Rural Population in England and Wales: a Study of the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages Author(S): A

Rural Population in England and Wales: A Study of the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages Author(s): A. L. Bowley Source: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 77, No. 6 (May, 1914), pp. 597-652 Published by: Wiley for the Royal Statistical Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2340305 . Accessed: 28/06/2014 12:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Wiley and Royal Statistical Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vol. LXXVII.] [Part VI.

JOURNAL

OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY.

MAY, 1914.

RURAL POPULATION in ENGLAND and WALES: a STUDY of the CHANGES of DENSITY, OCCUPATIONS, and AGES.

By A. L. BOWLEY, SC.D.

[Read beforethe Royal StatisticalSociety, April 21, 1914, Mr. G. UDNY YULIE, M.A., HonorarySecretary, in the Chair.]

I.-The separationof, Rural from Urban Areas, and thechanges in theirpopulation. IN this paper I proposeto give the resultsof an analyticalstudy of the nature and changes of rural populationin England and Wales. Ruralpopulation might be definedeither from consideration ofits density, or ofits occupations,or fromits positionin thescheme of local administration;or it mightbe taken as the residualof the populationof the Kingdomafter that of a scheduledlist of boroughsand townshad been abstracted. Of these definitions I regardthat which depends mainly on densityas mostsatisfactory, while that dependingon the administrativedistinction between Urbanand Rural Districtsis notonly misleading but also inapplicable to the Censusstatistics prior to 1891. Actuallythe greatmajority of Urban Districtsand CountyBorouighs have a densityof over I personper acre, and the greatmajority of areas whosedensity is less thanthis are in Rural Districts,so thata simpledensity line does in factcorrespond nearly with the administrativedistinction; but about 8o (out ofthe 657) RuralDistricts have a densitybetween o 5 and i per acre, and in thesethe majorityof the populationis connectedwith industryor miningor with neighbouringtowns. Rural Districtswhich contain no industrialor urban constituents VQL. LXXVII. PART VI. 2 T

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 598 BOWLEY-BuralPopulation in Englandand WVales: [May, have rarelya densityof morethan o * . For the purposesof this paper I mighthave definedbriefly rural areas as those adminis- trativeRural Districtswhose densityin the Census of 1911 was 30 per ioo acresor less,and the rural populationas the population enumeratedon these areas; but I have modifiedthis definition in practiceon the one hand by includinga smallnumber of districts wherethe densitywas between30 and 50 per IOO acres, and on the otherhand by takingthe civilparish as the unitand excluding a numberof dense parishes in sparse districts. The inclusion or exclusionof a particularparish was a matterof judgment; and morelocal knowledgethan I possessof those regions which, though mainlyrural, have some urban disturbance,would be necessaryif a hardand fastline were to be drawn. Mymethod was to challenge the districtswith densityover 30 and the parisheswith density over40, and to findby any meansI couldwhether this density was due to the presenceof mines, or offactories, or to scatteredindustry on a largescale, or to its use as a place ofresidence for people whose workwas in neighbouringtowns, or to militarydisturbance, or to the scatteredhomes of the leisured,or to provisionfor stummer visitors. If I could findno such reason,I leftthe parishas rural and assumed special agricultuiraldevelopment.' The list of districtsand parishesactually subtracted for the constructionof Table I is givenin AppendixI, pp. 629 seq. Forthe same table, use was made of the Censusaccounts of disturbinginfluences, and the inhabitantsof schools,of urbanhospitals and po6rlaw institutions situatedin countrydistricts,2 and soldiersand sailorsand others, weresubtracted; and further,when the parishcontained temporarv occupants,owing to the constructionof railways,waterworks, &c., or to any otherreason, whose number could not be distinguished, the wholeparish was omittedso as not to vitiatecomparison. The rural populationthus definedmust be distinguishedfrom the agriculturalpopulation ; foras willpresently be seenthe latter is to be foundin largenumbers in Urban Districts as wellas in dense Rural Districts,while in theRural Districtsas a wholethe majority of the populationis not directlyagricultural. One importanceof this particularanalysis lies in showingthat the growthof the populationof rural areas, taken crudely,is dominatedby urban influences.

1 In a few cases a parish of small area is dense from the presence of a large village,whose inhabitantswork on the land in neighbouringparishes. 2 Countyasylums were subtractedfrom the rural districtsin which they were situated,and are not replaced in Table I; but in Table lII they were includedin the registrationcounties.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 599

Some difficultiesdue to changeof boundariesarose in Table I in comparingthe 1911 populationwith that of 1891, but none of themwere serious,and they were met by reasonablehypotheses as to the proportionof populationaffected. When,however, the work of carrvingback the comparisonto 1861 was undertaken, the difficultieswere great and the complexityalmost overwhelming. This part of the analvsis was carriedout entirelyby Mr. A. R. Burnett-Hurstat the School of Economics,who also prepared muchiof the other material and helpedin mnostparts of the statistics; withouthis co-operationthe work wouildhave been prohibitive. We followedthe usual Censusplan, by definingthe areas as in 1911 and estimatingthe populationat formerdates on these areas. The unittaken was the civilparish and the wholecalculation made fromthe reports on populations in RegistrationDistricts. As nearlyas possiblethe same areas weretaken as forTable I, and the same adjustmentsmade for occasionalpopulation. Between each pairof consecutive censuses a vast numberof changes has been inade, many of them affectingthe boundariesof civil parishes. Wherethese took place in districtsto be treatedas rural,their nature had to be traced,and approximationsmade (in the lightof density of proportion,and of the movementin neighbouringparishes) as to the populationsat earlierdates of the areas affected.In a fewcases the data were so insufficientthat the errormight have vitiatedthe totals,and thenthe wholeregistration district or suib- districthad to be excluded; such exclusionsaccount for the difference(550,000) betweenthe figuresfor the rural population in 1911 in Tables I and III. Since adjustmentof boundaries generallytakes place where industrialor suburban growthis marked,the districtsexcluded for this reasonwere principallyin the neighbourhoodof towns or industries. The populationincluded in each RegistrationDistrict of whichthe whole or partwas treated as ruralis givenfor the years 1861, 1901, 1911, togetherwith its densityin 1911,in AppendixII, pp. 634seq. In a fewcases it was necessaryto throwtwo districtstogether. Where the approxi- mationwas speciallyuncertain the doubtfulnumber is asterisked in the list. It is believedthat none of the errorscould sensibly affectTable III, wherethe numbersare estimatedto the nearcest I,OOO. The detailedwork was carriedout to thenearest IOO. We may nowturn to the tables.

2 T

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 600 BOwLEY-RuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

TABLE I.-The population(1891-1911) of theadministrative Rural Distrwcts in each county,and of thoseareas of Enqglandand Wales whichwere practicallyuninIluenced by urban, industrial or miningconditions in 1911.

Populationin 000's. Desity: personsper 100acres.

AdmAdministrative PopulationIn Population, inistrative aggate of Rural Den aftfersubtraction of Den- Per- Counties. Isrcs sity mining,Industrial and sity cent- ______in suburbanareas, in age 1911. 1911. growth 1891. 1901. 1911. 1891. 1901. 1911. 1901-11.

Cornwall...... 190 186 184 23 154 149 145 19 - Devon ...... 236 224 227 15 233 219 220 14 Somerset .... 247 242 250 25 203 192 194 21 Dorset .... 109 101 105 17 106 97 98 16 Wilts ...... 162 154 161 19 146 134 136 17 - South-Western* 754 721 743 19 688 642 648 17 1

Hants and Isle of Wight..... 211 223 260 27 155 159 176 21 l Surrey .130 162 223 64 53 59 67 32 r Kent ...... 287 294 312 36 194 190 197 27 Sussex. .... 194 198 219 26 181 181 195 23 Berk . .... 127 127 139 31 95 90 94 24 Bucks. .... 126 128 140 31 90 87 89 23 Herts . ... 94 97 117 33 63 61 64 23

Home Countiest 828 844 927 31 623 609 639 24 6 Essex. .... 230 237 265 31 170 165 175 24 Suffolk ...... 201 191 195 22 195 185 187 21 Norfolk .... 263 253 261 21 261 250 256 20 Camb and Ely ... 107 103 110 22 10& 98 102 21 Hunts. .... 30 30 30 15 30 30 30 15 Lincs. 250 239 255 16 243 2b1 238 15 Eastern .... 1,081 1,053 1,116 21 1,002 959 988 19 3

Bedford ...... 80 75 78 27 71 66 67 24 Leicester... . 128 137 151 31 74 74 76 18 Rutland . ... 17 16 17 18 17 16 17 18 Northants anld Peterboro' .... 133 129 131 22 120 113 113 20 Oxford . . .. 104 96 100 22 95 87 89 20 - Gloucester 223 223 231 31 145 136 141 22

S. Midland .... 685 676 708 27 522 492 503 21 2

Monmouth . 43 43 47 13 37 36 39 11 Hereford. ... 78 75 74 14 77 75 73 14 Shropshire .... 135 133 137 17 126 123 125 16 Western .... 256 251 258 15 240 234 237 14 1

# Excluding Cornwall. t Excluding Hants and Surrey.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof theChanges of Density,Occupations, and Ages. 601

TABLE, I Contd.-Population(1891-1911) of administrativeRural Districts.

Populationin 000's. Density: personsper 100acres.

~Population, Administrative PpltoinafterPopulationin subtracetionof De- Per- Counties. ageate of Rural Den- mining industrialand De-cent- Districts. sity buourban sras iBty age ______In ar a . in g o t 1911. 1911. g90111 1891. 1901. 1911. 1891. 1901. 1911. 10-1

Worcester 136 .158 190 45 81 80 82 23 - Warwick... .. 140 150 172 84 97 96 101 23 - Stafford... .. 174 190 204 33 103 104 107 20 -

W. Mfidllandcl. 450 498 566 36 281 280 290 22 8i

Derby. ....202 234 272 49 68 67 70 21 - Notts ... .. 112 119 129 28 63 62 64 17 - W. Riding ... 272 311 383 30 165 174 181 16 - Cheshire...... 160 163 183 34 113 110 116 24 - Lancs .... 206 219 241 34 95 96 97 18 - N. Midlandlandl N.W. .... 952 1,046 1,208 34 504 509 528 19 4

E.Ridling ... 93 92 95 13 90 87 89 13 - N. ,, .. 138 133 137 11 133 127 128 10 - Durham ...... 279 316 401 72 30 31 31 11 - Northumberland 109 115 125 10 84 84 84 7 - Cumberland ... 107 101 101 11 103 98 98 11 - Westmorland 39 37 37 8 38 36 35 7 -

Northern .... 765 794 896 17 478 463 465 10

Flint .. ... 50 51 58 39 41 42 45 32 - Denbigh...... 85 91 9t 24 37 36 35 10 - Carnarvon 66 68 67 20 66 68 67 20 - A.nglesey ... 33 32 32 19 32 31 30 18 -

N. Wales .... 234 242 253 24 -176 177 177 18 0

Merioneth ... 27 27 25 7 26 25 24 7 - Cardigan ... 49 45 44 10 48 44 43 10 - Montgomery 38 35 34 7 38 35 34 7 - Radnuor...... 18 18 17 6 16 15 15 6 - Brecknock 35 37 42 9 29 28 29 7

Mid-Wales ... 167 162 162 8 157 147 145 8 -i rembroke .... 53 51 51 13 51 49 47 13 - Carmarthen .... 82 86 100 17 58 56 56 12 -

S. Wales ... 135 137 151 16 10.9 105 103 12 -

Glamorgan .... 120 144 206 63 18 18 23 19 - Total . 6,958 7,140 7,859 2386 5,163 5,000 5,137 17-0 27 Rest of En'glan'd.. and Wales .... 22,04525,388 28,211 712-0 23840 27,52830,933 434*0 12-4 Populationof Eng- land and-Wales29,003 32,528 36,070 96'6 9003 32,52836,070 96-6 10-9

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 602 BOWLEY-Rural Pofpulationin England and TWales: [May, Throughoutthis paper a special groupingof countieshas been adopted,partly geographical, partly with reference to the density ofthe rural population in 1911,partly with reference to thepresence of great industriesor the neighbourhoodof London, and partly to make Table VI possible. In Hampshireand in iSurreythe distinctionbetween purely rural and otherareas is so difficultto maintainthat these countiesare not includedin the sub-totalof Home Counties; and in Cornwalland Glamorganthere are so fewrural districts unaffected by miningand quarryingthat these countiesalso are treatedapart. All (except Middlesex,which is treatedas if it was whollynon-rural) are includedin the total. The areas concernedare: rural districts before subtraction, 33,322,ooo acres; urban districts, 4,0I6,000 acre.s. The area transferredfrom rural to urban is 3,100,000 acres. Whilethe aggregateof administrativerural districts in England - and Wales has a densityof 23 6 per I00 acres,that of ouirselected portionshas a densityI7T0. While the populationof the former increased2 7 per cent.in the period1891-1901 and io- i per cent. in 1901-11,that of the latterfell 3o2 per cent. in the firstperiod and roseonly 2 *85 per cent. in the latter. The populationof the aggregateof the subtractedparishes increased I9 per cent. and 27 per cent. in the two periods,and so far as can be judged this growthwas mainlydue to industry,mining or suburbanityin practicallyall cases, though,as we shall see later,these were probably associatedwith some development of an agriculturalnature; thisrate ofincrease 1901-1911 is greaterthan in the urbandistricts as a wholeor in any of the categoriesin Vol. I, page xvii,Table K, of the Census,where these districtsare classifiedby population. It is thenprecisely in thesedense rural districts that population has grownmost rapidlv in recenttimes. The fall and rise of the populationof the purelyrural regions is apparent,though in varvingdegrees, in all the sub-totals,except the NorthMidland, where there is a doublerise, and in Wales where thereis no rise. The separatecounties utsually move in the same directionsas the sub-totals,except wherethe changesare slight, the main exceptionsto thisrule are Sussex,Cheshire and Durham. Closerexamination of the data showsthat these movements are not the balance of contrarymotions, butt the resultantof similar movementsof partsand of the whole. In orderto comparethe movementsof separateRural Districts withthat of the counties,Table II has been prepared.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density,Occupations, and Ages. 603

TABL'E II.-Number of (modi.fied)Rur-al Districts clags8ified according to the change in populationin 1891-1901 and 1901-11. The symbols ++" mean " no substantialchange in 1891-1901andl a rise in 1901-11:' andlsimilarly for the otherhealingi.______

Numberof districts where in theperiod No.o, 1901-1ithere was an districts.

Increasein IStationary Decreasein Total population. population. Ipcopulation. 1891-1901-

++ =+ -+ +===-

Cornwall 91 ii 0 1 1 3 10 61 4 Increased. OtherS.W. ...2 4 18 Oj 1 23 0 0 15 63 Cornwall ... 3 2 Hants and Surrey 12 5 7 0 1 0 1 0 0 26 Rest of England 97 246 Home ... 14 6283 4 11 31 474 Wales ... 1012 East ... ..6 6 29 4 6 29 0 0 7 87 S.Midlandcl . 3 4 23 1 10 18 1 0 10 70 N hne West... 129 14 82 16 34 Cornwallg2. W. Micllancl .... 8 5 4 6 10 5 1 1 1 41 Cetornwallan 13205 N..aclNW 13 14 9 2 15 12 1 2 2 70 Raeist..of.Englan 13'2 Northi... ..4 19 47 20 43 9 61W es2 2 N. Wales .31 1 14 52 2 322 Decrec-rd. Mid,, .11 1 0 59 02 8 27Cornwall .. 9 7 S. .1 0 0 02 4 01 412 Restof Englancl316 75 Glamorgan ...2 1 00 1 10 00 6 Walies... ..36 22

Totals .... 71 51 138 23 71 148 16 13 75 606 606 606

Namesof the104 ruraldistricts included in the threecolumns in whicha perceptibledecrease took place in 1901-11,and approximatediminution ofpopulation (near-est hundred).

Cornwall- ,wilts- NYorfolkc- Helston ...... 5 Crickladle... 5 Depwade ... 2 Truro ...... 16 Malmesbury .... 2 Walsinghiam 2 Reclruthl...... 4 Chippenham .... 2 Lincoln- E. Kerrier ...2 Devizes ... ..4 Welton... 3 Liskeardl ... ..6 Warminster ...2 Horneastle ...4 St. Germans 8 Hants- Louth ... 2 Laiunceston ...3 HartleyWintney .... 2 Caisitor... 2 Devon- Kent- Lietr Torrington ...3 Dartford . 2 Blabyce.te- Credliton...... 7 Faversham .... 10 Blaby . .. Tiverton.... 2 Hoo ... .. MarketBosworth 2 Somer-set- 2Sussex- Belvoir.. ..2 Langport ... 2 Battle . 2 Northampton- Wellington ...2 Hastings... ..2 Wellinghorough...3 Taunton...... 5Bcs Hardingstone 2 Briclgwater ...2 Long Crendon .... 2 Pottersbury 2 Wells;...... 2 NewportPagnell .... 2 Toweester... B Dorset- Wing ... .. 2 Bedford- Cerne ...... 2 Suffolk- Eaton Bray ...2 Stourminster 3 Melford... 4 Biggleswade ...5

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 604 BOWLEY-Bural Populationin England and Wales: [May,

Nlame8of the 104 districtsin whicha perceptibledecrease took place-contd.

