Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

more and more thoroughly organized.” The cause for this evident decrease is without doubt the large number of strikes for the closed shop, the greater portion of which have been lost.

As a result of this brief résumé of the statistical data upon strikes contained in the Twenty-first Annual Report of the United States Commissioner of Labor, we may draw the following conclusions, keeping in mind, however, that we are speaking only of the period 1881-1905:

(1) That strikes have increased absolutely; that, as compared with the growth in population, they have increased relatively, although there may be some doubt as regards their relative increase when compared with the increase of wage-earners in the manufacturing industries.

(2) That the number of union strikes has increased more rapidly since 1896 than ever before.

(3) That it is not so much the restraining influence of unionism as the loss of membership and bargaining power, together with some decrease in the number of unions, that causes & decrease in the number of union strikes during periods of business depression.

(4) That, as strikes increase, the average number of strikers, establishments, and employees affected per strike decrease, and, as strikes decrease, the size of the average strike increases.

(5) That the average number of strikers, establishments, and employees affected per strike,-i.e., the size of the average strike,-has tended to decrease since 1896.

(6) That, as unions grow stronger, the tendency is for the average union strike to decrease in size and importance.

(7) That the percentage of successful strikes decreases during periods of business prosperity and increases during “hard times.”

(8) That compromised strikes are becoming more numerous.

(9) That union strikes are not becoming more successful, even though unionism is being more thoroughly organized.

(10) That tradesunionism affects the causes of strikes by reducing the importance of hours and wages and by increasing the importance of union rules, closed shop, recognition of the union, etc., as causes of strikes.

FEDERAL CENSUS REPORTS: STATISTICS OF CITIES,

1905.

BY EDWARD M. HARTWELL, SECRETARY STATISTICS DEPARTMENT,

CITY OF BOSTON.

One of the first and best fruits of placing the Federal Bureau of the Census upon a permanent basis is found in the Bureau's publications relating to the statistics of cities covering the years 1902–05. The latest number of the series is the fullest and most valuable. It is entitled “Special Reports. Statistics of Cities having a Population of 30,000 or over, 1905. Washington: Government Printing Office. 1907."

The tables of this Report relate to 154 cities, which, according to the estimates of the Bureau of the Census, had a population of 30,000 or over in 1905, the basis of estimated annual increase being one-tenth of the actual increase in the period 1890–1900. The cities and the subject-matter are classified according to population under four groups, namely: (1) cities of 300,000 or more inhabitants; (2) cities of 100,000 to 300,000; (3) cities of 50,000 to 100,000; (4) cities of 30,000 to 50,000. No account is taken, as in Bulletin 20, 1905, of cities of 25,000 to 30,000 inhabitants.

Table 1 shows (1) the date of incorporation, (2) area, and (3) population estimated as of June 1 for 1905, 1904, and 1903, and enumerated for 1900 and 1890. Like most of the tables, this is a reference table, consisting (a) of summary statements regarding the whole number of cities and of each of the constituent groups and (b) of detailed data for each city included in the table. All the data are expressed in absolute numbers. The table affords direct comparison for the years specified of the total population of the several groups and their aggregate population, and of detailed data relating to each of the 154 cities. But inquirers who make other comparisons-e.g., be

tween cities of equal population, cities grouped by States or geographical sections—must rearrange the primary data given in the table for themselves. This remark applies to practically all the forty-six other tables as well as to Table I.

The following tables, compiled from Table I, illustrate the value of the tables as sources of data for compiling secondary comparative tables. In these tables the absolute numbers are derived directly from Table I, while the per cents. have been supplied by the writer.

The following tabular statement shows, by groups, the increase in the number of cities having a population of 30,000 or over, enumerated in 1890 and 1900, estimated for other years:

[blocks in formation]

The following statement shows the percentage of (1) actual increase in 154 cities, by groups, 1890–1900, and (2) of estimated increase 1900-05:

CITIES WITH POPULATION OF 30,000 OR OVER IN 1905.

A. PER CENT. OF ACTUAL INCREASE, 1890-1900.

[blocks in formation]

B. PER CENT. OF INCREASE OF ESTIMATED POPULATION, 1900-05.

[blocks in formation]

Inspection of the foregoing statement leads to the conclusion that in each of the groups the relative increase of estimated population in the period 1900-05 was greater than the increase calculated on the basis of their actual increase 1890–1900. This conclusion is corroborated by the actual increase of population, 1900–05, shown by the returns of the State Census in 1905 in eight States for 57 cities, having an aggregate enumerated population of 9,392,297 in 1905. The per cent. of actual increase for 57 cities was 14.30 against 12.58 of calculated increase. In other words, Table I affords positive evidence, not to be found elsewhere in convenient form, that in the case of more than a third of the cities embraced in it, having an aggregate population amounting to 42.29 per cent. of the total population given for 154 cities (22,204,506), the actual increase of population, 1900–1905, was 14.30 per cent. against 12.58 per cent. of calculated increase. It may be noted that there was a State census taken in Michigan in 1904 which showed an aggregate population of 530,342 in the five cities of the State included in Table I, or an actual increase of 49,577 (10.31 per cent.) from 1900 against a calculated increase of 43,846 (9.12 per cent.).

TABLE 1.-SHOWING INCREASE OF POPULATION SINCE 1900 IN CITIES OF

30,000 OR OVER OF ENUMERATED POPULATION, 1905.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »