The New York herald., 1921-06-19
HORSELESS AGE
FURTHER OFF
Complete Census Returns Show
Equine Population Has In
creased Since 1910.

Supplementing the census of horses on
farms. which was made public a week
ago. the Department of Commerce yes
terday gave out the figures relating
to horses not on farms otherwise those
owned in cities towns and villages Of
the United States. These figures show
that while the motor car. the motor
truck and the tractor have not ar
rested the increase of horses and mules
on the farms they have made tremen-
dous tnroads on the ranks of the urban
equine workers In the last ten years
When the enumeration was made on
April 15, 1910. there were 3,1S2,7s9
horses. 27o,371 mules, and 1s,5O2 asses
and burros of this class making a
total of 3,469.662. while the numbers
on January 1, 1920 were 1,705,611
horses, 37S,250 mules and 1880 asses
and burros, or 2,09S.s46 in all. The
total decrease is thus 1.s7o.s16. CIR
nearly 40 per cent. Mules alone held
their ground and made gain of 107.S79.
or nearly 40 per cent. Horses decreased
1.477.17s. or more than 46 per cent.
The States reporting the largest num-
ber of horses in cities In 1920 were,
New York with 141.64S. Illinois with
1876, and Pennsylvania with 111,67o
This State lost more than SO per cent.
of such horses in the ten years pre-
ceding this census, the number in 1910
having been 303.256. Pennsylvania,
New Jersey, and several New England
States made similar showing, as did
Ohio and Indiana. Even in the great
horse breeding States of Iowa, Nebraska
and Kansas the decrease exceeded SO
per cent, while In California, Oregon and
Washington the cities lost still larger
percentage of their horses, CALIFORNIA; $
total having dropped from 132,52l to
As sos and Oregon's from 30,203 to
1O,575 When 1t came to mules there
was different story to report Nearly
all States except New York, New Jersey
Pennsylvania and those In the Pacific
Northwest showed gains, even New
England cities having increased their
holdings from S34 to 1920. In Arkan-
sas there was jump from WIS IN lslV
to 24,973 in 1920.
Figures from individual cities indi-
cate that local conditions have good
deal to do with the number OF horses
in use, for the losses In ten years are
by no means uniform. New York had
l2S. .224 horses and 1,107 mules when the
census of 1910 was taken, while in l92o
the number of horses in the city was
sc. .539 and of mules LIB. The loss in
horses was thus 7,6s5, or close to 90
per cent. Buffalo, Rochester and Syra-
cuse all lost more than so peg cent. or
their horses, the total in Buffalo nav
ing fallen from 14131 to 5,267; In Roch-
ester from $500 to 3,139. and in Syracuse
from 5,O63 to 2,135.
Detroit. with its comparatively level
rto1 M
more than half as many horses in 1920
as in 1910, but this was partly due to
the tremendous growth of the city be-
tween those years. In Cleveland. an
other fast growing city. the number
fell from 1889 in 1910 to 1924 in 1920.
Wilmington's equine population dropped
from 2,627 to 1893 during the same period,
il the census takers did not make
glaring mistake. In Baltimore, not tar
away, the returns were 1878 last year,
as compared with 15,346 in 1910. Out in
California the number OF horses fell
from 215l1 to 5,491 at San Francisco
and from $500 to 4.301 at Los Angeles.
In Jersey City the number decreased
from 0,233 to 1897. and in Newark from
s63 to 4,457.
Adding the number of horses not on
farms to the number on farms the
total number in the United States Is
shown to be 21,S4S,066: of mules s.
S2S,S73, and of asses and burros S9,142,
making total equine population of ~
s66,0s1. The figures for 1910 were 49,
015,9O2 horses, 4,4S0,140 mules and 122,-
200 asses and burros, making a total
of 27,61S.242. so that after losing much
more than 100000 during the great
war this country still had 247.SSe more
In 1920 than in 1910. Verify, the horse
less age is a good ways off.