the Week of Proper 25 / Ordinary 30
Click here to learn more!
Bible Encyclopedias
Migration
1911 Encyclopedia Britannica
or Under this title will be considered movements of men with intention of changing their residence or domicile. Such migration (Lat. migrare) may be either external - that is, from one country to another, including emigration from mother country to colony; or it may be internal - that is, within the limits of a single country. Under external migration are comprised emigration and immigration, denoting simply direction from and to. The emigrants are at the same time the immigrants; that is, the material of the movement is the same, but the effect upon the country giving up and the country receiving the migrant requires separate treatment. Hence it is proper to separate emigration from immigration. Temporary migration, or travel for purposes of business, enterprise or pleasure, will be considered only incidentally, and because in some cases it is difficult to distinguish between such movements and permanent migration.
Migration in general may be described as a natural function of social development. It has taken place at all times and in the greatest variety of circumstances. It has been tribal, national, class and individual. Its causes have been political, economic, religious, or mere love of adventure. Its causes and results are fundamental for the study of ethnology (formation and mixture of races), of political and social history (formation of states and survival of institutions), and of political economy (mobility of labour and utilization of productive forces). Under the form of conquest it makes the grand epochs in history (e.g. the fall of the Roman Empire); under the form of colonization it has transformed the world (e.g. the settlement of America); under free initiative it is the most powerful factor in social adjustment (e.g. the growth of urban population). It must suffice here to indicate the character of the principal movements in the past, and then describe certain aspects of modern migration. The early movements may be grouped as follows: (a) Prehistoric migrations. Among savage and nomadic nations the whole tribe often moves into new territory, either occupying it for the first time or exterminating or driving out the indigenous inhabitants. We have only vague knowledge of these early movements, laboriously gleaned from archaeology, anthropology and philology. The cause has been commonly said to be the pressure of population on the food-supply. A more probable explanation is the love of booty and the desire of the stronger to take possession of the lands of the weaker. (b) Greek and Roman colonization. Both of these ancient civilizations extended their influence through migration of individual families and the planting of colonies. The motive seems to have been primarily commercial-that is, the love of gain. It may have been partly a sort of "swarming" process, caused by pressure of population at home. In some cases it had a political motive, as the planting of military colonies or providing new homes for the proletariat. The consequences were of course momentous. (c) The German Conquest. Beginning about the 5th century, the Roman empire was overthrown by German tribes from the north of the river Danube and east of the river Rhine. This V Olkerwanderung, as it is called by German historians, again transformed the face of Europe, resulting in the establishment of independent kingdoms and a great mixture of races and institutions. It was coincident with the building-out of the feudal system. The conquered in many cases could be left as serfs and tillers of the soil, while the conquerors seized the higher positions of administration and power. (d) The later middle ages saw many minor migratory movements, such as those accompanying the crusades, the pushing of German colonization among the Sla y s, and the introduction of Flemish weavers into England. The religious reformation caused a considerable amount of expatriation, culminating in the expulsion of the Huguenots from France. (e) The period of discovery and colonization opened up a new era for migration. The first expeditions were for adventure and booty, especially the discovery of gold and silver. Then came the establishment of commercial posts or factories for the purposes of trade. Finally came colonization proper-that is, the settlement of new countries by Europeans intending to remain there permanently, but still retaining their connexion with the mother country. This meant the opening up of the world to commerce and the extension of European civilization to vast areas formerly peopled by savages or half-civilized peoples. It meant a great outlet for the spirit of enterprise and adventure, relief from over-population, an enormous increase in wealth and power, and a struggle for supremacy among the nations of Europe. Colonization and colonial policy excited immense attention in Europe; and this extended into the 19th century (e.g. E. G. Wakefield's plans for colonization, and the various colonization societies of modern times). The colonial policy proper was broken down by the revolt of the North American colonies from Great Britain, and later of Mexico and Central and South America from Spain. (f) The movement of population, however, has continued under the form of emigration. This movement is characterized firstly by its magnitude; secondly, by the fact that the emigrant changes his political allegiance, for by far the greater part of modern emigration is to independent countries, and even where it is to colonies the colonies are largely self-governing and self-regarding; and thirdly, it is a movement of individuals seeking their own good, without state direction or aid. This is 20th-century emigration, differing from all preceding forms and having an importance of its own.