Oxford- Lancashire- Carnrvon- Thame ...... 3 Ulverston...... 7 Gwyrfai . ... 16 .... Gloucester- North Riding Glaslyn. 3 ChippingSodbury 3 Aysgarth.... 2 Geirionydd .... 4 Guisborough .4 Anlesey . Hereford- Scarborough 2 Aethwy3 3 Dore ...... 2Twrcelyn ... 2 Weobley. .... 3 Durham- Merioneth- Bromyard .... 3 Barnard Castle .... 5 leudraeth .... 2 Kington . 3 Stockton .... 2 l)olgelly ...... 2 Shropshire- Northumberland- Montgomery- Ludlow .... 2 Glendale ...... 2 Machynlletlh .... 3 Teme ...... 2 Norham .... 3 Newtown .. 2 Clun . ... .2 Belford ...... 2 Llanfyllin .. 3 Cleobury.. 4 Anik....n .... Cardigan- Chirbury. 2 Morpeth . ... 2 Llandyssil. .... 2 Haltwhistle .... 4 Aberayron. .... 6 Warwick- Cumberland Abervstwvth 2 Brailes .. 4 ...... 3 Penrith .... . Tregaron Stafford- Brampton .ngho4adnor .... Mayfield.2 Longtown...... 5 enighton.4 Tutbury.... 2 Westmorland- St. Dogmells .... 4 West Riding- East .... 3 Haverfordwest .... 4 Bedbergh...... 2 South .... 5 PembrokeP o ...... Todmorden .... 5 Denbigh- Carmarthen- Wharfedale .... 4 St. Asaph. .... 2 Llanbyther .... 2 Wortley ...... 10 Llanrwst.... 2 Llandovery .... 4

In the preliminarywork for the tablesthe correctedpopulations of the Rural Districtswere entered to the nearesthundred, so that a differenceof IOO in two columnsmay be onlythe accidentof the arithmetic.All differenceswhich worked out as o or 0OO have been ignoredin Table II. It appearson examinationthat in most cases the great majorityof the Rural Districtsmoved with their countyand the corresppndingsub-total. In England (excluding Cornwall)3I6 out of 526 decreasedin 1891-1901, only 75 fellfurther in 1901-li ; of these 75 some are isolated,but the majorityfall into fourgroups or lines-(i) fromTorrington to Wells; (ii) from Warminsterto- Cricklade; (iii) the Welsh borders; (iv) the high moorlandfrom Sedbergh to Norham. In Wales, especiallymid- Wales,the fallcontinued. Table III showsthe changeduring fifty years, county by county, of the populationon those areas, whichwere practicallyfree of urbanor miningpopulation in 1911, and whichcould be followed back throughthe Census Reports. Comparisonof Tables I and III showsthat the latterhas a deficiencyin populationcounted ruralof 550,ooo; mostof these persons were on areas in the neighbourhoodof urban disturbances,where boundaries had been so

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof thieChanges of Den,sity,Occupations, and Ages. 605

TABLE, IIL-RegqistrationCounties after subtraction of urbanand industrialregions.

000's. Decrease -. Changes: 000's. Decrease-. ~~Nosignificant change= Increase +

1861 1871 -1881 1891 1901 to to to to to 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1901. 1911. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1901. 1911. Per Per Per Per Per cent, cent, cent. cent. cent.

Cornwall .... 165 160 139 128 122 120 - - - - -

Devon. .257 249 233 226 212 214 - - - - + Somerset 233 230 215 204 193 194 - - - - + Dorset...... 116 116 108 103 94 95 = - - - + Wilts ... 156 151 141 136 128 129 - - - - 4

S.W. (exc. Cornwall) 762 746 697 669 627 632 -2 -7 -4 -7 + 1

Hants ... ..141 144 142 145 146 159 + - + + + Surrey... 41 44 46 50 55 61 + + + + +

Kent ... ..167 177 180 182 178 184 + + + - + Sussex... 168 178 183 185 183 197 + + + - + Berks... ..109 110 111 110 103 108 + = = - + Bucks... ..80 81 74 75 72 75 + - + - + Hertis .... 813 81 77 76 72 75 + - - - +

Home (exc. H. and S.) 604 627 625 628 608 639 + 4 = -3 + 5

Essex ...... 171 171 159 157 152 162 = - - - + Suffolk ..219 214 203 196 183 185 - - - - + Norfolk 273 265 260 256 245 249 - - - - + Cambridge 1l1 114 106 103 100 105 + - - - + Hunts .. 41 39 35 32 29 30 - - - - + Lincsa...... 268 268 258 240 227 233 = - - - +

E. ...1,083 1.071 1,021 984 936 9641 -1 -5 -4 -5 +3

Bedford ...89 92 85 80 75 76 + - - - + Leicester,....81 78 78 75 73 76 - = - - + Rutland ...21 20 20 19 17 16 - - - - Northants ...129 124 121 114 108 109 - - - - + Oxford.... ill 109 101 97 87 88 - - - - + Gloucester ...136 137 127 123 117 120 + - - - +

S.M. .... 567 560 532 508 477 485 - 1 -5 -4.5 -6 + 2

Monmouth .... 48 50 44 43 41 43 + - - - + Hereford .... 85 85 79 74 71 69 = - - - - Sh.ropshire ...152 154 151 145 142 145 + - - - + W. ...285 289 274 262 254 257 +1 -5 -4 -3 +1

Worcester ...76 80 78 76 76 78 + - - = + Warwick ...103 106 106 101 97 101 + = - - + S3tafford .... 102 107 110 Ill 114 118 + + + + +

W.M. .... ~281 293 294 288 1287 297 + 4 = 2 = +8,5

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 606 BOWLEY-Rural Populationin Englandand Wales: [May,

TABLE III.-Regstration Countiesafter subtraction of urbanand industrialregions-Contd.

Changes: 000's. Decrease -. No significant change Increase +.

1871 1881 1891 1901 ______- ______-_ __ _1861 to to to to to 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1901. 1911. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1901. 1911. Per Per Per Per Per cent. cent. cent. cent. cent.

Derby ...... 56 55 56 55 54 56 - + - - + Notts ...... 77 72 70 67 65 67 - _ _ - + W. Riding .... 165 164 167 163 171 178 - + _ + + Cheshire 98 103 104 105 102 108 + + + - + Lancs .108 105 106 103 101 103 - + - - +

N.M.&cN.W. 504 499 503 493 493 512 -1 +1 -2 = +4

E. 93 92 87 - - + Riding .... 94 83 86 _- N. ,, .. . 135 137 133 124 118 120 + _ - + Durham .... 40 42 37 36 35 35 + - - _1= Northumber- land .... 99 94 91 85 84 84 - - - - + Cumberland .... 99 99 101 100 95 95 = + __ Westmorland 38 38 38 38 35 35 = = = - = N. .... 505 503 492 470 450 455 -4 -2 -4 -4 + 1

Flint ...... 29 32 33 29 31 33 + + - + + Denbigh .... 39 37 36 33 32 31 - - - _ Carnarvon .... 64 69 75 71 73 72 + + - + Anglesey .... 25 22 21 20 19 19 - - - - =

N. Wales .... 157 160 165 153 155 155 + 2 + 3 -7 +1 =

Merioneth .... 36 38 39 37 36 35 + + - _ Cardigan .... 82 82 78 71 66 64 = _ _ _ Montgomery.... 53 53 50 44 40 39 - _ - Radnor .... 13 13 12 11 11 10 = _ - = Brecknock .... 37 35 34 32 30 31 - - - _ +

Mid-Wales .... 221 221 213 195 183 179 = -4 -8 -6 -2

Pembroke .... 55 52 49 47 45 44 _ - - - Carmarthen .... 46 44 45 45 40 44 - + = - +

S. Wales .... 101 96 94 92 85 88 -5 -2 -2 -81 + 4 England and Wales- Rural regions.... 4,939 4,936 4,764 4,625 4,454 4,581 = 3-5 - 29 - 37 + 2-9 Industrial ,, * 15,127 17,776 21,210 24,378 28,074 31,489 + 17,5 + 19,3 + 14-9 + 15,2 + 12,2

Total .... 20,066 22,712 25,974 29,003 32,528 36,070 + 13,2 + 14-4 + 11-7 + 12-2 + 10 9

* All Middlesex and Glamorganincluded.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 607 alteredas to make disentanglementimpossible. The ruralpopulation as a wholewas unchangedfrom 1861 to 1871, and then fell by threenearly equal steps,making io per cent. in all, between 1871 and 1901, and recoveredone of these steps by 1911. The fall took place withlittle interruption throughout England, south of the Trent,except in six home counties; the populationfell similarlyin the countiesfurther north than the West Riclingof Yorkshire,in the countieson the Welsh bordersand in eight of the twelveWelsh counties. In the remainingcounties, influenced presumablyby the neighbourhoodof London,of industry, of mines or ofquarries, notwithstanding that all theareas which were actually denseeven at the end ofthe periodhad been subtracted,the move- mentswere sinaller and irregular. The actual nuimbers(to the nearest ioo persons)included in the table are given in AppendixIl foreach RegistrationDistrict forthe years 1861, 1901, and 1911, togetherwith the densityin 1911. Of these residual rural populationisin 477 districts,354 decreasedbetween 1861 and 1901, iii increased,and i2 were equal at the two dates. The only districtsshowing an increasein 1861-1901 in the groups called South-Western,Eastern, South .Midland,West, North, and in Wales (thatis in thosegroups where the countiesdiminished steadily) were Plympton,Long Ashton (Bristol), Epping, Rochford, Mutford (Ipswich), Yarmouth, Erpingham(Cromer), St. Faith's (Norwich),Whittlesey, Blaby and Billesdonin Leicestershire,Northampton, Bridlington, Sculcoates (Hull), Middlesbrough,Guisborough, Darlingt,on, Stockton, Morpeth, Carlisle,Cockermoiuth, Whitehaven, Bootle, IEawarden,Conway, Carnarvon,Festiniog, and Dolgelly,28 in all out of 299. Of these the only one whichis not near a large town or miningdistrict is Whittleseyin Cambridgeshire.In the othergroups, all containing industrieson a largescale, the districtsare dividednearly equally betweenincrease and decreasein mostcounties and exactlyequally (83 up, I2 level,83 down)in the aggregate. It is thusseen that as a wholethe movementin each countyis not only the total, but is thetype of the movements in its parts. The importantconclusion that we reachis that howeverthoroughly we purifythe population of urban and mininginfluences, we still findthat the remaining populationfalls less or increasesmore in the neighbourhoodof industryor residence. It is an importantquestion which will be answeredin part later on, whetherthis influenceis an actual encouragementto agriculturefrom the neighbourhoodof a good market,or is onlya penumbraof the townstoo thinto be identified by the statisticalinstrument we have used.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 608 BOWLEY-Rur-al Populationin Englandand Wales: [May,

Moredetailed inspection of the numbersat each Censuts8in the districtsshows other illustrations of thisradiating urban influence, and also showssome definitegeographical lines of division,other than county. Thus in Hampshirethe rural populationnorth of a line joiningFordingbridge to Farnboroughhas been practically stationarvin all the districtsthroughout the half-century;south of this line it has increased. In Berkshirethe districtseast of Reading have increased,Bradfield, Newbury, Wallingford and Abingdonare nearlythe same in 1911 as in 1861,while the western districtshave decreased withthe contiguousdistricts in Wiltshire. In the extremenorth the populationof the coast districts,east and west,has grown,while the moorlanddistricts have fallenoff. It is to be rememberedthat throughoutreference is onlymade to the residualareas includedin Table III. The resultsobtained show some markeddifferences from those in Dr. Ogle'spaper, " The allegeddepopulation of the rural districts "of England,"read to this Societyin 1889,in whichhe maintained that the ruraldistricts had containeda stationarypopulation from 1851 to 1881. His methodwas to subtractfrom the total the populationsof all urban districtscontaining io,ooo persons or morein 1881, and to treat the residueas rural; this residuein fifteen" chiefagricultural counties " amountedto 2,38I1ooo in 1851 and 2,358,ooo in 1881. If he had omittedBerks, Herts and Bucks,the fallwould have been 3 *6 per cent.instead of i per cent. Having the advantageof the 1891 and latercensuses, I have been able to searchmore thoroughlyfor industrialinfluences, and it appearsthat in theresidual treated by himthere was a considerable decreasein the purelyrural districts (which he notedin the case of certaincounties) which was in factbalanced by the spreadingof urbaninfluences. These influencesare subtleand gradualand at firstdifficult to recognise; but they are cumulative,and when we examinethe historyof a districtthat had become adminis- trativelyurban in 1911 we findtraces of its developmentas far back as 1871. Dr. Ogle did not, I think,use the test of density, or he wouldprobably have remarkedmore explicitly on thegrowing intermixtureof town and countryin the industrialcounties. Table IV givesa view'ofrural population, similar in definition to Dr. Ogle's, and carriedback to 1801 and forwardto 1911. It differsfrom Tables I and III, in that on the one hand onlythose administrativeRural Districts, which in 1911 werevery obviously industrial,mining, or suburbanin character,were subtracted;

3Not printedbecause of the size of the necessary table.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 609

TABLE IV.-Populationon areaswhich were in RuralDistricts, or Urban Districts containingless than 20,000 persons,in 1911 (le8s certain msburbanand miningdistricts). (In 000's.3

Counties. 1801. 1851. 1861. 1881. 1901. 1911.

South-West ...... 944 1,453 1,435 1,391 1,378 1,433 Hants and Surrey .... 216 358 388 484 613 749 Home ...... 606 955 980 1,082 1,181 1,305 East .901 1,490 1,462 1,444 1,447 1,551 South Midland...... 556 806 811 812 800 835 West ...... 268 360 375 373 360 377 West Midland ...... 349 583 643 760 779 839 North Midland and North-West 660 1,021 1,078 1,368 1,716 1,998 E. and N. Ridings,Durham 286 459 508 600 665 788 Northumberland, Cumberland, Westinorland. .... 219 307 312 329 322 336 N. Wales ..., ...... 158 284 296 328 351 371 Mid-Wales...... 170 253 254 252 228 228 S. Wales ...... 153 254 260 290 326 406

England and Wales. .... 5,486 8,583 8,802 9,513 10,166 11,216 and on the othersmall country towns, which appeared to be simply markettowns, and had a populationof less than 20,000 in 1911, were added; the aggregatepopulation of these towns in 1911 was about i,8oo,ooo. These areas were almost certainlypurely ruralor dependententirely on agriculturein 1861,and the growth from 1801-51, withthe slightfurther addition in 1861, probably gives a truepicture of the growthof ruralElngland prior to 1861. But from 1861 to 1911 the furtherincrease on these areas of 2,400,000 persons occurs entirely in the residential and industrial counties,and is not due to ruralgrowth. We concluidefrom the tables now given that the rural population increasedsome 50 percent. in theperiod 1801-1851, was verynearly stationaryfrom 1851 to 1871,fell Io percent. by 1901,and recovered 3 per cent. bv 1911. The percentagechanges depend on the definitionadopted; but all reasonabledefinitions would give the same generalimpression and the same dates.

II.-Land occupations. The analysis of agricuilturaloccupations was carried ouit so thoroughlyby Lord Eversleyin his paper on " The decline in " numberof agricultuLrallabourers in GreatBritain," read to this Societyin 1907,that it willbe unnecessaryto go into muchdetail as to the natureof the classification.I have insertedthe corre spondingfigures for 1871 and 1891 and carriedhis table (Journal

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 610 BOWLEY-BUIal Populationin England and Wales: [May,

TABLE V. -Land occupation. Enzglandand Wales. Men over20 years. [Numbers in thousands and decimals of thousands.]

All_districts._Rural Urban All districts, districts. districts.

1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1901. 1911. 1401. 1911. 1901. 1911.

Farmers .... 226'0 224 5 202 4 200Q5202-0 208-1 174-3 179-3 27-7 28-8 Farmers'relatives .... 60-0 47 9 47 1 43 4 55-7 63-3 49 3 55-5 6-4 7-7 Bailiffs.... * 15-6 16 3 19 4 18 0 22 4 22-0 19-4 18-8 3 1 3-2 Shepherdsand labourers 809-4 657-8 606-0 345 6 4584 498-2 395-6 424-4 62-8 73 8 Gardeners,seedsmen, florists .... (28 2) (46 7) (58 9) (78 9) 105-4 121-5 46-1 48 3 61-3 73 3 Agriculturalmachines: proprietors,attendants 1-4 2'0 3 9 4-3 6-1 69 1 Others(including wood- 19,6 22-8 2,9 37 men). .... 84 7-8 9 7 10'3 16-4 197J

Total...... 1149-0 1003-0 947-4 901-9 866 4 939.7 702-3 749-1 164-2 190 5 Domestic gardeners .... (50 2) (61.0) (62.1) (68 8) 75-2 100'6 41-2 58-9 34 0 411 Gamekeepers ...... _ 94 11 8 11 3 12 7 15 1 15 5 13-8 14 2 13 14

Grand total .... 1208-6 1075 8 1020 8 983 4 9561 1055 8 757 3 822'2 199 5 233 6

Areas: thousand acres. Total (modified) .... 1,180 1,049 1,020 983 977 1,056 33,500133,322 j3,849 14,016

* Labourersinclude farm-servants,cottagers, those in charge of horses or of cattle, and possibleother variants in nomenclaturein the variouscensuses.

