, NATIONAL CENTER Series 21 . 

For HEALTH STATISTICS INumber 16 

VITAL and IIEALTH STATISTICS 

DATA FROM THE NATIONAL VITAL STATISTICS SYSTEM 

United States, 1963 

This is a study of changes in age-specific marriage rates, age 

distributions of unmarried women, and trends in marriages and marriage rates for 1940-63. An analysis is made of the differences in 

trends of marriage rates by sex, age, and marital status between 

1960 and 1963. Also, a description and classification are presented 

of the types of nonsampling errors found in the marriage statistics 

for 1963, with estimates of the proportions of cases affected by 

nonresponse and items not appearing on some record forms. 

Washington, D.C. September 1968 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

Public Health Service 

HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE 

William H. Stewart 

Wilbur J. Cohen 

Secretary Surgeon General 
.“-. a“ 

i.’’.’” p 

Public Health Service Publication No. 1000-Series 21-No. 16 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D. C., 20402- Price 40 cents 
NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS 

THEODORE D.WOOLSEY, Directo~ 

PHILIP S. LAWRENCE, SC.D., Associate Directoy 

OSWALD K. SAGEN, PH. D.,, Assistant Director for Health Statistics Development 

WALT R. SIMMONS, M.A., Assistant Director for Research and Scientific Development 

ALICE M. WATERHOUSE, M. D., Medical Consultant 

JAMES E. KELLY, D. D. S., Dental Advisor


M), RGERY R. CUNNINGHAM, Information Officer


DIVISION OF VITAL STATISTICS 

ROBERT D. GROVE, Ph. D., Director


ROBERT A. ISRAEL, M. S., Deputy Director


ARTHUR A. CAMPBELL, Special Assistant to the Director


ROBERT A. ISRAEL, M. S., Acting Chief, Mortality Statistics Branch


PATIENCE LA IJRIAT, M. A:, Acting Chic/, NaZazity Statistics Branch


LOREN E. CHANCELLOR, Chief, Registration Methods Branch


PATIENCE LALJRIAT, M. A., Chief, Marriage and Divorce Statistics Branch


ARNE B. NELSON, M.A., Chief, Vital Records Survey Branch


ALICE M. HE TZEL, chief, Statistical Resources Sectian


Public Health Service Publication No. 1000-Series 21-No.\ 16 

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 66-62203 
-----------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

----------- ------- -------- ---

-----------------------------------------------

------------------------------

----------------------------

------ -------

------- -------- ---------------

--------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

----------------------------------

------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------

CONTENTS 

Introduction 

Trends in Marriages 

Demographyof MaritalSelection 

Introduction 

Limitations of Data -------- ------= 

Selection byAge 

Selection by Marital Status~------------------------------------

Selection by Age and MaritalStatus 

Changes in Rates of MaritalSelection 

Marriages by Previous Marital Status, Age , andColor 

Completeness and UniformityofData -

Introduction 

Completeness of Reporting 

Uniformity ofData 

Detailed Tables 

Technical Appendix 

Introduction 

Terms adProcedures 

Place and Time of Occurrence 

Coverage ofStatistics 

Completenessof Data ------------------------------------------

Characteristics of Samples 

Sampling Error 

Figure 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Actual and expected marriages per 1,000 population United


States, 1940-63


Actual and expected marriages per 1,000 unmarried women15


years of age and over: United States, 1940-63------------------


Estimated and expected marriages per 1,000 maximum possible


marriages, by marital status of eligible populations: marriage-


registration area, 1963--------------------------------------


Interquartile range (1Q to 3Q) and median age(M) atmarriage


of bride and groom, by color of couple: marriage-registration


area, l963-------------------------------------------------


Page 

1 

2 

6 

6 

6 

7 

11 

11 

13 

14 

16 

16 

18 

20 

22 

32 

32 

32 

35 

35 

38 

38 

39 

5 

5 

15 

18 

. .. Ill 
------------------------ ---

-------------------

----------------------------

------------------

SYMBOLS 

Data not available 

Category not applicable . . . 

Quantity zero -

Quantity more than O but less than O.05----

Figure doesnot meet standards of 

* reliabilityor precision 

iv 

0.0 
SELECTED MARRIAGE STATISTICS, 1963 

UNITED STATES 

ESTIMATED NUMBER OF MARRIAGES.. .1,654,003	 MARRIAGE RATE per 1,000 

resident population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.8 

ESTIMATED MARRIAGE RATES 

Per 1,000 unmarried women Per 1,000 women 15 years


15 years of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73.4 of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24.7


Per 1,000 unmarried women Per 1,000 men 15 years


15-44 years of age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143.3 of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26.4


MARRIAGE-REGISTRATION AREA 

ESTIMATED NUMBER OF MARRIAGES . . . 1,033,950	 MARRIAGE RATE per 1,000 

resident population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.0 

ESTIMATED MARRIAGE RATES 

Per 1,000 unmarried women 14 years Per 1,000 unmarried women 15 years


of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61.7 of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66.3


Per 1,000 unmarried men 14 years Per 1,000 unmarried men 15 years 

.T


of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72.5 of age and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79.0


PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF MARRIAGES MEDIAN AGE IN YEARS AT MARRIAGE


BY PREVIOUS MARITAL STATUS BY PREVIOUS MARITAL STATUS


Bride Groom Bride Groom 

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.3 23.7 

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76.8 77.4 Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.3 22.5 

Previously married . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.2 22.6 Previously married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.6 40.3 

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 5.3 Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49.7 58.0 

Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.2 17.3 Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.8 36.3 
IN THIS REPORT a comparison of the 1963 marriage Yates by sex, age, and mavital status is 

made with corresponding rates fov 1960. The coverage of the rates for 1963 vavies somewhat 

from that fov 1960 because of changes in the States included in the mawiage-vegistva tion avea, 

(MRA). However, the pavticulav States added to the MRA had no significant impact on the age 

and marital status distribution of the MI?A in 1963. 

In explaining differences between the 1960 and the 1963 marriage totals and the vates computed 

J?om them, changes tkat occurved in the age-specific marriage rates were more significant 

than changes in the age and the marital status composition of the populations eli~”ble to mavvy. 

Declines in Yates at which young single men and wopmen marvied were offset only in pavt by 

incveases in the vates at which young divoyced pe?csons vemamied. 

There wew fewev single men at the peak marriage ages (about 21-22) than single women (about 

18-19) since more young women @om the increasing birth cohorts of the years 1940-43 were 

reaching theivpeak marriage ages than young men in the same cohorts. To allowfov unbalanced 

sex vatios such as these, rates pev 1,000 maximum possible marriages were computed. Each 

such rate has as the numevatov the numbw of mavrtiges of eligible women of a specified age 

and mavital status to eli~”ble men of a specified age and mayital status and as the denominator 

the lessev of the two eligible populations specified for the numerator, Thus each rate estimates 

the pvopovtion of the maximum possible numbw of marnlzges that could occuv duving a yeav. 

These vates also indicate preferences by persons in each age and marital status group fov 

mavriage partners of various ages and marital statuses. 

Rates for both 1963 and 1960 indicate tkat,velative to the maximum possible numbers of mavviages, divovced and widowed men and women of the younger ages Hefewed single persons to 

previously married persons, and those of the oldev ages Pveferred previously married to single 

pevsons. If one assumes tkatthese vates ave empirical estimates of the likelihood of vcwiou-s 

types of marriages, the most likely mavriage would be that of two divovced pevsons and the 

next, that of two single persons. Mam”ages least likely to occw ave those of widowed to single 

pwsons. 

A comparison of tvends in marriages and vates for the United States is @“ven foy the 24-yeav 

period 1940-63. It is noted that long-tern changes in the mawiage vate (1920-63) included 

thyee changes in tvend-genevally downward from 1$?20to 1932, then upwavd until shovtly aftev 

WoYld Way II, then genevally downvnwd until about 1962. The trends since 1940 are compcwed 

with hypothetical trends constmcted by holding constant the age-specific rates for unmarried 

women (using the rates computed for 1960 as constants). These comparisons show that agespecific mavviage rates were genwally lowey during Wovld Wav II than in 1960, that they vose 

aftev the wav, and thatthey vemained relatively high during the 1950’s 

Estimates of the completeness of the statistics are presented fov the mamiage-registration 

area in 1960 and 1963. All data tabulated fov the statistics weve recovded with at least 95-

percent completeness. Information about uniformity of the data is also summarized. 

vi 
MARRIAGE STATISTICS ANALYSIS


Carl E. (X’tmeyer, Ph.D., and Russell 

FNT’RcXWCTION 

The increase in marriages and marriage 

rates for 1963 over 1962 marked the largesrrelative increase since that of 1950 over 1949. The 

number of marriages increased by 4.9 percetit— 

from 1,577,000 in 1962 to 1,654,000 in 1963. The 

annual total had not exceeded 1,600,000 since 1950. 

Geographic variations in marriage rates and 

@ir trends are quite marked in “a population as 

Eirge, varied, and mobiIe as that of the United 

States. The largest regional rate of fncrease between 1962 and 1963—52 percent for the North 

Central Region-was over 2% times as large as 

&e smallest rate of increase-2.O percent for-the 

South. Differences among the States in rates of 

increase were even greater, varying from a decline of 4 percent in Momana to an increase of 

over 10 percent in South Dakota. 

As in previous years, detailed statistics on 

marriages have been tabulated from a sample of 

marriages occurring in the States participating 

in the marriage-registration area (MRA). These 

statistics are found in detailed tables 1-8. While 

the list of States. and other areas participating, in 

the MRA did not change between 1962 and 1963, 

the total “number of marriages increased by 5.2 

percent to 1,035,.596. This is the first year that 

marriages in the MRA exceeded one million. 

Reflecting this increase, the crud’emarriage rate, 

which has been lower for the MRA than for the 

Nation as a whoIe, rose from 7.7 to 8.0 per 1,000 

population. The MRA accounted for 62.5 percent 

of the national total of marriages, about the same 

proportion as in 1962. 

P. Kuhn, Division OY Vit’d Stdistics 

Both the crude rate and the rate per 1,000 

unmarried women 15 years of age and over were 

al.mut 10 percent larger for the United States than 

for the MM. Since the estimated distributions of 

men and women 14 years of age and older by age 

and marital status did not differ greatly in the 

MRA from corresponding distributions for the 

entire United States, marriage rates are probably 

higher at most ages for the Uirited States than for 

the NIRA. Nationwide rates estimated by age for 

1960 were higher at each age than those for the 

~~ .1 

As in 1962, total counts of marriages. for the 

year and for each month were obtained from State 

and local officials for the States outside the MRA. 

Such figures were also reported by Statedirectors 

of vital statistics in each State in the MRA, and 

each of these annual totals was compared with the 

corresponding total estimated from. the sample 

of marriage records. Inquiries were made to 

account for differences greater than 1 percent 

between the two counts. 

A few innovations were made in 1963 in 

processing the records and in analyzing the data. 

AU but one of the areas participating in the MRA 

submitted copies of all marriage records rather 

than” a sample. This made it possible to institute 

uniform procedures for inspecting records and 

selecting samples for processing. 

lNational Center for Health “Statistics: Vital i%tis tics of 

tfie United States, 1960, Vol. HI. Public Health ‘Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1964. Tables 1-L 

and l-M. 

1

The proportion of records included in the 

sample rose from 4.4 percent in 1962 to 11.7 

percent in 1963. This change was accomplished 

by increasing the minimum sample size for each 

State from 400 to 2,500 records. 

More details on sources of data and sampling 

procedures are given in the Technical Appendix. 

Marriage rates by age, sex, and marital status were; instituted on an annual basis in 1963. The 

population bases for such rates, estimated by the 

U.S. Bureau of the Census, relate to the resident 

population of the MRA as of July 1, 1963. The rates 

are approximately comparable to rates for the 

MRA in 1960, with the exception that rates for 

1963 include Indiana, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia, which were added to the MRA 

in 1961. 

In the years immediately following 1963, the 

annual total number of marriages would rise even 

if there were no increases in the rates by sex, 

age, and marital status. This prospective rise 

would be due to increases in the proportions of 

the population at ages when marriage rates are 

highest. For example, it has been estimated that 

marriages may total about 2.1 million by 1970, 

assuming that age-specific marriage rates for 

women will continue to equal those estimated 

from a nationwide probability sample of data on 

age at marriage in 1960. 

An analysis of long-range trends in marriage 

rates constitutes the first part of this report. The 

second part analyzes marriage rates for 1960 

and 1963 by sex, age, and marital status. Although 

these raues are presented as estimates of rates 

at which partners of specified marital statuses 

and ages married in the MRA, they can be used 

to compute trends standardized for age, sex, and 

marital status. Based as they are on estimates 

of populations eligible to marry, the specific rates 

should also indicate in considerable detail the 

interactions, if any, between trends in sizes of 

age cohorts and in sex ratios of persons at the 

peak marriage ages. These rates could also be 

used to construct marriage tables, analogous 

to life tables, and in cohort analyses of lifetime 

marriage experience of a population. 

Data showing variations in age at marriage, 

marital status, and color of brides, classified 

by corresponding characteristics of their grooms, 

and vice versa, are also included in the second 

part of the report. 

The last portion of the report includes a 

description of types of nonsampling errors found 

in the 1963 data. Derivation of rates and sampling 

errors are discussed in the Technical Appendix. 

TRENDS IN MARRIAGES 

Throughout the period 1959-62, the marriage 

rate remained unchanged at 8.5 marriages per 

1,000 population. Such stability during a 4-year 

period has not occurred since this rate was first 

computed for 1867. The 1963 marriage rate rose 

to 8.8 as the large numbers of young men and 

women born during and after World War II began 

to reach marriageable age. Since 1963, the marriage rate has continued to rise at a rate of over 

2 percent per year. 

The disrupting effects of World War II and a 

severe depression greatly, influenced marriage 

rates during the midpart of this century and were 

largely responsible for the extreme fluctuations 

observed in the early 1930’s and 1940’s. The 

long-term marriage trend up to 1962 appears to be 

composed of three short-term movements: downward from 1920 to 1932, upward until after World 

War 11, and downward until 1962. 

In this section of the report, the marriage 

trend since 1920 will be analyzed in terms of the 

following demographic factors: the available number of unmarried persons, age distribution of 

those eligible to marry, and age at time of marriage. 

During the 1920’s and early 1930’s marriage 

rates drifted downward to a low of 7.9 marriages 

per 1,000 population. With the exception of 1928, 

the rates between 1920 and 1930 were above 10.0 

and averaged 10.5. For the 1930’s, the average of 

the annual marriage rates was only 9.8. However, 

if the low rates in 1931-33 were excluded from the 

data, the marriage rates for the 1930’s would have 

been like those of the 1920’s, averaging about 10.6 

marriages per 1,000 population. At no time since 

1932 has the marriage rate dropped below 8.4. 

The 1940’s witnessed sharp increases in 

marriage rates as the Nation experienced a swift 
--

succession of economic recovery, war, and postwar demobilization. Marriage rates moved upward for about 14 years, culminating in the alltime high marriage rate of 16.4 in 1946. The 

average marriage rate from 1940 to 1950 was 

12.6. Marriage rates then drifted downward from 

the high wartime level to a postwar trough in the 

late 1950’s and early 1960’s. 

Marriage rates did not rise after the Korean 

conflict as they did very sharply after World 

Wars I and II. They decreased to 9.2 in 1954 and to 

8.4 in 1958 and ,ultimately reached the 8.5 level 

during the period 1959-62, as pointed out earlier. 

Table A. Estimated and expected number 

of marriages and ratio of estimated to 

expected marriages: United States, 

1940-63 

Ratio of 

Year Es Eimated” Expqc-ted 1 estimated 

to expected 

. 

Number of marriages Percent 

1963-- 1,654,000 1,686,943 97.8 

1962-- 1,577,000 1,631,452 96.7 

1961-- 1,548,000 1,554,192 99.5 

1960-- 1,525,080 1,525,080 100.0 

1959-- 1,494,000 1,451,697 102.9 

1958-- 1,451,000 1,465,337 99.0 

1957-- 1,518,000 1,429,704 106.4 

1956-- 1,585,000 1>407,574 112.6 

1955-- 1,531,000 1,414,721 108.2 

1954-- 1,490,000 1,446,267 103.0 

1953-- 1,546,000 1,423,151 108.6 

1952-- 1,539,318 1,456,656 105.7 

1951-- 1,594,694 1,474,226 107.9 

1950-- 1,667,231 1,522>153 109.5 

1949-- 1,579,798 1,527,303 103.4 

1948 1,811,155 1,590,747 113.9 

1947-- 1,991,878 1,686,372 118.1 

1946-- 2,291,045 1,783,004 128.5 

1945-- 1,612,992 1,816,539 88.8 

1944-- 1,452,394 1,817,122 79.9 

1943-- 1,577,050 1,845,482 85.5 

1942-- 1,772,132 1,880,521 94.2 

1941-- 1,695,999 1,927,658 88.0 

1940-- 1,595,879 1,970,891 81.0 

‘Expected numbers are based on 1960 

age-sp;cific rates for unmarried women 15 

years of age and over shown in table 5. 