Statistics of Emigration.-The direction of the modern movement is from Europe to America, Australia and South Africa, as shown in the following table: Emigration from Certain States of Europe, 1890-1905.1 1 The figures relate only to the emigrants of each nationality emigrating from their own country to countries outside of Europe.
2 Exclusive of emigrants to Spanish colonies.
s Russian emigrants from German ports.
Since 1820 over twenty million persons have emigrated from Europe to countries beyond the sea. The greater part of this emigration has been to the United States of North America. The history of emigration is well shown in the following table of emigration from Great Britain and Ireland. Down to 1853 the figures include all emigrants from British ports; after 1853 emigrants of British and Irish origin only.
Emigration from Great Britain and Ireland, 1815-1905. it was speedily resumed on an enlarged scale owing especially to the improved means of ocean transportation. It culminated in the decade 1880-1890, and declined after the commercial crisis of 1893. Later there was another increase.
The relative movement of nationalities is best presented by the statistics of the United States. The nationality (country of origin of immigrants coming to the United States, 1871-1895) is shown in the following table: Nationality of Immigration to the United States. Anglo-Saxons, Celts, and England and Wales Scotland Total. Irish-Ireland Teutons Austria.. Germany. Netherlands Total Latins Belgium France Italy Spain Portugal Total Years Per cent. 25 1871-1895. of Total Immigration 1,334,817 12.9 286,807 2.8. 1,621,624 15.7 1,334,635 12'9 Emigration from various Countries of Europe. The general direction of emigration from Europe is shown in the following table: Scandinavians Denmark Norway Sweden Statistics of Immigration.-The statistics of the United States are the most important and the most complete. The statistics since 1820 are shown in the following table: Immigration into the United States, 1820-1905.
Total.. .23,116,501 Prior to 1820 there was no official record of immigration, but it is estimated that the total number of immigrants from the close of the Revolutionary War was 250,000. During the decade from 1820 to 1830 the movement was very moderate. From 1830 to 1840 it steadily increased, but never reached 100,000 per annum. In 1846 came the Irish potato famine, and an enormous emigration began, followed by a very large German emigration from similar causes. The Civil War of the United States interrupted the movement, but 1 Of these, 77,409 went to the Cape of Good Hope and Natal.
2 Of these, 152,797 went to the Cape of Good Hope and Natal.
3 Of these, 69,052 went to the Cape of Good Hope and Natal.
I,151,210 II 1 Czechs, Magyars, Sla y s Bohemia 77,247 01 Hungary 256,347 2.5 Poland 141,908 Rumania 10,377 0.1 Russia 500,797 0I Total Europe 9,197,014 88.9 3.6 Grand Total 10,339,539 Total Swiss-Switzerland Greeks-Greece Turks-Turkey Europe, not specified 135,736 7,325 3,411 294 North America All other countries 77 6 ,071 7.5 366,454 1000 1'4 4.8 9.5 A very important transformation has taken place in the proportionate number coming from different countries during the last half of the 19th century. At first the Irish and Germans were most prominent. Of later years, the Italians, Czechs, Hungarians and Russians were, as will be seen from the following table, numerously represented.
Nationality of Immigrants to the United States, 1901-1905. Number. % The following table shows the relative number of different nationalities represented in the immigration to the United States: Sex and Age.-Of all the immigrants (1871-1895), 61.25% were males and 38.75% were females.
This percentage remains fairly constant, but the proportion differs The immigrants were in the most vigorous period of life, few children and few old people, as shown in the following table: Ages of Immigrants to the United States, 1881-1890. Occupation.-The immigrants are for the most part unskilled labourers. The statistics for the United States show the following figures for the years 1881-1890: Occupation of Immigrants to the United States. Those "without occupation" are mostly women and children. The "miscellaneous" are day labourers. It is probable that about 20% of the adult males are "skilled." Immigration to Other Countries.-In no other country is immigration conducted on so important a scale as in the United States. The statistics are very imperfect. The main figures have already been given in the table of emigration. Australia has an annual immigration of about 250,000, mostly of British origin. This is offset by a very heavy emigration, which sometimes exceeds the immigration in certain of the states. The immigration to Canada for the year 1905 was put down as 146,266, but a portion of this consisted of immigrants passing through to the United States. Brazil has had a large immigration (in 1895 equal to 169,524, but in 1904 only 12,447). The Argentine is credited with an immigration in 1905 of 177,1 17, and Uruguay with an immigration in 1903 of 6247. In all the South American immigration the countries principally represented are those of southern Europe, especially Italy. The majority of the immigrants are adult males and farm labourers.