1907, page 27a) on to 1911. In the earliercensuses domestic are not adequatelyseparated from other gardeners, and I have followed Lord Eversley'shypothesis putting the figuresaffected in brackets; I have also addedother occulpations which definitely involve working on the land. Thoughit is reasonableto separatedomestic from othergardeners for some classifications, they are in factproducing vegetables,fruit and flowersjust as thoseemployed by nurserymen or hired intermittentlyby householders.Gamekeepers are also definitelyemployed in charge of animals on the land,and may properlybe includedin the total of what I call land occupations. For the finaltotal I have adoptedLord Eversley'smodifications in subtractingan estimatednumber of retiredpersons prior to 1881 and adding a numberfor those absent in South Africain 1901. It shouldfurther be remarkedthat the numberof farmer's relatives (workingon the farms)has so irregulara relationto the numberof farmersas to makeit almostcertain that the content of the definition has varied. The numberof farmersis seen,when allowance is made forthe "retired" includedprior to 1881, to have remainedpractically

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Chianges of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 611 unchangedfor fifty years. It is verynearly equal to thenumber of holdingsof over 2o acresin Englandand Wales estimatedfor 1895 bv the Board of Agriculture.The number of shepherdsand labourersdeclined rapidly from 1861 to 1901, the firstand last steps beingthe greater. The cause and extentof the fallprior to 1871 has not, so far as I know,been completelyanalysed. The notebelow shows that a considerablepart of it was apparent,rather thanreal, and due to fauiltyclassification. Noteas togeneral and agriculturallabourers.-General Report, Census of England and Wales, 1871, p. xlv.-" Notwithstandingthe explicit instruc- " tions on the subject to the householdersand the enumerators,it is not " improbablethat many agriculturallabourers returned themselves simply as " labourers; to enable the skilful inquirer to judge for himselfwe place the " facts in juxtapositionin the annexedtable." [Abbreviatedhere.] All ages. [In 000's.]

1851. 1861. 1871.

Agriculturallabourers .... 909 914 765 Labourers (branchundefined) .... 324 307 509 1,233 1,221 1,274 Shepherd(outdoor)...... 12,5 25,6 23,3 Farm servant(indoor) ...... 189 158 134

General total...... 1,435 1,405 1,431

" Mr. Read, M.P., and Mr. Caird,good authorities,hold that therehas been " a diminutionof the numberof agriculturallabourers." In the General Report,Census of 1881, p. 37, we findthe above total for 1871 (with the additionof cottagers)corrected for retired persons, and compared with that for 1881 withthe followingresult:- All ages. (In 000's.]

1871. 1881.

Agricultural labourers,shepherds and farmservants ...... 962 871 Labourers(branch undefined) .... 506 560 1,468 1,431

In 1891,the general labourerswere 594,000 in number; in 1901, 410,000; in 1911, 295,oco, that is, fewerthan in 1861. The figuresin this note referto all ages and all districtsin England and Wales. The disturbance of course affectstown occupations,especially the

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 612 BOWLEY-BuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

The total numberof men over 20 yeaTs in agriculturewas nearlythe same in 1851 and 1861, the numberfor 1861 being if per cent. less than in 1851. The subsequentgeneral fall in actual agriculturewas in part compensatedby the increasein horticulture.While the numberof personsclassified as shepberds and agriculturallabourers diminished by at least 40 per cent. in the period 1861-1901,the total in " land occupations" fell only I7 per cent. Since 1901 the shepherdsand labourers,gardeners, machin-istsand othershave togetherincreased 13 per cent., and the wholein land occupations8 per cent. The increasein thenumber of " gardeners,seedsmen, florists " is verynoticeable. In 1911 the total was made up as follows:-

Urban districts.T Rural districts. f Total.

Nurserymen,seedsmen, florists 16,000 7,200 23,000 Marketgardeners (including labourers) ...... 12,400 18,500 31,000 Gardeners...... 34,900 22,600 68,000

Thenumber of marketgardeners is smallerthan might have been anticipated. It is difficultto findin the Censusof Occupationsthe personswho occupy the holdingsof from5 to 20 acres, which amountedto I27,000 in 1895. buildingtrades and worksof construction,and in 1901 four-fifthsof them were in urban districts. The followingtable givesthe data for1901 and 1911 when rural districtscan be separated:-

Hates over 20 years. (In OOO's.]

Urbandistricts. Rural districts. All districts.

1901. 1911. 1901. 1911. 1901. 1911.

In OrderVIL Agriculture- Shepherds ...... 1 1 21 18 22 19 Men in chargeof- Cattle ...... 8 8 48 42 56 50 Horses ...... 14 11 96 89 110 100 Agriculturallabourers undistin- guished...... 40 54 230 275 270 329

Total ...... 63 74 395 424 458 498 In Order XXII. Undefined- General labourers .... 288 213 71 58 359 272 Grand total ...... 351 287 466 482 817 770

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 613

The urban districtsaccount, as wouildbe expected,for a great partof the increase of gardenersof all classes,but it is at firstsight surprisingthat the numberof agriculturallabourers has increased morerapidly in urbanthan in ruraldistricts, even whenallowance is made forthe changein area. It is nore surprisingto findthat, takingadministrative Urban Districts as a wholeand administrative Rural Districtsas a whole,there are morefarmers, more relatives, more bailiffs,more agriculturallabourers,4 and more " others" per i,ooo urbanacres than per 1,ooo ruralacres. The latterit is true incluidethe nearlvunpopulated mountains and moorlandsof Wales and ofthe northern counties, but the formerinclude London. Justas we foundthat the ruralpopulation was denserand least inclinedto fallin therural regions which were in theneighbourhood ofdenser populations, so nowwe find that the agricultural population is denser and more inclinedto rise in and among the denser populations. Actuallythe area coveredby buildingsin a modern extendedCounty Borough is oftennot a greatproportion of the whole; there is much space left for parks and gardens,and thereforemany gardeners,and a considerablegrazing and even arable area is includedin its outskirts,together with regions of intensivecultivation. In the smallertowns and in the scattered miningand industrialurban districts,the housesof the industrial populationmay take up an almostnegligible area, and agriculture flourishover the minesor roundthe factoriesundisturbed. The wholeanalysis strongly suggests that the number of persons occupied on the land in anv place is determinedto a greatextent by the neighbourhoodof a populationnot engagedin agriculture. When we comparethe changesin the ruralpopulation shown in Table III withthe echanges in the,numbers in " land occupations," excludingnow domesticgardeners,. we findmarked divergencies.

Decennial changes.

Population. Occupations.

Per cent. Per cent. 1861-71 .... 0 -13 '71-81 .... -3 5 - 4 '81-91 .... -2 *9 - 4 '91-1901 .... -3 .7 _ 3* 1901-11 .... +29 + 6

* Not allowingfor absence in South Africa.

4 Fewer shepherdsand fewergamekeepers. VOL. LXXVII. PART VI. 2 U

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 614 BOWLEY-RuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

The ambiguityof the Census returils of 1861 and 1871for occupations does not nullifythe fall,though it makes it probable that 13 per cent. is much too big; and it appears that therewas an exodus of personsengaged in agriculture(at any rate fromntheir occupationsif not fromtheir homes) prior to 1871,before the rural exodushad begun. We shall see immediatelythat thisdiminution was not confinedto the young,but a considerablepart may have beenof men who went to thetowns or abroadahead oftheir families. Actuallythe numberof boys and men engagedin agriculturewas in 191153 percent. of the number in all occupationsin theaggregate of the ruraldistricts of m8counties selected as havingvery little urbandisturbance, and was only4I per cent.in all administrative rural districtsin England and Wales. Occupiedmales formonly 32 per cent. of the personsin ruraldistricts. Hence a diminution of I3 per cent. of those occupiedin agriculturewould now make a differenceofonly 2 percent. in therural districts, if they left without any dependents. The discrepancyprior to 1871 is not then so greatas appears. Thereis no inconsistencyin thechanges between 1871 and 1911. But it shouldbe remarkedthat we have not so far had the reasonedreport of the Censusauthorities as to 1911 occupations,but only an unannotatedtable. It is probablethat thenew form of schedule separating " industrv" from" occupation" has resultedin a morerigid classification; and partof the rise shown in 1901-11 may prove to be only apparent,as suggestedby the statisticsin the.note, pages 611-612. In Table VI it is shown that the declinein the numberof agriculturallabourers took place all over England and Wales. Considerabledifficulty was found in making this table. The Censiusesof 1881 and 1891 make no distinctionby age in the occupationsin counties,and comparisonswhich do not separate theincreasing numbers of boys at schoolfrom the totalsare useless. These dates are thereforeomitted. The classificationfor 1861 and 1871is forRegistration Counties, while that for 1901 and 1911 is forAdministrative Counties, and theindividual differences are so great as to preventcomparison county by county. But it was foundpossible to groupcounties as in the table,so that the group areas were very nearlythe same numericallywhether we took registrationor administrativerecords. The actual places were not always the same; e.g., administrativegroup F has IOO,OOO acres in registrationgroups A, C and I, while II5,000 acres in registrationgroup F are in administrativegroups C, G or H; the populations on these areas in 1911 were 23,ooo and 26,ooo. On the assumptionthat such interchangehas no importanteffect,

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 615

TABLE VI.-Occupations in groupsof counties. Mfenand lads 15 to 65 years.

[00's omitted.]

Farmers, relations and Shepherds and Together. hailiffs. lahourers. Districts.

1861. 1871. 1901. j1911. 1861. 1871. 1901. 1911. 1861. 1871. 11901. 1911.

A. South-West. ... 40,8 37,2 40,2 42,9 116,1 95,8 63,4 69,6 156,9 133,0 103,6 112,5 B. Hants and Surrey ... 6,6 6,0 6,5 7,4 41,2 37,8 24,2 26,6 47,8 43,8 30,7 34,0 C. Home .18,8 17,6 17,8 20,3 119,5 107,4 70,2 77,9 138,3 125,0 88,0 98,2 D. Middlesex ... 1,6 1,6 1,2 1,3 10,2 7,4 4,2 4,7 11,8 9,0 5,4 6,0 E. East .37,0 34,7 36,8 39,8 187,3 163,8 126,6 142,0 224,3 198,5 163,4 181,8 F. South Midlands 17,8 16,5 16,6 18,2 93,4 76,7 46,5 51,8 111,2 93,2 63,1 70.0 G. West ...... 13,9 13,4 13,7 14,2 38,6 31,4 21,7 23,7 52,5 44,8 35,4 37,9 H. West Midlands ... 15,2 13,9 14,5 15,4 51,8 42,0 28,1 30,3 67,0 55,9 42,6 45,7 7 r I. N.W. and Midlands 60,4 55,81 74,2 74,61 114 839480 187,1 174,1 139,4 115,2 119,2 J. North-East... ..18,5 17,5) 40,9 33,7 j'59,4 51,2 46,1 49,4 K. North ...... 14,4 12,8 13,4 14,0 25,5 20,9 14,7 15,0 39,9 33,7 28,1 29,0 L. Wales ...... 43,1 40,2 38,3 1 40,0 51,5 39,3 31,2 33,0 94,6 79,5 69,5 73,0

Total (000's) ... 288, 2267, 273, 288, 890, 740, 518, 569, 1,179, 1,007, 791, 857,

A. Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, Wilts. C. Kent, Sussex, Berks, Bucks, Herts. D. Middlesex and London. E. Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Camb, Hunts, Lincs. F. Beds, Northants, Leicester, Rutland, Oxford, Gloucester. G. Monmouth, Hereford, Shropshire. H. Worcester, Warwick, Stafford. I. Derby, Notts, W. Riding, Cheshire, Lancs. J. East and North Riding, Durham. K. Northumber- land, Cumberland, Westmorlanid. L. Wales. In 1911 the County Boroughs are separated in the occupation tables from the administrative counties, and labourers are not distinguished; some approximation was necessary to allow for this.

it was foundsufficient to add i per cent. and 3 per cent. to administrativegroups C and G, and subtractI per cent. from group E to make them comparablewith the registrationgroups, the other groups being unaffected.The ages 15-65 have been chosenso as to includethe great bulk of those engaged in agriculture, whilethe confusionsas to school-childrenand retiredpersons were to a greatextent avoided. Whateveruncertainty difficulties of classificationmay cause in the totals is minimisedwhen we comparechanges in one group ofcounties with those in another,as in Table VII, et seq.

2 u 2

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 616 BOWLEY-Bural Populationin England and Wales: [May,

TABLE VII.- Comparisonof changesin population,occupation and wages in groupsof counties.

Farmersand Shepherdsand Densit Aver- labourers* labourersonly Rural ofrural Mone eagrn (1565 p5years). popatIon areas wages. ings,t ______from Table III. -orn- Per- includ- Districts l fromTge s langes | Percentage puted centage ing Districts ~~~~~~changes.Table changet allow- (as in Table VI). Percenstagechanges Tbe ances, fromTable VI. &c.

1861- 190111. 1861- 1.901-1 1861- 1901-11. 1891. 1861b 1907. 1901. 1901. 1901. 1902.

s. d. A. S.W. . -34 + 9 -45 +10 -19 = 18 + 41 16 11 B. H. and S. .. -36 +12 -40 +10 -11 +10 20 +31 18 1 C. Home...... -36 +12 -41 +11 + 1 + 5 24 +31 17 5 D. Middlesex -54 +11 -60 +10 ...... +40 20 3 E. E...... -27 +11 -32 +12 -144 + 3 19 +14 16 6 F. S.M. . -43 +11 -50 +11 -144 + 2 22 +25 16 8 G. W. -33 + 74 -43 +10 -11 + 1 14 +40 17 8 H. W.M. ..-36 + 7 -46 + 8 + 2 + 31 22 +35 17 4 I. N.M. and W. -33 + 3i I_4 + 8 - 2 + 4 18 +39 19 9 J. N.E. .... -21 + 7 j -11 + 2 10J +35 20 2 R. N. .... -30 + 3 -40 + 2 -10 _ r +31 20 11 L. Wales ...... -26 + 5 -40 + 6 -12 12 ? 18 0

England and Wales -33 + 8 -42 +10 -10 + 3 .... +31 18 0

* Farmers,relations, bailiffs, shepherds, labourers. t For detail and referencessee AppendixIII, p. 645.

We exclude Middlesexfrom the discussionin t.he following paragraphs. The generaluniformity of the rate of decrease of shepherdsand labourersthroughout the countryis verynoticeable. From 1861 to 1901 onlyin the East (32 pei cent.)was the fallless than 40 per cent., and only in the South-West(45), the South M[idland(50), and the West Midland (46) was it over 43 per cent. The rise1901-11 is uniform(io to I2 per cent.)over groups A to G, smaller(8) in the manufacturinggroups H and I, smallerin Wales, and negligiblein the North(K). With such slightvariations in numberswhose possible error is so considerableit is unlikelythat we shall find any clear connectionwith any other measurable characteristicsof the groups. Thatno strictproportion can be found betweenwhat I have called rural populationand the numberof labourersis again shownby comparingthe East with the South Midlandsgroups, or theWest and WestMidland. Nor does thefall appearto be relatedto the density,either towards making it more uniformthroughout the countryor less uniform.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyofthe Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 617

Are the changesrelated to wages? In AppendixIII is givena table of weeklvmoney rates of wages in the countiesat various datesfrom 1861 to 1.907. Wrhatevertheir exact relation to earnings or to averagewages, it is practicallycertain that theyare definite enoughto enable us to comparerates of changein the districts, as in Table VII. Again,whatever rule is suggestedis contradicted by the contrarybehaviouir of the East and SouthMidland districts. The last columnof Table III showsthe computedannual earnings (divided by 52) estimatedfor ordinaryagricultural labourers for the Wage Census (Cd. 5460). The greatestearnings are in the North(K) wherethe risein the numberof agriculturistsin 1901-11 is least,the least in the East wherethe rise 1901-11 is greatest; but even this impetustowards lower wages is not general. The purelystatistical examination, without any referenceto agriculturalconditions, does not thenshow or saggestany explana- tion of the local variationsin movement. Withoutentering on any ge-neraldiscussion as to agricultural wages,I wishto pointout thatthe average earnings of the aggregate engagedin land occupationshave probably-advancedmore rapidly than would appear fromthe data in AppendixIII or fromother statisticsgenerally quoted, for two related reasons. First, the continualgrowth of all the occupationsdealt within Table V other than ordinaryfarm labour has presumablyresulted from a movement towards better wages. Secondly,the greaterincrease in numberof nearly all landoccupations in Urban than in Rural Districts has increasedthe proportionin regionswhere the pav is relatively high. There is no doubt that agriculturalwages are in close sympathywith wages that can be obtainedfor unskilledlabour in the same neighbourhood,and men cannothe kept on the land wherethe populationis denseexcept at a wage approximatingto a town wage. It may oftenhappen (as is alleged) that the higher level is in part nominalrather than real, but at the least it must oftenmean that the laboureris obligedto pay forhouse accom- modationof a typesuperior to that in ruraldistricts and that his wages allow for this payment. How far real wages differfrom nominalin this way mustvary enormouslyaccording to the type of townor urbandistrict; bat I have littledoubt that real wages for gardeners(nursery or domestic,or marketgardening labourers) are definitelyhigher in urban districtsthan the wages of farm labourersin neighbouringrural districts. Now, in searchingfor typical agriculturalwages, the last place an investigatorwould visitwould be a farmwithin a countyborough, and in generalhe would examinethe more rural parts of a county. I thinkthat this suLbjectdeserves careful investigation.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 618 BOWLEY-BuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

III.-Ages. VolumeVII of the Censusof 1911 showsvery clearly and com- pletelythe varietyof distributionby age in England and Wales and the characteristicsof urban and ruraldistricts, and it further shows the markedchange in general age-distributionthat has taken place in recent decades. This reportdoes not, however, deal withages in relationto occupations,a subjectdeserving much moreattention than has hithertobeen givento it. I shall assume that those interestedwill referto the Census volumefor general poputlation,and I shall deal mainlywith occupied male population and in particularwith the group shepherdsand agricultural labouirers. TABLEVIII.-England and Wale8. All occupiedmales.*

Nmes(n000's). Percentagesof totalbetween NUmberS(in OOO's). 15 and 65.

Ages ... 15- 25- 35- 45- 555-6. Total. 15- 25- 35- 45- 55-6f.

1861... 1,800 1,380 1,125 835 555 5,695 31v6 24 3 19-7 14 -6 9 -8 '71.... 1,965 1,569 1,214 947 624 6,319 31 2 24-8 19 2 15 0 9 9 '81t 2,224 1,797 1,379 1,020 648 7,068 31 -5 25 -5 19 5 14 4 9 2 '91.... 2,617 2,049 1,571 1,142 690 8,069 32 5 25 4 19 65 14 2 8 .5 1901....2,910 2,443 1,889 1,341 808 9,391 31U0 26 0 20 2 14-3 816 '11.... 2,981 2,793 2,296 1,639 972 10,68128 0 26 1 21 5 15 4 9 1

Agriculturallabourers and shepherds.