Insufficient data make itimpossibletocompute age-specific marriage rates for every year 

from 1920 to 1963.”However, such rates canbe 

computed for 1960 on the basis of data gathered 

from a nationwide sample of marriage records 

for that year. These numbers of marriages by 

age of the bridehave been dividedbythe numbers 

of unmarried women by age as enumerated inthe 

1960 census. Applying these age-specific marriagerates to the estimated numberofunmarried 

females in the other years yields “expected” 

numbers of marriages, which maybe compared 

with actual numbers. This approach to trend 

analysis has been done for the years 1940-63. 

Table A shows theestimated and expected 

numbers of marriages, and table B shows the 

estimated and expected marriage rates. Figure 1 

contrasts the actual and the expected 24-year 

trend in the marriage rate per 1,000 population. 

Figure 2 shows the comparison between actual 

and expected marriages per 1,000 unmarried 

women 15 years of age and over. By indirect 

standardization, based on standard rates rather 

than a standard population, it can redetermined 

whether the age and sex composition ofthepopulation or the marriage rates have exerted a 

greater influence on shifts inthe marriage trend. 

Although the marriage rates observedduring 

1940-45 seemed highincomparison withpost-1960 

rates, they were low relative to the larger number of women who were unmarried at that time. 

This follows from the fact that the expected 

marriage rates were consistently higher than the 

actual rates for the period 1940-45. In other 

words, age-specific marciage rates were lower 

during 1940-45 than in1960. 

During the period 1946-59, age-specific marriage rates were above the levels prevailingin 

1960. They were especiallyhigh during the early 

postwar period 1946-48. After 1960, the trend 

again reversed. The total number ofmarriages 

increased in the early sixties, but age-specific 

rates appeared to be slightly lower thanin 1960. 

The interacting effects of marriage rates, 

proportions of unmarried women, and the age 

composition of the population brought about the 

divergence of the trend lines in figure 1. 
-------- -------- -------- ----

-------- -------- ----

-------- ----

--------- ----- -------- -------- ----

--------- --------- ----

-------- -------- -------- ----

- - -- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- -- - - -

-------- -------- -------- -------- ----

-------- -------- ----

-------- -------- -------- ----

-------- -------- -------- -------- ----

-- - - - - -- -- -- - -- -- - - -- - - -- - -- - - - -

Table B. Estimated and expecteci marriage rates per 1.,000 resident population and un­ married women 15 years of age and over: IJni.ted States, 1940.63 

Year 

1963------------------------------------

1962 ------=-

1961 -.------ -----.--

1960 ------.- .------- ------”-

1959 --., 

1958 ----.--- ---.----

1957 ----..---

Estimated Expectedl 

I I 

Resident Unmarried Resident Unmarried 

population ~g+~~;rs population l~+m~&rs 

I I 

Rate per 1,000 in specified group 

8.8 73.4 9.0 74.9 

8.5 71.2 8.8 73.5 

8.5 72.2 8.5 72.2 

8.5 73.5 73.5 

8.5 73.6 %; 71.6 

1956 - - .


1955


1954 ----.--- -----,---


1953------------------------------------

1952 -----.--

1951 

1950------------------------------------

1949------------------------------------

1948------------------------------------

1947------------------------------------

1946------------------------------------

1945------------------------------------

1944 . - . -

1943------------------------------------

1942------------------------------------

1941------------------------------------

1940------------------------------------

8.4 72.0 8.3 72.7 

8.9 78.0 73.5 

9.5 82.4 %: 73.2 

80.9 8.6 74.8 

;:2 79.8 9.0 77.5 

9.8 83.7 9.0 77.1 

83.2 9.4 78.8 

1::: 86.6 9.6 80.0 

11.1 90.2 10.1 82.7 

10.6 86.7 10.3 83.3 

12.4 98.5 10.9 86.5 

13.9 106.2 11.8 89.9 

16.4 118.1 12.7 91.9 

12.2 83.6 13.7 94.2 

10.9 76.5 13.7 95.7 

11.7 83.0 13.7 97.1 

13.2 93.0 14.4 98.7 

12.7 88.5 14.5 100.6 

12.1 82.8 15.0 102.4 

lExpected rates are based on 1960 age-specific rates for unmarried women 15 years 

of age and over shown in table 5. 

Between 1940and 1942, the annual numberof 

marriages increased rapidly; afterward thenumber declined during the full-rnobilizatio nyears, 

and then increased sharply, reaching a peak in 

1946. As a result, the number of unmarried 

women declined over the same period. Following 

the war, for about 10 years, thenumberof women 

eligible to marry continued to fall. The decline 

was particularly great for the agegroup 20-24, 

which characteristically has thehighestmarriage 

rates. For single years of age, the decline would 

have been greatest at ages 18 and 19. The period 

1957-63 witnessed the beginning of a reversal 

of the downward trend in thenumberofunmarried 

women. 

Growth in the number of unmarriedwomen of 

marriageable age has been gradual since 1958. 

Recent annual marriage rates for the total populatioii have also increased gradually, butnotas 

sharply as they did after the war, when young 

unmarried women c’ornprised a much higher 

proportion of the total population. Thus, the 

tendency among unmarried women to marryafter 

1958 was notas greatasithadbeen after the war. 
..

180 

I ?0 

16.0 

z 

g 

+ 15.0 I~ 

a ‘%,,, J %,,u,, 3


n . g 14.0 – +, 

‘..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,, 

. o 

~ 13.0 – _. 

a 

w 

m I 2,0 

m 

u 

m 

: I 1.0 -

2 

E 

I 0.0 -

9.0 -

8.0 I I I I I I I I ! I 

1940 1945 1950 

Figure 1. Actual and expected Marriages per


120.0


= IIo.o
 u
E


9 i
 0 %,,,,,


!!![00.0
 m


m “’’’’’’’’’”
 “~0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 < 

z 

z 

3 

g 90.0 

0 

_. 

E 

u 

n 80.0 -

z 

0 

= 

K 

2 

z 70.0 -

60.0. I I I I I I I I 1 1 

1940 1945 1950 

Figure 2; Actual and expected marriages per 1,000


_ Actual marriage rate 

,,,,,.,, s,,s Expected marriage rate 

(computed using totolm.arriages 

expected if age-spec]f!c rates 

for unmarried women in 1960 

had prevailed ) 

I I I I 

1955 1960 1963 

YEARS 

1,000 population: United States, 1940-63.


_ Actual morriage rate 

,,,,,,,,,,,, Expected marriage rate 

(computed using expected totals 

ofm OrriOges 0s in figure l.) 

I I I 1 I ! I I I I I I 

1955 [960 1963 

YEARS 

unmarried women [5 years of age and over: United


States, 19f+0-63.


5

DEMOGRAPHY OF MARITAL 

SELECTION 

Introduction 

Marriage is a highly selective social phenomenon. Statistics based on thousands of marriage choices show remarkably stable distributions. The groom is usually 2 or 3 years older 

than the bride, but grooms about 40 years of age 

or older usually marry brides from 5 to lO years 

younger. Divorced persons tend to choose partners who have also been divorced; however, about 

4 out of every 10 choose partners whohave never 

been married. How can these tendencies to 

choose partners with particular characteristics 

be measured? It would be interesting to know the 

extent to which people in various socioeconomic 

categories marry those in the same or different 

categories. Similarly, it would be interesting to 

see how strongly educational attainment and 

religious preference affect marital choices. However, the present analysis is limited to three 

major characteristics of bride and groom which 

are collected routinely on the marriage certificates of most States in the MRA—age, previous 

marital status, and color. 

The number of marriages of men and women 

with particular characteristics is limited by the 

number of eligible men or women having these 

characteristics, whichever is smaller. For example, the number of marriages between single women and divorced men is limited by the smaller 

of these two populations: if there are 10 million 

single women and only 2 million divorced men, 

the maximum possible number of marriages between single women and divorced men is 2 million. Therefore, the marriage rates shown in this 

section use as bases the maximum possible 

numbers of, marriages that could occur between 

men and women with the specified characteristics. 

As in the above example, if there are 100,000 

marriages between single women and divorced 

men in a particular year, the rate would be computed as follows: 

50 marriages per 1,000 

100,000 1,000= maximum possible 2,000,000 “ marriages. 

If there are 11 million single men and 250,000 

marriages of single men to single women, this 

rate would be computed as 

25 marriages per 1,000 2,500,000 1,000 = maximum possible 10,000,000 “ marriages. 

The results of the examples above show that marriages between single women and divorced men 

took place at a rate twice as high as that between 

single women and single men. Of course, more 

information than the rates is needed to explain 

these differences. 

When the rates per 1,000 maximum possible 

marriages. are computed for various age and 

marital status groups, determining trends for 

each group over a period of years can become 

very ~complex. A method of simplifying such 

comparisons has been developed for 1960 and for 

1963. These kinds of questions should be answered. First, would couples have married at the 

same rat,e in 1963 if the ages of persons eligible 

to marry had been the same in 1963 as they were 

in 1960? Second, what would these same rates 

have been in 1963 if the rates for each marital 

status combination in 1960 had continued in 1963? 

Third, which of the above comparisons would have 

the greater effect on the trends in the overall marriage rates? Through this analysis of marital 

selection, increases or decreases of the overall 

rates during this period due to changes in age 

composition and changes in detailed age-specific 

rates could be estimated. The procedures followed 

in this analysis are described in the Technical 

Appendix, 

Limitations of Data 

The rates presented here are based on data 

which have certain limitations, as mentioned below and described more fully in the Technical ~ 

Appendix. The data are limited to the States 

participating in the MRA—33 States in 1960 and 

35 States and the District of Columbia in 1963 

(see table IV in Technical Appendix). About 57 

percent of all marriages in 1960 and abom 63 

percent in 1963 were in States participating in 

the MRA. 

Rates for previous marital status exclude 

data for Louisiana in 1963 and for Michigan and 

6 
Ohio in both 1963 and 1960, because record 

forms for these States didnot include this item. 

Excluding these States, reporting of previous 

marital status was over 98 percent complete in 

areas of the MRA requesting this item on their 

record forms. Reporting of age for both years was 

also 98 percent complete for the MRA. 

Both the numerators and the denominators 

of the rates are estimates based on probability 

samples. Their sampling errors, measured as 

standard errors ( I u ), are estimates of variation 

which would occur in these rates if they were 

computed repeatedly from a. large number of 

samples selected by identical procedures. A 

sampling error also indicates the extent to which 

a rate based on a sample may differ from a rate 

computed from a complete count. The chances 

are about 95 in 100 that a sample estimate will 

be within 2 standard errors above or below the 

rate computed from a complete count. For 

example, if a rate of 50, based on a sample, has 

a standard error of 3, the chances are about 95 

in 100 that the rate based on a complete count 

will be between 44 and 56, i.e., 50 + 6. 

Instructions are given in the Technical Appendix for computing the standard errors of the 

large number of rates used in this analysis. A 

few of the detailed rates shown in the tables are 

based on such small numbers that the standard 

errors are large enough to render the rates unreliable. The standard in this report for judging 

a sample estimate to be unreliable is that its 

standard error exceeds 30 percent of the estimate. This is the standard applied to all marriage statistics based on samples in the tables 

in Volume III of Vitul Statistics of the United 

States, As a general guide, the detailed rates 

which have the largest relative standard errors 

are of the following two types: 

1.	 Scattered small rates for which the number of marriages was small, that is, 

about 650 or less in 1960 and about 500 

or less in 1963; 

2.	 Those 1963 rates having the smallest 

base populations, specifically those for 

marriages of widowed men aged 14-44 

years and divorced women or men aged 

14-24 years. 

Selection by Age 

The number of marriages per 1,000 maximum possible marriages decreased slightly in 

the MRA, from 74.6 in 1960 to 72.5 in 1963. The 

decline was large enough to be significant. The 

probability that these two rates could be equal 

is less than 5 percent. The specific rates at 

which marriages occurred between partners of 

various age groups are shown in table C. 

What do these rates show about marriage 

selection? Whereas it is known that husbands 

are usually older than their wives, these rates 

indicate that in 1963 women in their teens married men aged 20-24 at a rate that was more than 

four times the rate at which they married teenaged men and at a rate that was more than eight 

times the rate at which men in their teens married women aged 20-24. In fact, women in their 

teens were more likely to marry men aged 25-44 

than were women in any older age group to 

marry men in a younger age group. 

What becomes evident from the rates based 

on couples is that teenaged couples constitute 

only a minority of all of the marriages which 

include one teenaged parmer. Most of the teenagers who marry are brides marrying older 

grooms. The rate at which young women (14-19 

years of age) married was over three times the 

rate at which young men in the same age group 

married (table C). Interestingly enough, this 

rate for young women dropped much more sharply 

between 1960 and 1963 than did the rate for young 

men. 

Only a few of the age-specific rates for all 

brides and grooms shown in table C changed 

appreciably between 1960 and 1963. However, the 

changes had very significant effects on overall 

rates of marriage, because they occurred in age 

groups with the highest marriage rates. Women 

in their teens married men in the same age group, 

as well as men aged 20-24 years, at markedly 

lower rates in 1963 than in 1960. While the peak 

marriage rate changed very little for couples with 

both parmers aged 20-24 years, women in this 

age group married men aged 25-44 years at a 

much lower rate in 1963 than in 1960. At the 

same time their rate of marriage to younger 

men (14-19 years of age), although low, increased slightly. While women aged 20-24 mar7 
-----------

-----------

-----------

-----------

-------------

-----------

-----------

-----------

-------------

-----------

-----------

-----------

-------------

-----------

-----------

-----------

-------------

-----------

-----------

-----------

-------------

Table C. Marriage ratea per 1,000 maximum possible marriages by previous marita 1 status and age of bride,


by previous marita 1 status and age of groom: marriage-registration area, 1960 and 1963


years


1963 I 1960 

Previous marital Age of groom I Age of groom 

status of I 

bride and groom and age of bride All 

ages, 14-19 

All 

25-44 45-64 65+ 

14+ years w years years years

Brides and grooms of


all marital statuses Rate per 1,000 maximum possible marriages


All ages, 14+ years- 72.5 20.4 195.: 149.7 45.2 15.1 74.6 23.5 212.6 137.6 46.2 13.4
 _ — - - _


14-19 years 63.5 19.8 91.1 15.0 0.2 0.( 76.6 24.3 107.6 16.5 0.2 0,0 

20-24 years 264.5 10.7 163,: 89.4 1.0 0.1 277.1 9.6 166.1 100.3 1.1 0.0 

25-44 years 111.6 0.5 8.! 84.7 18.8 0.[ 102.5 0.2 8.6 77.2 19.8 0.9 

45-64 years 19.3 0.1 3.8 24.7 8.[ 18.5 0.0 3.4 24.4 7.7 

65+ years 2.2 0.0 I 0.8 5.1 2.3 0.0 1.0 4.7 

Bride single, 

All 

groom 

ages, 

single 

14+ years- 74.6 19.7 179.( 88.8 4.1 79.7 22.8 195.8 

7

87.5 3.9 

14-19 years 58.8 19.3 87.: 12.9 0.1 72.0 23,9 103.5 15.9 0.1 

20-24 years 229.6 10.4 154./ 64.2 0.2 243.1 9,4 159.0 74.4 0.3 

25-44 years 61.3 0.5 8.! 49.8 2.6 57.1 0.2 7.9 F 47.0 1.9 

45+ years 2.0 0.( 0.3 1.9 2.1 0.5 1.7 

Bride single,


14-24 years 448.5 227.4 124.0 0.3 267.4 169.0 97,9 0.5 

25-44 years 58.1 10.6 44.0 3.4 0.[ 62.2 9.0 50,0 3,0 0.1 

45-64 years 6.1 0.0 2.5 3.2 (). / 5.7 0.1 1,5 3,8 0,3 

groom divorced 

All ages, 14+ years- 60.2 233.3 112.0 12.1 5.( 58.4 240,9 98.9 15.7 3.8 

14-24 years 38.8 226.0 70.1 1.7 0.: 33.7 219.5 56.7 1.3 0.2 

25-44 yeara 19.4 7.3 41.5 7.6 0.: 22,1 21.5 41.6 9.7 0.5 

45-64 yeara 2.0 0.4 2.8 3.1 2.6 0.6 4,7 2.8 

65+ years 0.2 1.1 0.1 + 0.4 

Bride divorced, 

groom single 

All agea, 14+ years- 49.2 17.9 28.3 4.0 0.: 47.1 15.0 28.8 4.1 1.1 

65+ years 0.6 0.6 0.1 3.0 T1.1 1.9 

Bride divorced,


groom divorced


All ages, 14+ yeara - 94.4 112.6 170.7 52.3 9.E 88.1 113.6 140.5 57,0 13.6 

14-24 years 208.2 84.2 145.1 4.6 0.1 158.7 79,2 118.0 1.7 

25-44 years 106.5 28.1 134.6 27.3 1.( 96.1 34.4 108.6 31.6 0.9 

45-64 years 26.5 0.2 7.1 24.1 6.4 24.5 5.2 24.9 10.2 

65+ years 3.4 0.6 2.E 2.7 + 0.4 2.5 
-------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------

---------------------------------------

---------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

Table C. Marriage rates per 1,000 maximum possible marriages by previous marital status and age of bride,


by previous marital status and age of groom: marriage-regiatration area, 1960 and 1963—Con.