Balance of Emigration and Immigration.-Even in the case of emigration from Europe to countries beyond the seas there is some return movement. Emigrants who have been successful in business return in order to end their days in the old country. Those who have not succeeded return in order to be cared for by friends and relatives, or simply from home-sickness. Thus, for Great Britain and Ireland, while the emigration of persons of British and Irish origin was, in 1905, 262,077, the immigration of persons of the same category was 122,712, leaving a net emigration of only 139,365. In the United States' statistics we cannot distinguish in the outgoing passenger movement emigrants from other persons. But if for a period of years we take the total inward passenger movement and subtract from it the total outward passenger movement, we ought to have the net immigration. By this method we arrive at the conclusion that while the gross immigration during the five years1901-1905was 3, 8 33, 0 7 6, the net immigration was only 1,779,976, showing an outward movement of 273,134, or about 7.12% of the total number of immigrants.
Temporary Emigration.-In many European countries there is not only emigration beyond seas, but a very considerable movement to neighbouring countries in search of work, and generally with the intention of returning. Thus in Italy, the "permanent" emigration (i.e. to countries beyond seas) numbered, in 1905, 447, 08 3; the "temporary" emigration to European or Mediterranean countries amounted to 279,248. This temporary emigration is strongest in the spring, and consists principally of adult males (agriculturists, farm and day labourers, bricklayers and masons) in search of work. It resembles somewhat the movement of Irish labourers into Great Britain at harvest time. It is notorious that the Italians who emigrate to the United States largely return.
Effects of Emigration.-There are two views with regard to emigration: one unfavourable, viz., that it is a drain on population, reducing its economic strength and disturbing social and political relations; the second looking upon it as a relief from over-population and a congested labour market. As a matter of fact, emigration has not succeeded in diminishing the population of Europe, which, on the contrary, doubled during the 19th century. The one great exception is Ireland, where population declined from 8,175,124 in 1841 to 4,458,745 in 1901. From 1851 to 1901 the total emigration from Ireland was 3,881,246 or 72.5% of the average population. Emigration, by carrying off the young men and women, also reduced the Irish marriage and birth-rates, which were almost the lowest in Europe. But hitherto the countries of strongest emigration (England, Germany, &c.) have shown practically undiminished birth and marriage-rates and a steady growth in population.
The intensity of emigration is measured not by the absolute number of emigrants, but by the number of emigrants to the total population. Its, effect is shown by comparing the number of emigrants with the excess of births over deaths per moo of the population. This is shown in the following table (1905): It will be observed that, with the exception of Ireland and Italy, wherever there is a heavy emigration there is usually a considerable excess of births over deaths, i.e. natural increase more than makes up for the loss by emigration. Even taking Great Britain and Ireland together, the loss by emigration per annum has not been very large, as is shown by the following table :- Annual Emigration per moo of the Average Population of Great Britain and Ireland. Even in particular districts where emigration is heavy the loss is made up by births. For instance, in 1891 the emigration from the provinces of West Prussia and Posen was extraordinarily heavy10.9 and Io4 per mille respectively-but the excess of births over deaths was 19.6 per mille. Emigration may give temporary relief to congested districts, but it is not in itself a remedy for so-called over-population.
It is difficult to analyse closely the economic effect of emigration, because so much depends upon the character of the emigrants and the condition of the labour market. The following considerations have been urged at different times: Although emigration does not diminish population, yet, as the emigrants are in the most productive period of life (15 to 45), the country of emigration loses adults and replaces them with children. It thereby loses the cost of rearing that number of people to adult age, and is left with a disproportionate number of children and old people. The age distribution of the population of Ireland lends some support to this view. In the same vein it is urged that voluntary emigration takes away the cream of the working-classes. It is the man of energy, of some means, of ambition, who takes the chances of success in the new country, leaving the poor, the indolent, the weak and crippled at home. It is maintained that such emigration institutes a process of selection which is unfavourable to the home country.