1861....294 2 190 8 163 6 134 4 107'2 890 33 0 2t 5 18i4 15'2 12 0 '71.... 250 7 148-2 130-8 118,2 92,4 740 33 9 20'0 17-6 16'0 1265 '81t 2.556 132'5 108-1 107 0 87,1 690 37 0 19 2 1567 1565 12i6 '91.... 236v8 128 8 97 5 89 *6 76 -5 629 37 6 20'5 15'5 14'2 12'2 1901. 181V8102,6 93-2 767 64*0 518 35,1 19'8 18'0 14-8 12'4 '11.... 201A4117 7 96 9 88 5 63 6 568 35 5 20 7 17 0 15 6 11 2

* The residualstreated as Unoccupiedvary in definitionfrom Census to Census. No doubtafter careful study these might be madeuniform, but thishas not been attemptedhere. In consequence,none of the figuresdepending on the "all occupied" tableshould be usedexcept for such rough purposes as in thissection. t The Censusgives groups 25-45 and 45-65; thesehave been sub-divided byinterpolation.

Table VIII showsthe numbersof all occupiedmales in fiveage- groupsfor 15 to 65 yearsfrom the Censusesof 1861 to 1911,both absolutelyand in percentages; and the agriculturallabouring group,classified as such in the reports,are dealt with in a similar

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, andAges. 619 way. By beginningat 15 yearsand stopping at 65 yearswe eliminate someof the difficultiesof classification,and reduceconsiderably the disturbancecaused by the inclusionof retiredpersons prior to 1881. The percentagesare probablynot much disturbedby the confusionbetween agriculturaland general labourers. Looking firstat the percentages,we see that in 1861 ancd1871 the agricul- tur'istsshow an excessunder 25 and over45 yearsand a deficiency in the middleages; in 1881 the excessunder 25 jumpsup, and the deficiencyfrom 25 to 45 is moremarked. Thereis littlechange in the relationsabove 45 yearsthroughout the fifty years. The excess of the youngvaries down and up fromthe highlevel of 1881 in a curiousmanner, and finisheswith the maximum,7-5 above the percentageof all occupied. No definiteconclusion as to the nature ofthe change can be drawnfrom these figures alone, for they measure the balance of opposingtendencies. If an industryis decaying, and thereis nomovement of persons out of it, itis shownbv a cutting offof the supply of younglabour and a high percentageof old (see the diagramsin Booth's Life and Labourof thePeople), while if it is growingthere is a highpercentage of young. On the other hand, if the youngenter the industryand aftersome yearsleave it, thereis again a high percentageat the low ages, and if this continues the age - distributionremains distinct but constant. Again,if the death-rate in theindustry is low,and ifit can be carried on by elderlymen, there will be a highpercentage of the old. The figuresare consistentwith the hypothesisthat young men left agriculturewith acceleration about 1871,that the outwardstream was regularand a steadyage-distribution established for the following thirtyyears, and that in the last ten yearsa largerproportion remainedup to the age of 25. We shall examinethese hypotheses later. It wouldbe interestingto see howthese movements affected the ages of the wholepopulation of ruralareas, and forthis purpose we cannotdepend upon administrativeRural Districts. Out of the EnglishRegistration Districts used forTable III thosewere selected fromwhich no urban areas had been subtracted,for which no approximationshad been made, and wherethere had been little, ifany, change of boundary. It provedthat only 29 districtssatisfied these conditions,but that thesewere scattered in a fairlyrandom way fromthe ScillyIslands to Belfordin the extremeNorth. In Table IX the averageof the percentagedistributions by age of all males over 15 yearsis given,including those over 65.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 620 BOWLEY--RuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May)

TABLE IX.-Ttwent.y-nineregistration districts, selected as beingpureil ruraland subjectto littlechange of boundary. All males. Average of thepercentages in the districts.

Ages ... 15-25. 25-45. 45-65.45-

1861. .... 274 36.4 26,0 10-2 '71. .... 26 -9 34 -9 26*7 11*4 '81. .... 28 -3 34-2 26 -3 11*3 '91 .... 27*5 35*4 25-2 12-0 1901.... 26 -0 36,9 25-6 11-6 '11 ..... 25,3 37 2 26-2 11 2

The selecteddistricts are:- Kent, Hollingbourne. Wilts, Tisbury. Warwick,Shipston. Sussex- Dorset,Beaminster. Rutland, UJppingham. Hailsham. Cornwall- Nottingham,Bingham. Petworth. Camelford. Lancashire,Lunesdale. Hants- Scilly. N. Riding- Fordingbridge Gloucester Helmsley. Stockbridge. Dursley. Aysgarth. Whitchurch. Northleach. Northumberland, Eel- Cambridge,Caxton. IHereford,Weobley. ford. Essex, Dunmow. Shropshire,Market Dray- Cumberland,Alston. Suffolk,Bosmere. ton. Norfolk- Worcester- Aylsham. Tenbury. Loddon. Pershore.

The movementhere shown is quitedifferent from that of agricultural labourers. The relativenumbers between 25 and 45 years have risenover the whole period and thosebetween 15 and 25 years

TABLE X.-A ge-distributionof various groups. Percentagesof males over15 years. 1901. Urban Districts. } Rural Districts.

15-26. 25-45. 45-65. 65- 15-25. 2 5. 4565.1 65-

All males ...... 30-0 43*4 21 -4 5 1 274* 38-6 24-1 9-6 All occupiedmales 30-2 45*4 21 2 3 -2 28-2 40*5 24-4 7 -0 All occupied males in agriculture. .... 229 35-0 31*2 10-9 271 358 27 -1 10 -1 Shepherdsand labourers 29*4 33-6 27-2 9 *8 32-2 34-5 24 -3 9 -0

1911.

All males ...... 26-6 44,5 229 6 -0 26-3 39 I 24 - 9 -3 AR occupiedmales 261 46*8 23-0 3 5 26 -8 42 -0 25 0 6-2 All occupied males in agriculture ...... 25-2 36-3 29-4 9 1 28-1 36-0 27 1 88 Shepherdsand labourers 29 -1 35 -0 27-3 8-7 3382 34*8 24.3 7-6

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 621 have fallen,and thereare manyminor differences. These figures may be compared with those in Table X, which exhibits the relationshipof the percentagesfor the wholepopulation (occupied or not) to those occupiedin general,and in particularto all in agriculture,and to shepherdsand labourers. The selecteddistricts have relativelyfewer young and below 45 years and more over 45 than the administrativeRural Districtsas a whole,and the Rural Districtshave fewerunder 45 yearsthan the Urban. It is verynoticeable that for all engagedin agriculture(incluiding non-domesticgardeners), and separatelyfor labourers,the ages in UrbanDistricts are higher than in Rural Districts, though agricultural ages are still lowerthan those of all occupiedin UrbanDistricts. Put otherwise,the migrationfrom agriculture in Urban Districts, thoughconsiderable, is less thanthat fromRural Districts. This deserves moredetailed examination, and we will investigatethe age-distributionin 1901 and 1911 as minutelyas the Censusdata allow. In Table XI the numberof male personsoccupied is shown forurban and rural districtsseparately year by year up to 20 yearsfor 1911. TABLEXI.-England and Wale8. 1911. Per 1,OOOof all ages above 10. 125and Ages ...... 10- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- up- wards.

All occupied- UTrbanDistricts .... 2 6j 19 24 26 26i 27 27 129 713- RuralDistricts .... 1 7 21 26 28 28 28 27 193 711 Agrieulturallabourersand marketgardeners* UrbanDistricts .... 1 7' 21 27 31 31 30 29 122 700 RuralDistricts .... i 12 30 36 39 39 36 32 128 647

Per ioo lads of 14, 15, 16, 17 of each group.

Ages ...... |18-25.25.35. 36-45. 45-55. 55-65.| 65-.

All occupied ...... 186 250 206 146 87 40 All occupiedin agricultureU.D. 167 .186 172 162 128 91 (OrderVII) .... 1 R.D. 143 150 135 124 90 70 Agriculturallabourers and U.D. 165 168 145 136 109 78 marketgardeners R.D. 136 127 106 96 68 52

* Shepherds,agricultural labourers, market gardeners (including labourers) and woodmen.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 622 BOWLEY-RBralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

TABLE XI Contd.-Englandand Wales.

Per Ioo menof 25-35a of each group. -. Ages ...... 35-45. 45-55. 55-65. 65-.

All occupied ...... 82 4 58 4 35 16 All in agriculture URD. 925 837 760 497 U.D...... 85 80 64 77 Labour group* , R.D. .... 83 75 54 41

1901. Per x,ooo of all ages above 15.

Ages ...... 15- | 20- 25- 35- - 45- 55- 65-

All occupied .... 15 ]. 14 '6 25 0 19 *3 13 *7 8 *2 41 Shepherdsand agricultural labourers .... 19*6 12*2 18'0 16*3 13 5 11 :2 9*2

Per i oo lads, 15-20 of each group.

Ages ...... 20- 25- 35- 45- 5- 65-

All occupied...... 97 16( 128 91 54 27 Shepherdsand labourers ...... 63 92 83 69 57 47

Per loo men,25-35 of each group.

Ages ...... 85- 45- 55- 65-

All occupied ...... 77 55 33 16 Shepherdsand labourers .... 91 75 62 51

It appearsthat the numberoccupied rises year by year of age till 18 in the urban districts,but is checkedat 16 in the rural districts. In selected agriculturaloccupations the maximum numberis reachedat 16 or 17 years. The proportionunder 20 yearsis muchgreater in ruralagriculture than in urbanagriculture. We cannot,of course, follow these lads further through their career, but we can comparethem with the co-existing older groups. In the secondpart of Table XI is shownthe numberof personsat higher age-groupsper everyioo lads of ages 14 to 18, and we observethat for occupationsin generalthere are i86 youngmen of 18 to 25 yearsand 250 of 25 to 35 years. In agriculturethe numbersare verymuch lower, and are againlower in ruralthan in urbanagriculture,and again lowerin the agriculturallabouring classes than in

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 623 agriculturein general. We have thus localised the maximum movementas takingplace fromthe age 17 yearsfrom the ranksof rural agriculturallabourers. Following up the age-scale and startingafresh with ioo menof 25 to 35, we findpart of the pheno- mena reversed; largernumbers are foundin agricultureat all higherages than in occuipationsin general; but still the relative numbersare largerin the urbanthan in the ruraldistricts and for agriculturistsin generalthan forlabourers. It is thus suggested thatthe movementis overby 25 yearsof age. The last part of Table XI givesa similaranalysis, less detailed for want of data, for 1901. The relationsobservable are similar to those in 1911. An analysis of migrationcan be carriedout with less detail forfifty years, where we can followthe generations throughout all or a greatpart of their working life. The actual numbersin Table VIII are shownin the diagram, whichis in a formused by Dr. Cannanfor a differentpurpose in the EconomicJournal, 1895, page 509. The numberof personsin each age-groupin each Census year is shownon verticallines. Then the positionof the line BICF relativeto A1X showsthe growth of the numbersof personsfound at the ages 15-25 at successive censuses; the positionof KL relativeto BF shows the lnumbers at 25-35 and so on. At thesame time we followan actuialgeneration as it graduallybecomes extinct by the space between such lines as A1A2A3A4A5and B1B2B3B4B5. Persons born between 1836 and 1846 werebetween 15 and 25 years old in 1861 (AlB1), between25 and 35 in 1871 (A2,B2),and so on till theywere over 55 in 1901 (A5B5),beyond whichdate theyare not followedin the diagram. Of course, migrationprevents the persons included in A5B5being in everycase identicalwith some of thoseincluded in AiBi. The second diagramshows on a tenfoldvertical scale the movementof the numbersof the generationsof agricultural labourersand shepherdsas classifiedin the Censuseson precisely the same plan. The correctionsuggested from the note on page 611 would diminishthe total foragriculturists in 1861 and push the wholeof the line NM together,but N would remainlower than T on the page; similarlyit is possiblethat R oughtto be pushedtowards 8, but it wouldstill remain below W. The line fromT to V would remainnearly straight, but shouldperhaps be lowereda little(i.e., away fromMS). Whatevermodifications are made, the main differencesbetween the two diagramswill remainand can easily be followedin detail.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 624 BOWLEY-Rural PopUlatiOnin Englandand Wales: [May,

Englaid and WYales. yrs. A x_r_. XY 15 ______15 000 1,000 25BB A2 2,000

4,000 5 2

7,000

8,000 5

fo 65 65 1,000

2,0004

5,000 3

i0000 45~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5

1861 1871 1881 1891 19011901 1911 AgricultuallAgricultuAlllabocuperseanlaoccupiead shlephrsmalephrs (15 to 6565 years).a lssfe

yro.M n heSenssyepots

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 625

If the data were moretrustworthy, definite calculations could be made comparingthe losses by death and by migrationof each generationin each tenyears; as it is the numbersgiven in the followingtable wouldprobably be alteredconsiderably, if men had throughouttheir lives returned themselves at the Censusas agriculturallabourers or throughoutas labourerssimply .- TABLEXII.-Agricultural labourers and sAepherdc. Survivors of decennialgenerations. 1. Actuallyoccupied in agriculture. 2. Numberif diminutionhad been at samerate as thatof all occupiedmales. 3. If losshad beendue onlyto agriculturaldeath-rate.* (Rough estimate.) 4. If diminutionhad beenas all occupiedmales if their death-rate had been as lowas thatof agriculture.

t000s.]

1871. 1881. 1891. Ages. 1 2

25-35 .... 148 256 283 259 133 230 242 233 129 235 246 238 35-45 .... 131 168 177 172 108 130 137 133 98 116 123 119 45-55 .... 118 137 145 148 107 110 118 115 90 89 97 93 55-65 .... 92 100 111 111 87 81 98 89 77 72 89 79 25-65 .... 489 661 716 685 435 551 595 570 394 512 555 529

1901. 1911. A ges. _ _ _ - ______1. 2. 3 4. 1. 24t 3.t 4.t

25-35 .... 103 221 229 224 118 180 182 182 35-45 .... 93 119 122 123 97 101 98 104 45-55 .... 78 88 89 87 88 82 86 86 55-65 .... 64 63 77 69 64 55 66 60 25-65 .... 8384 486 517 503 367 418 432 432

* Thesecolumns are calculatedroughly on thehypothesis that a generation aged, e.g., 35-45 is subject for ten yearsto the averageof the death-rates forfarm labourers at the age-periods35-45, 45-55. (Supplementto 65th AnnualReport of the Registrar-General,p. cxxxv.) The death-ratesfor the years1900-02 are applied for the last two dates, those for 1890-92 to the firt three. The ratesfor 1880-82 (the earliest given) show so littledifference that it wasnot worth while to introducea new factor in so rougha calculation. t An estimateis includedfor those absent at thewar in 1901; 2 percent., 5 percent. and it percent are addedto thenumbers otherwise obtained for the firstthreeage groups. NNot including those absent at thewar, perhaps 12,ooo.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 626 BOWLEY-BUralPoppulation in England and Wales: [May, Columns1 in Table XII showthe actual numbersof shepherds and labourersas givenin TableVIII. Columns2 showthe numbers that would have been foundif the agriculturalgenerations had diminishedin the same ratios as the all-occupiedgenerations of the same age and date. Columns3 show the numbersof agricul- turiststhat wouldhave survivedif subject to no otherloss than that in accordancewith the death-ratestated in the Registrar- General'sSupplements for theirage and occupation; the effects of theserates have been computedvery roughly. Each generation of all occupiedis subjectto a higherdeath-rate than that of agri- culturists,and the excess of the numbersin columns 2 over columns1 underestimatesthe movementfrom agriculture; those who succumbedto the less healthyconditions of otheroccupations should be counted as well as the survivors; this correctionis attemptedand leads to columns4. Columns4 are still below columns3 in mostcases fromthe effect of emigration out ofEngland and Wales. An effortis madeto correctthe 1911 figuresto include those who wereabsent in South Africain 1901. No stressshould be laid on the numbersfor 1871 separately till the questionof classificationin thatyear is decided; but when all allowancesare made, the followingstatements are, I think, substantiated:-From some date subsequentto 1861 therewas a veryheavy exodusof menunder the age of 35 fromagricultural labour,nearly half of each generationleaving at someage between 15 and 35; the 1911 recordshows a smallerloss. Up to the year 1901 froina fifthto a quarterof the menbetween 35 and 45 years was absent at each Census; these men leftat some age between 25 and 45. In 1911 practicallythe whole of the corresponding groupwere present. At higherages the numbersfound in agriculture are a high proportionof the possible, increasingto the maximumpossible bv 1911. Some part of the previousinvestigations could be extendedto the separatecounties if space permitted. I will onlyremark here on the varyingproportions of youngmen to olderin agriculture. In the aggregaterural districts of Englandand Wales 33j per cent. of shepherdsand labourersover 15 vears were in the age-group 15-25 years in the year 1911. The correspondingpercentage in England varies from23X2 (Surrey)to 53 9 (Westmorland). A low rate may mean eitherfew lads startingin agricultureor few youngmen leaving it; a veryhigh rate means a greatexodus after the early ages. There is a marked but irregulargeographica' distributionas the followingtable shows

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 627

TABLii XIII.-Number of shepherdsand agriculturallabourers of 15 to 25 yearsas percentageof all over15 in theseoccupations in theagqgregate Rural Districtsof thecounties of England, 1911.

Southerncounties. Midland counties. Northerncounties.