1963 1960


Age of groom Age of groom


Previous marital status of bride and groom
 and age of bride


H 65-!­


years


Bride single, groom widowed Rate per 1,000 maximum possible marriagea


All ages, 14+ years 6.9 61.9 10.7 1.7 7.3 64.3 10.3 1.8 

14-44 years 4.6 60.6 5.4 0.4 5.5 63.6 6,8 0.5 

45-64 years 3.1 1.3 5.2 0.9 2.4 0.7 3.5 0.9 

65+ years 0.7 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.7 

Bride widowed, groom single 

All ages, 14+ years 2.1 1.5 3.3 1.7 2.4 1.7 2.9 2.2 

14-44 years 26.4 24.0 2.3 0.1 25.1 23.0 2.1 0.1 

45-64 years 1.9 0.5 2.3 0.9 2.0 0.8 1.9 1.5 

65+ years 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.7 

Bride divorced, groom widowed 

All ages, 14+ years 12.3 73.3 23.0 3.0 11.7 44.3 23.6 2.5 

14-44 years 13.6 69.3 11.7 0.3 11.8 38.6 11.3 0.4 

45-64 years 12.1 4.0 11.0 4.1 13.8 5.7 12.2 3.7 

65+ years 5.5 0.7 4.7 3.0 0.4 2.6 

Bride widowed, groom divorced 

All ages, 14+ years 20.5 20.6 23.4 10.5 19.1 19.4 21.1 11.3 

14-44 years 29.0 20.7 8.1 0.3 24.1 17.5 6.5 0,2 

45-64 years 10.3 4.9 17.0 5.6 8.9 4.4 14.6 6.8 

65+ years 0.8 0.0 0.5 4.6 0.7 0.4 4.2 

Bride widowed, groom widowed


All ages, 14-I-
 years 19.5 27.2 36.2 12.6 17.9 25.8 33.7 11.0 

14-44 years 12.3 22.4 6.8 0.8 12.1 19.9 7.1 0.7 

45-64 years 12.3 4.8 28.7 6.7 11.1 5.9 25.1 5.9 

65+ years 4.3 1.5 5.7 3.9 2.1 4.8 
---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

---------------

ried men aged 25-44 at a lower rate, men aged 

25-44 married women 25-44 at a markedly higher 

rate in 1963 than in 1960. 

Perhaps the rates changed because of changes 

in the ratio of eligible men to eligible women. Because of the increases in sizes of birth cohorts 

during the years 1940-43 and 1945-47, one would 

expect that by 1963 ratios of eligible older men to 

younger women would drop at the ages where the 

women were about 20-23 and 15-17 and the men 

2 or 3 years older. However, there is little 

consistency between changes in the marriage 

rates and changes in the ratios of unmarried men 

to unmarried women between 1960 and 1963 (table 

D). 

The changes in rates and sex ratios may 

mean that teenaged couples married at lower 

rates in 1963 than in 1960, but the drop in the 

ratio of eligible men to women was minor compared with the drop in the rate. There was no 

decline ‘in the ratio of eligible men aged 20-24 

to women in their teens, but the marriage rate 

for such couples declined almost as much as that 

for the teenaged couples. Furthermore, the sharp 

decline in the ratio of eligible men 25-44 to teenaged women was accompanied by a drop of only 

9 percent in the marriage rate for these couples. 

What happened, according to these comparisons, 

is that young women in their teens not only 

married at a lower rate in 1963 than in 1960 but 

they also tended to choose older men less frequently. 

What of the women aged 20-24 years whose 

numbers increased by about the same proportions 

as did those of teenaged women? It seems that 

they married men aged 25-44 years less frequently. However, their numbers increased so 

rapidly between 1960 and 1963, relative to the 

number of eligible men 25-44 years, that the 

decrease in the rate may have been occasioned 

by the lack of available marriage partners in 

that age group. As noted before, their low rate 

of marriage to teenaged husbands increased 

somewhat, despite a small decline in the number 

of available women 20-24 years. 

Women who married at ages 25-44 years 

shifted their choices in age of husband toward 

men in the same age group as themselves. Their 

rate of marriage to men 20-24 years increased 

slightly, but this may have been due to the inTable D. Percent change from 1960 to 

1963 in marriage rate per 1,000 maxi­

? possible marriages %d in ratio of 

el~gible men per 100 eligible women,


by age: marriage-registration area


Age 

Women, 14-19 years 

Men: 

14-19 years 

20-24 years 

25-44 years 

Women, 20-24 years 

Men: 

14-19 years 

20-24 years 

25-44 years 

Women, 25-44 years 

Men: 

20-24 years 

25-44 years 

45-64 years 

Change in: 

+ 

Percent 

-18 

-15 

-9 -R 

+3 +31 

+10 +2 

-5 +10 

crease of over 30 percent in the relative number 

of available men in that age group. 

There aremany other factors which influence 

choices of marriage partners. One is the marital 

status of eligible menandwomen discussed below. 

Another is that stability of residence and of 

employment for young people at the peak marriage ages may cause the marriage rates toshift. 

Many men aged 25-44 years have completed their 

military service. Perhaps many of them chose 

their mates before they entered service. It may 

also be that many of the eligible women in the 

age group 20-24 years were waiting for their 

husbands-to-be to complete military service, but 

a few more of them chose younger husbands 

in 1963 than in 1960, perhaps before the men 

began their military service. Another factor related to military service for men is their job 

opportunities. They may find better and more 

stable jobs after completing military service 

and can then plan with more assurance to marry. 

10 

-3 
------

------

-----

At any rate,the age-specific
 ratesformen and


women in the age intervals
25-44yearsshowed


themost substantial
 increasesfrom 1960to1963.


These increasespartlyoffsetthe declinesat


youngerages,so thattherateforcouplesofall


ages declinedby only 2.1pointsfrom 74.6to


72.5.Itmay be thatmany ofthemarriageswhich


did not take place at the younger ages were


merelydelayed.


Selection by Marital Status 

Marriagesbetweensinglemen and women,


which constitute thegreatest
number ofallmar­


riages,
tookplaceata rateofalmost75per 1,000


of theirmaximum possible
number in1963.This


raterepresentsadecline
since1960,whentherate


was almost80 per 1,000(table
E).


In 1963 divorcedmen and women married


each otherat a rateof 94 per 1,000maximum


possiblemarriages,an increasefrom the 1960


rate of 88.However, divorcedwomen married


Table E. Marriage rates per”1,000 maxi-


mum possible marriages, by previous


marital status of bride and groom:


marriage-registration area, 1960 and


1963


Previous marital status
 Year and


previous of groom


marital


status of


bride


~ 

1963 Rate per 1,000 maximum 

possible marriages 

Total--- 72.5 66.6 38.5 176.8 

.Single 82,0 74.6 60.2 

Widowed----- 10.3 12; 20.5 

Divorced---- 134.1 4::; 12.3 94.4 

1960 

Total--- 74.6 70.7 36.1 167.7 

Single 87.5 79.7 58.4 

Widowed 10.4 1;:? 19.1 

Divorced---- 122.1 4::? 11.7 88.1 

singlemen at a rateofonly49per 1,000maxi-


mum” possiblemarriages,whiledivorcedmen


married singlewomen atthe somewhat higher


rate of 60 per 1,000maximum possiblemar-


riages.About24 percentofallmarriagesin1963


involved‘atleast one divorcedpartner;both


partnerswere divorcedinonly37 percentofthe


marriagesinvolving
divorcedpersons.Divorced


men marriedwidowedwomen ata ratesomewhat


above therateformarriagesofcouplesinwhich


bothpartnerswere widowed.


Both widowed and divorcedmen selected


singlepartnersat higherratesthanwomen of


thesemaritalstatuses chosesingle
men.Divorced


men also married widowed women at a higher


ratethandivorcedwomen marriedwidowedmen.


These relationships
 holdtrueforboththe1960


and 1963 rates.In otherwords,singlewomen


were more likelythan singlemen to marry


previously
marriedspouses,andwidowedwomen


were more likely
thanwidowedmen tomarry di­


vorcedparmers.


Selection by Age and Marital Status 

The age-specific
 ratesby maritalstatusof


bridesandgrooms are shownintableC.


Althoughmarriage rates for young single


coupleswere lowerin1963thanin1960,therates


atwhichdivorced
men marriedyoungsinglewom­


en increasedduring this period.These in­


creaseswere contrasted
withmarked decreases


in themarriageratesfor youngdivorcedwomen


and singlemen: That young singlewomen were


marrying divorcedmen at a higherratein1963


may be an adjustmentto a continuing
shortage


of youngmen who were 2 or 3 yearsolder.This


deficit ariseschiefly
from two sources.Thefirst


is servicein the Armed Forces, but thisis


temporary.The secondarisesfrom the inter­


actionoftwofactors —the tradition
 forthegroom


to be olderthanthebrideby about2 yearsatthe


peak marriage ages, and the annualincreases


in most of the birthcohortsfrom 1940through


1957.Sincethe number of personsbornineach


age group duringa periodof risingbirthrates


issmallerthanthenumber borninitssuccessor,


thenumber ofyoungmen attheirpeakmarriage


ageswillbe Iessthanthenumberofyoungwomen


who are 2 or 3 yearsyounger.Sincethenumbers


11

----------------------------

------ ------ ------ ------ ----

----------- --------------- --

----------------------------

------- ------ ------------- --

------- ------- ------

----------------------------

----------------------------

----------------------------

------------- --------------

----------------------------

----------------------------

-- - ------ - --------------

-- - -- - ----------------------

-- - -- - - - - ----- ----- ---- - - -

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

of young men and young women of the same age Table G. Ratios of men to women, by age: 

are about equal, the approximate trend discussed marriage-registration area, 1964 

above can be depicted by computing ratios of live 

births in any one year to live births 2 years later 

or by computing live births in any interval of Ratios 

years to live births in an equal interval of years Age per 100 

women
 occurring 2 years later. The latter has been


done for each pair of 7-year-age intervals of men


through 1982, with the results shown in table F. years 

years 

103.2 

103.4 

(About two-thirds of’ all men and three-fourths years 102.6 

of all women who marry, marry for the first time 

at ages 20-26 and 18-24, respectively. ) 

years 

years 

years 

99.6 

97.9 

96.9 

For almost 25 years, from about 1957 to years 96.2 

1980, there will be a continuous deficit of young 

men relative to young women 2 years younger, 

years 

years 

years 

95.9 

95.8 

95.2 

ranging from 1 percent to about 10 percent. The years 95.7 

effects, if any, of this deficit in altering the age years 

years 

96.8 

!33.; 

years 

years 97:2 

Table F. Ratios of men aged 20-26 years to 

aged 20-26 and of women aged 18-24 from 1956 years 103.6


women aszed 18-24 vears: United States. . 1956-82-

— .— combinations of brides and grooms over the next 

Ratios generation will be interesting to observe, aswell 

Year 

per 100 as any changes in age at marriage for brides. 

women An approximate estimate of the deficit of 

men due to service in the Armed Forces outside 

1956 101.3 the United States may be obtained th$ough age 

1957 99.9 ratios of men per 100 women of the same age 

1959 96.8 

1960 94.9 young men serve in the Armed Forces. These 

1961 ,------ -_ 92.7 ratios are shown in tableG. 

1962 

1963 

1964 

93.4 

95.5 

93.6 

The number of men per 100 women is,expected to decline with advancing age because 

1965 - 89.9 of a higher death rate for men. But the decline 

1966 

1967 

1968----------------------------

90.4 

93.2 

95.0 

to 95.2 at age 24 followed by an increase to97.7 

at age 28 indicates a factor in addition to the 

1969---------------------------- 94.3 differential death rate contributing to this im1970----------------------------

1971---_ 

1972----------------------------

92.5 

93.9 

96.9 

balance atages 19-27 years. It seems verylikely 

that the movement of men in the Armed Forces 

1973---------------------------- 97.3 to overseas posts and their return a few years 

1974 

1975 . . 96.3 

95.6 

Iateraccount for most of this deficit. [ 

1958 98.4 for a period of years covering the ages when 

1976---------------------------- 96.2 Among divorced couples who remarried ata 

1977---------------------------- 97.2 higher rate in 1963 than in 1960, the increases 

1978---------------------------- 97.7 were restricted to those who married at ages 1979---------------------------- 98.4 under 45 years. Why did the remarriage rates 1980---------------------------- 99.2 

1981---------------------------- 100.2 for these couples increase when young single 

1982---------------------------- 101.4 couples were marrying at declining rates? The 

number of divorces was almost 9 percent larger 

12

in 1963 than in 1960. It seems likely that the increase in the rate at which persons were added 

to the divorced population caused remarriage 

rates for divorced persons to increase. It maybe 

that higher proportions of persons whose marriage ended in divorce had plans to remarry. It 

would be helpful to know when the last previous 

marriage of divorced persons ended in order to 

estimate trends in length of time between divorce 

and remarriage. If the average length of time 

between divorce and remarriage decreased, rates 

of remarriage would increase even though the 

proportion of divorced persons who eventually 

remarry remained the same. Whether or not this 

is what is happening, the attraction of marriage 

is clearly not declining for persons whose previous 

marriages ended in divorce. 

Changes in Rates of Marital Selection 

The question discussed in this part of the 

analysis is “Were changes in the overall rates 

from 1960 to 1963(due to changes in the rates at 

which specific age groups married or were they 

due to changes in the relative sizes of various 

age groups in the population eligible to marry?” 

For purposes of this analysis, a specific rate 

is the rate per 1,000 maximum possible marriages of brides in a specified age interval to 

grooms in a specified age interval. Overall rates 

are the rates per 1,000 maximum possible marriages for all couples and for couples of each of 

the marital status combinations listed in table H. 

Each of the 10 overall rates has component 

specific rates as shown in table C. 

In order to answer the question, the data were 

manipulated in two ways. First, the 1963 rates 

were applied to the 1960 population by age and 

marital status, thus holding changes in the composition of the population constant. Second, the 1960 

rates were applied to the 1963 population by age 

and marital status to obtain the expected number 

of marriages if there had been no change in the 

rates. The expected numbers of marriages were 

then used to compute overall rates (table H and 

fig. 3). 

The marriage rate for all couples in 1963 

was 72.5 per 1,000 maximum possible marriages. 

If the age distributions had been the same”in 1963 

as they were in 1960, the rate would have been 

70.5; therefore, changes in the composition of the 

population between 1960 and 1963 increased the 

1963 total rate by 2.0 points. If the age-specific 

rates in 1963 had been the same as they were in 

1960, the rate would have been 77.4; hence 

changes in age-specific rates between 1960 and 

1963 lowered the rate by 4.9 points. Actually, 

as shown in table C, the rate for 1963 (72.5) was 

2.1 points less than the rate computed for 1960 

(74.6). From these data it is evident that declines 

in specific marriage rates (chiefly for young, 

single persons) had at least twice as great an 

effect on the trend of the overall rate as had the 

increases in the proportions of eligible populations at the ages when marriage rates are 

usually highest. 

Estimates of the effects on the overall rates 

due to changes in the age distribution of the 

eligible populations and to changes in the specific 

rates are shown in table J. 

The two greatest changes in the overall 

rates by marital status —the decrease in the rate 

at which single couples married each other and 

the increase in the rate at which divorced persons married each other—were both primarily 

due to changes in age-specific rates rather than . 

to changes in the age composition of the eligible 

populations. Changes in the age distributions of 

the single populations increased the overall rate 

by 3.0 points, but the sharp drops in the agespecific rates at the younger ages lowered the 

overall rate by 8.7 points. Because the divorced 

populations were older in 1963 than in 1960, 

changes in age lowered the overall rate by 5.3 

points, but increases in the age-specific rates 

at which younger divorced persons married each 

other increased the rate by 10.0 points. The 

computed rate for 1963 was 6.3 points higher 

than that for 1960. 

Table J indicates that the rate at which divorced men married single women increased 

the overall rate for these marriages by 3.1 

points. However, an increase in the rates at 

which divorced women married single men had 

a negligible effect on the overall rate for these 

couples, which declined at older ages. 

Most of the specific rates increased during 

the period 1960-63, but these increases were 

offset by the large decline in the number of single 

couples, so that the overall rate declined 4.9 

13

--------------------------------

--------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

Table H. Estimated and expected number of marriages and marriage rates per 1,000 maxi- mum possible marriages, by previous marital status of bride and groom: m=riageregistration area, 1963 

Expected


Previous marital status Estimated Based on Based on


1:95;y:s 1:!2:y;s


population population


Number of marriages


All marriages 1,033,950J ll,005,612j 1,103,425 

Rate per 1.000 maximum possible


All marriages


Bride single


Groom:


Single


Widowed


Divorced


Bride widowed


Groom:


Single


Widowed


Divorced


Bride divorced


Groom:


Single


Widowed


Divorced


‘mmriages 

72.5 70,5 77.4 

74.6 83.3 

6;:; 5;:! 

1;:: 1;:: 20.5 22.3 

49.2 50.9 46.2 

12.3 13.6 10.7 

94.4 99.7 84.4 

lAdjusted for population increase from 1960 to 1963. 

points. Changes in age composition, although not 

as great, followed the opposite pattern-increasing for the single couples and declining for 

the others. Generally speaking, changes in agespecific rates had greater effects on overall 

rates than did changes in the age distributions 

of the eligible populations. 

