The Washington times., 1902-02-10
SMALL TOWNS
MAKE PROGRESS
Census Director Gives Out
His Report.
GREAT GROWTH IN LAST DECADE
Eastern Communities share in the
Prospcrity-Agricu Counties
Show II Decrease i'm Population
The Tide of Migration.

The Director of the Census has ISSUED
bulletin regarding the increase of popu.
lation of places containing less than 4,OO(
| inhabitants, east and west of the Missis-
! sippi River and the counties which have
decreased in population
1t shows that the increase of population
in the States east of the Mississippi
| River was l6.1 between 1880 and 1890, and
| 1872 between 1890 and 1900 In the same
area the increase in urban population
meaning thereby all places of more than
1000 inhabitants. was 53.I per cent be-
| tween 1880 and 1890, and only 372 per
cent between 1890 and 1900.
Grew Rapidly.
Both of these statements could not be
true unless the population of places hav-
ing less than 1000 inhabitants had been
growing more rapidly in the last ten
years than in the preceding decade Such
is the fact. Between 1880 and 1890 the
population east of the Mississippi, and
excluding places of more than 1000. in
creased 40 per cent but between 1890 and
1900. 81 per cent
To throw further light upon this in
creased prosperity of the small towns dur
ing the last ten years a study has teen
made by the Census Office of those ooun-
ties which actually decreased in popula-
tion at either decade, after making al
lowance for changes in county boup-
daries.
AEriCuIt Cnnntias
Counties of this class are predominant
ly agricultural. and usually have lost
through migration to more favored To-
calities the natural increase of their non
uiation by excess OF births over deaths.
between 1880 and 1895 the counties east
Of the Mississippi which lost population
extended over an area of Isl oD2 square
miles. or nearly as great rs New Eng
land, New York, and Pennsylvania This
was about one-si2th III ! per cern of
the total area easE of the MissjssIupi
River
Between 1890 and 1900 the counties east
OF the Mississippi River which lost popu
iatlon extended over an area of 90 21S
square miles. This is only about one
tenth t1O.6 per cent? of the total area
east Of the Mississippi. The figures show
that in this part of the country an area
almost equal to that OF New England lost
population between 1880 and 1885, but
gained between 1890 and 1900.
West of the Mississippi the changes
were in the reverse direction: thai is
the area losing population was slightly
larger between 1890 and 1900 than it was
between 1890 and 1890 (234S62 square
miles as compared with eOs $50 square
miles,. But in the country as whole
the area of counties losing populationwas
over 10000 square miles less in the last
decade than 1t was between 1880 and
1890.
To show the influence of this change
the per cent of total area as defined by
county lines which shows loss of pop
ulation has been computed. occasional
corrections being made for the changes
in county boundaries. In the North At
lantic group the per cent OF county area
losing population between 1880 and 1890
was 26.S; between 1890 and 1900 2l9.
South Atlantic Group.
The corresponding figures for the other
groups were: South Atlantic 1Ss0-1Ss0.
11.6 per cent; 1S90-190O, SO per cent;
North Central, 1880 1890, 121 per cent
1s9O-l90O. 191 per cent; South Central.
1SsO-1s9O. 6.7 per cent; 1S9O-l9OO. 46 per
cent; Western Division. 1SS0-1S90, 1873
per cent; 169O-1900. Sc per cent
These figures show that in four of the
five divisions. ali except the North Cen
tral. the increase of population was more
widespread and general in the last decade
than it was between 1880 and 1890. II
the North Central division be divided into
two parts at the Mississippi River, the
per cent of area in the eastern part
showing loss of population fell from 2O.9
in the earlier to 131 in the later dec
ade.
On the contrary, in the Western North
central the per cent rose from 10 in the
earlier to 22.5 in the later decade.
Gain in Population.
Further analysis shows that a gain Of
population in the last decade was re-
ported from every county of Minnesota
and North Dakota. and every county but
one in Iowa. In South Dakota, Nebraska.
and Kansas. on the contrary, there were
large areas, mostly in the western part.
and sparsely settled, for which a decrease
of population was reported.
The tide of migration in 1890 had
pushed up the slopes of the great plains
farther than conditions warranted. and
in the last decade the wave has been re-
ceding. depicting these areas and filling
up the rural counties of such States as
Iowa and Illinois.
FaII in Iowa.
In Iowa the per cent of area losing
fell from go between 1SSO'and
1890, to 1.6 between 1890 and 1900. In
Illinois it fell from 2S.6 TO &c.
In other words, over about quarter
OF each State the population decreased
between 1880 and 1880. only to increase in
the last ten years. In no other i'm
s.rtant States has there been so marked
a change.
PROMENADE IN A WATCH.