Surrey ...... 23 Hereford ...... 28 Shropshire...... 32 Kent ...... 27 Worcester...... Nottingham 36 Middlesex ...... Monmouth...... Northumberland.... 38 Sussex . ...) Gloucester...... 3 Lancashire...... 40 Essex .... 28 Warwick ...... Cheshire - l 41 Berks ....* Rutland ...... W. Riding ...... J Hants .... Bedford .... 13....1 1 Derby .... .1. Herts ...... 29 Northants .. Il J E. Riding ...... 44 Suffolk. . Hunts ...1 32 Durham. J Norfolk .... Cambridge ....f N. Riding.... 46 Bucks . 30 Leicester .33 Cumberland .... 52 Oxford ...... Lincoln .... 35 Westmnorland .... 54 Wilts ...... Stafford .... 37 Dorset . 31 Somerset .... Devon .... 34 Cornwall ...... 39

IV.-Summary. Evidentlya great part of this paper is a re-hashof known statisticswhich have been subject to analysis again and again, and of thatwhich depends on the Censusof 1911 and is new)much willno doubtbe dealt within the finalreports of the Census; but the importanceof the subject justifiesfrequent return to it, and thereare still severalpromising lines of investigationwhich may be pushedfurther, especially those which start from local and occu- pationalage distributionsand fromdensity of population. Where so much is vague in definition,and wherethe classificationis so imperfectthat the Registrar-Generalof 1871 preferredthe impres- sions of a competentobserver to his own statistics,it is evident that verygreat caution must be exercisedin drawingconclusions; and in so greata mass oftabulation, approximation and calculation there is room for undetectednumerical errors. The following statementsare not,I believe,vitiated by anyof these considerations. The influenceof the towns and industrialdistricts is very penetratingand subtle,and the populationof rural districtscon- tinuallyappears to increasefrom non-agricultural growth. When the effectof theseinfluences is eliminatedit is foundthat the rural (as distinguishedfrom the agricultural)population diminished by some io per cent. between1871 and 1901, and increasedabout 3 per cent. between1901 and 1911. The fall and rise took place

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 628 BOWLEY-BUralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May, throughoutthe country,but the nearerthe regionto an industrial districtthe less was the fall. Some relativelysmall areas in Englandand a greatpart of Wales did not sharein the rise. The populationin purelyrural areas is notcompletely dominated by the numberin agriculturaloccupations, and the numberin agriculturedoes not move eitherin the countryas a wholeor in separateregions in strictproportion with the rural population. The numberoccupied on farmssuffered a greatfall which began between1861 and 1871 and continuedto about 1901, even if we consideradult menonly; therehas been somerecovery since 1901. The numberof farmershas changedvery little in 50 years. The numberin horticulturaland marketgardening occupations has, on the otherhand, grownthroughout the period. A considerableand growingproportion of persons occupied on the land is to be foundin the UrbanDistricts, and the relativenumber of men in the primeof life is there greaterthan in the Rural Districts. A verylarge number have throughoutthe last 5O yearsstarted theirworking life in agricultureand subsequentlvmoved to other occupationsin the country,in the townsor abroad. At present 17 years seemsto be the criticalage. There are indicationsthat in the earlypart of ouir period many men must have leftagricultulre whenno longeryoing, whereas in morerecent times there is little movementafter the age of 25 years. The exodus of youngmen is relativelvgreater in the Northerncounties than in the South. Thereis no evidentconnection between the numbers of agricultural labourers,or the changesin theirnumbers, on the one hand, and the changesof wages,heights of wages,the densityof population, or the movementof otherparts of the rural populationon the otherhand. I have made no attemptto deal withthe causes of these movements or to connecttheir variations with agricultural conditions; but I hope that I shall have made it easierfor others to tracethe influencesof agriculturaland land-holdingdevelopments both by illustratingthe natureof the generalstatistics and by showingthat the mostinteresting and importantaspects of the problemsin land- culturemust be studiedintensively and locally.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 629 APPENDIX I. DenseRural Districts and Parishes. The followinglist contains the names of the districtsand parisheswhich are " rural" foradministrative purposes but contain a large elementof urban, military,naval, industrialor mining population, together with some whose natural population is disturbedtemporarilv by railwayor otherworks of construction thatcannot easily be eliminated. The namesof the administrative RuralDistricts are given in italics and ofthe civil parishes in ordinary type. Whereno parishnames occur,the wholedistrict is dense. The list is made fromthe areas as constitutedin 1911 (Cd. 6258), and names have been abbreviatedwhen no ambiguityis caused. In I the parishesappear to be mainlyaffected by proximityto a town; in II by the presenceof mines or quarries; in III by industriesin localitiesnot yeturbanised ; in IV by militarvcamps, worksof construction,schools, and other causes of fluctuation; in V thecause of densitywas not ascertained. The linesof division are somewhatarbitrary, and somedistricts are disturbedfrom more causes than one, and furtherlocal knowledgewould no doubtlead to alterations(especially in Class V). The densityof a fewof the subtractedparishes may be due to peculiaritiesof a purelyrural nature,while on the otherhand the followingparishes, not included in the list or subtractedfor the tables,are unusuallydense. The difficultiesoccur principallyin Kent, Essex, Leicestershireand Derbyshire,Cheshire and Bedfordshire. Denseparishes not subtracted. Alton; Grayshott.Droxford; Hambledon, Shedfield, Soberton, Swanmore. Winchester;Compton, Fair Oak, Wonston. Ring- wood; Ringwood. Wimnborne; Colehill, Hampreston, Verwood. Horsham; Billingshurst,Ifield. Rochford;Eastwood, Hadleigh, South Benfleet, Thundersley,Rayleigh. Erpingham; Holt. Amersham.Parishes in the followingRural Districtsother than those named: Arnpthill;Aspley Guise. Biggleswade; Arlesey. Nantwich;Audlem, Haslington, Shavington, Willaston. Tadcaster; Barwick, Kippax, Micklefield.Hexham; Broomley,Corbridge, Haydon, Wylam. Dense parishessubtracted. In each ofthe five lists the orderof counties is thatof Table I. I.-Suburban, residentialand watering-places. St. Austell; Fowey. Okehampton; OkehamptonHamlets. Bath. Keynsham. Long Ashton; Long Ashton,Nailsea, Yatton. VOL. LXXVII. PART VI. 2 x

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 630 BOWLEY-RBralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May,

Weymouth;Wyke Regis. Poole; Kinson. Wilton; Bemerton. Chippenham; Chippenham Without. Basingstoke; Wortineg. Havant; Farlington,S. Hayling. Farehamr; Crofton,Cosham, Portchester,Hook with Warsash. NetwForest; Dibden. Isle of Wight. SouthStoneham. Farnham. Eghamn.Epsom. Chertsey. Croydon. Godstone;Warlingham. Guildford; Merrow, Pirbright. Hambledon; Haslemere,Witley, Shalford. Reigate; Betchworth, Horley,Nutfield, MIerstham, Walton. Elham; Lyminge.Sheppey; Minster.Bromley. Cranbrookl; Hawkhurst. Dover; St. Margaret's. Thanet; Birchington,Garlinge, Minster, Westgate. Sevenoaks; Edenbridge,Westerham. Uckfield; Crowborough. Cuckfield; Lindfield.Hailshamr; Hailsham. Bradfield;Pangbourne, Theale, Tilehurst.Cookham; Bray, Cookham. Easthampstead; Crowthorne, Sanidhurst.Wallingford; Didcot. Wokingham; Shinfield, Woking- ham Without. Amershamr;Chalfont St. Peter,Amersham, Great Missenden.Eton ; Burnham,Datchet, Eton Wick,Farnham Royal, Iver,Langley Marish, Taplow. Wycombe;Chepping Wycombe Rural. Princes Risborough, West Wvcombe, Hughenden, Wooburn. Hitchin; Knebworth,Letchworth. St. Albans; St. Peter Rural. Barnet; Totteridge. Hatfield; Bishop's Hatfield. Ware; Great Amwell,Stanstead Abbots, Wormlev. Watford. Welwyn; Welwyn. Romford.Orsett. Billericay. Stansted;Mountfitchet. Tendring; Ramsey. Ongar; ChippingOngar. King's Lynn; W. Lynn. Chesterton; Grantchester,Trumpington, Cherry Hinton, Milton. Blaby; Oadby,Kirby Muxloe. Spilsby; Suttonle Marsh. Luton; Leagrave,Limbuirv. Peterborough; Walton, Peterborough Without, Witney;Curbridge. Woodstockl; Wolvercot. Headington; Cowley, Headington,Littlemore. Cheltenham;Prestbury. Gloucester; Barnwood,Churchdown, Hucclecote, Upton St. Leonards,Wotton St. Mary, Wotton Vill. St. Mellons; Rumney, Rogerstone. Chepstow; Caldicott. Wellington; Hadley, WellingtonRural. Bromsgrove;Clent, Hagley, Stoke Prior. Eveshamn;Broadway. Kidderminster;Kiddermninster Foreign, Wribbenhall, Wolverley. Solihull; Packwood,Solihull. Warwick; Stoneleigh. Coventry. Cannock; Bushbary,Cheslyn. Stafford; Castle Church,Seighford. Seisdon; Codsall,Upper Penn, Womboarn. Kingswinford. Walsall. Hayfield; Mellor. Norton. Knaresborough;Killinghall, Pannal. Chester; Newtonby Chester. Macclesfield; Taxal. Runcorn; Grappenhall,Stockton Heath, Latchford,Walton Inferior. Wirral; Bidston,Noctorum, Prenton, Heswall. Hoylake. Escrick; Water Fulford. Flaxton; Heworth,Huintington. Sculcoates; Sutton. Middlesbrough;Marton. South Westmorland;Arnside. Valley; Llanfaelog.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 631

The wholeof the administrativecountv of Middlesexhas been excluded. II.-Mining and quarrying. Calstock;Calstock. Liskeard; Linkinhorne.St. Austell; Roche, St. AustellRural, St. Blazey,St. Dennis,Tywardreath, St. Stephen. Redruth.E. Kerrier.Clutton; Clutton, Paulton, Timsbury. Chippen- hanm;Box, Corsham, Eastry; Eythorne. Dover; Sibertswold, Ewell. Ashby-de-la-Zouch;Measham, Oakthorpe,Ravenstone, Swannington,Thringstolie, Worthington. Market Bosworth; Bag- worth,Barlestone, Desford, Ibstock, Markfield, Newbold Verdon, Ratby,Stanton, Thornton. Lydney; Lydney. E. Dean; E. Dean, LittleDean, Ruardean. W. Dean; W. Dean. St. Mellons; Machen U., Bedwas. Oswestry;Weston Rhyn. C(leobury;Highley. Ather- stone; Ansley, Baddesley, Hartshil], Mancetter, Polesworth. Foleshill; Bedworth, Exhall, Foleshill, Keresley, Walsgrave, Wyken. Meriden; Fillongley. Nuneaton; Arley. Tamworth; Kingsburv,Wilnecote. Cannock; CheslynHay, Essington,Great Wyrlev. Cheadle; Cauldon. Belper; Smallev, Crich, Denby, Dethick, Duffield, Holbrook, Horsley Woodhouse, Kilbourne, Milford,South Wingfield. Blackwell. Hartshorn; Hartshorne, Over- seal, Woodville. Clowne.Chesterfield. Skegby; Skegby, Sookholme. Doncaster;Adwick le Street,Askern, Conisbro', Denaby, Edlington, Owston,Skellow, Stainton, Carr House. Hemsworth;Ackworth, Brierley,Havercroft, Great Houghton, Hemsworth, Ryhill, Shafton, South Elmsall, South Hiendley,South Kirkby. KivetonPark; Dinnington,Wales. Thorne; Thorne. Wakefield. Rotherham; Aston, Brinsworth,Catcliffe, Treeton, Glass Houghton,Bramlev, Dalton, Laughton,Maltby. Tadcaster; Allerton. PateleyBridge; Bewerley,High and Low Bishopside. Whiston; Bold, Ditton. Eccleston, Halewood, Rainhill, Whiston. Patrington; Kilnsea, Guisborough;Easington. Stokesley;Great Ayton. Reeth; Arken- garthdale. Auckland. Chesterle Street. Durham. Easington, Houghtonle Spring. Lanchester.Barnard Castle; Cockfield,Stain- drop. Stockton;Cowpen Bewley, East Hartburn,Whitton. Sedge- field; Bishop Middleham, Chilton, Cornforth,Cherry Hill, GarmondswayMoor, Mainsforth, Sedgefield, Trimdon. Morpeth; East Chevington,Ellington, Longhirst,Pegswood, Woodhorn Demesne. Castle Ward; Black Callerton,Dinnington, Mason. Haltwhistle;Blenkinsopp, Haltwhistle, Hartleyburn. Tynemouth. Brampton; Midgeholme,Farlam. Holywell; Holywell Rural. Nerquis. Wrexham. Dolgelly; Talyllvn. Aberystwyth;Upper lianfihangel.Ystradgynlais. lianelly; LlanellyRural, Llanedy, 2 x 2

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 632 BOWLEY-RuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May, Llannon. LlandiloFawr; Llandilo Rural, QuarterBach, Bettws, Llandybie. Carmarthen;Llanarthney. Llantrisant. Pontardawe, Swvansea.Cowbridge; Llanharan, Peterston. Gower; Llanrhidian Higher. Llandaff; Caerau,Lavernock, Leckwith, Lisvane, Llandaff, Llanedeyrn,Llanilltern, I.lanishen, Llanvedw, Michaelston le Pit, Pentyrch,Radyr, Rhyd y Gwern,Rudry, St. Andrews,St. Fagans, Van, Whitcharch.Neath; MichaelstonHigher and Lower,Llanwit Lower,Blaenhonddan, Coedffranc, Dyffryn, Dylais Higher, Resolven. Penybont;Coity Higher, Llangynwyd Lower and Middle,Newcastle Higher,Pencoed, Pyle, St. Bride's Major and Minor,Tythegston Higher. 111.-Industrial. St. Austell; Mevagissev,St. Mewan. HighworthaRodbourne Cheney,Stratton. Chippenham; Hardenhuish.Winchester; Twy- ford. Hursley; ChandlersFord. Strood; StroodExtra. Midhurst; Linchmere. SteyningWest; Upper Beeding. Stony Stratford. Barnet; Elstree. HemelHempstead; King's Langley. Mutford; Kessingland. Walsingham,;Melton ConEstable. Branston; Boult- ham. GlanfordBrigg; Ashby,Crosby, Barnetby le Wold, South Killingholme. Grimsby.;Imningham, Little Coates. Welton; Saxilby. Lutterworth;Broughton Astley. Melton Mowbray; Asfordby. Hinckley; Barwell, Burbage, Earl Shilton, Stoney Stanton. Daventr,y;Woodford. Wellingborough;Wymington. Kettering;Burton Latimer, Corbv, Loddington. Warmley.Stroud. Halesowen.Yardley. Rugby; Bilton. Cannock; Bushburv. Stoke- upon-Trent.Repton; CastleGresley. Shardlow. Ba4ford. Stapleford. Newark; Balderton. Rotherham;Thrybergh, Tinslev. Leeds. Skipton; Thornton,Coniston Cold. Halifax. Keighley.Wharfedale; Menston,Pool. Hunslet.Bucklow; Partrington.Congleton; Brad- wall. Northwich;Lostock. Disley. Blackburn;Billington, Livesey, Mellor,Ramsgreave, Wilpshire, Yate. Burnley; AlthamBriereliffe, Dunnockshaw,Foulridge, Hapton, Higham,Huncoat, Old Laund Booth, Read, Reedley Hallows, Sabden. Preston; Farington, Longton,Penwortham, Ribehester, Whittingham. Barton. Bury; Ainsworth,Birtle, Outwood, Unsworth. Chorley.5 Glitheroe; Whalley,Wiswell. Leigh; Astley,Culcheth, Lowton. Limehurst. Sefton.8Warrington; Burtonwood, Great Sankev, Penketh, Poulton, Southworth,Winwick. WestLancashire; Aughton,Lydiate, Mag- hull, Melling, Wigan.7 SouthShields. Sunderland. Hawarden; B. and W. Saltney. Haverfordiwest;Stevnton. 5 Except RivingtonUlnes WaItcin, Welch Whittle. I ExceptKirkby, Sefton. 7 Except]Dlton.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 633

IV.-Miscellaneous(camps, schools, waterworks, &c.). St. Germans;Millbrook. C7ippenham ; Nettleton.Malmesbury; Hlullavington.Pewsey; LIudgershall.Amesbury; Bulford. Droxford.; WVestMeon. Alton; Selborne. Fordingbridge;Ashley Walk. HartleyWintney; Cove, Crookham,Hartley Wintney,Yatelev. Andover;Shipton Bellinger. Petersfield; Bramshott, Liss. Horsham; HorshamRural. SteyningWest; Lancing. Abingdon; Radley. Hadham; Much Hadham. Mitford; Bintree. Cutlham;Culham. ChippingSodbury; Old Sodbury,Wapley, Winterbourne. Magor; Llanvaches. Wigmore;Burrington, Downton. Warwick; Hatton. Chapelen le Frith; Hope Woodlands,Bamford, Edale. Bakeuwell; Bradwell,Eyam. Hayfield; Hayfield. East Retford;Rampton. Knaresborough HaverahPark. PateleyBridge; UpperStonebeck. Penistone; Langsett. Garstan.g;Barnacre. Bellingham; Rochester Ward,Troughend. Cockermouth;Castlerigg. South Westmorland; PrestonPatrick. Knighton;Bleddfa. Rhayader; Llansantffraid. Brecknock;Cray, Cantref, Llanfrynach. Haverfordtwest; Llanwnda. V.-Unclassified. Milton; Rainham. Dartford; Crayford,Darenth, Eynsford, Farningham,Horton Kirby, Kingsdown,Longfield, Southfieet, Stone, Sutton at Hone, Swanscombe,Wilmington. Malling; Aylesford,Birling, Burham, Ditton, East and West Malling,East Peckham, Ightham, Offham,Ryarsh, Snodland, Wateringbiirv, Wouldham. Hemel Hempstead; Markyate. Tendrtng; Mistley. Braintree; Great Coggeshall. Mutford; Pakefield. Plomesgate; Framlingham. Blaby; Blaby, Cosby, Countesthorpe,Croft, Enderby, Glenfield,Huncote, Whetstone. Castle Donnington; Castle Donnington,Kegworth. Bigglesuade; Sandy, Potton, Stotfold.Barrow upon Soar; Anstey,Barrow, Birstall, Mountsorrel, Rothley,Sileby, Syston. Wellingborough;Earls Barton,Irchester, Wollaston.Feckenhamr; Feekenham. Tamworth; Fazeley, Bolehall. Cheadle; Alton,Caverswall, Cheadle, Forsbrook. Lichfield; Armi- tage, Burntwood,Hammerwich, Whittington. Newcastle-under- Lyme; Betley,Keele, Madeley. Tutbury; Tutbury.Glossop Dale; Ludworth. Southwell;Lowdham, Southwell. Barnsley; Carlton, Notton,Woolley. Penistone; Cawthorne,Silkstone, Thurgoland. Wortley; Ecclesfield,Tankersley. Bucklow; Dunham Massey, Northenden,Styal, Timperley. Chester; Christleton,Great Bough- ton, Great Saughall,Upton. Congleton;Church Hulme, Church Lawton, Odd Rode, Wheelock. Northwich; Acton, Barnton, Comberbach,Moulton, Weaverham, Wincham, Winnington. Run- corn: Frodsham,Frodsham Lordship, Great Budworth,Halton, Helaby,Norley, Weston.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 634 BOWLEY-Rural Populationin England and Wales: [May,

APPENDIX II.