Marriages by Previous Marital Status, Age, 

and Color 

An analysis ofrates comparable tothe foregoing was not carried out for separate color 

groups because of the unavailability ofdata;however, information wasobtainedin 19630nprevious 

marital status and age of white and nonwhite 

brides and grooms (table K). These data exclude 

California, New Jersey, and Ohio; they are based 

on marriages occurring in32 States andthe District of Columbia. 

Nonwhite brides and grooms married for the 

first time in somewhat higherproportions thandid 

the white at ages under 18 years andatages25 

years and over. Thus nonwhite persons (brides 

more than grooms) showed greater dispersions 

in age at first marriage than did the white. What14

100 r 

o


g 40
 _.


a


w


n


: 30


a 

a


I


20 

10 

0 [ All 

nmrriog.s 

Figure 3. Estimated 

ever the reasons, 

Estimated rote, 1963 

EzlExpected rote, 1963 

(age distribution of 1960) 

Expected rote, 1963 

(age specific for 19 60) 

— Divorced Si”gl. Singlo Divar<.d Widowed Hiched Divorcod Shgle 

bri do bride bride brido b,: de bride b,id. brid. 

and and div.rcod single divorced .nd wid.w.d wld.wed 

m..m 9m.m 9mm gm.m sr..m w..m yea. 9,~m 

MARITAL STATUS OF BRIDE AND GROOM 

w dewed 

bride 

single 

9-M 

.and	 expected marriages per 1,000 maximumpossible marriages, by marital status of 

eligible populations: marriage-registration area, 1963. 

many more nonwhitebrides and 

grooms delay marriage until older ages. White 

brides and grooms remarried in larger proportions atyoung ages (under 25 years)thandidnonwhite. Most of this difference is attributable to 

higher proportions ofremarriagesat young ages 

for the divorced. Withthe shorter lifeexpectancy 

for nonwhite persons than for white, widowhood 

occurred more often at younger ages and remarriage of the widowed also happenedrelatively 

more often at ages under 45 for nonwh~tepersons 

than for white. 

Median and quartile ages at marriage (table 

L and fig. 4) offer one way of comparing age 

distributions of the small numbers of brides 

and grooms in white-nonwhite marriages with 

marriages between brides andgroomsofthesame 

color. For the States and couplesreportingcolor, 

15 
----------

----------

Table J. Change in overall marriage rate from


1960 to 1963 and effect of changes in age


distribution and age-specific rates, by pre­


vious marital status of bride and ~room: mar­


riage-registration area


Previous


marital status


All marriages-­


Bride single


Groom:


Single-----------


Widowed


Divorced---------


Bride widowed


Groom:


Single-----------


Widowed


Divorced---------


Bride divorced


Groom:


Single-----------


Widowed----------


Divorced---------


Effect on overall


rate of
 Change changes in:
 in


overall


rate
 Age Age­
 distri- specific


bution rates


-2.1 +2.0 -4.9


-5.1 +3.0 -8.7


-0.4 -0.3 -0.1


+1.8 -1.8 +3.1


-0.3 -0.3


+1.6 -0.3 +2.0


+1.4 -1.8 +2.8


-2.1 -1.7 +3.0


+0.6 -1.3 +1.6


+6.3 -5.3 +10 .0


there were 1,748 marriages of white brides to 

nonwhite grooms, and 1,606 ofnonwhite brides to 

white grooms. The age distribution for white 

brides ofnonwhite grooms resembles mostnearly 

that for nonwhite brides of white grooms. Thus, 

it would appear thattheagedistributionofspouses 

of a given sex does not depend upon color. White 

brides married to nonwhite grooms tend to be 

slightly older and have a greater dispersion of 

ages. Nonwhite brides of white grooms and nonwhite grooms of white brides are somewhatolder 

in median and quartile ages than any of the other 

color groups. Thus white marriage partners of 

nonwhite brides and grooms have age distributions similar to those of nonwhite marriage 

partners. 

Previous marital status of nonwhite couples 

in the reporting States differed little from that 

of white couples (table M), except that the proportion of couples of whom both had been previously divorced was higher among white than 

among nonwhite couples and the proportion previously widowed was higher for thenonwhite. 

Couples who reported differences in color 

(about 3,000 in 1963) included more previously 

married persons than did couples of the same 

color. These differences were most marked for 

white and nonwhite brides and for nonwhite 

grooms. 

Information was also obtained onthe raceof 

the bride and groomin 1963. It was found thatof 

the 796,827 couples in the three major racial 

groups (white, Negro, and ’’other’’) who reported 

race, only 3,444 reportedracialdifferences (table 

N). Of these, 210 weremarried inAlaska, l,208 in 

Hawaii, and 2,026 in the other 31 reportingStates r inthe MRA. 

In nine reporting States and the Districtof 

Columbia the number of interracial marriages 

as tabulated for 1963 equaled at least 100, or 1 

percent of the State’s marriages, or both. 

In five States (Alaska, Hawaii, Montana, 

South Dakota, and Wisconsin) the interracial 

marriages were predominantly those of white 

persons to nonwhite who were not Negro. The 

most frequent combination, in turn, in these 

marriages was that of white grooms and other 

nonwhite brides. In four States (Connecticut, 

Massachusetts, Michigan, and Pennsylvania) the 

majority of interracial marriages consisted of 

white persons and Negroes, with the brides more 

often being white. In the District of Columbia, 

most of the marriages were those of white brides 

to nonwhite grooms, both Negro and other races. 

Thus the racial composition of these couples 

varies within racial groups. Thenumbersofthese 

marriages are so small that any results other 

than large differences in proportions of distributions by race would be statistically insignificant. 

COMPLETENESS AND UNIFORMITY 

OF DATA 

Introduction 

There are several reasons for variation in 

the levels of accuracy in statistics, only one of 

which is sampling. Data may not be available because some States may not require the reporting 

of certain items; some items may be so phrased 

16 
----------------

---------------- -------------------

-------------------

-------------------

------------------- -------------

----------------

---------------- -------------------

-------------------

-------------------

------------------- -------------

----------------

---------------- -------------------

------------------- -------------

----------------

---------------- -------------------

-------------

Table K. Percent distributionof brides and grooum,by age accordingtoprevious marital


status and color: marriage-registrationarea, 1963


Bride Groom


Previous marital status


and age Non- Non-
 Total White white Total White white


Single Percent distribution


All ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Under 18 years 14.8 15.0 17.6 1.6 1.6 1.9 

18-19 years 30.7 32.0 25.6 14.7 15.1 14.3 

20-24 years------------------- 42.6 42.9 36.0 56.3 57.6 49.7 

25-29 years 6.7 5.8 10.6 16.7 16.2 17.6 

30-34 years 2.3 1.9 5.4 4.9 ;.; 

35-44 years 

45 years and over 1.9 

1.0 ;:? 

::; 

1.8 

3.6 

1.7 

3.2 

1.4 3:5 

Previouslymarried


All ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100 �o 100.0 100.0 

Under 25 years 18.9 20.4 

25-34 years 29.5 30.1 2;:: 2%; 2;:: 22:: 

35-44 years 24.1 22.7 28.9 25.9 25.2 25.2 

45-54 years 16.0 15.5 18.6 17.7 17.1 21.3 

55-64 veals 10.0 11.0 10.6 14.4 

65 yea>s and over M H 3.2 8.9 8.8 11.2 

Widowed


All ages 100.0 100.0 100 �o 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Under 45 years ;;.; 35.5 42.4 20.7 19.4 23.1 

45-54 years 29.8 30.6 21.4 21.3 25.8 

55-64 years 21:8 22.2 19.0 26.5 26.7 25.9 

65 years and over 12.2 12.5 8.0 31.4 32.5 25.2 

Divorced


AU. ages 100.0 100.0 100 �o 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Under 25 Years 24.3


25-34 yeaks 36.4


35-44 years------------------- 25.1


45 years and over 14.3


thatsome of thedistinctions
eededforcoding,


such as thatbetweenwidowedanddivorced,
are 

notreported;some recordsmay be delayedor 

mispIaced; theresponserecordedfor
 aniternsuch

as thenumber of thecurrentmarriagemay not


26.1 12.2 10.4 11.5


37.0 37.7 g;.; 35.9 3$:


23.6 30.7 29.5 30.5


13.3 19.5 24:3 23.1 31.8


be consistent
withthe responsetoanotheritem


such as previousmaritalstatus.
Inthissection


data arepresentedon preliminary results
ofef­


fortsto identify and estimatedeviations
from


completereporting, on efforts toclassify
 varia­


17

--------

-----

-----

--------

--------

-----

-----

--------

�

Table L. Median age at marriage and first Nation. (Evidence for this statement comes from 

and third quartiles of age at marriage returns on a nationwide sample ofmarriagerec­ for bri,des and grooms, by color: mar- orals for the year 1960 and from legal require­ riage-registration area, 1963 

ments for issuance of marriage licenses. Completeness of national reporting was estimatedto 

be over 98 percent for date of marriage and age.) 

Color If an item requesting race or color were on 

all record forms of all areas in the MRA, the 

result would probably be at leastan increaseof 

White bride Age in years 15 percentage points in reporting completeness 

(1963 estimates). The absence of this item from 

White groom 

Nonwhite groom 

19.05 

19.62 

21.76 25.68 

22.78 28.00 a few forms decreased the completeness for the 

MRA from almost 96percent tolessthan80 perNonwhite bride cent. Gains of 12 or 13 percentage points would 

Nonwhite groom 

White groom 

19.02 

19.68 

22.45 29.23 

23.60 29.44 

also be realized in the completeness of reporting 

of marital status before the current marriage for 

EIE@ 

White groom 

White brick 21.26 23.93 29.69 

Nonwhite bride 21.76 24.40 32.02 

AGE OF BRIDE 

Nonwhite groom $ I 1 r 1 1 u v I I 1 I I ! I 

White brides of white grooms 

Nonwhite bride 21.54 24.69 33.90 IQ 

—. M — 3Q IQ. First quartile 

Wbi.te bride 22.68 26.79 33.02 M= Median white brides of nonwhite grooms 

LQ M 3Q 30= Third quartile 7*— 

Nonwhite brides of nonwhite grooms 

tions in the items appearing on record forms, IQ M 3Q 

andon the extent of nonsampling errors. Nonwhite brides of white grooms 

1: M 3Q 

Completeness of Reporting 

AGE OF GROOM 

In 1963, as in 1960-62, all of the variables WhitO grooms of white brides 

tabulated for the marriage statistics were coded IQ M 3Q . �— 

with more than 95-percent completeness for the 

States having the necessary items ontheirrecord White grooms of nonwhite brides 

IQ M 3Q —. 

forms. TableOpresente somesummary estimates 

of completeness. Nonwhite grooms of nonwhite brides 

Data on date of the marriage, age (or date IQ M 3Q 

of birth), and State of residence of the bride and Nonwhite grooms of white brides groom, as wellas on whether the bride orgroom IQ M 3Q —. had been married previously, were reported


with the-highest level of completeness. These 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I {


are also the data which were available from the 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34


record forms of all of the areas inthe MRA. In Age (in years) at morriage


fact, forms submitted to the National Center for


Health Statistics indicate that information about


date of the marriage, age or date of birth, and igure 4. Interquartile range (IQ to 3Q) and


median age (M) at marriage of bride and groom, residence of the bride and groom is requested by color of couple: marriage-registration area, 

on marriage records used in every State in the 1963. 

18 
-----------------------------

---------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------

------------------------------

-----------------------------

---------------------------------- ------------------ ------------------------------- -----------------------------

-----------------------------

---------------------------------- ------------------ -------------------------------

------------------------------

-----------------------------

---------------------------------- ------------------

-----------------------------

---------------------------------- ------------------

� 

Table M. Percent distribution of marriages, by previous mari~al status of groom ac­


cording to previous marital status of bride and color: marriage-registration area,


1963


Previous marital status of groom


Previous marital status of bride


and color


~-d
 Total


All marriages


Total


Single


All previously married—


Widowed


Divorced


White bride, white groom


Total


Single


Al$i~wvvsly married


Divorced


Nonwhite bride, nonwhite groom


Total


Single


All previously married


Widowed


Divorced


White bride, nonwhite groom


Total


Single


All previouslymarried


Nonwhite bride, white groom


Total


Single


All previously married


previouslymarried bridesand grooms ifthis 

item were on recordforms of every area.For 

allbridesand grooms thegainwould be3 or4 

percentagepoints.Similarly,ifdataaboutthe


title oftheofficiant athewedding
ceremonywere


100.0 

;;.; 

12;


100.0 

;;.; . 

l;:: 

100 �o 

81.2 

18.8 

1;:;


100.0


70.3


29.7


100.0


68.7


31.3


Percent distribution


IT

78.0 

78.2 21.8 

70.8 0.8 

7.4 1::2 4.1 

4.6 2.6 

::: 10.8 1.4 

22.0 5.1 

70.6 6.7 0.9 

7*4 15.3 4.2 

4.6 2.6 

::; 10.7 1.6 

4.9 

II79.6 20.4 6.7 

72.9 8.3 

6.8 12.0 ;:; 

4.7 

::; 7.3 1:9 

54.2 16.1
 *


17.2 12.5 *.


76.9 23.1 *


59.8
 *


17.1 1::: *


16.9


12:


2.0


9.4


13.7


6.4


7.3


H


J*.


.~.


A­


*


* 

* 

requestedon every	 form, the gain incompleteness in classifying ceremoniesas religiousor


civil wouldbe9 or 10percentage
points.


Itwas foundthatthe levelofcompleteness


of marriage dataintheMRAwas unusually
high


19

------------

------------ -------

--------- ----- ----------

-----------------

------ ---------

Table N. Number of total marriages, number and percent of interracial marriages, and percent 

distribution of interracial marriages, by race of bride and groom: marriage-registration area and selected States, 1963 

Total Couples of White groom Negro bride, 

Area 1 

numbe r di~~;;~g Total other groom; of 

marriages 2 categories	 Negro Other Negro Other other bride, 

groom groom bride bride EiEIYNegro groom

Number ?ercent 

)f total Percent distribution 

M8A,excluding: California, New 

Jersey, and OhioAlaska and Hawaii.-

796,827 

789,020 

3,444 

2,026 

0.4 

0.3 

Loo.o 

100.0 

22.5 28.2 39.2 

37.6 23.6 1;:2 23.1 

Stare: 

Alaska 2,055 210 10.2 100.0 2.9 18.1 1.0 78.1 

Hawaii 5,728 1,208 21.1 100.0 37.7 59.3 

Connecticut 19,320 175 0.9 100.0 3::; 22.9 28.; 8.6 

District of 

Columbia 

Massachusetts 

9,210 

34,240 

144 

170 $; 

100.0 

100.0 

38.9 40.3 9.7 

64.7 5.9 2::: 

2.8 

Michigan 68,075 275 0.4 100.0 54.5 18.2 18.; 

Montana 4,860 1.4 100.0 2;:: 62.9 

Pennsylvania 71,875 1;8 0.2 100.0 6;:? 16.7 16.; 

South Dakota 7,452 100.0 2.6 26.3 63.; 

Wisconsin 25,620 lx M 100.0 20.0 10.0 60.0 

lSelected States are those which reported 100 or more interracial marriages or where inter-


racial marriages were 1 percent or more of 1963 marriages.


2Excludes marriages for which race Was not stated.


when the record form included all the items 

necessary to obtain personal and demographic 

information. It is this completeness of reporting 

which accentuates the losses in completeness due 

to the absence ofa few items from record forms 

of some of the States in the MRA, particularly 

some of the larger ones. 

Uniformity of Data 

The use of uniform codingpvocedure.s, with 

complete verification of the variables coded for 

marriage statistics since 1960, had reduced 

variations between States in the statistics published annually and in those used inthis study.A 

tabulation of variations in the phrasing of items 

on the record forms indicated that the greatest 

variations occurred in items requesting dataon 

previous marriages and place of marriage and 

residence. Effects of these variations on the data 

are summarized below. 

Previous mawiages. —Wording of this item 

varied from one record form to another, moreso 

than for anyof the other items tabulated. Despite 

these variations, codable responses were usually 

obtained if the item specified marital status terms 

such as single, widowed, or divorced or if data 

were requested indicating whether a previous 

marriage had ended in divorceor with the death 

of the former partner. The item was most often 

deficient in indicating which marriage was the 

most recent for the relatively small numberof 

persons previously married two times or more. 

Geo~aphic place names.-ltems requesting 

place where marriage occurred andplace ofresidence and birthplace of the bride and groom did 

not always specify the kinds of geographic areas 

to rerecorded. ‘lleresidenc eiter nonthe forms 

of nine States and the birthplace item on those of 

11 States did not specifically request the State. 

The residence item onthe formsof 20 States and 

20

------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------- ------------------------------------

---------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

------------------------------------------- --- ---

the place-of-marriage item on those of nine 

States did not specify county as an area to be 

recorded. The States of residence and birth were 

usually reported or could be determined from the 

names of major cities, but data on the county 

were almost never recorded unless explicitly requested. Data on the county of residence are 

essential to computing marriage rates for areas 

below the State level not only counties but also 

standard metropolitan statistical areas. County 

or its local equivalent is also needed to specify 

a local residence area for the population living 

outside incorporated cities and towns. 

