The New York herald., 1921-04-17

females, z5.o4s: siaves. ee.6g7. with all
other persons registered numbering
| Il, sec.
Pennsylvania, tho second state.
showed white males, iJo7sS: males un-
der Is years. 106.s4s: females. 206. 1903;
slaves. 3.7s7. and all others. 6,5s7.
Massachusetts, showed corresponding
respective figures of IS. 453. S.2s9, 100, $50.
no slaves and 6.463 others,
New Jersey had q total population
of 1919, of which 45.5f were adult
males, E.4s male youths. S3.2S7 females.
11.423 slaves and area others.
Big Change in Figures.
There is a striking contrast between
these figures and those resulting from
the census of 1920. Not only does New
York head the list OF States, but she Is
almost 100000 population ahead of
Pennsylvania, her nearest competitor.
while Virginia has dropped an even
100000 behind her. Tho first five
States in the 1920 census were New
York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio and
Texas The 1920 population OF New
York State was 10, 3S4, 1923; Pennsylvania,
s,72o017; Illinois. 64s5. ESQ: Ohio. 5.75s. 1886
and Texas. 4.663. rs.
An interesting study OF the last two
decades shows that New York State
has jumped from a population of 7,26S,-
S94 in 1900 to s.113,614 in 1910. and its
present population In the last census.
The 1910 increase over 1900 represented
25.4 per cent. amounting to 1.A4,720
persons. The 1920 increase over 1910 was
only 1879 per cent.
It is easy to appreciate how this con-
dition Is a result OF the war situation.
with immigration stopped and labor
moving to other industrial centres. A
similar situation occurred in Pennsyl-
vania, where the increase from 1910 to
| 1920 was only 1873 per cent, or ], ,054. sos
persons, although from 1909 to 1910 IL
amounted to 21.6 per cent, or 1,s62,996
persons.
| Michigan, Illinois, Massachusetts and
Ohio had the advantage of the war fluc-
tuation, as did also the District of Co
| lumbia- The increase in the District OF
Columbia was shown to be 80 per cent
The smallness OF Its population and the
numbers OF war workers employed by
| the Government in 1920 account for the
| heavy percentage.
illinois. the third State in the Union.
showed an increase OF 15 per cent, or
| s46,6S9 persons, in 1920 over 1910. OHIO
showed an increase OF 20.8 per cent, or
| s92,273 persons, In 1920 over 1910, as
against an increase Of only 14.7 per
cent, or 609,576 persons, In 1910 over
1900. Tho 1920 increase for Texas was
only 1877 per cent. as against an In
crease in 1910 of 27.s per cent over 1900,
in spite of the migration to pioneer
States that has been so evident in the
last twenty years and which continued
| In spite Of the war.
q. 5. Had 3.ss3.635 I'm 1900.
| The total population of the United
States in 1880 was registered as 1885,, ,635
persons. For 1920 the census figures
show q total population OF los. S.71, ,r
| percentage increase In 100 years OF
| $500 per cent. To expect the same rela-
tive ircrease in the next 130 years would
give us a population In the year 2050 Of
something in excess of three and a half
billions.
But getting down to earth, 1t is rather
easy to calculate from past history
what the population mark will be IN
normal or similar conditions in ten,
twenty or thirty years. The big diff
Guilty is that tho last decade has been
too abnormal to use 1t as q basis for
calculation.
In 1900 our population was 75.s94.575.
In 1910 it jumped 15.977.6s1, or q per
cent, over this figure to 91,972. .266, and
in 1920 1t had jumped 49, 736.505 more. or
149 per cent. to total of more than
100.000.000. Among other things the
period from 1900 to 1919 was a good one
for immigration. The 1910 to 1920 decade
was decidedly otherwise. and its per-