Numberof persons in themodified separate registration districts, as includedin Table 1II, and thedensities in 1911. [00's omitted. Thus 2,4 means 2,400 persons.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. Pn 1911p 100acres.)

Cornwall- Scilly ...... 2,4 2,1 2,1 52 Penzance ...... 17,3 11,4 11,1 27 Helston ...... 26,2 17,7 17,2 24 Truro...... 31,8 22,1 20,5 28 St. Austell ...... 3,9 2,9 3,0 19 St. Columb...... 12,8 10,7 11,3 15 iBodmin ...... 12,5 10,4 10,4 12 Liskeard...... 21,5 14,4 13,9 15 St. Germans ...... 8,8 8,0 8,4 28 Launceston ...... 13,7 10,2 10,0 10 Camelford .... .7,8 7,2 7,4 14 Stratton .... .6,3 5,0 4,9 9 -Devon- Holsworthy .... .9,2 7,3 7,3 9 Bideford...... 8,2 6,4 6,3 11 Torrington ...... 13,6 9,3 9,0 11 ]Barnstaple ...... 20,3 17,8 18,2 14 S. Molton 15,5 10,8 10,8 10 Tiverton ...... 19,0 15,3 15,1 18 Crediton ...... 16,3 11,6 11,0 12 Okehampton. . 15,6 11,7 11,9 16 Tavistock .... 19,9 14,7 15,0 10 Plympton ...... 14,6 19,2 19,9 27 Kingsbridge...... 14,4 11,4 11,7 17 Totnes...... 13,0 11,5 11,9 18 NewtonAbbot ...... 19,7 19,0 19,5 20 St. Thomas ...... 31,0 24,7 25,0 22 Honiton ...... 12,5 9,3 9,6 18 Axminster ...... 14,5 12,2 12,3 24 Somerset- Williton ...... 16,7 12,6 12,7 i8 Dulverton .... .6,1 4,6 4,8 6 Wellington...... 12,4 9,4 9,2 17 Taunton ...... 21,0 17,5 17,0 24 Bridgwater ...... 21,8 18,4 18,1 21 Langport ...... 18,0 13,5 13,3 22 Chard ...... 15,7 13,4 13,4 24 Yeovil .... .20,1 16,2 16,4 30 Winoanton ...... 19,7 15,9 15,9 27 Frome...... 13,4 11,1 11,2 22 SheptonMallet ...... 11,4 9,9 10,2 22 Wells ...... 11,7 10,0 9,8 17 Axbridge .... .24,2 21,3 21,7 -25 Clutton ...... 11,0 9,1 9,7 *27 Long Ashton...... 9,7 10,0 10,2 28

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupatzons, and Ages. 635

Persons in theseparate registrationdistricts, as included in Table III-contd.

too's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. In 1911. 100 acres.)

Dorset- Bridport ...... 94 6,7 6,8 21 Beaminster ...... 13,8 9,2 9,2 16 Sherborne .... .7,2 5,7 5,9 16 Dorchester. 17,7 13,6 13,5 11 Weymouth...... 6,3 5,9 6,0 22 Wareham ...... 13,0 10,6 10,6 12 Wimborne...... 14,2 13,4 15,0 19 Blandford ...... 11,2 '8,8 8,6 14 Sturminster ...... 10,8 8,8 8,5 22 Shaftesbury ...... 12,5 11,0 10,9 25 Wilts- Mere.7,1 5,2 5,2 16 Tisbury ...... 9,9 7,7 7,8 18 Wilton ...... 7,8 6,3 6,3 12 Salisbury ...... 12,8 9.7 10,1 18 Axmesbury ...... 7,7 6,9 8,0 13 Pewsey ...... 18.6 10,6 10,7 15 Warminster ...... 9,8 6,3 5,9 11 Westbury ...... 7,9 6,4 6,6 24 Bradford...... 5,6 5,1 5,2 81 Melksham...... 4,9 4,5 5,0 86 Devizes ...... 14,7 11,9 11,5 18 Marlborough,...... 5,3 4,4 4,5 10 Calne ...... 5,8 4,6 4,6 16 Chippenham...... 11,1 8,4 8,3 22 Malmesbury. .... 10,7 9,0 8,7 16 Cricklade ... . 11,8 11,4 11,0 24 Swindon ...... 10,0 9,3 9,5 21

Hants- Havant .... 1,3 1,7 2,0 37 Fareham ...... 9 1,0 1,0 16 Lymington ...... 7,6 9,4 11,9 82 Christchurch...... 9 8 8 Ringwood .... . 5,5 6,2 7,1 19 Fordingbridge ...... 6,4 6,1 6,8 17 New Forest ...... 12,9 13,9 15,4 23 Romsey ...... 6,6 6,2 6,8 22 Stockbridge ...... 7,0 6,1 6,5 15 Winchester ...... 9,5 10,2 11,3 16 Droxford . . 9,9 10,8 12,1 27 Catherington...... 2,5 3,1 3,7 28 Petersfield. . 72 9,1 10,8 24 Alresford ...... 7,1 7,0 7,5 18 Alton . . 89 9,4 10,9 22 Hartley Wintney .... 9,5 10,2 8,9 21 Basingstoke ...... 12,6 11,7 12,1 17 Whitchurch...... 5,5 6,8 6,1 19 Andover...... 10,0 8,8 9,2 15 Eingsclere ...... 8,8 8,6 8,8 19

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 636 BOwLEY-Rural Populationin England and Wales: [May, Personsin theseparate registration districts, as includedin TableI1I-contd. [00's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. In 1911. (Persons per 100acres.)

Su'rrey- Hambledon...... 19,3 25,5 28,2 56 Dorking ...... 8,0 9,7 10,6 27 Reigate ...... 5,0 6,1 7,1 30 Goodstone ...... 9,1 13,5 15,6 87 Kent- Dartford ...... 1,9 1,8 1,9 17 Strood ...... 8,7 13,8 14,6 46 Hoo ...... 2,9 4,1 3,8 89 Malling ...... 2,9 3,0 2,6 22 Sevenoaks ...... 14,8 17,3 18,0 34 Tonbridge ...... 9,4 12,7 13,1 39 Maidstone 15.7 15,6 16,4 47 Hollingbourne .... 13,6 12,6 12,8 22 Cranbrook . . 10,7 9,8 10,3 30 Tenterden ...... 7,1 6,6 6,0 16 W. Ashford ...... 8,1 7,6 7,7 19 E. Ashford...... 12,3 13,1 13,6 25 Bridge ...... 10,1 9,8 9,9 24 Blean ...... 6,9 7,0 7,4 31 Faversham...... 9,4 10,7 10,2 26 Milton.... .6,4 8,5 8,5 85 Sheppey ...... 1, 1,3 1,2 9 Eastry 11,5 11,7 12,5 80 Dover ...... 4,00 3,9 5,0 23 Elham ...... 6,0 5,8 5,9 18 RomneyMarsh .... 2,9 2,6 2,8 9 Sugsex- Rye ...... 8,2 7,2 7,2 19 Hastings ...... 2,0 2,0 1,8 18 Battle ...... 7,2 6,8 6,9 18 Eastbourne ...... 4,2 4,9 5,4 17 Hailsham ...... 11,5 11,5 12,1 23 Ticehurst...... 13,5 14,3 15o,0 29 UJckfield ...... 15,0 1.7,1 18,2 25 E. Grinstead...... 9,0 11,9 13,0 28 Cuckfield ...... 9,9 13,1 13,7 28 Lewes...... 10,1 11,2 11,6 23 Newhaven ...... 3,5 4,6 5,0 20 Steyning ...... 6,7 8,1 8,6 25 Horsham ...... 12,7 15,1 16,8 25 Petworth . . 10,1 8,5 8,8 19 Thakeham . . 7,9 7,3 8,3 20 E. Preston ...... 4,8 5,7 6,9 25 Westhampnett 12,1* 13,9 15,6 22 Midhurst ...... 12,2 13,2 14,2 22 Westbourne ...... 7,0 6,8 8,3 26 Berkia- Newbury ...... 10,9 10,0 10,8 25 HTIungerford...... 19,9 15,6 16,1 17 Faringdon ...... 15,7 12,3 12,9 20 Abingdon...... 10,8 9,8 10,5 22

Numbersasterisked have a large marginof error.

[00's.]

Density 1911. 1861.1861. 1901. 1911. (Persons~~In per 100acres.)

Berks-contd. Wantage ...... 13,9 11,6 11,9 16 Wallingford ...... 10,2 8,7 9,4 24 Bradfield ...... 10,7* 11,4 11,6 20 Wokingham ...... 6,7* 10,2 10,9 34 Maidenhead...... 3,8 3,7 4,0 28 Easthampstead ...... 6,1 10,2 10,2 45 Bucks- Amersham ...... 7,2 7,9 9,7 32 Eton ... 5,1 6,3 6,9 40 Wycombe . . . 12,2* 10,6 10,8 23 Aylesbury ...... 18,6 15,2 15,3 21 Winslow ...... 9,3 7,0 7,0 20 NewportPagnell .... 17,5 18,0 17,8 29 Buckingham...... 10,0 7,4 7,7 16 Herts- 23 Ware ...... 6,0 5,7 6,2 Bishop's Stortford ...... 9,7 8,7 9,0 23 Royston ...... 21,5 17,5 17,5 19 Eitchin ...... 13,9 11,7 12,0 23 Hertford ...... 7,8 7,5 7,5 22 Hatfield ...... 3,0 3,5 4,0 28 St. Albans ...... 7,9 8,7 10,2 31 Eemel Hempstead ...... 3,6 3,0 3,1 21 Berkhampstead 6,1 5,5 5,5 26 Bsse&- Epping ...... 5,6 6,8 7,1 24 Ongar ...... 10,4 8,9 9,L 20 Chelmsford ...... 22,1 20,7 22,8 27 Rochford 11,7 14,5 18,4 33 Maldon ...... 17,3 14,6 16,1 20 Tendring ...... 17,8 16,1 16,0 24 Lexden ...... 20,0 18,5 19,7 28 Halstead .... . 12,8 10,1 10,3 27 Braintree ...... 19,0 15,5 16,0 27 Dunmow ...... 19,8 15,7 16,1 22 SaffronWalden 14.2 10,2 10,3 18 Suflolk- Risbridge ...... 15,0 11,1 11,8 22 Sudbury ...... 22,6 17,9 17,4 23 Cosford. .13,8 11,7 11,8 24 Bury St. Edmunds ... . 18,2 14,5 14,4 17 Mildenhall ...... 9,6 8,3 8,3 13 Stow ...... 17,3 15,0 15,3 27 lartismere ...... 29,7 21,6 21,8 21 Bosmere ...... 16,1 14,1 14,1 24 Samford ...... 12,3 11,5 11,5 27 Woodbridge ...... 16,2 14,6 15,4 21 Plomesgate ...... 15,5 18,2 13,3 20 Blything ...... 20,1 17,3 18,1 21 Wangford .. . . 5,6 4,7 4,8 16 Mutford ...... 6,8 7,7 8,0 31

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 638 BoWLEY-R?ural Populationin England and WVales: [May,

Personsin theseparate registration districts, ms included in TableIII-contd. [00 s.1

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. (Personsper 100acres.)

Norfolk- Flegg .... } 8,2 9,2 9,9 31 Smallburgh ...... 14,5 13,3 13.4 21 Erpingham. .... 14,9 16,1 17,1 27 Aylsham ...... 19,1 17,0 17,2 25 St. Faith's . . 9,3* 10,1 10,2 21 Forehoe ...... 12,8 11,3 11,4 30 Henstead ...... 11,3 10,4 10,3 24 Blofield ...... 11,1 10,9 11,1 24 Loddon . .... 14,2 12,4 12,6 21 Depwade ...... 24,3 20,2 19,9 25 Wayland ...... 16,2 13,8 14,1 20 Mitford ...... 23,2 18,2 18,1 18 Walsingham ...... 17,8 16,2 16,0 21 Docking ...... 17,6 15,7 17,0 19 FreebridgeLynn ...... 12,8 11,8 12,1 16 Downham ...... 17,7 14,8 15,5 19 SwaffEham...... 10,1 7,6 7,6 10 Thetford ...... 18,2 15,8 15,9 12 Cambridge- Caxton...... 11,0 8,4 8,3 16 Chesterton ...... 19,5 18,2 20,2 29 Linton . . 13,6 11,3 11,1 22 Newmarket...... 23,7 21,4 22,1 23 Ely . .14,5 12,4 12,9 9 N. Witchford ...... 4,7 4,7 6,2 20 Whittlesey. .... 2,5 3,2 3,4 13 Wisbech ...... 21,3 20,1 22,1 22 Jluntingdon- Huntingdon ...... 9,8 7,0 7,0 12 St. Ives .... 16,4 11,9 12,3 21 St. Neots...... 14,5 10,0 10,2 16 Lincoln- Stamford ...... 10,3 8,3 8,6 16 Bourne...... 16,4 13,2 13,4 16 Spalding...... 13,4 12,4 13,2 18 Holbeach ...... 9,4 8,2 8,6 16 Boston.... .25,2* 22,6 24,0 23 Sleaford ...... 19,9 17,0 17,3 13 Grantham...... 17,6 15,4 15,0 14 Lincoln ...... 23,9 21,4 22,7 15 Horncastle...... 18,8 13,5 13,1 11 Spilsby ...... 25,8 19,9 20,2 16 Louth ...... 23,7 18,6 18,3 11 Grimsby ...... 5,3 5,2 6,0 16 Caistor . . 16,6 13,3 13,1 11 GlanfordBrigg ...... 21,9 20,0 20,9 19 Gainsborough. .... 19,8 18,1 18,7 17

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Stutdyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 639

Personsin thesepar ate reqistration distr icts, as includedin TableIII-contd. [00's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 191]. (Persons per 100 acres.)

Bedford- Bedford ...... 22,8 17,8 18,2 19 Biggleswade...... 21,0* 21,6 21,9 41 Ampthill ...... 24,9 19,1 19,5 29 LeightonBuzzard .... 12,1* 9,6 9,1 24 Luton ...... 8,3* 7,2 7,1 22 Leicester- Lutterworth ...... 13,6 9,8 10,2 19 MarketHarborough .... 13,1 11,5 12,0 18 Billesdon . . 5,1* 5,7 6,4 18 Blaby ...... 6* 2,9 2,8 17 . Hinckley...... 3,0 2,6 2,8 29 MarketBosworth .... 6,5 5,6 5,5 16 Ashby-de-la-Zouch...... 7,9 7,2 7,4 25 Loughborough .... 9,8 8,1 8,3 22 Barrow-on-Soar ...... 6,6 6,4 6,6 19 Melton Mowbray ...... 15,1 13,4 13,7 15 Rutland- Oakham ...... 8,4 7,1 6,4 11 Uppingham ...... 12,3 10,3 10,1 20 Northants- Brackley ...... 8,1 6,1 6,2 12 Towcester ...... 12,2 10,1 9,9 25 Potterspury...... 6,6 5,4 5,2 26 Hardingstone } 13,1 13,3 13,3 27 Northampton... .. Daventry ...... 15,3 11,8 12,0 21 Brixworth...... 15,4 11,8 11,8 19 Wellingborough .... 6,8 6,2 6,8 24 Kettering...... 8,0 7,5 7,7 18 Thrapston . . 11,8 11,1 11,5 24 Oundle ...... 11,7 8,1 8,2 12 Peterborough ...... 20,3 16,7 16,8 18 Oxford- Henley ...... 13,3* 11,2 11,9 21 Thame.... .14,4 10,3 9,7 17 Headington ...... 5,1 4,2 4,2 20 Bicester ...... 12,5 9,3 9,2 16 Woodstock ...... 11,9 9,5 9,4 20 Witney ...... 19,2 15,2 15,7 21 ChippingNorton .... 14,2 12,2 12,3 18 Banbury ...... 20,1 15,6 15,5 21 Gloucester- ChippingSodbury .... 18,4 16,7 16,3 27 Thornbury . ... 16,7 15,4 15,1 26 Dursley ...... 13,3 11,6 12,2 45 Westbury-on-Severn.... 3,8 3,3 3,3 25 Newent ...... 10,9* 8,2 8,2 20 Gloucester ...... 5,4 5,1 5,9 28 Wheatenhurst .... 7,7 6,0 6,0 24 Tetbury. .... 4,6 4,1 4,2 14 Cirencester. . 14,4 12,1 12,7 15

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 640 BOWLEY-Rural Populationin Englandand Wales: [May, Personsin theseparate registration districts, as includedin TableIII-contd. [oo's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. in 1911. 100 acres.)