Occupation. — The item which has been found 

to have the least uniformity in reporting is occupation, and therefore data on occupation have 

not been published. A beginning was made in 1960 

to code the occupation of the groom. Trials on the 

data from three or four States indicated that about 

15 percent of the responses could not be classified “with enough precision to assign them to one 

of the major occupational categories used by the 

Bureau of the Census. Most of the loss was due 

to the use of general occupational terms such as 

engineer and clerk and to the lack of specificity 

about self -employment. 

The investigations affecting the codability 

of data represent a preliminary investigation of 

the accuracy of the statistics. Responses which 

fitted the code categories on any variable were 

accepted, except for checks on the consistency 

of marriage order (first, second, and so forth) 

with reported marital status before marriage 

and on the reporting of extreme age differences 

between bride and groom. Probability sample 

estimates of the accuracy with which the key 

statistics are reported, particularly age or date 

of birth and marital status, are the next steps 

which would be most helpful in evaluating the 

quality of marriage statistics. 

Table O. Completeness of reporting of selected marriage certificate items: marriageregistr~tion area, 1960 and-1963 

Item 

Characteristic of marriage: 

Month 

Date within month 

Type of ceremony 

Characteristic of bride and groom:l 

Age 

Color 

Whether previously married 

Previous marital status 

Number of current marriage 

State of residence 

State where born 

Areas with 

Entire MRA item on 

marriage 

certificate 

ZEEtEzz


Percent complete 

99.9 99.6 99.9 99.6 

99.8 99.5 99.8 99.5 

87.7 88.8 97.2 96.6 

99.7 99.5 99.7 99.5 

77.1 90.9 95.7 98.7 

98.8 99.6 98.8 99.6 

94.9 94.6 98.6 98.3 

96.3 95.8 98.2 97.9 

99.1 99.4 99.1 99.4 

95.3 96.2 

lAverage of percent completeness for brides and grooms separately. 

000 

21 
-------------------------------------------------------------------- ------

-------------------------------------------------

Table 1. 

2. 

3. 

&. 

5. 

b. 

7. 

8. 

DETAILED TABLES 

Number of marriages and marriage rates: United States, region, division, and 

State, l959-63-------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of marriages and marriage rates per 1,000 total resident population, men 

and women 15 years of age and over, and unmarried women 15 years of age and over: 

United States, l94O-63-----------------------------------------------------------

Number of marriages and marriage rates per 1,000 total population, men and women 15 years of age and over, and unmarried women 15 years of age and over expressed 

as percents of 1959-61 averages: United States, 1940-63--------------------------

Number of resident population, by sex and age: United States, 1940-63------------

Re;;funmarried resident women 15 years of age and over,by age: United States, 

Marriage rates, by previous marital status and age of bride and groom: marriageregistration area, 1960 and l963-------------------------------------------------

Number of marriages, by previous nwrital status and age of bride and groom: 

marriage-registration area, 1960 

Number of unmarried resident population 14 years of age and over, by previous 

marital status, sex, and age: marriage-registration area, 1960 and 1963----------

Page 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

31 

22 
---------------------------- ------------------------

--------------------------------

--------------------------------

-------------------------- ----------------------

-------------------

-------------------

----------------------- -------------------

-------------------

-----------------------------

-----------------------------

------------------------------

------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------

-------------------------

--------------------------

--------------------------- -------------------------

---------------------------------

------------------------------

-----------------------------

-----------------------------

----------------------------

----------------------------

---------------------------------

-------------------------

------------------------- -----------------------------

-------------------------------

-----------------------------

----------------------------- ---------------- -----------------------------

------------------------

-----------------------

----------------------- ------------------------------

------------------------------

-----------------------------

---------------------------- ------------------------------

--------------------------

-----------------------------

----------------------------

----------------------------- --------------------------------

------------------------------

-------------------------------- ------------------------------

---------------------------

---------------------------

-------------------------------

Table 1. Number of marriages and marriage rates: United States, region, division, and State, 1959-63


ofo.currenca. suppfied Fig.wsdifferfmm inl ?swhicharebused on sample data. Rates bused [Bypluco D.timoc..nhofm.miqespe,f.med byS&tis.xceptasn.bd. fbosesh.w. onv.rml.tion. ,. en.memted asOfApril 1f.r1960nnd estimated .sofJuly1fm.lldwrye 

Region, division, and State 1963 I 1962 I 1961 I 1960 I 1959 .963


Number of marriages Rate per 1,000 population in
 specified area


United States1~2------------------,,654,003 L,577,360 L,547,945 .,523,381 1.494.000 S.8 S.5 S.5 S.5 8.5
 — _ _


Northeast:
 New England ~79,14s 76,174 75,463 76,206 277>350 27.2 7,1 7.2 g.; 27.4


Middle Atlantic 244,660 233,249 233,066 235,275 230,S95 6.9 6.6 6.7 . 6.S


North Central:
 287,18S


Regions: Northeast 2323,SOS 309,423 30S,529 311,4s1 230S,245 26.9 6.7 6.S 7.0 26.9 

North Central 42S,323 :::,;;: 403>329 403,595 400,194 7.7 7.7 7.8 7.s 

South 1::: 9.9 9.8 

liest~ %::+% 297:SS2 2%:$;; %;::; %!;i:i 10.2 9,9 Q9.S %; %; 

East North Central 304,925 

1

284,581 2S3,2S5 279,603 8.2 7,8 7.8 7.s 7.8 

West North Central 123,39S 117,642 11s,74s 120,310 120,591 7.9 7.6 7.6 7.8 7.9 

South:
 South Atlantic 2S7,500 275,939 226S,554 2261,S85 2257,755 1:,; 10.7. 210.1 1o.1 ~lo.1


East South Central 120,055 115,221 ~llo,300 9.4 29.2


West Swth Central 180,547 2174,065 2%:% 162,016 %:::;% 10:0 99.s % 9.6 &2


West:
 Mountain %43,499 136,131 2130,492 2122,S18 %22, 629 ‘19.1 18.4 %8.0 ~17.9 21s.3


PacificI 170,271 161,751 155,4ss 151,286 141,799 7.3 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0


Nw~~f&and : .- S,121 7,980 7,90s 7,S60 7,599 

New Hampshire Vermont S,151 7,852 

3,131 

7,347 

3,161 

7,337 

3,26S 

7,287 1;:: 1!:; 

S.1 

1;:: 

8.2 18:: 

S.4 1;:: 

Massachusetts ~3&? 33,557 3;,$; 34,050 93;:% %: 6.5 6.6 6.6 %: 

Rhode Island 5,967 5,575 5,S14 5,770 6.7 6.3 6.6 6.8 :.; 

Connecticut 19,336 18,079 17;793 17,s77 17,509 7.1 6.9 7.0 7.1 . 

Niddle Atlantic:
 New York----------------------------- 129,,283 122,871 1::,~:: 123,620 120,517 7.3 7.0 7.1 7.2


New Jersey 43,353 f++,4;; 39,820 3S,659 6.6 6.5 6.6 2:2 6.4


Pennsylvania 72,024 , 69:617 71,s35 71,719 6.3 6.1 6.1 6.3 6.4


East No&h Central:
 Ohio 71,675 66,963 66,076 68,043 66,S77 7.2 6.7 7.0


Indiana 45,992 43,464 42,261 42,050 40,982 9.6 $; 9.0 ::;


Illinois 93,420 S7,645 SS,692 87,529 S7,2S1 9.0 8.7 8.S ::? 8.7


Michigan 68,160 65,002 63,320 61,090 58,S26 8.5 S.1 7.9 7.6


liisconsin 25,67S 24,114 24,232 24,573 25,637 6.3 6.0 6.1 ::: 6.6


West North Central: Minnesota 25,064 24,635 24,123 23,596 23,1SS 7.2 7.1 ;.: 6.9 6.9 

Iowa 19,487 1s,9s1 21,962 25,116 9.0 

Missouri----------------------------- 37,667 35,192 34,s90 3::;:;$ 335,3s0 i:: ::; 8:1 88.3 3::: 

North Dakota 4,531 4,212 4,335 4,039 4,2S2 6,S 

South Dakota 7,470 6,954 6,213 5,7s7 5,S61 Ii:: ::: S.9 ::2 ::: 

Nebraska 11,711 11>1s5 10,976 10,591 10,724 ;.; 7.7 7.7 7.7 

Kansas 17,468 16,4S3 16,249 15,824 16>040 . 7.4 7.4 ;:: 7.4 

South Atlantic:


Maryland 

District of ColumbiaA 61,346 

9,577 

40,518 

9,3s1 

39,977 

9>101 

40>320 

8,600 

39,770 

8,377 

1::! 

12.0 1;:: 

11.9 

12.7 1;:: 

11.7 11.3 1::: 

11.0 

Virginia 42,0S5 39,703 3s,300 37,542 37,768 9.s 9.3 9.3 9.5 9.6 

West Virginia 

North Carolina 

13,760 

35,450 

13,487 

33,96S 

13,465 2,432,15s ~,4;?:% 34%;:% 7.6 7.5 7.3 2.4~:~ 2,46.9 9.4;:; 

South Carolina 42,469 :;>:;: 39,997 38,964 3S,661 1;:: 1::3 16.6 16.4 16.5 

Georgia 

Florida 56,803 

43,120 41;504 52,062 

40,934 

49,44s 

39,315 

4S,928 

3S,588 13.5 

7.8 

13.1 

7.6 1;.: 12.5 

7.9 12.6 

S.o 

Delaware 2,S90 2,5S5 2,560 2,394 2,3s3 5.6


East South Central:
 Kentucky 427,121 4;&;& 426,185 %&, ::: 1S,323 48.T 4s.5 4S.6 28.7 6.1


Tennessee 35,243 31,666 30,213 8.8 S.6 S.6
 Alabama 35,551 33:611 32,723 ;;:;;; 30,722 1!:: 1%: 9.8 9.s 9,6


Mississippi 22,140 22,007 21,610 > 20,447 9.7 9,7 9.7 9.7 9.6


West South Central: Arkansas 20,553 41s,951 31S,76S 31s,31s 1s,394 10.8 410.3 310.4 310.3 10.5 Louisiana 26,013 23,523 7.3 6.7 

Oklahoma 31,0S2 %$:; %:!% 9:::% 12$ %:: ? %2. 7 Ii:; %:.; Texas 102,S99 9s,371 96,244 %$% 93,258 10.1 9.7 .9.7 39.6 

Mountain: Montana 4,s54 5,051 5,635 5,892 6,228 6.9 7.2 S.1 

Idaho 12,680 11,934 1:,;:; 10,06S 9,343 1s.5 17.0 16.3 12:! 1!:; Wyoming 3,196 10.C Colorado4---------------------------- qgi 17,037 216:842 %:: % 21;;::: 29.2 ;:; ~;:: %: 29:1 New Mexico--------------------------- 12,132 311,825 11,051 11,113 12.1 12.2 312.0 11.6 12.1 Arizona------------------------------ 11;420 10,724 10,426 10,153 10,251 7.5 7.2 7.3 7,s S.1 

Utah--------------------------------- 8,263 7,653 7,400 7,119 6,734 

Nevada4------------------------------ 73,233 6S,404 63,967 59,373 60>365 .s::: 19;:; 20::: 20%: 21i:i 

Pacific: 

Washington 429,320 2S,950 27,659 42s,230 42S,556 49.9 9.6 9.4 49.9 410.1 ,Oregon:------------------------------ 11,786 11,122 10,798 10,606 10,166 6.4 6.2 6.1 6,0 5.8 

California 121,359 114,128 109,642 10:,;3: 101,314 6.9 6.7 6.7 6,7 6.6 

Alaska------------------------------- 2,056 2,067 2,091 1,763 8.4 8.5 8.9 8.2 

Hawaii 5,750 5,4s4 5,29S 5;237 4,95s 8.4 7.9 S.o S.3 ;:: 

lHawaii included beginnins 1960. 2Data are estimated. 3Data are incomplete. 4Marriage licenses issued.


23 
-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------

Table 2. Number of marriages and marriage rates per 1,000 total residentpopulation, men and


Women 15 years of age and over, and unmarriedwomen 15 years of age and over: United States,


1940-63


[Refers only to marriages occurring in the United States. Rates for 1940,1950, and 1960 based on population enumerated as of April I and estimated as of July 1 for all other yearsl 

UnNumber of Resident Men, Women, married Year marriages ?opula- 15+ 15+ women, 

tion years xyears 15+

years 

l963-----------------------------------------------
 1,654,003


l962-----------------------------------------------
 1,577,000


1961 1,548,000


1960 1,523,000


l959-----------------------------------------------
 1,494,000


l958-----------------------------------------------
 1,451,000


l957-----------------------------------------------
 :1,518,000


l956-----------------------------------------------
 1,585,000


l955-----------------------------------------------
 1,531,000


l954-----------------------------------------------
 1,490,000


l953-----------------------------------------------
 1,546,000


l952-----------------------------------------------
 1,539,318


1951 1,594,694


1950 1,667,231


l949-----------------------------------------------
 1,579,798


l948-----------------------------------------------
 1,811,155


l947-----------------------------------------------
 1,991,878


l946-----------------------------------------------
 2,291,045


l945-----------------------------------------------
 1,612,992


l944--------------------------Y--------------------
 1,452,394


l943-----------------------------------------------
 1,577,050


1942 1,772,132


1941 1,695,999


1940 1,595,879


Rate per 1,000


in specifiedgroup


8.8 26.4 24.7 73.4 

8.5 25.5 23.9 71.2 

8.5 25.5 24.0 72.2 

8.5 25.4 24.0 73.5 

8.5 25.2 23.8 73.6 

8.4 24.8 23.5 72.0 

8.9 26.4 24.9 78.0 

9.5 27.8 26.4 82.4 

9.3 27.2 25.8 80.9 

9.2 26.9 25.4 79.8 

9.8 28.2 26.7 83.7 

9.9 28.3 26.8 83.2 

10.4 29.4 28.1 86.6 

11.1 30.7 29.8 90.2 

10.6 29.4 28.5 86.7 

12.4 34.0 33.0 98.5 

13.9 37.9 36.8 106.2 

16.4 44.5 42.8 118.1 

12.2 35.8 30.5 83.6 

10.9 31.2 27.8 76.5 

11.7 32.2 30.6 83.0 

13.2 35.6 34.8 93.0 

12.7 34.0 33.7 88.5 

12.1 32.3 32.3 82.8 

24


L 
---

------------------------ -----

Table 3. Number of tirriages and marriage rates per 1,000 total population,men and women 15 years


of age and over, and unmarried women 15 vears .
 of age and over expressed as percents of 1959-61


averages: United States, 1940-63


Marriages


Number Marriages per 1,000 Marriages


persons, per 1,000


Year of per 1,000 15+ years unmarried
 total
 marriages women,
 population L-15+ years 

Men Women


Percent of 1959-61 average 

1959-61------------------------------------------ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

l963--------------------------------------------- 108.7 103.7 104.1 103.2 100.0 

l962--------------------------------------------- 103.7 100.1 100.5 99.8 97.0 

1961--------------------------------------------- 101.7 100.1 100.5 100.2 98.3 

1960--------------------------------------------- 100.1 100.1 100.1 100.2 100.1 

l959--------------------------------------------- 98.2 100.1 99.3 99.4 100.2 

l958--------------------------------------------- 95.3 99.2 97.8 98.2 98.1 

l957--------------------------------------------- 99.8 105.1 104.1 104.0 106.2 

l956--------------------------------------------- 104.2 112.2 109.6 110.3 112.2 

l955--------------------------------------------- 100.6 109.8 107.2 107.8 110.2 

l954--------------------------------------------- 97.9 108.7 106.0 106.1 108.7 

l953--------------------------------------------- 101.6 115.7 111.2 111.5 114.0 

1952------------------------------------------ 101.2 116.9 111.6 111.9 113.3 

1951--------------------------------------------- 104.8 122.8 115.9 117.4 117.9 

1950--------------------------------------------- 109.6 131.1 121.0 124.5 122.9 

1949---------------- 103.8 125.1 115.9 119.0 118.1 

1948--------------------------------------------- 119.0 146.4 134.0 137.8 134.2 

l947--------------------------------------------- 130.9 164.2 149.4 153.7 144.6 

l946--------------------------------------------- 150.6 193.7 175.4 178.8 160.9 

l945--------------------------------------------- 106.0 144.1 141.1 127.4 113.9 

l944--------------------------------------------- 95.4 128.7 123.0 116.1 104.2 

l943--------------------------------------------- 103.6 138.2 126.9 127.8 113.0 

l942--------------------------------------------- 116.5 155.9 140.3 145.4 126.7 

1941--------------------------------------------- 111.4 149.9 134.0 140.8 120.5 

1940--------------------------------------------- 104.9 .142.9 127.3 134.9 112.8 

25

-------

----------

Table 4. Number of resident population, by sex and age: United States, 1940-63


[Alaska included begi..ing
 1959 afid Hawaii, 1960. Figures include Armed Forces stationed in the United Stats but exclude those stationed outside the Unitsd States. All 

fi~.res are rounded to tbe newest thousand. Population enumerated as of April 1 for 1940, 1950, and 1960, and estimated as of July 1 for all other years] 

