representing
327 insane. For the highest age period, 80 years and
over, 1,014 insane were reported as admitted during
the year.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 499, number of white and
negro insane admitted to hospitals in the North and
South per 100,000 population, by age periods, in 1910,
represents each of the classes specified on the diagram
by a line which indicates, by its rise or fall, the in
crease or decrease of each of the specified age periods
ait the top of the diagram, over the previous aige period.
Under 15 is the first vertical line on the left, and 65
years and over is represented by the line on the ex
treme right. The vertical scale represents the raitio
per 100,000 of population. The number in the aige
period under 15 years was 0.9 per 100,000, almost
zero, for the whites in the North. An increase is indi
cated over the preceding age period for each age group
until the ratio of 140.6 per 100,000 is reached ait the
(95)

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

age period 45 to 40 years, when a slight decrease is
indicated to the uge period 55 to 59 years, then a rise
for the age periods 60 to 64 and 65 years and over,
when the ratio was 160.4 per 100,000. For the ne
groes in the North the ratio for the period under 15
years was 5 per 100,000 population; from this point
the rise was rapid, until the age period 25 to 29 years,
when the ratio per 100,000 was 133.8. A slight fall
is shown for the next age period, 30 to 34 years
(127.2), then a rapid rise in the line to the age period
45 to 49 years, 158.2 per 100,000. A decline is then
shown for two age periods, to 137.8 for the age period
55 to 59 years, then a rapid rise for the age period 60
to 64, to 228.6 per 100,000, and a further rise in the
next age group, 65 years and over, to 250.2 per 100,000.
The ratios represented on the diagram for the South,
lx>th whites and negroes, as indicated by the lines, are
much lower than for the same classes in the North.
The ratio of the whites in the South under 15 years
is 1.5 per 100,000, from which point a rise is shown
for each age period until 99.2 is reached at the age
period 35 to 39 years, then a slight decrease is fo l
lowed by a rise until 102.6 is reached at the age period
45 to 49 years; then the line falls to 92.3 for the age
period 55 to 59 years; a rather rapid increase is again
shown to the age period 65 years and over, of 128.6
per 100,000.
The ratios for the negroes in the South were lower
at every age period than for the whites, therefore the
line representing the negroes is below’ the whites, thus
reversing the relative positions of the two classes as
shown for the North. The ratio per 100,000 popula
tion for the negroes in the South was 1.2 for the age
period under 15 years; the ratio increased gradually to
76.2 at the age period 30 to 34 years; then, except for
the slight increase at the age period 40 to 44 years,
there was a decline, until at the age period 55 to 59
years it was 60 per 100,000: from that point a rapid
increase is shown to 98.2 for the age period 65 years
and over. The following table supplies the data
ujxm which the diagram is based.

'I'a a i<>:»

AI»MITTF.I» TO HOSPITALS K o lt TIIF.
INSANE: HMD.

While.

N egro

AGE AT AHMISSION.*
5
0
I

Number.

l’er
loo.ooo
popula
tion.

Numlier.

I’ er
loo.ooo

I> ill 1
op
Iion.

U N ITE D STA TE S.

All ages.......................

50.182

08. 7

4.3K4

44.0

Under 15 years...............
15 to l» years........................
20 to 24 years........................
25 to 29 years........ ...............
30 to 34 years........................
35 to.TO years........................
40 to 44 years........................
45 to 40 years........................
50 to 54 years........................
55 to 50 years........................
00 to 04 years........................
05 years and over.................
Age unknow n......................

272
2,215
5,101
0,394
0.090
0,945
0,040
5,349
4,609
3.208
2.700
5.H07
834

1. 1
27. S
03. 9
88. 1
100. 8
121.2
120. 5
131. 7
129. 0
125. 1
130. 8
159. 5

54
320
579
001
568
529
388
310
253
150
103
348
115

1.5
30.2
50.2
O .2
H
85.0
79.7
85.2
81.9
77.0
71.0
87.4
118.3

TH E N O R T H .

All ages___

41.118

75.3

1.105

107.5

Under 15 ye a rs..
15 to 19 years___
20 to 24 years___
25 to 29 years___
30 to 34 years
35 to T years___
O
40 to 44 years___
45 to 49 years___
50 to 54 years___
55 to 59 years___

140
1.552
3,019
4,561
4,770
5,059
4,504
4,050
3,449
2,450
1.983
4.423
552

0.9
29. 0
07. 5
92.9
111.9
128. 2
133. 0
140. 0
139. 3
1.36. 7
137. 2
100.4

12
56
130
107
133
143
105
87
07
39
49
90
27

5.0
65.0
114. 1
133.8
127.2
145.7
148.1
158.2
151.0
137.8
228.0
250.2

00 to i.4 years....
05 years and over
Age unknown. . .

