Netherlands 146,168 France 428,894 Switzerland 220,199 Denmark, Norway, and Sweden 1,730,722 Italy 2,000,252 j.a.pan 88,908 Germany 5,187,092 United Kingdom, Great Britain and Ireland 7,286,434 Russia 1,452,629 Countries not specified 2,130,756 China 288,398
[Sidenote: A Remarkable Shifting]
To appreciate the significance of these figures, it must be remembered that while the totals from the United Kingdom and Germany amount to nearly twelve and a half millions, or considerably more than one half of the entire immigration down to 1905, the proportions have been rapidly changing. The immigration from the United Kingdom, for example, reached its highest point in 1851, when the total was 272,740, predominantly from Ireland. The German immigration reached high mark in 1887, the total being 250,630. On the other hand, the immigration from Italy did not reach 10,000 until 1880, and pa.s.sed the 100,000 mark first in 1900.
In the past five years nearly a million Italians--or one half of the entire Italian immigration--have entered the country, and the number in 1906 promises to exceed a quarter of a million more. The highest mark was 233,546 in 1903; but even this did not equal the birth-rate in Italy. In Hungary and Russia, also, the birth-rate is greater than the immense drain of immigration, so that this stream will continue to flow and increase, unless some check is put upon it, or some legislative dam built. The immigration from Russia, consisting chiefly of Jews, did not become appreciable until 1887, when it reached 30,766. It pa.s.sed 100,000 in 1902; and from 1900 to 1905 the total arrivals were 748,522, or just about one half the entire number of Jews in the United States. The same is true of the Hungarian and Slav immigration. Its prominence has come since 1890.
[Sidenote: The Inferior Checks the Superior]
The point of importance to be considered is that as the immigration from southeastern Europe has increased, that from northwestern Europe has decreased. In 1869 not one per cent. of the total immigration came from Austria-Hungary, Italy, Poland, and Russia, while in 1902 the percentage was over seventy. In 1869 nearly three quarters of the total immigration came from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Scandinavia; in 1902 only one fifth was from those countries. The proportion has held nearly the same since.
[Sidenote: Change in Source]
The change is indicated most plainly in this table, which compares the total immigration of certain nationalities for the period 1821 to 1902 with that for the year 1903:
1821 to 1902 1903 Country Number Per cent Number Per cent
Austria-Hungary 1,316,914 6.5 206,011 24.00 England, Wales 2,730,037 13.4 26,219 3.1 Germany 5,098,005 25.0 40,086 4.7 Ireland 3,944,269 19.3 35,300 4.1 Italy 1,358,507 6.7 230,622 26.9 Norway, Sweden 1,334,931 6.5 70,489 8.2 Russia, Poland 1,106,362 5.4 136,093 15.9
This table shows not only the nations which have added chiefly to our population in the past, and which are adding to-day, but how the percentage of each has varied in the period before 1903 compared with 1903. Mr. Hall says: "If the same proportions had obtained in the earlier period as during the later how different might our country and its inst.i.tutions now be!"
[Sidenote: The Problem of Diverse Race Stocks]
This brings up the question of type, of character, and of h.o.m.ogeneity.
The new immigration introduces new problems. The older immigration, before 1870, was chiefly composed of races kindred in habits, inst.i.tutions, and traditions to the original colonist.[49] To-day we face decidedly different conditions. At the same time study of these comparatively unknown races will bring us many surprises, and knowledge of the facts is the only remedy for prejudice and the only basis for constructive Christian work. We must know something, moreover, of the Old World environment before we can judge of the probable development of these peoples in America, or learn the way of readiest access to them.
For they will not become Americanized unless they are in some way reached by Americans; and they will never be reached until they are understood.
_II. The Italians_
[Sidenote: Extremes of Opinion]
In our more detailed study of the new immigration we take first the Italians, who are seen wherever one turns in our cities, and are perhaps the most conspicuous of the immigrants. Here we come at once upon two extremes of opinion. One extreme finds little or nothing that is favorable to the Italians, who are cla.s.sed all together and judged in the light of the Mafia, or "black hand," ready for all deeds of darkness. The other lauds these aliens so highly that an Italian himself said to the writer, referring to a recent book about his people in America:[50] "I suppose I ought to be glad to have us all made out to be saints, but I am afraid there is another side to the story." We shall hope to find the truth between these extremes. This has to be admitted, on the start, that in most cases those who have most to do with the Italians, of whatever cla.s.s, become warmly interested in them, and believe both in their ability and in their adaptability to American life.