I I I I I I I I I I I 

Sex and age 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 

—
Men Number in thousands


All ages------- ?2,626 91,353 90,082 88,331 86,969 35,419 83,994 82,525 81,068	 79,427 77,980 76,801
 -


Under 15 years------- 29,878 29,566 29,318 28,358 27,727 27,008 26,408 25,611 24,800 23,957 23,132 22,350 

15-19 years---------- 7,748 7,437 6,888 6,634 6,450 6,167 5,772 5,526 5,377 5,337 5,237 5,148 

20-24 years---------- 6,023 5,665 5,445 5,272 5,168 4,997 4,880 4,868 4,870 4,662 4,735 4,883 

25-29 years---------- 5,336 5,270 5,281 5,333 5,346 5,442 5,564 5,647 5,685 5,732 5,782 5,801 

30-34 years---------- 5,537 5,635 5,735 5,846 5,869 5,933 5,944 5,988 5,999 5,941 5,834 5,814 

35-39 years---------- 5,997 6,047 6,081 6,080 6,025 5,958 5,926 5,840 5,746 5,690 5,643 5,620 

40-44 years---------- 5,945 5,854 5,767 5,676 5,617 5,573 5,527 5,472 5,410 5,349 5,282 5,223 

45-54 years---------- L0,495 10,380 10,257 10,093 9,945 9,784 9,629 9,459 9,312 9,164 9,009 8,882 

55-64 years---------- 7,891 7,775 7,663 7,537 7,445 7,352 7,292 7,237 7,151 7,060 6,981 6,908 

65+ years------------ 7,777 7,723 7,647 7,503 73376 7,207 7,053 6,877 6,718 63534 6,344 6,173 

a


All ages------- )5,905 94>469 92,961 90,992 89,544 37,901 86,.377 

T84.781 83.240 SlJ&7
 80,262 _78,886


Under 15 years------- 28,857 28,564 28>336 27,428 26,796 26,081 25,486 24,707 23,915 23,097 22,295 21,534


15-19 years---------- 7,663 7,388 6,836 6,586 6,413 6,157 5,817 5,603 5,458 5,387 5,284 5,212


20-24 years---------- 6,284 5,928 5,699 5,528 5,464 5,356 5,284 5,289 5,335 5,397 5,517 5,663


25-29 years---------- 5,522 5,462 5,469 5,536 5,541 5,648 5,781 5,877 5,947 6,034 6,117 6,157


30-34 years---------- 5,760 5,874 5,980 6,103 6,131 6,198 6,224 6,277 6,306 6,263 6,191 6,139


35-39 years---------- 6,289 6,359 6,400 6,402 6,341 6,266 6,214 6,104 5,997 5,937 5,896 5,851


40-44 years---------- 6,271 6,164 6,050 5,924 5,853 5,788 5,723 5,652 5,578 5,505 5,427 5,338


45-54 years---------- 10,970 10,801 10,625 10,393 10,246 10,057 9,868 9,670 9,497 9,323 9,145 8,985


55-64 years---------- 8,501 s,344 8,199 8,036 7,91s 7,786 7,680 7,576 7,435 7,288 7>150 7,009


65+ years------------ 9,790 9,585 9,365 9,056 8,842 8,564 8,300 8,024 7,772 7,506 7,239 6,996


Sex and age 1951 1950 1949 1948 1947 1946 1945 1944 1943 ‘1942 1941 1940


& Number in thousands


All ages------- 75,821 74,833 ~ 72,594 71,271 59,302 62,639 53, ”898 66,061 66,662 66.639 66,062 

Under 15 years------- 21,542 !0,611 20,044 19,346 L8,663 17,86( 17,583 17,317 17,139 16,823 16,716 16,726


15-19 years---------- 5,166 5,311 5,345 5,445 5,425 5,16( 4,987 5$262 5,694 5,994 6,123 6,180


20-24 years---------- 5,234 5,606 5,601 5,651 5,632 5,47; 3,313 3,964 5,004 5,556 5,734 5,692


25-29 years---------- 5,860 5,972 5,938 5,898 5,855 5,714 3,861 4,437 5,109 5,355 5,488 5,451


30-34 years---------- 5,715 5,625 5,57E 5,514 5,461 5,372 4,286 4,583 4,967 5,084 5,113 5,070


35-39 years---------- 5,571 5>518 5,43C 5,316 5,217 5,12( 4,513 4,633 4,790 4,834 4,s2.4 4,746


40-44 years---------- 5,148 5,070 5,004 4,919 4,843 4,77( 4,628 4,595 4,556 4,526 4,485 4,419


45-54 years---------- 8,769 8,655 8>624 8,565 8,519 8,45! 8,365 8,280 8,205 8,129 8,054 7,962


55-64 years---------- 6,809 6,697 6,592 6,439 6,303 6,171 6,051 5,930 5,822 5,710 5,592 5,434


65+ years------------ 6,007 5,767 5,66( 5,500 5,352 5,19[ 5,052 4,899 4,775 4,650 4,521 4,381


=


All ages------- 77.490 75,864 74.85( 73.499 72.17? 70,751 69,841 68,987 68,183 67,258 66,482 65,608


Under 15 years !0,765 9,871 .9,334 LS,661 .7,999 17,227 16,994 ‘.6,780 16,575 16,302 ‘.6 

15-19 years---------- 5,217 5,305 5,381 5,496 5,615 5,734 5,844 5,929 6,000 6,059 6,107 6,153 

20-24 years 5,77L 5,876 5,916 5,956 5,983 5,997 5,974 5,986 5,986 5,970 5,943 5,895 

25-29 years---------- 6,218 6,270 6,226 6,156 6,079 6,003 5,923 5,87S 5,836 5,787 5,731 5,646 

30-34 years---------- 6,026 5,892 5,838 5,760 5,682 5,608 5,532 5,467 5,406 5,339 5,270 5,172 

35-39 years---------- 5,799 5,729 5,641 5,524 5,409 5,306 5,213 5,133 5,060 4,986 4,908 4,800 

40-44 years---------- 5,246 5,134 5,072 4,989 4,907 4,s30 43754 4,679 4,608 4,536 4,463 4,369 

45-54 years---------- 8,843 8,688 8,627 8,533 8,443 8,347 8,234 8,102 7,972 7,838 7,704 7,550 

55-64 years---------- 6,S43 6,672 6,552 6,383 6,223 6,071 5,930 5,782 5,646 5,509 5,367 5,189 

65+ years------------ 6,763 6,427 6,262 6,040 5,833 5,629 5,442 5,24S 5,092 4,933 4,767 4,587 

,223 16,246


26 
Table 5. Number of unmarried resident womenl~~oy~s of age and over, by age: United States,


Year 

Total, 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-64 6%-
 15+


years years years years years years years years years


Number in thousands


1963----------------------------22,529 6,675 2,072 717 588 679 815 4>860 6,123


1962----------------------------22,156 6,324 1,850 732 734 820 931 4,854 5,911


1961----------------------------21,440 5,835 1,797 752 686 735 845 4,950 5,840


1960----------------------------20,725 5,555 1,686 765 688 761 834 4,869 5,567


1959----------------------------20,286 5,381 1,680 676 665 739 829 4,700 5,300


1958----------------------------20,147 5,154 1,682 815 677 749 842 4,976 5,252


1957----------------------------19,458 4,904 1,659 792 698 742 847 4,897 5,070


1956----------------------------19,235 4,633 1,622 817 673 860 965 4,715 4,950


1955---------------------------- 18,925 4,593 1,655 872 724 777 884 4,569 4,851


1954---------------------------- 18,664 4,606 1,774 832 808 768 871 4,391 4,614


L953----------------------------18,468 4,449 1,715 888 749 787 877 4,603 4,400


1952---------------------------- 18,494 4,396 1,778 970 780 816 885 4,524 4;345


1951---------------------------- 18,417 4,39: 1,890 901 850 792 843 4,482 4,263


1950---------------------------- 18,404 4,360 1,980 1,007 777 878 913 4,336 4,145


1949----------------------------18,230 4,456 1,921 1,086 849 826 863 4,261 3,968


1948----------------------------18,391 4,619 2,063 1,110 882 840 854 4,162 3,861


1947----------------------------18,760 4,827 2,276 1,151 945 861 845 4,060 3,795


1946----------------------------19,402 5,156 2,504 1,090 1,062 998 703 4,125 3,764


1945----------------------------19,283 5,200 2,562 1,167 1,007 977 761 4,026 3,583


1944----------------------------18,982 5,178 2,569 1,226 915 934 842 3,916 3,4o2


1943----------------------------19,009 5,217 2,617 1,286 905 913 879 3,879 3>313


1942----------------------------19>056 5,296 2,683 1,328 930 903 867 3,829 3,220


1941---------------------------- 19,161 5,360 2,771 1,393 970 898 862 3,787 3,120


1940---------------------------- 19,253 5,422 2,854 1,451 1,007 892 851 3,741 3>035


27

Table 6. Marriage ratea, by previous marital status and age of bride and groom: marriage-regis- ,


tration area, 1960 and 1963


1963 1960


Previous marital status and age


==1== -“’


All unmarried Rate per 1,000 in specified group


All ages, 14+ yeara-------------------------------- 61.7 72.5 64.1 75.0 

14-19 years---------------------------------------------- 63.5 20.4 76.6 23.5 

20-24 yeara---------------------------------------------- 264.5 195.1 277.1 212,7 

25-44 years---------------------------------------------- 111.6 149.7 102.5 137.7 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------- 19.3 45.2 18.5 46.2 

65+ years------------------------------------------------ 2.2 15.1 2.3 13.4 

Single, never married 

All agea, 14+ years-------------------------------- 82.0 66.6 87.5 70.7 

14-19 years---------------------------------------------- 61.4 20.0 74.7 23.1 

20-24 years---------------------------------------------- 249.7 189.1 263.9 206.0 

25-44 years---------------------------------------------- 84.8 112.9 78.6 111.3 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------- 8.4 12.7 8.6 13.2 

65+ years------------------------------------------------ 1.1 3.7 1.0 3.5 

Widowed and divorced 

All ages, 14+ years-------------------------------- 33.0 97.1 32.7 89.1 

14-24 years---------------------------------------------- 467.0 337.5 407.7 392.9 

25-44 years---------------------------------------------- 139.6 302.6 131.8 244.3 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------- 22.9 81.4 22.0 85.1 

65+ years------------------------------------------------ 2.3 18.7 2.5, 16.6 

Widowed


All agea, 14+ years-------------------------------- 10.2 38.4 10.4 36.1 

14-44 years---------------------------------------------- 66.6 163.8 61.7 134.0 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------- 16.2 70.1 14,9 68.4 

65+ years------------------------------------------------ 2.0 17.4 2.1 15.5 

Divorced


All ages, 14+ years-------------------------------- 133.5 177.0 122.1 i67.7 

14-24 years---------------------------------------------- 565.9 353.1 433.4 360.4 

25-{4 years---------------------------------------------- 179.0 306.6 , 171.7 262.4 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------- 45.2 89.5 44.7 96.5 

65+ yeara------------------------------------------------ 9.7 26.5 8.8 30.0 

28

.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

--- ---

---

--- --- --- ---

---

------

--- --- ---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

--- ---

Table 7. Number of marriages, by previous marital status and age of bride and groom: marriage-registration are!, 1960


[Figuc.s .x.l.do ~. nocstated fo?1960; agenotstated
 wasdistrib.tedfor ISL33. Figure. fop me.rcir,gesin which one or both partners were widowed or divorced ex.lud{.11 such msrrisg.s 

fmn Michi.mn and Ohio in both vears and from Lo.isinnain19631 . . 

1963


Previous marital Age of gram
 status of bride


and groom and
 age of bride


All Under 20-24 25-44 45-64 65+ All
 20
 ages years years years years years ages


All marriages 

All ages--- 1,033,950 W 470,006 332,034 

Under 20 years--- 368,981 ,15,128 220,183 33,271


20-24 years------ 376,921 15,232 232,689 127,461


25-44 years------ 214>619 900 17,057 162,933
 7


45-64 years------ 64,163 77 8,344


65+ years-------- 9,266 25


I
 Bride single,


groom single


o


All ages--- 713,488 26,598 421,471~ 160,122


Under 20 years--- 341,100 ,12,128 205,646 23,222


20-24 years------ 307,382 13,954 207,211 86,010


25-44 years------ 62>125 516 8,592 50>415


45+ years-------- 2>881 22 475
 — —


Bride single,


groom divorced


Number of marriages 

?8,685

I_

21,965 868,796
 —


364 35 330,963


1,444 95 285,283


12,610 1,119 190,030


i2,889 12,853 54,666


1,378 7,863 7,854


5,297 605,202


104 309,929


207 232,618


2,602 59,942


2,384 2,713


All ages--- 49,727 10,033 34,72.3 &c@ 526 39,863 

Under 25 years--- 32,074 9>720 21,717 613 24 23,006 

25-44 years------ 16,047 313 12,880 2,797 57 15,078 

45-64 years------ 1,494 126 1,035 333 1,748 

65+ years-------- 112 112 31 

Bride divorced,


groom single


All ages--- 53,476 19.405 30.738 3.187 146 45,497


Undar 25 years--- 27,804 14,098 7,689 17 16,845


25-44 years------ 28>921 5,292 21,932 1,695 2 26,182


45-64 yeaits 2,696 15 1,117 1,425 139 2,179


~
 65+ years-------- 55 50 291


Bride divorced


groom divorced


All ages--- 77.953 4.840 52.918 L9.158 1.037 60,168


Under 25 years--- 12,910 3,620 8,999 286 < 9,995 

25-44 years------ 53,035 1,210 41,717 9,997 111 40,462 

45-64 years------ 11,716 10 2,202 8,822 682 9,448 

65-Hyears-------- 292 53 239 263 

,,. , 

1960 .


,. 

Age of groom “, 

,; Under 

20 

years 

20-24 25-44 “ 4S-64 years years ; years 

65+ 

years 

,, 

,. ’.’ 

.15,3241377,295 M.&	 _ - 70,132 17,933

.05,076 190,970 34;555 352 10


9,912 171,004 .03,2i5 1,092 40


336 15,271 .43,124 30,150 1,149


50 7517.8 37,066 10,372


26 1,472 6,362


,,


.,


.11,966 340,425 .48,245 4,566


.02,779 179,968 27,022 160


8,973 152,152 $1,183 310


214 8,305 $4,384 2,039


+ 656 2,057 

7,468 ,: 27,597 4,461 337


‘ 6,803 15,826 357 20 ., 

665 11,606 T2,766 41

165 1,338
 245

31


14.485 27,802 2,887 323


10,648 6,167 -+ 30 

3,807 21,064 1,271 40 

30 571 1,476 102 

110 181 

3,521 39,197 16,252 1,198


2,456 7,435 104 

1,065 30,299 t 9,017 81 

1>463 7,091 894 > 

40 223 

29 

i

Table 7. Number of marriages, by previous marita1 status and age of bride and groom: marriage-registration area, 1960—COII.