THE SOUTH.
All ages___

10.101

49.5

3.193

36.5

Under 15 years..
j 15 to 19 years___
20 to 24 years___
I 25 to 29 years___
30 to 34 y e a r s ....
35 to TO years
40 to 44 y e a rs .. . .
45 to 49 years___
50 to 54 years___
55 to 59 years___

114
507
1,079
1,246
1,275
1,258
902
837
709
528
473
932
181

1.5
23.5
55.2
74.0
90.3
99.2
99.0
102.0
98. 7
92.3
102.2
128.0

41
263
4TO
422
425
375
271
221
180
108
111
252

1.2
27.1
48.2
50.3
70.2
71.0
71.3
07.5
64.2
00.0
07.7
98.2

m io i.l years. ...

05 years and over
Age u n k n o w n ...

.84

TH E W EST.

A 11 a g e s .

109. S

INSANE IN HOSPITALS.
Diagram 3 on Plate No. 499, proportion of insane
enumerated January 1 to adult population, 1904 and
1910. The largo squares are drawn proportional to the
adult population— that is, the population 15 years of
age and over, as returned in 1910, and the estimated
adult population for 1904. The small, solid black
square in the lower right-hand corner of each large
square represents the insane in hospitals in proportion
to the total adult population returned, and presents
strikingly the very small proportion of the insane in
hospitals as compared with the total adult population.
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 500 presents, by the rise
and fall of the two lines, the ratio of the male and
female insane admitted to hospitals in 1910 per 100,000
population of the same age and sex. The ratio for the
males exceeds that for the females at each age period.
The line for the males rises regularly from the age
period under 15 years to the period 45 to 49 years; a
slight fall is then shown to the age period 50 to 54 years,
after which the rise in the ratio for each age period
is rapid, until at the age period SO years and over,
it reaches 224 per 100,000 nudes. The line represent
ing the ratio of the females for each age period increases
almost parallel to that of the males, except that the
males show a slight fall from the period 45 to 49
years to the period 50 to 54 years, while the females
show a slight increase. In the next age group, 55 to
59 years, the ratio shows a decided falling off, but for
each period thereafter it rises rapidly, reaching for the
age period SO years and over the ratio of 192.7, an
increase in the hist two age periods from 150 to 192.7
per 100,000 females, a much more rapid rise than is
shown for the males in the same age periods. Table 5,
on which this diagram is based, follows the description
of the diagrams on Plate No. 501.
Diagram 2 on Plate No. 500 indicates, by the two
lines, the ratio per 100,000 population of the native
white and foreign-born white insane admitted to
hospitals in 1910. The age periods and scale are the
same as on Diagram 1. The line for the foreign-born
white shows a rapid increase in the ratio per 100,000
from the age period under 15 years to the period 50 to
54 years, then a slight decline for the period 55 to 59
years, after which each age period shows a rapid
increase over the previous period, to the ratio of 264.7
per 100,000 at the period 80 years and over. The
ratio for the native white is lower than that of the
foreign-born white at each age period. The line rises
for each age period from under 15 years to the period
45 to 49 years, then there is a decline for two age
periods, 50 to 54 and 55 to 59 years; after this period
the increase is very slight for the age periods 60 to
64 and 65 to 69 years; the succeeding age periods show
increases almost parallel to the increases for the for
eign-born white, the ratio for the last age group, 80
years and over, being 197.6. The following table (No.
4) supplies the figures upon which the diagram is based:
28546°— 14------ 7

T able 1

AGK

97
NATIVE

wiiitk :

Total
number.
Sum her.

All ages...

riiR K K i.S -llO K N

Admitted to
hospitals for
the insane.

G ROUP.

Under 15 years............
15 to 19 years.............
2 to 24 years.............
0
25 to 29 years...................
30 to 34 years.............
35 to 39 years...................
40 to 44 years.............
45 to 49 years...................
50 to 54 vears........
55 to 59 years...................]
M to 64 years...................
I
65 to ti9 years...................|
to .4 years.............
75 to 79 years...................
SO years an<! over..
Ace unknown..........

1910.

Per
loo.ooo
poitulatfan.

Admitted to
hospitals tor
the inline
Total
mini tier.

39.029

57.9

13.345.545

256
1.871
3.966
4.749
4.841
4.999
4.201
3,656
3.197
2.178
1. TVs

1.0

750,34ft
673.761
1.430.381
1,662,606
1.505.715
1.408.093
1.303.475
1.146.360
925.055
693. .520
627.583
488.397
336.967
208.212
149.773

18
,2 2

1.009
094
570
432

10
2 .8

120 H

145. 4
168.1
197. 6

10 0
0 ,0 0
ffi,

24.W7.I49
7,294.630
6,556.030
5.594.440
4.761.561
4.323.752
3.476.797
2.914.702
2,630,258
1.870.6s».
1.441,740
1.061,557
093.917
412.7*0
2Wi, 400
ios.013

125. 4
121.5
116.4
119.9

Per

Num
ber.