[Sidenote: A Gifted Race]
When so keen a writer as Emil Reich, in discussing "The Future of the Latin Races," in the _Contemporary Review_, says, "there can be little doubt that the Italians are the most gifted nation in Europe," we see that it is a mistake to cla.s.s all Italians as alike and put them under the ban of contempt as "dagoes." They differ from one another almost as much as men can differ who are still of the same color, says a recent writer.[51]
[Sidenote: Marked Differences Between North and South]
Most northern Italians are of the Alpine race and have short, broad skulls; southern Italians are of the Mediterranean race and have long, narrow skulls. Between the two lies a broad strip of country, peopled by those of mixed blood. In appearance the Italians may be anything from a tow-headed Teuton to a swarthy Arab. Varying with the district from which he comes, in manner he may be rough and boisterous; suave, fluent, and gesticulative; or grave and silent. These differences extend to the very essentials of life. The provinces of Italy are radically unlike, not only in dress, cookery, and customs, but in character, thought, and speech. A distinct change of dialect is often found in a morning"s walk. An ignorant Valtellinese from the mountains of the north, and an ignorant Neapolitan have as yet no means of understanding each other; and what is yet more remarkable, the speech of the unschooled peasant of Genoa is unintelligible to his fellow of Piedmont, who lives less than one hundred miles away.
[Sidenote: Different Environment]
The northern Italian is the result of a superior environment. His section is more prosperous, intelligent, orderly, and modern. The industrially progressive, democratic north presents a striking contrast to the industrially stagnant, feudal south. The northern division is full of the spirit of the new Italy, and its people are less p.r.o.ne to leave home. Central Italy, too, is making steady advances in agriculture and education, and the peasant farmer is a stay-at-home. In southern Italy agriculture is practically the sole reliance of the people, the lot of the day laborers is wretched, and the failure of a wheat crop is as disastrous as the potato famine in Ireland was to the Irish in 1847.
United Italy is undoubtedly making progress in education and industry, the standards of living are rising, and the money sent or carried back to Italy from America has helped to some degree in this advancement.
Religiously, of course, the domination of the Roman Catholic Church continues over all Italy, and in illiteracy as in other respects Italy is an example of what this ecclesiastical rule means where it has power over the people sufficient to enable it to work its will.
[Sidenote: Common Poverty of the Peasants]
In view of these facts regarding the home environment and difference in peoples, it will not do, evidently, to use sweeping generalizations, or to regard the organ-grinder and fruit-peddler as the representatives of Italy in America. We receive all grades, from cultured professionals to illiterate peasants, though mainly, of course, the peasant cla.s.s. The one common feature of the Italian provinces is the poverty produced by the crushing taxes and agricultural depression. Absentee landlordism has blighted southern Italy as it has Ireland. Yet with great tracts of fertile soil thus held away from the people, and with no new territory to cultivate, the population of Italy has increased within twenty years from twenty-eight and a half to thirty-two and a half millions, an average density of 301 per square mile, and the excess of births over deaths amounts to nearly 350,000 a year. Hence the question with the people in overcrowded districts is simply emigration or starvation. The southern Italian is driven from home by necessity to work, and work is to be found in America, so he comes. His labor is mostly unskilled, and this is in demand here. The result is that almost eighty per cent. of the Italian immigrants are males; over eighty per cent. are between fourteen and forty-five, the working age; over eighty per cent. are from the southern provinces, and nearly the same percentage are unskilled laborers, and a large majority of these are illiterates. The eighty per cent. of "human capital of fresh, strong young men" is Italy"s contribution to America, and is a force winning its way to recognition.
[Sidenote: Figures of Italian Immigration]
Let us note the growth of Italian immigration, its sources, and its distribution. In the sixty years from 1820 to 1880 only 68,633 Italians made their way to America, while during this period the total foreign immigration was over ten millions. The census of 1890 gave the Italian population of the United States as only 182,580, and at that date not over a half million in all had come here. The rapid increase during recent years is shown in the following table:
IMMIGRATION FROM ITALY TO THE UNITED STATES
1890 52,003 1898 58,613 1891 76,055 1899 77,419 1892 61,631 1900 100,135 1893 72,145 1901 135,996 1894 42,977 1902 178,375 1895 35,427 1903 230,622 1896 68,060 1904 193,296 1897 59,431 1905 221,479
[Sidenote: Remarkable Increase]
This shows how steady and remarkable the immigration has been since 1900. In five years 959,768 Italians have come to this country. Surely it is worth our while to know more particularly the character of this million and their promise as an element in our civilization. Thousands of them are "birds of pa.s.sage"--that is, they come and go, earning money here and going back home to spend it and then returning to earn more; but tens of thousands come to stay, and will play their part in shaping our future.