On the other side, it is said that the men who are doing well at home are the ones least likely to emigrate, because they have least to gain. Modern means of transportation have made the voyage so cheap that almost any one is able to go. It is therefore the restless, the unsuccessful, or at least those not fitted for the strenuous competition of the older countries, who are tempted to go. Emigration affords a natural outlet for the superfluous labour force of a country. The supply of labour is somewhat reduced, but wages are kept up for those who remain. Those who go find means of bettering their own condition beyond the seas, where they become producers of food and raw material for the home country, and at the same time customers for her manufactured products. Emigration is therefore an economic gain, both directly and indirectly. It is evident from these arguments that no general answer can be given to the question. In some cases it may be an evil; in most, when conducted under normal conditions, it would seem to offer little danger.
The same remark would hold true in regard to the social and political effects of emigration. In some cases, by taking away the strong, self-reliant and energetic, it may result in the deterioration of the home population. In other cases it allows restless spirits who have failed at home to try again elsewhere. Often in cases of political revolution the members of the defeated party have sought refuge elsewhere, as after the revolutionary movements of 1848. In case of conquest the conquered nationality takes to emigration on an extensive scale, as after the absorption of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany in 1871. The movement may be aided either by the state or by private associations. Of such character have been the state-aided emigration from Ireland, and the assisted emigration of paupers, criminals and other persons in the effort to relieve a congested population, or simply from the desire to get rid of undesirable members of the community. Such efforts fail if the new countries are unwilling to admit these persons. Finally, we have the expulsion of the Jews from Russia as an example of the effort of a community to get rid of an element which has made itself obnoxious to the local sentiment.
Effects of Immigration.-The effects of emigration are negative in character; those of immigration are positive. (a) On population: immigration, of course, is a direct addition to the population of new countries, and greatly accelerates the growth by natural increase, especially as the immigrants are in the most productive ages of manhood and womanhood. In the United States, for instance, out of a population of 76,303,387 (in 1900), there were 26,147,407 persons who were either foreign-born or who had one or both parents foreignborn. This does not mean that the population would have been twenty-six millions less if it had not been for immigration; for the rate of natural increase among the native-born might have maintained itself. Nevertheless, immigration has probably stimulated the growth of population. (b) Economic effects: The economic gain of immigration to new countries is evident. It adds directly to their available labour force, that is, to the number of adults engaged in the work of producing wealth.
According to the United States census of 1900, out of 29,073,233 (1900) persons engaged in gainful occupations, 5,851,399 or 20'1%, were of foreign birth. If we add to these the native whites of foreign parentage (5,300,924) we have 11,152,323 persons of foreign extraction or 39'4% of the total labour force. The foreign whites alone constituted 10.4% of the total number of persons engaged in agricultural pursuits; 11.4% of those in professional services; 2 5.7% in domestic and personal services; 19.2% in trade and transportation; and 30.6% of those engaged in manufacturing and mechanical industries. In addition to these, the native whites of foreign parentage constituted, in agriculture, &c., Io6%; in professional service, 20.6%; in domestic and personal service, 16.4%; in trade and transportation, 25.7% in manufacturing and mechanical, 25.4% of all those engaged in those occupations. The labour force of the United States is thus made up very largely of immigrants and the children of immigrants.
Attempts have sometimes been made to put a money value on the economic gain by immigration. The amount of money brought by the immigrants is not large, and is probably more than offset by the money sent back by immigrants for the support of families and friends at home or to aid them in following. The valuable element is the able-bodied immigrant himself as a factor of production. It is said, for instance, that an adult slave used to be valued at from $800 to $1000, so that every adult immigrant may be looked upon as worth that sum to the country. Or, it has been said that an adult immigrant represents what it would cost to bring up a child from infancy to the age, say, of 15. This has been estimated by Ernst Engel as amounting to $550 for a German child. The most scientific procedure, however, is to calculate the probable earnings of the immigrant during the rest of his lifetime, and deduct therefrom his expenses of living. The remainder represents his net earnings which he will contribute to the well-being of the new country. W. Farr reckoned this to be, in the case of unskilled English emigrants, about 1 75. Multiplying the total number of adult immigrants by any one of these figures, we get the annual value of immigration. Such attempts to put a precise money value on immigration are futile. They neglect the question of quality and of opportunity. The immigrant is worth what it has cost to bring him up only if he is able-bodied, honest and willing to work. If he is diseased, crippled, dishonest or indolent, he may be a direct loss to the community instead of a gain. So, too, the immigrant is worth his future net earnings to the community only if there is a demand for his labour.
Social and Political Effects of Immigration.-The influx of millions of persons of different nationality, often of a foreign language and generally of the lower classes, would seem to be a danger to the homogeneity of a community. The United States, for instance, has felt some inconvenience from the constant addition of foreigners to its electorate and its population. The foreign-born are more numerously represented among the criminal, defective and dependent classes than their numerical strength would justify. They also tend to segregate more or less, especially in large cities. Nevertheless, the process of assimilation goes on with great rapidity. Intermarriage with the native-born occurs to a considerable extent. The influence of the physical environment leads to the adoption of the same mode of life. The most powerful influences, however, seem to be social. These are common school education and the adoption of one language (English); participation in political life, which is granted to all adult males after five years' residence; and the general influence of social standards embodied in laws, institutions and customs already established. Doubtless immigration in the last fifty years of the 19th century had a modifying effect on American life; but on the whole the power of a modern civilized community working through individual freedom to assimilate elements not differing from it too radically has been displayed to a remarkable degree.
Restriction of Immigration.-New countries have sought to escape certain evils of indiscriminate immigration. These evils were as follows: (a) The immigration of criminals, paupers, persons diseased in mind or body, and persons unable to support themselves. By the Acts of 1882 and 1893 such persons were refused admission to the United States, and, when rejected, the steamship companies that brought them were compelled to take them back. The number debarred from 1896 to 1905 is shown in the following table: No law of international comity is violated by the refusal to receive these unfortunates. They should be taken care of at home. The English legislature in 1905 passed an act to prevent the landing of undesirable aliens, and the number refused admission in 1906 was 493. (b) Immigration sometimes increases the competition in the labour market, and thus lowers wages. One case is particularly aggravating, viz. when employers import foreign labourers in order to take the place of their men who are on strike. In 1885 the United States passed what is called the Contract Labor Law, forbidding the landing of any person who is under contract to perform labour in the United States. It is very difficult to discover such cases, but the number rejected is fairly large (see table above). (c) The immigration of men of alien race who refuse to assimilate with the natives is said sometimes to be a danger to the country. This at least is the excuse for the entire exclusion of Chinese labourers from the United States since 1882 (provisions made more severe in 1888 and 1892) (see also the article Co01.IE).
Internal Migration.-In modern times there is constant movement of population within national lines, from section to section, and especially from rural districts to the cities. No record is kept of this, and we can trace it only through the census statistics of birthplace. In the United States, for instance, it was shown in 1890 that more than 21.5 per cent. of the native-born inhabitants were living in a state other than that in which they were born. Still further, it appears that about one-half of the native-born inhabitants had moved out of the county in which they were born. In 1890 there were 1,233,629 natives of the state of New York living in other states. The movement is principally westwards in direction and along parallels of latitude. For instance, New York has made large contributions to the population of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa and so on. Virginia has contributed largely to the population of West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri. In Europe there is a similar movement; but it is difficult to make comparisons, because of the differences in the administrative areas. In England in 1891, 71.6% of the population were residing in their native county; in Prussia, 69.7% in the kreis; in France, 81.7% in the department; in Austria, 80.2% in the bezirk; in Switzerland, 82.1% in the canton where they were born (Weber, Growth of Cities, p. 249). The most important phase of internal migration is the movement from the rural districts to the cities. The statistical results are shown in the following table extracted from the admirable work of Weber, just quoted: Percentage of Population living in Towns of 10,000 and over at Three Periods. Everywhere the city population is increasing faster than the rural. In the United States the rate of increase per decade was as follows: In England and Wales the rural population increased in the aggregate during the first half of the 19th century, but at a gradually diminishing rate; in the second half of the century the population declined with varying regularity, until the decennium 1891-1900, when there was an increase. But notwithstanding this aggregate increase there are many rural districts which still show a steadily declining population. The urban population is increasing, as shown in the following table: Decennial Rate of Increase or Decrease. Year. Urban. Rural.
1851-1861-1861-18711871-1881-1881-18911891-1900 Somewhat the same phenomenon is seen in France. According to the census of 1891 not less than 55 out of the 87 departments had decreased in population; and out of the 32 that had increased, 7 showed a decrease in their rural parts when the large towns were deducted. In Germany the towns of 10,000 and over show a much more rapid increase than the rural districts; and the same fact is generally true of the other countries of Europe. This more rapid increase of population in cities is due only in part to migration from the country. Until the 19th century deaths generally exceeded births in cities, so that if it had not been for constant immigration the cities would not only not have grown, but would have decreased in population. Cities grow more rapidly now than formerly, because the excess of deaths over births has been turned into an excess of births over deaths. Thereby the cities are becoming less dependent upon immigration for increase of population than formerly, but the migration still goes on. The causes of migration from country to city are mainly economic. In early stages of culture men are scattered over the country, or at most gathered together in hamlets and villages. Each of these is self-sufficing, having its own artisans. and handicraftsmen, and producing what it needs. With the beginning of exchange commercial centres spring up, situated on navigable streams and especially at points where land and water journeys are broken. With the growth of manufactures, industrial centres spring up where the division of labour can be fully provided for. In modern times two factors have accelerated this process, viz.: (I) the building of railways, which have developed commerce to a very great degree and favoured the large towns at the expense of the small; and (2) the invention of machinery, which has greatly increased the possibility of division of labour and manufactures on a large scale. The old handicraftsman has been superseded by machine labour and the village artisan by the factory hand. At the same time improvements in agriculture and the opening up of new countries have enabled the modern community to gain its food and raw material with a less expenditure of labour force, and the surplus agricultural population has gone to the city. The attractive influences upon individuals have been higher wages, greater scope for the ambitious, and the social advantages of city life.
The general laws of internal migration may be summarized (according to Ravenstein) as follows: I. The great body of migrants proceed only a short distance.
2. The process of absorption goes on as follows: The inhabitants of the country immediately surrounding a town of rapid growth flock into it; the gaps thus left in the rural population are filled up by migrants from more remote districts, until the attractive force of one of the rapidly-growing cities makes its influence felt, step by step, to the most remote corner of the land. Migrants enumerated in a certain centre of absorption will consequently grow less with the distance, proportionately to the native population which furnishes them.
3. The process of dispersion is the inverse of that of absorption, and exhibits similar features.
4. Each main current of migration produces a compensating countercurrent.
5. Migrants proceeding long distances generally go by preference to one of the great cities of commerce or industry.
6. The natives of towns are less migratory than those of the rural parts of the country.
7. Females are more migratory than males.
Authorities
- The statistics of migration are to be found in the official returns of different countries, especially the statistical tables relating to emigration and immigration published by the British Board of Trade, and the Reports (annual) of the CommissionerGeneral of Immigration of the United States. For general discussion see Philippovich, Auswanderung and Auswanderungspolitik (Leipzig, 1892). An exhaustive bibliography will be found in an article by same author, "Auswanderung," in Handworterbuch der Staatswissenschaften; R. Mayo-Smith, Emigration and Immigration, with bibliography (New York, 1890). For internal migration see A. F. Weber, Growth of Cities (New York, 1899). See also Ravenstein, "The Laws of Migration," in Journal of Royal Statistical Society (1885 and 1889). Professor Flinders Petrie, in his Huxley Lecture for 1906 on Migrations (reprinted by the Anthropological Institute), deals with the mutations and movements of races from an anthropological standpoint with profound knowledge and originality.
(R. M.-S.; T. A. I.)
These files are public domain.
Chisholm, Hugh, General Editor. Entry for 'Migration'. 1911 Encyclopedia Britanica. https://www.studylight.org/encyclopedias/eng/bri/m/migration.html. 1910.