69,306.412

25. 6
60 5
84.9
101.7
115.6

WHIT*: 1910.

2 .2 1
01

15.523

1
0

320
1.074
1.568
1.777
1.848
1.755
1.605
1.341
982
92s
765
610
407
370
163

116.3
13
47.5
75 1
94 3
1 80
1
131.2
134.6
1 0
40
145.0
141 6
147.9
156.6
IH 1.0

195.5
> 47
►

On Plate No. 501, insane admitted to hospitals
suffering from general paralysis or alcoholic psychosis
and all other causes in 1910, Diagram 1 indicates, by
the rise and fall of the lines, the ratio per 100,000 popu
lation of same age, for the males, the solid lino repre
senting the “ all other” causes, and the broken line
those having general paralysis or alcoholic psychosis.
The line representing the insane having genera]
paralysis or alcoholic psychosis starts practically at zero
for the age period under 15 years, rising rapidly to the
ago period 40 to 44 years, when it reaches the point
48.6 per 100,000, the highest point reached. From this
age period there is a gradual decrease, except at the
period 75 to 79 years, until at the age period SO years
and over the number admitted was 14.8 per 100.000.
The line representing admissions from all other causes
shows a continuous and rapid rise from 1.1 per 100.000
at the age period under 15 years to the age period 50 to
34 years, when a slight decrease is noted for the period
35 to 39 years, then it rises very slowly to the age
period 50 to 54 years, after which the rise is nearly
vertical to the age period 80 years and over, with a
ratio per 100,000 of 209.1.
Diagram 2 furnishes similar data for the females.
The line representing the number admitted from
paralysis and alcoholic psychosis is very much lower
than for the males, the highest point reached being at
the same age period, 40 to 44 years, 12.2 per 100,000
population of same age. It gradually decreased to
the age period 70 to 74, when it was 5.4 per 100,000
population. A slight increase was noted for the next
age period, 75 to 79 years, to 7.7 per 100,000, then
a decrease to 5.8 for 80 years and over. The line
representing all other causes does not show a contin
uous increase, as for the males. Starting at 0.9 for
the age period under 15 years, it advances rapidly to
the age period 50 to 54 years, when a slight decrease
followed to the age period 55 to 59 years, then a

STATISTICAL ATLAS.