[Figures
 exclude age not stated for 1960; age not stated was distributed for 1968. Figures for rrmmiages in vhich . . . or both partners were widowed or divcmed exol.de .11 such marriages 

fmm Miohigm and Ohio in both wars and from Louisiana in 19881 

1963 1960


Previous marita1 status of bride and groom and age of bride


Bride single, groom widowed Number of marriages 

All ages------------------------------------------------- 8,015 1,469 3,212 L,334 8,025 3,667 3,042 1,316 

Under 45 years------------------------------------------------- 5,307 3,394 1,632 281 6,025 3,626 2,oo5 ’394 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------------- 2,349 75 1,555 719 1,726 41 1,037 648 

65+ years------------------------------------------------------ 359 25 334 274 274 

Bride widowed, groom single 

All ageS------------------------------------------------- 10,361 7.200 2.637 524 9,992 7,237 2,087 668 

Under 45 years------------------------------------------------- 7,019 5,390 599 30 6,708 5,135 553 20 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------------- 2,954 800 1,863 291 2,910 L,082 1,383 445 

65+ years------------------------------------------------------ 388 10 175 203 374 20 151 203 

Bride widowed, groom widowed 

All ages------------------------------------------------- 22,518 L,522 0,903 D,093 L9,578 L,472 9.945 9.161 

Under 45 years------------------------------------------------- 3,283 1,255 1,814 214 3,221 1,136 1,905 180 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------------- 14,255 267 8,650 5,338 L2,116 336 7,406 $>374 

65+ years------------------------------------------------------ 4,980 439 $>541 4,241 - 634 3,607 

Bride widowed, gromn divorced 

All ages------------------------------------------------- 16,949 7.257 8.577 1.115 L3,020 6,023 6,007 990 

Under 45 years------------------------------------------------- 7,714 5,517 2,167 3C 6,431 4,672 1,738 21 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------------- 8,544 1,730 6,219 595 6,102 1,351 4,155 596 

65+ years------------------------------------------------------ 691 lC 191 49C 487 114 373 

Bride divorced, groom widowed 

All ages-----------------------------L------------------- 13,412 4,102 6,914 2,39! 11,304 2,52: 6,950 1.831 

Under 45 years------------------------------------------------- 7,590 3,881 3,531 176 5,692 2,20( 3,320 172 

45-64 years---------------------------------------------------- 5,358 222 3,320 l,81f 5,323 32: 3,588 1,412 

65+ years------------------------------------------------------ 464 63 401 289 42 247 

30 
--------

----------------------

----------------------

----------------------

----------------------

------------------------

-------

---------------------

---------------------

---------------------

---------------------

-----------------------

----------------------

----------------------

------------------------

--------

----------------------

----------------------

------------------------

Table 8. Number of unmarried resident population 14 years of age and over, by previous marital 

status, sex, and age: marriage-registration area, 1960 and 1963 

1963 I 1960 

Sex and age Total, 

Single Previously Total,


14i- 14-!­
 married


years years


* 

yerJ Number in thousands 

All ages, “14+ years 14,264 11,880 2,384 11,646 9,524 2,122 

14-19 years 6,438 6,435 3 4,916 4,912 4 

20-24 years 2,409 2,355 54 1,775 1,739 36 

25-44 years 2,218 1,804 414 2,094 1,695 399 

45-64 years 1,739 924 815 1,519 827 692 

65+ years 1,458 361 1,097 1,342 351 991 

Women


All ages, 14+ years 16,745 9,569 7,176 13,628 7.594 6,034 

14-19 years 5,814 5,804 10 4,318 4,303 16 

20-24 years 1,425 1,339 86 1,030 957 73 

25-44 years 1,923 1,013 910 1,854 1,050 804 

45-64 years 3,325 868 2,457 2,959 819 2,140 

65+ years 4,258 544 3,714 3,467 465 3,002 

MRA, excluding Louisiana, I MRA, exc~i;~=ichigan


Michigan, and Ohio


I 

Sex and age I I II I 

Total,


14+
 vorced 

years J5_l!2z’ ‘“ Di­

‘ing’e k 

Number in~thousands 

Ail.ages, 14+ years-------- 12,129 10,148 1,1561 826 9,940 8,161 1,096 683 

I 

14-24 years 7,504 7,450 11 43 5,731 5,697 3 31 

25-44 years 1,936 1,581 45 310 1,790 1,457 54 279 

45-64 years---------------------- 1,469 801 301 366 1,291 711 295 285 

65+ years 1,220 316 799 106 1,129 297 744 88 

Women


All ages, 14+ years 14,072 8,083 4,903 1,087 11,601 6,457 4,179 965


14-24 years 6,056 5,989 5 62 4,519 4,445 11 63


25-44 years---------------------- 1,600 840 261 498 1,577 900 256 421


45-64 years 2,792 764 1,587 442 2,535 709 1,441 385


65+ years 3,622 488 3,049 85 2,970 403 2,471 96


31

TECHNICAL 

Introduction 

This section includes data and explanations of the 

information available about the coverage of the statis -

tics presented in this report. Data are presented showing the completeness of tbe statistics, the specifications 

of the samples of marriage records, and approximations 

of the sampling errors of the statistics used in the 

analyses. 

Terms and Procedures 

Mawiage vates. —The marriage rates presented in 

this report are measures of the incidence of marriages 

during a year, or, stated differently, probabilities that 

marriages will occur in eligible populations based on 

their incidence in the period covered. The rates shown 

vary conceptually in the kinds of probability of which 

they are estimates. 

1.	 Marriages per 1,000 vesident population. —l%is 

is an overall estimate of the probability of 

marriages in an entire population. As such, it 

is comparable to crude rates of other vital 

events (births, deaths, divorces) in the same 

resident population. Such rates are useful in 

providing information about a population when 

they are related to other similarly defined rates 

in describing the overall characteristics of the 

population. 

2.	 Marviages pev 1,000 women ov men 15 yeavs of 

age and ove~. —These rates measure the probabilities of marriages occurring in populations 

of adults. As is the case for all of the rates, 

the populations are composed of residents. 

The first two types of rates are crude measures 

of incidence in populations. As such, they cannot be 

used as estimates of average probabilities of marriage 

to individuals in these populations since many of the 

individuals included are not legally eligible to marry, 

being already married or too young. Other rates are 

based on unmarried populations which also exclude 

most persons too young to marry. Some of the persons 

in these populations, even though unmarried, would 

APPENDIX 

encounter legal obstacles to marrying; however, their 

number is small relative to the number of persons in 

the total or adult populations not eligible to marry. 

3.	 Mawiages per 1,000 unmawied women 15-44 

yeazs of age and 15 years of age and ovev, 

United Stutes. —The numerators of these rates 

are marriages occurring in the specified year 

in the United States. The base populations are 

unpublished figures prepared by the U.S. Bureau 

of the Census. They are enumerated as of 

April 1 for 1940, 1950, and 1960 and estimated 

as of July 1 for all other years. The rate for unmarried women 15 years of age and over is an 

estimate of the probability of marriage over 

this age span. The rate based on unmarried 

women 15-44 years of age is an approximation 

of a rate from which the probability of marriage 

could be inferred since the numerator is marriages to women of all ages. The appropriate 

numerator of the number of marriages of women 

in this age interval was not available for the 

United States except for 1960. When the estimate of the number of brides aged 15-44 was 

used for 1960, the estimate of the rate for that 

year was 134.4 instead of 148.0, which was 

estimated using brides of all ages as the numerator. It appears from figures on age at 

marriage that the magnitude of the rates for the 

MRA for brides 15-44 years is about 10 percent smaller than that of rates for all brides. 

4.	 Mawiages’ pev 1,000 unmawied worn en OY men 

of specified ace and marital status, mawiage ­

~eg+s tvation ayea. —These rates by age and 

marital status are shown in table 6. (Marriage 

rates per 1,000 unmarried women or men 15 

years of age and over are included on the key 

statistical information page at tie front of this 

publication.) The numerators are numbers of 

marriages in which the bride or groom was of 

the specified marital status before marriage and 

included in the specified age at marriage. The 

denominators are estimates of the population 

resident in the marriage-registration area as of 

32 
April 1, 1960, or July 1, 1963, with the same 

sex, age, and marital status characteristics as 

the brides or grooms included in the numerator. 

(As explained subsequently under “Adjustments 

and limitations of rates, ” rates for widowed and 

for divorced persons exclude estimates for 

Michigan and Ohio in 1960 and 1963 and for 

Louisiana in 1963 from both numerator and denominator.) The base population estimates for 

1963 are consistent with population estimates 

published in Cuv~ent Population Repovts.2 

5. Marriages par 1,000 ream-mum-possible maYm“ages of unmavried men and women of specified 

mavital .svWuses and/or ages.—These rates are 

shown in table C. Each rate is computed using 

the number of marriages of brides of specified 

age at marriage and marital status before marriage to grooms of specified age and marital 

status as the numerator and the lesser of the 

two eligible populations as the denominator. The 

two eligible populations are unmarried men of 

the same marital status and age as the grooms 

and unmarried women of the same marital status 

and age as the brides. For example, for 1960 the 

rate of marriages per 1,000 maximum possible 

marriages of previously single women under 25 

years to previously divorced men under 25 years 

is computed using 6,803 marriages as the numerator and 31,000 divorced men under 25 

years as the denominator. Of the two eligible 

populations, the number of divorced men under 

25 years is smaller than the number of single 

women under 25 years. This rate, R, may be 

expressed as the ratio of two other rates. In a 

population, P, composed only of the two eligible 

groupa of men, Pm, and women, Pw, if Pm< Pw , 

the maximum possible rate of marriage is Rmax= 

&#P].1000. If M,., is the estimated number of 

marriages which occurred between persons in 

Pm and Pw in the year 1963, then the actual rate 

of marriage in population, P, is Re,t=[&t/ZjlOOO. 

The ratio of the estimated rate to the maximum 

possible rate can be expressed as follows: 

~e,t,Rmax = [Me,t/~.looo = M /pm 

est . [PJP].1OOO 

If Pw< Pm the result would of course be M,,t jPw, 

and if Pm= Pw this figure would be the denominator. Thus the rate per 1,000 maximum possible number of marriages is a ratio of an observed rate at which an event occurs to the 

maximum possible rate at which the event could 

occur. 

213uRau of the Census: Estimates of the poptdatimrof States, by 

age, July 1, 1963. Current Population Reports. Series P-25, No. 294. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington. U.S. Government Printing 

Office, Nov. 5, 1964. . 

Adjustments and limitations of Yates. —Marriages 

occurring in the MRA include some brides and grooms 

who were not living in the MRA. In 1963, 2.5 percent of 

the brides and 3.7 percent of the grooms reported residences in non-MRA States, and another 0.3 percent of 

each reported their residence as outside the United 

States. It seems likely that more residents of States in 

the MRA were married in States outside the MRA than 

vice versa, probably by a ratio of about 2 to 1. 

In 1961 the District of Columbia, Indiana, and Massachusetts were added to the MRA. All tabulations. and 

rate computations were made using the areas participating in the MRA as of each year. Comparisons of the 

percent distributions of age and marriage order of 

brides and grooms in 1963 for the MRA including and 

excluding marriages reported in 1963 by these three 

reporting areas indicate only small differences in these 

distributions, even though the three areas accounted for 

over half of the increase in total marriages for the MRA 

in 1963 compared with the total for the MRA in 1960. 

Also the 1963 rate of 8.0 per 1,000 resident population 

for the MRA is only reduced to 7.9 when these three 

areas are excluded. The similarity of the percent distributions of marriage order and age at marriage in 

1963 for the entire MRA and for the MRA excluding the 

three reporting areas is shown in table I. 

Marital status of previously widowed and divorced 

brides and grooms could not be classified for Michigan 

and Ohio in both 1960 and 1963 because these data were 

not requested on the marriage record forms of these 

two States. In 1963 previous marital status was not 

classified for Louisiana due to incomplete reporting and 

the use by some local offices of outdated forms which 

did not include an item on marital status before the 

current marriage. 

Hence data on remarriages of widowed and divorced 

women and men exclude Michigan and Ohio for both 

1960 and 1963 and Louisiana for 1963. Base populations 

for 1960 of widowed and divorced persons, excluding 

Michigan and Ohio, were prepared from 1960 census 

figures, and for 1963 they were estimated by the Bureau 

of the Census. Later the 1963 base populations were 

adjusted to exclude Louisiana also by distributing, 

proportional to the reported age by marital status distributions for Louisiana from the 1960 census, the 

appropriate age group totals (14 years of age and over) 

estimated for Louisiana as of July 1, 1963. The results 

of these proportional distributions by sex, previous 

marital ‘status, and age for Louisiana were deducted 

from corresponding base populations which already 

excluded Michigan and Ohio (table I). Marriage rates 

by previous marital status of the bride and groom, in 

which either or both were widowed or divorced, exclude these States. The only rates (table C) which 

include these States are those for which age of all 

brides is classified by age of all grooms and those for 

which age of single brides is classified by age of single 

grooms. 

33 
------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

---------- -------- -------- -------- ---

------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

--------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------

------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

--------- --------- --------- ----------- ---------

------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

---------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -----

-------- ---------- -------- --------

-------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------

------------------------------------------

Table 1. Percent distribution of marriages, by nwrriage order and age of bride and groom: marriage-registration area. 1963 

Marriage order and age at marriage 

Marriage order 

Total 

First mrriage 

Rarriage 

Under 

18-19 

20-24 

25-29 

30-34


35-44


45-54


55-64 

First marriage 

Total 

18 years -------.


years---------------------------------"-------------­


years---------------------------------------:-------­


years


years


years


vears


~ears


65 years and over 

Under 

20-24 

25-29 

30-34 

35-44 

45-54 

55-64 

Remarriage 

Total 

20 years


years


years


years


years ----.--- ----k­


years-------------------------------&---------------­ ----= vears 65 yea;s and over 

Bride Groom I


MM,. MRA, Entire exc.lud~ng Entire excluding 

3 areas~ 3 areasl 

I 

Percent distribution 

100.0 ~ 100.0 I.00.O 100.0 

76.8 76.7 77.4 77.2 

23.2 23.3 22.6 22.8 

100.0 100.0 LOO .0 100.0 

14.8 15.0 

30.7 30.7 1::: 1::: 

42.6 42.4 56.3 56.3 

6’.7 6.6 16.7 16.6 

2.3 2.3 5.4 ;.: 

1.9 2.0 3.6 

0.7 0.7 1.0 1:0 

0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 

0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

0.2 0.3


1;:: 1%: 

15.5 15.5 1;:; 1::; 

14.0 14.0 13.7 13.8 

24.1 24.3 25.9 26.0 

16.0 15.9 17,7 17.8 

11.0 11.0 

<:: H 8.9 8.9 

lExcludes Indiana, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia. 

Procedures for analysis ofvariation between 1960 

and 1963 mawiage rates per 1,000 maximum possible 

marviages.—Rates of marriage per 1,000 maximum 

possible marriages in1960 and 1963 were computedas 

measures of rates at which persons of a specified 

marital status and age selected marriage partners of 

specified marital statuses and ages. The analysis of 

differences in these rates compared expected overall 

rates with corresponding rates computed for 1963. 

In the first procedure each specific rate for1963 

was multiplied by the corresponding population of1960 

and the products summed across age groups to obtain 

an expected number of marriages. 

The comparative overall rates were computedby 

the same procedures, except that the specific rates 

were those of 1960 and the specific populations were 

those of 1963. 

.%ocedu~es for computation of expec ted t~ends in’ 

mawiuges and mcwviage vates, 1940-63. —Age-specific 

marriage rates for unmarried women 15 years of age 

andover (table5) werecomputedfor 1960for the United 

States. The expected number E(M) of marriages, based 

on these 1960 specific rates, was computed for each 

year 1940-59 and 1961-63, using the formula, fl(~)~ 

! 

;1 Ri_60 Pi_,, where Ri_GO is the marriage rate id, 

1960 for unmarried women in the ith age interval, and 

PI_ ~ is the population of unmarried women in the ith 

age interval in theyth year of the series 1940-59 ancl 

1961-63. The populations of unmarried females 15 

years of age and over for the period 1940-63 were 

estimated by the Bureau of the Census for use in computing birth and marriage rates during this period. 

34 

I 
--------- -------- -------- ---------

-------- --------- -----------------

-------- -------- -------- ----------

-------- -------- -------- -------- --

-------- ----------- -------- -------

----------- -------- -------- -------

-------- ---------------- -------- --

--------- -------- ---------------- ---------- -------- --------- -------

-------- ---------------- -------- --

------------ -------- -------- ------

--------------- -------- -------- ---

Place and Time of Occurrence Table II. Number of counties not reporting 

marriages: United states, 1948-63 

Marriage statistics for the United States are I 

based on counts of marriages performed during the, Year Number 

data year by place of occurrence, except that a few 

States report number of marriage licenses issued dur- 1963 

ing the year. Statistics’ for the marriage-registration 1962 : 

areas are tabulated by place and time of occurrence. 1961----------------------------------

1960 

16 

) 

1959 1: 

Coverage of Statistics 1958----------------------------------

1957 2; 

United States. —All data exclude Alaska for years 

1956----------------------------------

1955 

30 

35 

preceding 1959 and Hawaii for years preceding 1960. 1954---------------------------------- 35 

Total marriages for the United States in 1963 is the 

sum of annual totals reported for each of the 50 States 

1953 

1952 

1951 

37 -

:; 

and the District of Columbia. Within the States esti- 1950 

mates were made for only seven nonreporting counties 1949 E 

1948 81 of a total of 3,113 counties or equivalent local areas in 

m.. .,,,0 ”,. llCWSE No. r 1 l“..” s“”,. ” .0, 6s.,,,0, 

us. nAt40ARD 

COUNN D*7E CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE ,,.7, ml .“..6” 

TYY;MO; ~PRRN:N;N /= RooM_NmE M,,T A1.. u *.,, 

~ SK IIANDBDOK FOR ,,


~ IMSIRUCIIOM ~~,DENcE_~,ArE INSIDE Cm LIMITS 

~ ,, PEC!FTY,S 01,.40., 

$ 

. 

5 .0”.,1”, s 

. 1,, 

; FATHER—NAME STATE OF BIRTH, MNoTIN”.L4., iiOTHEt-MAIDEN NwE STATE OF BIRTH ur Nor IM “.s4, 

. . . . CO”.mr! NAME ..”.,*,, g 

5,, Sb, k. 6b. 

i BRIDE-NAME ‘,!s, Woolf us, MAIDEN NAME ‘,, .W,,,w) 

< 

; 7., 76. 

< RESIDENCE—STATE CIW, TOWN, OR L0C4T10N	 !?4,,., Vrf LI”ns 

(S,,c,m “,s 0, .0, 

f k, 

2

; 

8,. 

: FATHER-NAUE STATE OF BIRTH (,v1407,N”.$L. ?iOTHER-MAfOfN NbJ4f STATE 0F81RTH (IF NOI ,. “.s.~, 

s .,., COur,m,, NAN, CO”.m,, 

. 

. Il.. IIb, Im. l:h. 

: APPLICANT-SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED I...DAYAY, A,,,, 

~z 

~:~ ~ lab. 

— APPL!CANT-SIGNAIWf DATE SIGNED 1-Om*.oAY.~_~, j: 

;% 14., Mb 

>: ;~~;wpEyS;:Ny ~&vE *W. 0.7 “at PLACE OF MARRIAGE-COUNTY STATE 

< 

1s. 

0ATE51GNED c140.rH, IW,VL..8 OrflclANT-.t”o3o”s m Ccvn <sm.,” 1 . 

s 

; 15.. lsf, 

=. WilNESS-SIGNATURE wllNES5-SIGNAWRE 

5 

s I&, 16h, . LOCAL WFIC!AL MAKING RE:URN ~ S7A~ HEALTH Department DATE RECEIVED BY 10 CAL OFFICIAL I.ONT?+. DN, =AR4 

: 

. 

: 17,. SIGNAWRF m. 

~ CONFIDE~lAL INFORMATION 

; / W14BW. 0, IF PREVlOUSLY MARRIED EOuUTiON—sPECIFY HIGHE~ GRADE cOMpcfnn 

. ME-GROOM 7“!5 UAW,.., u,, ..,,,.., ,*,, ,,fm, m,” “G. -L Comfct 

w“!,,, .,0”0, ..,,,,.. ,m.,AN, “c, H“,,, $,,0”0, 

M,%”:, O, “0”’” “A* ‘“,’,’,”, .-. “’ “ ‘ “,’0’ “ “’,” “’‘+ ‘ % ,sPEaPv , ‘m. “’’”m’ ,...,.,.’7,,,,0”) ~ 

> 18, 19. m,, m. 11. : 

Wu., m OF IF PREVlOU SLY MARRIED EWtiTlON-SFfCIF’f HIGHEST GRADE CO,VPMJED

I RACE-BRIDE mls M4mIAOE u,, ... ”,.., ,A,~ ,Lr.c.r.,” “G” SCHOOL COLllGt ~ W“!% “,0”., $.C, KA” !m.mw m ,,ss,, SECOND, ‘Nero lr— MOM ‘(u, ,,,,.,.,,4, m ,, (,.,,,. 61 .! ,8,2. >,,, 0,,+) “ ,SPEOIV, cm, ,S,,c,rf, mm., .!”0”.,, 0! 

. ..”..,., ,,FKWV,


: 

. \n. 23. 21, !lb. 25. 

“.,. a“<.”.,”, ,n,w,.. orrlm: !,670-*.I -661 

Figure 1. Standard Certificate of Marriage 

35 
---------------------------- --------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

---

---- ------ ----

---

the Nation. The totalareportedby 43 Statesand the conductedby Stateofficials
 (inNew York City,thecity


Districtof Columbia are based on countsofindividual clerk)to obtainannualcountsofmarriages from local


marriage reportsincentralized files. InsixStatesand offices. Inone Statewithoutacentralfile,
 localofficials


New York City, without centralfiles,surveys were reportedto theNationalCenter forHealthStatistics
 on


Table III. Percent of marriages for which selected characteristics were not stated, by source of


nonresponse: marriage-registration area, 1960 and 1963


Characteristic


tionth of marriage


Date of marriage---------------”


Age


Bride


Groom


Color


Bride


Groom


First or remarriage


Bride


Groom


Previous marital status


Bride----------------------------------------
 Groom


Number of this marriage


Bride


Groom


State of residence


Bride


Groom


State of birth


Bride


Groom


Type of ceremony-----------------------------


1963


20.1


20.2


90.3
 2am3


22.9 18.6


22.9 18.6


1.2


1.L


:.; 3.7
 . 3.7


3.8 1.9


3.6 1.9


0.8


1.0


4.8 0.9


4.5 0.9


12.3 9.5


Percent 

20.1 0.4 

20.2 0.5 

20.3 0.5


20.3 0.5


4.3 9.2


4.3 8,.9


1.4


M 1.3


5.5
 ::: 5.3


1.8 4.3


1.8 4.1


0.8


1.0 ;:::


3.9


3.6


2.8 11.2


0.4


0.5


0.5


0.5


7.8 1.4 

7.8 1.1 

1.4 

1.3


3.8


3.7


2.1


2.0


0.6


0.6


7.8 3.4


lRePorting areas not requesting certain items on their record fOrms were as follows:


Color (or race):Ohio in both 1963 and 1960, and~alifornia and New Jersey in 1963.


Previous marital status (for previously married persons):Michigan and Oh?o in both,1963 and 1960,


and Louisiana in 1963. 1


Number of this marriage (for previously married persons): Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, and Oregon in


both 1963 and 1960,


State of birth: District of Columbia in 1963.


Type of ceremony (civil or religious depending on title of officiant):Ohio in both 1963 and 1960,


and Kentucky in 1963.”


s~sti~tes based on preliminary counts; these cases were allocated for X963.


36

-----------------

---------------- --------------------

---------------------------------------------------

-----------------------

-----------------------------------------

-----------------

---------------------------------------

-----------

-------------------------

Table IV. Marriage sample-sampling rates and samp~~~size: marriage-registrationarea,“1960and
 J.>(J> 

!hmber of Estimated


Year and area Sampling sample number of
 rate
 records marriages


1963 . 

Total, MRA---------------------------------------------- . . . 

“Stratum1: Alaska, Delaware,Vermont, Wyoming All records


Stratum 2: District of Columbia,Hawaii,Maine, Montana, New


Hampshire, Rhode Island, South Dakota; Utah----------------- 1/2


Stratum 3: Connecticut,Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana,Mississippi,


Nebraska, Oregon ------A- 1/5


Stratum4: Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky,


Maryland,Massachusetts,New Jersey, Tennessee, Virginia,


Wisconsin 1/10


Stratum 5: Georgia, New York (excludingN? York City)-------- 1/20


Stratum 6: Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania 1/25


Stratum 7: California 1/40


1960


Total, MRA---------------------------------------------- ...


Stratum 1: Alaska, Delaware,Vermont, Wyoming All records


Stratum2: Maine, New Hampshire,Rhode Island, South Dakota,


Montana, Utah, Hawaii 1/10


Stratum 3: Connecticut,Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas,


Maryland,Virginia, Florida, Kentucky,Tennessee,Alabama,


Mississippi,Louisiana, Idaho, Oregon, New Jersey 1/20


Stratum 4: New York (excludingNew York City), Pennsylvania,


121,404 1,033,950


11,595 11,595


28,920 57,840


24,243 121,215


39,233 392,330


5,922 3-18,440


8,474 211,850


3,017 120,680


39,674 873,360


10,790 10,790


4,503 45,030


20,257 405,140


Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, California


a monthlybasis.In general,theannual”totak
 forthe


years1960-62haveadegreeofcompleteness
 ofcoverage


comparablewiththatfor1963.The amountofestimat-


ing for incompletereporting has steadily
decreased


duringtheperiod1940-63.No comprehensivetestof


completenessofreporting hasbeenconducted
todate.


However,thetrendtowardmore completecoverageis


shown inan approximate
wayby thedownwardtrendin


thenumber of counties
forwhichno reportswere re- “


ceived(table II).
Thesecountscanbemadefortlmyears


shownbutarenotavailable forearlier
years.


I ?Ja~@e-+e@s*ation a7ea.–Coverage for 1963\ 

consistedofmarriagesoccurringin 35 Statesandthe


Districtof Columbia.Of theseareastheDistrict
of


Columbia,Indiana,
and Massachusettswere theonly


areasnotintheMRAin 1960.


1/10( 4,124 412,400


The marriage-registration area cortsists
 ofthe


Statesand independent
 areasthatmeet thefollowing


criteria:


1. Centralfilesof
m,arnagerecords


2. A statistical
 reportform thatincludesitems


conformingcloselyto thoseon theStandard


Certificate
 ofMarriage(seefig.I)


3. Regularandtitnely reporting
byalllocalareas


4. Agreement on teatsof marriageregistration


completenessand accuracy,carriedout in


cooperatio~ withtheNational
CenterforHeakh.


Statistics.


Coverageforapecific statistical variables
 usedin


theanalysesof datafrom theMRA was completewith


the following two exceptions:
 race or colorwas not


37

--------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------

Table V. Approximate sampling errors	 of specified numbers of marriages: marriage-registration 

area, 1960 and 1963 

1963 1960 

Percent of marriage-registration area total 

Corresponding Sampling Corresponding Sampling

number errorl number errorl 

0.01 or----------------------------------------

99.99-------------------------------------

103 or 

1,033,847 40 87 or 

873,273 70 

0.05 or----------------------------------------

99.95------------------------------------ - 517 or 1,033,433 90 436 or 872,923 156 

0.1 or-----------------------------------------

99,.90-------------------------------------

1,034 or 

1,032,916 127 873 or 

872,487 221 

0.5 or-----------------------------------------

99.50-------------------------------------

5,170 or 1,028,780 283 4,367 or 

868,993 495 

1.0 or-----------------------------------------

99.0--------------------------------------

10,339 or 

1,023,610 399 8,7.34or 

864,626 696 

2.0 or-----------------------------------------

98.0--------------------------------------

20,679 or 

1,013,271 562 17,468 or 979 855,893 

3.0 or----------------------------------------- 31,018 or 97.0-------------------------------------- 1,002,931 685 26,201 or 

847,159 1,193


4.0 or----------------------------------------- 41,358 or 787 34,934 or 96.0-------------------------------------- 992,592 838,426 1,370 

5.0 Or---

9500-------------------------------------- 51,697 or 875 43,668 or 1,524 982,252 829,692 

7.0 or----------------------------------------- 72,376 or 1,024 61,135 or 93.0-------------------------------------- 961,573 812,225 1,784 -

10.0
) or---------------------------------------- 103,395 or 1,204 87,336 or 90.0-------------------------------------- 930,555 786,024 2,098 

15.0)	or---------------------------------------- 155,092 or 1,433 131,004or 85.0-------------------------------------- 2,497 878,857 742,356 

20.0
)	or---------------------------------------- 206,790 or 1,606 2,797 80.0-------------------------------------- 827,160 

25.0
)	or---------------------------------------- 258,487 or 1,738 218,340 or 75.0-------------------------------------- 775,463 655,020 3,028 

50.0 ) 516,975 2,007 436,680 3>497 

lAt the la level. 

available for Ohio in 1960 and 1963 and for California Completeness of Data


and New Jersey in 1963; previous marital status was


not available for Michigan and Ohio in both 1960 and Table III shows, for each characteristic tabulated


1963 and for Louisiana in 1963. The following figures and for 1960 and 1963, estimates of the number ofre­


are the percentages of estimated national totals of sponses not completed, the number of cases notreport­


marriages and of resident population included in the able (i.e., the number of cases for which data from a


MRA. reporting area could not be tabulated), and the total of


cases not stated (i.e., the sum of responses not comPercent inMIU: pleted and cases not reportable) for theMRA. 

Of vesident of total Characteristics of Samplss 

populationof 

United States 

mawiages 

in United 

States 

In table IV the sampling rates, sample sizes, and 

estimated numbers of marriages are shown for each 

reporting area in the marriage-registration area for 

1963----------------- 69 63 1960 and 1963. The States listed in each stratum were 

1960----------------- 67 57 sampled at the same rate. The minimum sample size 

38 
---------------------------

---------------------------

---------------------------

---------------------------

---------------------------

---------------------------

expected from each State for 1960 was 400records; for 

1963 it was 2,500 records. 

Sampling Error 

In table V approximate sampling errors are shown 

as standard errors (1uIfor estimates of frequencies corresponding to the specified proportions of the MRA 

totals. In table VI approximate sampling errors are 

shown for an array of frequencies which approximate 

the estimates of populations used as bases for marriage 

rates for the MRA in 1963. The estimates shown for 

age- sex groups are not based on sample data, but 

numbers in marital status subgroups (single, widowed, 

divorced) are based on sample dat~ the sampling error 

of each depends on the age-sex groups of which it is a 

part. Actual estimated sizes of age groups by sex and 

by marital status are shown in table 8. The populations 

used as bases for the marriage rates for the MRA in 

1960 have relatively small sampling errors compared 

with the numbers of marriages, since they are based 

on a 25-percent sample of the population enumerated 

on April 1, 1960. The sampling error of each such 

Table VI. Approximate sampling errors of specified estimates of Dowlations:marriage-registration area, 1963” -

Size of estimate Sampling 

error 1 

estimate for 1960 is negligible, approximately 0.7 percent as large as the est-tiated population. 

A few of the specific rates for the MRAin 1963 

have sampling errors so large relative to their sizes 

that they should be interpreted only as small and not 

as numerical estimates. These rates maybe identified 

by the following rule: 

Rates having as numewatoys less than about 500 

marriages have relativesamplingerrorsexceeding 

30 percent, given the range of base populations 

used. 

The specificrates shown intable6 ~oY1960 include 

some rates for which relative sampling errors are 

large. A corresponding rule for identifying these rates 

is as follows: 

Rates having as numerators less than about 650 

marriages have relativesamplingerrorsexceeding 

30 percent. 

For any rate shown for 1963, an approximate 

sampling error may be computed by selecting that 

numerator, &f, and that denominator, Ji!, from tables V 

and VI which most nearly equal those of the rate, along 

with the corresponding sampling errors S~ andSP and 

computing the relationship 

SR=.2K S_+s, where R= ~ 

P i &fz pz P 

Since the sampling errors ofthebase populations are 

negligible, for 1960 the sampling errors of the rates 

20,000 7,000 

50,000 

100,000 

11,000 

15,000 SR= R.% 

M 

200,000 21,000 

300,000 26,000 To determine whether the difference between any 

maybe computed by the simpler relationship 

400,000--------------------------- 30,000


500,000--------------------:------ 34,000 two rates is significant, divide the difference by the


750,000--------------------------- 41,000 square root of the sum of the squares of the standard


1,000,000--------------------------- 48,000 errors oftbe two rates beingcompared. Ifthe rates are
 1,500,000--------------------------- 57,000


2,000,000--------------------------- 66,000 designated byRi and Ri, with sampling errors :~ 1 

and ..””’


3,000,000--------------------------- 80,000 s~., the formula is


4,000,000--------------------------- 90,000 I 

R; –R,€ 5>000,000--------:------------------100,000


7,500,000---------------------------115,000


10,000,000 130,000


15,000,000---------------------------136,000


25,000,000---------------------------150,000 If the value of this explkssion equals about 2 or is 

larger, the probab~lity that the difference between the 

lAt the lU level. two rates is duetochance-is less than 1 in 20.” 

000 

*U. S. Government PRINTING OFFICE 1968—34W40/4 

39

U(JI LINE UF KEI’UKI 3EKIE3 tUK VI IAL AND HtALltl SlAT151iCS 

Public Health Service Publication Na. 1000 

Seyies 1.	Pvo~awzs and collection pvoceduYes.— Reports which describe the general programs of the National 

Center for Health Statistics and its offices and divisions, data collection methods used, definitions, 

and other material necessary for L!nderstanding the data. 

Seyies 2,	 Data evaluation and methods YeseaYch. —Studies of new statistical methodology including: experimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical 

techniques,, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, contributions to statistical theory. 

Seyies 3.	 Analytical studies. —Reports presenting analytical or interpretive studies based on vital and health 

statistics, carrying the analysis further than the expository types of reports in the other series. 

Series 4	 Documents and committee YepoYts. —Final reports of major committees concerned with vital and’ 

health statistics, and documents such as recommended model vital registration laws and revised birth 

and death certificates. 

Sevies 10. Data fyom the Health Interview Suvvey. —Statistics on illness, accidental injuries, disability, use of 

hospital, medical, dental, and other services, and other health-related topics, based on data collected 

in a continuing national household interview survey. 

Sevies 11.	 Data fyom the Hea.Jth Examination Survey. —Data from direct examination, testing, and measurement of national samples of the population provide the basis for two types of reports: (1) estimates 

of the medically defined prevalence of specific diseases in the United States and the distributions of 

the population with respect to physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics; and (2) 

analysis of relationships among the various measurements without reference to an explicit finite 

universe of persons. 

Se7-ies 12.	 Data from the Institutional Population Suvveys.— Statistics relating to the health characteristics of 

persons in institutions, and on medical, nursing, and personal care received, based on national 

samples of establishments providing these services and samples of the residents or patients. 

Sevies 13. Data j%om the Hospital DischaYge SuYvey.— Statistics relating to discharged patients in short-stay 

hospitals, based on a sample of patient records in a national sample of hospitals. 

Series 20.	 Data on movtaZity.—Various statistics on mortality other than as included in annual or monthly % 

reports —special analyses by cause of death, age, and other demographic variables, also geographic ~ 

and time series analyses. 

Series21. Data on natality, mavw”age, anddivovce. —Various statistics on natality, marriage, and divorce othex 4 

Q 

than as included in amual or monthly reporta— special analyses by demographic variables, also 1 geographic and time series analyses, studies of fertility. 

.ieyies 22. Data jl-om the Natiomzl Natality and MoYtality Sm’veys. —Statistics on characteristics of births and \

deaths not available from the vital records, basedon sample surveys stemming from these records, 

including such topics as mortality by socioeconomic class; medical experience in the last year of ) 

life, characteristics of pregnancy, etc. .J 

For a list of titles of reports published in these series, write to: Office of Information 

National Center for Health Statistics 

U.S. Public Health Service 

Washington, D.C. 20201