Gloucester-contd. Northleach ... 10,9 8,1 8,1 12 Stow-on-the-Wold.... 8,0 6,8 7,1 16 Winchcomb...... 10,1 8,8 9,6 17 Cheltenham ...... 3,3 3,3 3,5 23 Tewkesbury ...... 8,9 7,3 7,4 19 Monmouth- Chepstow ...... 11,3 10,4 10,6 18 Monmouth...... 13,3 10,6 10,9 14 Pontypool . ... 13,9 11,3 12,0 14 Newport ...... 9,7 8,4 9,7 20 Hereford- Ledbury ...... 10,8 9,0 9,0 18 Ross ...... 12,6* 10,3 10,4 17 Hereford ...... 23,0 20,2 19,7 14 Weobley ...... 9,0 7,0 6,7 14 Bromyard ...... 9,1* 8,0 7,7 13 Leominster . . . 9,9 7,5 7,5 13 Kington ...... 10,9 8,6 8,1 8 Shropshire- Ludlow ...... 11,0 11,5 11,2 14 Clun ...... 8,8 7,1 6,9 8 Church Stretton ...... 5,5 4,4 4,7 10 CleoburyMortimer ...... 8,1 8,1 7,7 14 Bridgnorth . . 9,7 8,4 9,0 13 Shifnal .... 9,0* 8,9 9,0 19 Madeley ...... 6 5 5 Atcham ...... 22,3 20,1 21,0 17 Oswestry ...... 17,3 17,2 17,4 22 Ellesmere ...... 13,5 12,5 13,0 17 Wem...... 8,7 8,3 8,3 18 Whitchurch ...... 7,2 6,9 6,9 20 MarketDraytoil .... 14,2 13,8 14,6 22 Wellington ...... 4,7 4,4 4,4 17 Newport ...... 11,5 10,2 10,2 22 Worce.s'ter- Kidderminister ...... 3,5 3,1 3,3 19 Tenbury ...... 7,4 7,0 7,1 19 Martley ...... 11,5* 12,0 11,9 21 Worcester ...... 3 1,2 1,4 28 lUpton-oii.Severn. .... 14,4 13,0 13,4 27 Evesham ...... 8,5 9,1 10,6 26 Pershore ...... 13,9 12,5 12,7 24 Droitwich . . . 11,8 12,8 12,8 24 Bromsgrove ...... 4,7 5,3 5,3 23 Warwick- Meriden 9,8 10,2 11,3 26 Atherstone...... 6,5 8,1 8,5 56 Nuneaton ...... 1,3 1,4 1,5 15 Foleshill. . . 1,1 1,1 1,1 14 Rugby...... 15,5 14,0 14,5 19 Solih.ull ...... 5,9 6,6 7,3 26

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 641

Personsin thesepar ate 2registr ation districts, as includedin TableIII-contd [oo's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. in 1911. 100 acres.)

Warwick-contd. Warwick . . 5,1 8,6 8,9 21 Stratford-on-Avon. .... 14,4 12,5 13,2 18 Alcester .13,0 9,6 9,6 20 Shipston-on-Stour ...... 19,9 15,1 14,9 19 Soutbam . ... 0,4 9,9 10,0 19 Stafford- Stafford ...... 7,1 8,1 8,6 18 Stone...... 9,2* 13,8 14,3 21 Newcastle-under-Lyme .... 1,8* 1,7 1,6 16 Leek ...... 12,3* 14,4 15,4 22 Cheadle .9,7* 10,0 10,0 27 Uttoxeter. .... 11,7 10,7 10,9 17 Burton-on-Trent ...... 16,6 20,4 20,7 27 Tamworth ...... 5,6 5,8 6,7 21 Lichfield...... 10,2 13,3 13,5 22 Cannock...... 10,0 9,0 9,2 19. Wolverhampton ...... 8,2 6,9 7,2 20 Derby- Shardlow ...... 1,6 1,3 1,3 15 Derby ...... 4 1,0 9 - Belper...... 6,3 5,7 5,8 20 Ashbourne ...... 16,7 14,5 14,2 15 Bakewell ...... 18,8 16,5 17,7 22 Chapel-en-le-Frith. .... 9,9 12,2 13,9 28 Glossop ..2,3 ...... 2,4 2,3 14 Nottingham- E. Retford ...... 14,6 13,0 13,2 15 Worksop .... .7,9 8,4 9,8 22 Mansfield ...... II 1,1 1,2 17 Southwell...... 20,0 15,0 15,3 14 Newark ...... 17,7 13,7 13,5 15 Bingham ...... 15,7 13,8 14,1 20 West Riding Sedbergh...... 2,4 2,4 2,4 12 Settle ...... 10,7 11,7 12,3 11 Skipton ...... 17,9 17,8 17,9 13 Pateley Bridge 5,7 4,3 4,3 8 Ripon ...... 8,9 7,3 7,6 11 Great Ouseburn ...... 9,2 9,6 10,6 23 Knaresborough .... 5,6 4,6 5,0 14 Wetherby ...... 15,0 13,9 14,4 23 Wharfedale ...... 4,6 4,1 4,2 10 Todmorden ...... 4,6* 5,1 4,5 22 Pontefract ...... 8,2 9,5 10,6 29 Hemsworth ...... 2,4 3,1 3,4 21 Barnsley . . 7 7 7 Penistoneand Wortley 4,7 9,7 8,9 20 Rotherham. .... 4,9 7,1 7,2 47 Doncaster...... 12,1 10,9 12,0 16 Thorne ...... 9,9 9,1 9,3 19 Goole ...... 9,4 8,9 9,5 28

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 642 BOWLEY-Rural Populationin England and Wales: [May,

Personsin theseparate registration districts, as includedin TablellI-coWitd. [00's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. in 1911. 100 acres.)

We.8tRiding-contd. Selby...... 10,2 8,9 9,2 17 Tadcaster ...... 17,7 22,8 24,4 35 Cheshire- Macclesfield ...... 17,0 15,5 16,0 21 Bucklow ...... 10,3 10,t 10,L 21 Runcorn ...... 9,4 8,8 9,4 27 Northwioh ...... 9,3 11,1 11,2 25 Congleton. .... 5,0* 5,6 6,0 19 Nantwich ...... 23,8* 23,2 25,0 25 Chester .... 15,8* 16,7 17,6 21 Wirral . . 7,0 10,6 13,1 40 Lancashire- W. Derby ...... 1,8 1,6 1,5 28 Prescot ...... 5,6 4,2 4,2 28 Ormskirk ...... 16,6 12,8 13,2 26 Wigan...... 5 4 4 Warrington ...... 1,7 1,9 1,7 24 Leigh .... .3 3 3 Bury ...... 8 7 7 Burnley } 17,2 14,5 13,5 11 Clitheroe ... .. j Blackburn ...... 3,3 2,6 2,5 23 Chorley ...... 1,0 1,1 1,0 18 Preston ...... 7,9 7,8 8,2 20 Fylde ...... 7,8 10,3 11,5 29 Garstang ...... 10,4 9,4 9,2 17 Lancaster ...... 7,6 8,9 9,2 17 Lunesdale ...... 7,5 6,9 6,9 9 Ulverston ...... 18,5 17,7 17,0 13 East Riding York ...... 11,3 11,2 12,9 18 Pocklington ...... 13,9 11,1 11,2 10 Howden ...... 14,8 12,1 12,1 16 Beverley ...... 11,3 10,4 10,7 14 Sculcoates...... 3,1 5,3 6,1 36 Patrington ...... 8,9 6,9 7,1 12 Skirlaugh ...... 8,6 6,4 6,5 10 Driffleld ...... 14,8 12,0 12,1 11 Bridlington ...... 7,7 7,9 7,8 12 North Riding- Scarborough . . 9,3 8,6 8,6 11 Malton ...... 15,3 11,8 11,9 11 Easingwold...... 12,0 9,9 10,2 14 Thirsk...... 13,1 12,7 12,8 18 Helmsley ...... 11,8 10,0 10,0 9 Pickering ...... 7,1 6,6 6,4 8 Whitby ...... 9,5 8,0 8,5 10 Guisborough...... 5,4 7,3 6,9 37 Middlesbrough 5 9 1,7 22 Stokesley ...... 10,0 9,5 9,8 13 Northallerton . . 9,2 7,6 7,8 12

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof theChanges of Density,Occupations, anid Ages. 643

Personsin theseparatte registration districts, as includedin TableIII- contd.

100's.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. in 1911. .(Persons per 100 acres.)

North Riding-contd. Bedale...... 7,9 6,7 7,0 14 Leyburn...... 8,8 6,1 6,3 8 Aysgarth...... 5,6 4,5 4,3 5 Reeth...... 6 2 2 3 Richmond ...... 9,2 7,8 8,0 10 Durham- Darlington . . . 4,9 7,5 7,7 14 Stockton ...... 2,1 2,2 2,0 10 Hartlepool .... 1,8 1,4 1,5 9 Sedgefield ...... 1,8 1,8 1,9 7 Teesdale .... 14,8 12,9 12,2 7 Weardale ...... 14,8 9,7 9,6 10 Northumberland- Castle Ward...... 8,8 7,5 8,6 10 Hexham ...... 23,8 20,6 21,8 11 Haltwhistle ...... 4,2 4,2 3,8 4 Bellingham...... 6,4 5,1 5,2 3 Morpeth...... 7,8 8,8 8,7 11 Alnwick .... 13,6 12,6 12,2 13 Belford ...... 6,3 5,2 5,0 13 Berwick .... .8,6 6,1 5,8 12 Glendale ...... 13,2 8,8 8,6 6 Rothbury ...... 6,3 4,7 4,7 3

Cumberland- Alston ...... 6,4 3,1 3,1 8 Penrith 11,9 10,4 9,9 6 Brampton ...... 9,0 7,1 6,8 8 Longtown ...... 10,5 6,7 6,2 7 Carlisle ...... 14,8 16,7 16,7 25 Wigton ...... 14,2 11,4 11,4 11 Cockermouth...... 18,3 20,8 21,5 15 Whitehaven . . 10,5 13,5 14,9 20 Bootle ...... 3,7 5,3 5,0 6

Westmorland- E. Ward ...... 12,9 11,0 10,8 6 W. Ward . 7,4 6,5 6,4 5 Kendal ...... 18,0 17,9 17,4 11

Flint- Holywell .... 28,9 J 18,9 19,6 33 Hawarden ...... 12,0 13,8 47

Denbigh- Ruthin ...... 12,4 9,2 9,1 10 St. Asaph .... .16,2 12,9 13,5 15 L]anrwst ...... 10,2* 9,5 8,9 8

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 644 BOWLEY-RuralPopulation in Englandand Wales: [May, Personsin theseparate registration districts, as inclutdedin TableIII-contd. [EOO8.]

Density 1861. 1901. 1911. in 1911. 100acres.)

Carnarvon- Conway ...... 6,0 7,8 9,0 26 Bangor ...... 16,6 15,1 15,2 19 Carnarvon ...... 23,9 32,9 31,2 36 Pwllheli ...... ]7,6 16,8 16,8 18 Anglesey- Anglesey...... 12,0 9,4 9,3 17 Holyhead...... 13,3 9,7 9,8 17 .3erioneth- Ffestiniog ...... 10,8 11,7 11,1 9 Dolgelly...... 6,8 7,1 6,8 6 Corwen ...... 13,3 13,0 13,2 11 Bala ...... 5,1 4,2 4,1 4 Cardigan- Cardian ...... 15,1 11,7 11,1 14 Newcastle-in-Emlyn.... 19,1 18,1 17,8 16 Lampeter ...... 9,0 7,6 7,2 10 Aberayron ...... 10,6 8,2 7,8 12 Aberystwyth...... 18,0 12,4 12,2 11 Tregaron ...... 10,7 7,9 7,5 6 Montgomery- Machynlleth... 8,1 5,2 5,1 5 Newtown ...... 14,5 11,8 11,6 7 Forden } 30,2 23,1 22,6 9 Lilanfyllin ... .. Radnor- Knighton ...... 9,0 7,3 66 6 Rhayader ...... 4,4 3,5 3,7 6 Brecknock- Builth...... 7,9 7,2 7,8 6 Brecknock ...... 10,8 8,3 8,3 5 Crickhowell...... 9,8* 7,1 7,7 17 Hay. .... 9,0 7,7 7,5 8 Pembroke- Haverfordwest ...... 24,4 19,2 18,7 12 Pembroke ...... 9,6 8,8 8,4 15 Narberth ...... 21,3 17,4 17,3 14 Carmarthen- Llanelly.r' 8,l 9,9 45 Llandovery ...... 46,4 J 7,8 7,4 6 Llandilofawr ..,.2,4.... 5,4 10 Carmarthen ...... 21,3 21,2 14

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] a Studyof the Changes of Density, Occupations, and Ages. 645

______APPENDIX III.-Details of Table VI. ______Estimatesof weekly money wages. Percent- ______- ______- ____ _ - age rise Earnings 1861- 1907. 1861. 1870. 1880. 1892. 1902. 1907. 1902.

s. d. s. d. s.d s. d. s.d. s.9d. .d. Cornwall .96 11 013 914 014 615 0 5 17 7 Somerset .9 6 10 512 611 013 6 140 49 17 3 Devon ... ..9 010 213 013 613 914 6 5 17 9 Dorset ... ..9 610 110 910 0 11 11 12 1 215 16 1 Wilts ... ..9 711 910 012 912 0 34 16 0 6_10 Hants ... ..10 610 1112 011 613 915 1 31 17 5 Surrey ....12 413 615 615 016 416 8 32 18 9

Kent ., ....13613617 15 914 616 4164 21 18 10 Sussex:... . 11 6 11 10 13 6 12 0 14 10 15 1 29 17 9 Berks ....10 610 112 3 11 013 213 9 2, 16 8 Bucks ... 10 8 12 10 12 9 12 4 14 8 14 10 37 16 11 Herts ... ..10 012 713 611 614 814 8 47 16 10 Middlesex .... 12 9 12 2 15 0 14 1 17 10 18 7 40 20 3

Essex ....12 011 612 611 613 9137 15 16 4 Suffolk... ..11 6 10 11 12 6 12 0 12 9 12 5 11 15 9 Norfolk... ..10 6 114 12 6 12 0 124 127 17 -15 4 Cambridge .... 1l0 10 10 13 612 0 12 8 13 3 15 16 3 Hunts... ..11 012 012 613 013 813 5 24 16 2 Lincoln... ..14 3 14 0 14 3 14 8 15 6 15 3 9 19 5 Beds ... ..11 6128312 612 613 613 9 ig 16 3 Northants ..11 6 1 110 136 14 014 1 14 6 16 9 Leicester .... 12 013 113 015 015 9167 81 18 9 Oxford... ..10 8 10 10 12 9 12 0 12 0 12 11 16 14 11 Gloucester .... 9 6 10 9 13 3 10 6 12 11 13 11 86 16 3

Monmouth ...11 6 12 11 12 012 616 6 14 9 48 18 1 H3ereford .... 99 10I1119 11 013 313 11 .36 17 0 Shropabire ...10 613 6 13 314 014 814 7 40 18 0 Worcester .... 10 0 11 9 13 0 12 0 14 214 6 42 16 3 Warwick ..11 012 714 311 6 14 415 4 80 17 2 Stafford... ..12 0 13 0 14 6 16 0 15 11 15 10 &3 18 8

Derby ... 12 013 10 15 6 16 0 18 817 5 55 20 5 Notts... ..13 613 2 14015 01 3 17 2 21 19 5 W. Riding ...12 6 165 16 6 16 0 173 17 6 81 20 0 Lances... ..13 0 15 0 17 6 18 0 18 10 16 2 45 19 10 Cheshire .... 13 31336 15 415 017 016 7 81 19 0

E. Riding .. 10 11 14 11 15 0 15 6 16 9 16 5 .53 19 3 N. Riding .13 615 4166 15 6 16916 9 24 19 7 Durham .... 14 3 16 0 - - 20 0 - 40 21 9

Nortbumberlandl13 6 16 7 17 0 17 0 19 4 43 21 2 Cwmberland .... 13 6 14 9 18 0 18 0 18 4 19 3 86 20 6 Westmorland .... 15 9 16 1 - -18 419 1 16 21 2

Theestimates for 1851, 1870, 1880, 1892 and 1902are quoted fromcolumns 10, 13, 16 and 17 of thetable on'pp. 704-7 In theJournal for 1898. Thosefor 1902 are from Cd-2376, anLd for 1907 from Cd-5460. The wages and earningsare In all cases those of ordinaryagriculturml labourers. VOL. LXXVII. PART VI. 2 y