--H IC IO W M W N -

SSglSKgSSSSS'ls

100 insane admitted to each 100.000 population, covers
steady rise for every other period, the period SO
the states of Rhode Island, New \ ork, Mainland,
years and over having a ratio of 187 per 100,000, as j
and Colorado. The lowest group, less than 40 insane
compared with 209.1 for (lie mules. The figures upon
admitted per 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 population, includes 11 states,
which these two diagrams are based will be found in
w hile the next group, 40 to 50, includes S states.
the following table:
Diagram 1 on Plate No. 503 shows, by the rise and
fall of the heavy black line, the ratio per 100,000 popu
INSANE ADMITTED Tn hospitals: 1910.
lation of the insane admitted to hospitals in 1910, by
ago periods. The line starts at the fiist age period,
IlnvillK KPtHTllI
Total
paralysis or ulcounder 15 years of age. with 1.1 per 100,000, and rises
holto psychosis.
rapidly to 127.1 per 100,000 at the age period 45 to 49
Female.
Male.
Female.
Male.
Female
Mule
years; a decline follows for two age periods to 120.8 in
the age period 55 to 59 years; from this point a rapid
NUMBER.
rise is shown to 207.4 in the last age period, 80 years
24.802
25.700
1.851
25,633
S. 356
and over.
31.116
All ones 1 ...........
137
169
Diagram 2 represents, by the rise and fall of the four
9
.2
IM
I
Cnilrf 15 years.............
1.037
1.419
.3
1
32
1.471
2.372
2,966
JM
A
95
lines, the number of insane admitted to hospitals in 1ft 10
3.211
30 to 31 years...............
2,961
153 • 3.232
A79
3.911
25 to 9 years...............
3,056
2.927
per 100,000 population of the same age, race, and na
1.091
221
4,01m
30 to 31 years...............
3.116
2.679
289
1.411
4.090
35 to 39 yrurs...............
2.548
2,265
mi
tivity for four classes of the population— native white
1,333
3,A
IM
to to tt years...............
2.287
2,032
*3 1
3
1.131
3.16,1
45 to 49 rears...............
1.992
1.807
905
173
of native parentage, native white of foreign or mixed
2.712
50 t o 51 y e a rs .............
1.288
1.393
105
5.V
2
1.975
55 to 59 years...............
1,095
1.218
79
360
parentage, foreign-born white, and negro. The lines
1.A0M
no lot'.i years...............
877
1.014
.39
211
1,955
65 to 6* years...............
752 | representing the foreign-born white and the native
910
30
M
4
901
70 to 74 rears...............
478
26
614
62
676
75 to 79 years...............
486
479
15
34
white of foreign or mixed parentage are very close
513
M rears anil o r e r .......
0
together, indicating that there is only a slight differ
NUMIIF.R fER 100,0110 POPULATION OP SAME sp.X AND AGE.
ence in the number of insane admitted for those two
classes at each age period. It will also be noted that
55.6
54.4
4.1
17.7
59.7
72.1
All ones'
the lines for all of the four classes for the age period
0.1
0.9
0.1
1.1
1.0
C2
Under 15 years.
31.3
22.9
0.7
1.1
21.5
3-2.5
15 to 19 rears...............
under 15 years to the age period 20 to 24 years are
64. 8
53.0
5.9
55.1
2.1
70. rt
16.0
3.9
76.1
75.2
79.2
92. 1
25 to 39 years........
very close together. After the ago period 20 to 24
98. K
80.0
6.7
92.2
• 9. S
3
109.9
30 to 34 rears...............
102.9
9.5
79.6
41.9
112. 1
121.5
35 to 39 rears...............
years they separate, and for the foreign-born white and
4M.6
102.9
115. 2
12.2
81.3
129. m
40 to 44 rears...............
120.5
47.5
11.1
85.4
109.4
45 to 49 rears...............
133.0
the native white of foreign or mixed parentage the
85.6
42.9
9.7
120.9
111.2
I2M 3
50 to 54 years...............
99. 2
8.1
93.6
107.3
39.1
132.7
55 to 39 rears.............
ratio increases much more rapidly than for the native
10m A
.
.30.4
7.3
112.8
101.3
143.2
60 to 64 rears...............
lll.M
24.4
7.2
120.8
107.5
115.3
63 to 69 rears...............
white of native parentage and the negroes. The line
15.0
136.2
177.0
5.4
162.0
141. A
70 to 74 rears...............
IS. 7
185.3
130.0
4. 4
142.3
301 1
75 to 79 rears...............
for the native white of native parentage runs almost
14.8
5.8
•309.1
187.0
224.0
192.7
M years and over........
O
midway between the lines representing the negroes and
• Includes aj;e unknown.
the other two classes. The ratio for the native white
Mu]> 1 t> Plate No. 502 indicates, by the shading, of native parentage increases from the first age period,
n
the ratio of insane enumerated per 100,000 of popula under 15 years, regularly to the age period 45 to 49
tion in 1910, in six groups. The group with the lowest years; then a sharp decline is indicated for two age
ratio, less than 100 insane per 100,000 of population, periods to the age period 55 to 59 years; from this age
covers five states—Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, period it Increases to the age period 05 years and over,
New Mexico, and Utah. The darkest shade, indicating the bust shown on the diagram. The line representing
a ratio of .'100 or more insane per 100,000 of population, the negro insane is nearly parallel to the lines of the
covers only three states—Massachusetts, Connecticut, native white of native parentage and the native white
and New York. The shade indicating a ratio of 250 of foreign or mixed parentage for the first three age
to :$00 insane per 100,000 population covers the states periods, but after the age period 20 to 24 years it does
of Vermont, 'Wisconsin, Nevada, and California. The not rise as rapidly as for the other three classes of the
remaining states all fall in the three groups with ratios population. From the age period 25 to 29 years, when
between 100 and 250 insane per 100,000 population.
it reaches 68.2 per 100,000 population, a further rise
Map 2 indicates, by the eight groups of shading, the is noted to 85 per 100,000 population in the next age
number o f insane admitted to hospitals in 1910 to each period, after which it declines to 79.7 at the age period
100,000 population. The states having the highest 35 to 39 years; the line again rises to 85.2 for the age
ratio, 100 and over per 100,000, are Massachusetts, period 40 to 44 years; then falls for three age periods
Connecticut, and Wisconsin. The next group, 90 to to the age period 55 to 59 years, when it reaches the

INSANE IN HOSPITALS.

low point of 71.6. For the next two age periods, 60 to | other classes at the same age period, which rank as
04 years and 05 years and over, a sharp rise is shown. follows: Native white of native parentage, with 139.3
The highest ratio for any age period of the negroes was per 100,000 population of the same age, rare, and na
118.3 per 100,000 population for the age period 05 1 tivity; foreign-bora white, with 181.9; and native white
years and over. This is far below the ratio for the | of foreign or mixed parentage, with 190.9.

Full text of Statistical Atlas of the United States, 1910 : Descriptive Text

FRASER