[Sidenote: Distribution of Italians]
The distribution of the Italians is shown partially in the accompanying diagram.[52] This, however, is based upon the Census of 1900, and does not account for the million arrivals since 1900. The destination clause in the immigrant"s manifesto gives light upon the matter of distribution, although the incomer does not always get to the point named in his papers. From the official report for 1905 these results are drawn:
North South Locality Italian Italian Total
New York 9,733 81,572 91,305 New Jersey 1,272 11,494 12,766 Pennsylvania 7,554 43,078 50,632 Connecticut 1,626 5,835 7,461 Ma.s.sachusetts 2,011 11,747 13,758 Rhode Island 196 2,422 2,618 Illinois 3,663 6,685 10,348 Ohio 861 6,230 7,091 Michigan 1,330 1,649 2,979 West Virginia 421 2,987 3,408 Louisiana 177 2,631 2,808 Missouri 769 1,477 2,246 Mississippi 674 213 887 Eight Southern States 467 1,036 1,503 California 4,513 1,081 5,594 Colorado 824 881 1,705
[Sidenote: Largely in Cities]
It is interesting to note that at least one Italian immigrant was destined to every state and territory. Of the total Italian population in this country in 1900, 62.4 per cent. was in the 160 princ.i.p.al cities, and nearly one half in New York alone. The percentage of Italians attracted to the cities is about the same as that of the Irish.
[Sidenote: Italians and Irish Compared]
An interesting parallel, indeed, may be drawn between these races. The Italians to-day occupy largely the place occupied by the Irish of yesterday. The Irish came in the earlier years by reason of distressing conditions at home, forcing them to seek a living elsewhere; this is now true of the Italians. The Irish were chiefly peasants, unskilled laborers and illiterate; so are the Italians. The Irish came mainly from agricultural sections and herded in the great cities; so do the Italians. The handy weapon of the Irish was the shillalah, that of the Italian is the stiletto. The Irish found ready employment by reason of the demand for cheap unskilled labor created by the vast material enterprises of a swiftly developing country, with cities and towns and railroads to build; this work is done by the Italians now, and they are commonly conceded to be in many respects better at the job. Here is a sample of the kind of testimony frequently given concerning them as workers:[53]
[Sidenote: Good Workers]
"I have learned to be cautious in comparing races. I find good, bad, and indifferent people in all races. But I dissent from the current notion that the southern Italian is so much inferior to the northern. As a people there is more illiteracy among them; but when he goes to school the southern Italian holds his own with the northern. Another fact of promise is that Italians have not lost the spirit of service. They are good workmen. Not long since, asking a contractor who was building a sewer in the city why he had only Italians in his employ, he replied, "Because they are the best workmen, and there are enough of them. If an Italian down in that ditch has a shovelful of earth half way up when the whistle blows for dinner, he will not drop it; he will throw it up; the Irishman and the French-Canadian will drop it. And when the lunch hour is over, when the clock strikes the Italian will be leaning on his shovel ready to go to work, but the Irishman will be out under that tree and he will be three minutes getting to his job, and three minutes each, for 150 men, is not a small item. The Italian does not regard his employer as his natural enemy. He has the spirit of kindly service."
[Sidenote: Cheerful and Responsive]
The writer can confirm this from personal observation. The Italians are cheerful workers, and on hand ten to fifteen minutes before the hour to begin work. They relish a kind word, and can give lessons in politeness to many an American-born. Ask anyone brought in contact with them and you will get the same testimony.
[Sidenote: Flower of the Peasantry]
According to Adolfo Rossi, Supervisor of the Italian Immigration Department, who is deeply interested in the proper distribution and welfare of his countrymen in America, these immigrants are the flower of the laboring cla.s.s of Italy. Economically they are doubtless of value at so many dollars per head. But of far more importance is the question, what are they in the social fabric? If, as some a.s.sert, the Italian race stock is inferior and degraded, if it will not a.s.similate naturally with the American, or will tend to lower our standards, then it is undesirable, even though the immigrant had a bank account in addition to his st.u.r.dy body. The further one investigates the subject, the less likely is he to conclude that the Italian is to be adjudged undesirable, as a race. He must be judged individually on his merits.
[Sidenote: Demand for Unskilled Labor]
Mr. Carr draws a decidedly favorable picture of the Italians, whether from north or south. He says that immediate work and high wages, and not a love for the tenement, create our "Little Italies." The great enterprises in progress in and about the city, the subway, tunnels, water-works, railroad construction, as well as the ordinary building operations, call for a vast army of laborers. It is the educated Italian immigrant without a manual trade who fails in America. The illiterate laborer takes no chances. The migratory laborer--for more than 98,000 Italians went back to Italy in 1903, and 134,000 in 1904--confers an industrial blessing by his very mobility. Then, in his opinion, there is something to be said for the illiterates who remain here. They are never anarchists; they are guiltless of the so-called "black hand" letters.
The individual laborer is, in fact, rarely anything but a gentle and often a rather dull drudge. More than this, our school system deprives us of unskilled laborers. The gangs that dig sewers and subways and build railways are recruited from the illiterate or nearly so, and for our supply of the lower grades of labor we must depend upon countries with a poorer school system than ours.
[Sidenote: Favorable Comparison]
[Sidenote: Italians Not Beggars]