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 646 [May,

Discussiox on DR. BOWLEY'S PAPER. SIR ATHELSTANE BAINES, in proposinga vote of thanksto the authorof the Paper, said that the subjectin hand was one which, as the authorhad well said, requiredintensive and detailedstudy, and it was here dealt with in a thoroughlystatistical way. He joined heartilyin the thanksthe author said were due to the assistantwho had so laboriouslytraced back the populationof units throughthe complicatedalterations of area which made the work unusuallydifficult in this country. Dr. Bowley was amplyjustified in the prudentreserve with which he put forward the conclusionshe derivedfrom the resultsof that compilation, conclusionswhich were welcome to all who wishedfor instruction in this interestingquestion of depopulation. To begin at the beginning,the distinctionbetween urban and ruralwas one as to which no standardhad been universallyaccepted. He thought that, on the whole,the author'sselection of relativedensity was the best in the circumstanceswith whichhe was dealing. But evenhere the demarcation lacked definition in somecases, especially whereone great branchof primaryproduction, such as mining, competed with another,agriculture, and imparteda different characterto the population. In this respecthe thoughtthat the authorhad conductedthe processof eliminationas effectivelyas it was possibleto do. Anotherpoint was the overspillof urban populationon to the adjacent country,and here, he heartily thankedDr. Bowleyfor his inventionof the veryexpressive and usefulword " suburbanity."The Paper did not deal with the causesof this centrifugal movement, but he mightmention, perhaps, the influenceof the bicyclein importinglabour into the smaller towns fromdistances not formerlyaccessible. Then, again, he had recentlyheard direct confirmation of the tendency,mentioned in the Paper, of sons of farmersand gardenersto forsaketheir paternalcalling at the age of 17 or 18, forthe morevaried life in the town. In some cases theyreappeared, if successfulin life,as small holders. The evidenceof the census as to occupationleft him cold, as the authorwell knew. The detail involvedwas so minuteand widespreadthat he had neverbeen satisfiedthat the machineryof a generalcensus was adequateto recordit satisfactorily. The Censusof Production, which was ofa morespecialised character, seemedto himto yieldmore useful results. Mr. REW,in secondingthe vote of thanks,said that the Paper had struckhim as one of the mostsound and conscientiouspieces of statisticalwork that the Societyhad ever had laid beforeit. But, to praise Dr. Bowley's statisticalwork was almost an im- pertinence,and to criticiseit was almost an impossibility.He noticedthat Dr. Bowley,with his usual modesty,spoke of it as to some extenta re-hashof old statistics. It mightbe quite true that a certainamount of materialconsisted of meat cut froman

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] Discussionon Dr. Bowley'sPaper. 647 old beast. He would not say it had been freshlycooked because that was an ambiguousphrase, but at any rate it had been pre- sentedto themin a freshand palatable way, whichreflected the greatestcredit on Dr. Bowley as a statisticalchef. To make anythingin the way of usefulobservation on such a Paper as this, representingsuch enormouslabour and so much research,would involveif not equal research,at any rate a considerableamount of labour. The scientificbasis which Dr. Bowley had adopted to solve the old difficultyof discriminatingbetween raral and urban districtsseemed to him the best. Density was the real test of whatwas or was not a ruraldistrict, and if fornothing else than the adoptionof that basis and the workingout of the figures on such a basis, the Paper wouldbe memorable. He wouldmake only one criticismof the figuresand this was he thoughtnot a criticismof Dr. Bowley but of Lord Eversley. In the addition made to the figuresfor 1901 for the absence of men in SouthAfrica, he gatheredDr. Bowleyhad adoptedLord Eversley's figure recording the numberof menabsent as 20,ooo. He could not help thinking that, as Lord Eversleyat the time admitted,this mustbe a low estimate; because not onlymust there have been a largenumber of the actual reservistsor militiathemselves absent, who, had they been at home,would have describedthemselves as agricultural labourers,but theremust be a certaindrain on the ruraldistricts owing to the increaseddemand for labour in towns. Although theycould not do morethan speculateon whatthe figuresshould be, he venturedto say that the figureof 20,000 could not at any rate be an over statementbut ratheran understatement. The conclusionone was inclinedto come to was, that on the whole therehad been practicallyno increasein the numberof agricultural labourers during the decade but that they remained about stationary. It seemedto him curiousthat with regard to farmers thereshould have beenan increaseof 8,ooo in the courseof twenty years,while as they knew the amountof land undercultivation had decreased. If he rememberedrightly, the figures of the holdings themselveshad also decreased. The descriptionof "farmers" must alwayshave a certainelement of doubt in it. Onlv a day or two ago he had had an instancebefore him of a gentlemanwho describedhimself as solicitorand land agentand was also farming 200 or 3OOacres. He wonderedhow he describedhimself in the Census. The land in this countrywas held and farmedto a very large extent by persons who had other occupations. Almost invariablythe countryauctioneer had a farm. A large number ofpeople of that class also occupiedland, and whetherthey returned themselvesas farmersor whetherthey returned themselves as under the occupationfrom which they probably got the greaterpart of theirincome, he did not know. It thereforeseemed to him that any conclusionsdrawn from variations in the numberof farmers must always be open to considerabledoubt. The discussionof the age-groupfigures seemed to him extraordinarilyinteresting, 2 Y 2

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 648 Discwsion [May, but he was bound to say he had not had time to considerthem with the care thev deserved. Dr. Bowley had drawn certain deductionsfrom the changesin the age groups. What one would verymuch like to see if it were possible,and franklyhe did not see that it couldbe possible,was somelight thrown on the number of personswho left the agriculturallabouring class and became farmers. He had not consideredthe subject sufficientlyto know whetherit was possibleto gain any lighton that subjectfrom the Censusreturns, but if so it would be a fact of very considerable interest. At all times,and perhapsnever more so thannow, there had been a certainproportion of personsengaged on the land as labourersrising gradually through the smallholding to the occupation of largerfarms. That was certain; but the extentto which it wenton nobodyknew, and ifcensus statistics under Dr. Bowley's able analysiscould throwany lighton that interestingsubject, it wouldbe of verygreat public interest.

Mr. MACROSTY said withregard to the adjustmentwhich Mr. Rew had said shouldbe made forthe personswho wereabsent at the war in 1901-02,he would suggestthat the note to Table XII to the effectthat about 12,000 agriculturallabourers over the age of 25 wereabsent at the war ratherconfirmed him in the sus- picionhe had alwayshad that20,000 was muchtoo low an estimate for the total numberof agriculturistsabsent at the war. Dr. Bowley on one or two occasionshad raised the questionas to whetherthe actual congregationof ruraloccupations in the neighbourhoodof townswas due to the presenceof a near and better marketin the towns,or whetherit was due to some moresubtle influenceof the town spreadingitself over the adjacent country- side. He suggestedit mightbe not merelythe presenceof a better market,but the presenceof a marketwhich entailed a more intensivecultivation in the neighbourhoodof the townand there- forea largerproportion of personsengaged in rural occupations than in those districtswhich were moreremote from the towns. He thoughtthey would find some confirmation of that in Table V, whereit appeared that gardeners,seedsmen, and floristsin the urbandistricts had risenvery much-more rapidly than in the rural districts; and the relativelymuch greater rise between1901 and 1911 in the numberof farmlabourers in the urban districtsthan in the ruraldistricts might be connectedwith the prevalenceof a good deal of dairyfarming of the stall-fedcharacter in the neighbourhoodof towns. The thingone wanted to go into was the age classification,but it was impossibleto do thatby simplylooking throughthe Tables at two or threemoments' notice. He thought it was one ofthe linesupon which further investigation might most fruitfullybe spent,because the two diagramsto whichDr. Bowley had referredto showedsuch a widedivergence between agricultural occupationsand all other occupationsthat he was convinceda good deal of examinationwas requiredbefore they could be fully accepted.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] on Dr. Bowley'sPaper. 649

Mr. FAY said such remarksas he had to makewould not be on the figures,which he had not yet mastered,but on one or two pointswhich he had followedup forhimself on the linessuggested by Dr. Bowleyat theend of the Paper, namely, a studyof conditions in particulardistricts. He had derivedfrom these the impression which,he gathered,ran throughoutDr. Bowley'sstatistics, namely, the extraordinarveffect industry had upon the agriculturein its neighbourhood.It was obvious to anybodywho made a tour of Englandhow everyregion, especially the Midlands,was feeling the contact of the towns,and how local agriculturewas always beingthreatened with revolution by the appearanceof a coal mine or some new industrialworks, so that the generalposition was one of instability. He himselfhad taken a numberof villagesin Gloucestershireand had foundwithin that one countyvariations of wages almost as wide as those existingbetween the different parts of England; fromI3S. in isolated villages to 2IS. in the neighbourhoodof Gloucester. The next pointhe had investigated was the wages on farmsinside towns round about Liverpool. A fewrural patches still remained, and it seemedto him that house rentwas the predominantconsideration. On one estate,such as Lord Derby's KnowsleyEstate, the labourershad wages of 208. with a cottagethrown in; but apparentlythe same sort of men workedin a neighbouringdistrict on about the same wage with a houserent in somecases of4s. gd.,in othercases of 5S., and even as high as 7s. 6d. These differenceswere hard to explain by differencesin the quality of the housingaccommodation. The higherrents seemed to be the resultof pressurefrom other occupations on a limited supply of house room. The whole of the advantages of the higherwages in the North might thus be swallowedup in houserent. He thankedDr. Bowleyparticularly for the encouragementwhich he gave to those who, not being fittedfor work on big statisticallines, confinedthemselves to intensivelocal study in particulardistricts. He thoughtthat a groupof ten or twelvevillages which had certainthings in common -the neighbourhoodof a greattown, uniform geological conditions, or a commonform of cultivation-wouldform good unitsof study. In conclusionhe asked if therewas anythingin the suggestionthat therewas a considerableamount of land on the marginbetween arableand pasture,so thata farmerwishing to avoid a heavywages bill would findit profitableto transfera good deal of land from arable to pasture,thereby considerably diminishing his labourbill. He had heard it said that the farmersof Wilts and Dorset were proposingto take actionon thoselines to avoid the higherwages, whichwere now threatened.

Dr. GREENWOODaskled whether the criterionof densitymight not in such countiesas Essex lead to difficultiesof interpretation. Thus in such a neighbourhoodas that of Epping, the districts thinly populated might neverthelessbe really "suburbanised,"

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 650 Discssion [May,

the inhabitantsbeing merelyof a somewhatwealthier class than thoseresiding near the railway; converselysome strictlyagricul- turaldistricts in the moreremote parts of the county,e.g., in the neighbourhoodof Thaxted,might be excludedalthough the density was merelythe outcomeof the presenceof large villageswhich servedas local clearinghouses or of the developmentof the seed- growingindustry as in the neighbourhoodof Coggeshall. Mr. VIGORsaid he wishedto supplementthe suggestionsmade by Mr.Macrosty with regard to the reasonfor the largerdensity of farmersin urban than in rural areas. He said Dr. Bowley had made the ratherstartling observations on page 613 that therewere " more farmers,more relatives,more bailiffs,more agricultural labourersand more ' others' per i,ooo urban acres than z,ooo ruralacres." Mr.Macrosty had shownthat the numberof market gardenershad certainlyincreased to a greatextent, and suggested that one reasonfor the greaterdensity of farmersmight be found in the numberof dairy men and the numberof personsengaged on intensivefarming. He (the speaker)agreed that that was quite the most likelyreason for the factspointed out by Dr. Bowley. For instance,Lancashire he believedhad more dairy cows than any othercounty in England,and of the agriculturalpopulation of Lancashire a much smallerproportion was found in the rural districtsthan was the case in other counties. Cheshirewas a countyof a similarcharacter. Lancashire,Cheshire and the West Ridingof Yorkshirewere great potato growingcounties and that was a kind of farmingwhich involved a greatamount of labour. He thoughtlocal inquiryon thoselines would probably show that thesuggestion of Mr. Macrosty accounted for the surprising difference inthe density of farmers in urban and in ruralareas. Mr. FLUX said that in addinghis congratulationson the very valuable mass of materialDr. Bowleyhad gatheredtogether, he wouldlike to congratulatehim furtheron the indicationsafforded in the Paper ofthe stimulushe had given to certainstudents at the London School of Economicsenabling him to enlist their assistancein certainparts of the work. He thoughtthat kind of stimulusto othersto startout on investigatingwork was possibly even morevaluable than the gathering of a massof variedmaterial in a Paper ofthis class forreading before a Societylike theirs. It was likely to bear much valuable fruitin the not very distant future. In referenceto the tables of age distribution,he noted that Dr. Bowleygave a verynecessary warning that theyneed to be studiedwith very-greatcloseness; because any divergencein the percentagein any one age-groupled to correspondingdiver- gences in oppositedirections in other age-groups. Lookingfor exampleat thetable on page 618 and comparingthe distribution of all occupiedmales in 1891 and 1911,in orderto get rid of the awkwarddisturbance of 1901and its possibleeflects even on all occupiedmales and theirage distribution,one foundthat, although

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1914.] on Dr. Bowley'sPaper. 651 the figuresall throughas they stood suggested considerable differences,if they took those overthe age of 25, the proportions of all occupiedmales were practicallyidentical in the fourgroups above the age of 25 at those two periods,the whole of the divergence arisingfrom the relativeexcess of youngpersons between the ages of 15 and 25 in thoseoccupations in 1891as comparedwith 1901. In the case of agriculturalworkers there was a divergence stillremaining after taking account of the youngestage-group.

Mr. YULE said that he was in agreementwith Dr. Bowleyand previousspeakers in holdingthat densitywas a correctcriterion forjudging districts as " rural." One naturallythought of a rural districtas a districtwith a low densityof population. Curiously enoughDr. Bowleyhad hit on the preciselimit of densitythat he (Mr. Yule) took forthe purposeof sortingout ruralunions in the study of pauperism. If he rememberedrightly, that limit was suggestedto himby the densityof- the districtschosen for investi- gationas typicalagricultural districts by the Labour Commission. Theyhad a meandensity of about o'25 per acre,and a densityof 0 3 includedvery nearly all of them. It mustbe notedthat Dr. Bowleyhad gonerather further and had not used his criterionas an absolutecriterion, but had used his judgmentin includingor excluding doubtfulcases. The distinctionbetween rural and agriculturaldistricts seemed to him a veryimportant one. One mustremember that in dealingwith a ruralproblem one was not necessarilydealing with an agriculturalproblem. The factstruck himvery forcibly in consideringthe remarks made by Mr.Chambers in a Paper read at the Farmers'Club recently. When he went into some figuresfor the ruraldistricts of certaincounties which Mr. Chambersgave in a table showingthe changesin population, he confessedhe was verymuch puzzled by the facts. Takinga groupof ten countiesin whichthe populationhad eitherdecreased or had increasedonly slightly,and in orderto avoid difficulties about boundarychanges taking those counties as a whole,he found that in six of them (Radnor,Merioneth, Cardigan, Montgomery, Carnarvonand Hunts)the numberof malesengaged in agriculture had goneup and thenumbers that were engaged in otheroccupations had gonedown, so it was not agriculturethat was to blamein those chieflyrural countiesat all. The facts as regardsHunts were especiallystriling; the numberof males engagedin agriculture wentup by 13 per cent.and thenumber of malesengaged in other occupationswent down by 2 per cent. In Norfolkthe increase in the numberof malesengaged in agriculturewas slightlygreater than that of the numberof males engagedin otheroccupations, and in Herefordthe same was the case. Onlyin Cornwalland in Westmorlandwas the increasein the numberof malesengaged in agricultureslightly less than the increasein the numberof males engagedin otheroccupations. He thoughta studyof the changes in thenumbers of those engaged in agricultureand in otheroccupa- tionsin ruraldistricts would be well repaid.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 652 Discussionon Dr. Bowley'sPaper. [May,

Dr. BOWLEY, in reply,said Sir AthelstaneBaines was rather severeon the occupationalCensus, but verylikely not moresevere than theyall were,especially all who spentmuch time on it. But evena faultytabulation might have a use,and he did notsee anything a prioriin the descriptionof a man as agriculturallabourer or anythingelse, to vitiatethe age distributionas betweenthe agricultural labourersand otherpeople. From that point of view he thoughtthe occupationaltables werefree from errors which must certainlycreep into any othertables relatingto occupation,and he did not thinkthe figuresof age descriptionhad yetbeen studied sufficiently.He acceptedLord Eversley's statementwith regard to the numberof men at the war, but he had made slightly differentestimates for the tables relatingto ages when he was studyingthe expectationof survivalsin agriculture.The number abroad in the Army,Royal Navy and Royal Marinestogether in 1901, of Ehglishor Welshnationalitv, as tabulatedin the General Reportsof the Censuswas onlyII6,700 greaterthan the numberin 1891. He did not reallythink that agriculturegave 20,000 out of thoseI36,700, even if one includedthe movementinto the town and.hewas inclinedto doubtthe movementinto the towns as being veryimportant; because war or no war the one thingwhich must go on was the gettingin of the cropsand therewere not too many menfor the purpose in a normalyear. So he was disposedto think himselfthat 20,ooo was an overestimate, and wouldhave giventhe figuremuch nearer IO,OOO if he had not followedLord Eversley's lines. He had nothingbut agreementto offerwith regard to what Mr. Macrostyand Dr. Greenwoodhad said. He was not able to followin detailDr. Greenwood'squestion, but he gatheredit related to a county(Essex) withwhich his acquaintancewas verylimited, so limitedthat he had nearlyplanned a fortnight'stour last year to go and look at the townsand largevillages and tryto findout whyt.he villages were so dense. As he couldnot do thathe had put out of the map, as it were,those districtswhich were suspectof being influencedby London,and in puttingout the districtshe had not onlyto put out the industrialand commercialpopulation, but also the agriculturallabourers. That was done all over the country; but Essex was one of the counties mentionedin the appendixas ofparticular difficulty. When one cameto look at the Tables to testthe kindof effect made by excludingparticular areas, whichshould have beenkept in, veryfew tables would be foundto be muchaltered; buthe wouldbe veryglad to have anysuggestions as to AppendixI withregard to thereasons why some of those places were dense,because althoughhe could not re-castthe tables to includealterations, it was quite possibleto make a notethat these particularareas mightbe transferred. The followingCandidates were elected Fellows of the Society JohnBaker. E. B. Morris. J. W. Bispham. ManuSubedar. Msanathanatu Ghosh.

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.103 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:57:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions