in the purely temporary immigration has gone along hand in hand with the shifting of the emigration centers.

The temporary immigration is much to be deplored, since it introduces into the body politic a class of people not only alien in fact but determined to remain so, wholly indifferent to their adaptation to the conditions of life by which they find themselves surrounded. To put it in another form, we have here a class eager to profit by our standard of wages but unwilling to adopt our standard of expenditure. Just how far the standard of life is a result of wages and just how far it is a factor in determining them cannot be discussed at this point. That it is to some degree a factor in determining wages is generally conceded, and the introduction and maintenance of a lower standard must result in injury to the working classes when it embraces a number of persons large enough to be a factor in the labor market. Hence, there is little doubt that temporary immigration is undesirable, and so far as this element is concerned there can be no question that the newer immigration is less desirable than that of former years.

The problem of the permanent immigration is the probability of assimilation to the conditions, standards and ideals of American life. It rests, therefore, upon the willingness and capacity of the immigrant to adapt himself to new conditions. General evidence of this willingness and capacity can be stated only in the vaguest terms; and it is to be regretted that, so far as there are any statistical indications upon these points, they must of necessity embrace all the foreign born, as the census cannot distinguish between those who have settled in the United States as their home and those whose sojourn here is for a time only.

Much attention has been given to the aggregation of the foreign born in cities; and there is a tendency to find in this fact a symptom of the unwillingness of the immigrant to discard his foreign habits, and of a desire on his part to build up settlements of his own nationality, where he can, at least in some degree, continue his old life. The fact is uncontested; but the inference is a forced explanation of a perfectly natural and comprehensible

'In the principal cities of the nation (the 161 cities having over 25,000 inhabitants) the foreign born constitute 26.1 per cent of the population, while in the remainder of the country they form but 9.4 per cent of the population.

tendency. Population follows the opportunities for employment, and these have the most attractive force for the more mobile elements. The fact of city growth cannot be ignored in connection with the tendency of the foreign born to the cities. Between 1890 and 1900 the increase of the population was thus distributed:

Cities have in recent years offered more attractive labor opportunities than the rural regions, and people have streamed into them from the country districts as well as from foreign lands. That the foreign born element, being without local ties, should have contributed to the growth of cities in larger measure than the native-born citizens is perfectly natural. Of course it would be one-sided to overlook the consideration that immigrants flock to the cities because others of their own race are there. The contact with their own people is not wholly a matter of choice, it is a vital necessity upon their first entrance into a new world. They need interpreters and go-betweens in their relations with a people whose language is foreign to them. Of necessity they seek the people of their own race, and find employment either in the service of their fellow countrymen or through their agency.

Such herding together of the foreign born in cities gives rise to grave problems of municipal life, but it cannot be taken as an evidence of unwillingness of the foreign born to adapt themselves to new conditions. Is it an obstacle to such adaptation? It may seem strange to suggest the question, but if, with the inability of the immigrants to speak English and their lack of any connections which would aid them in securing employment, a general diffusion throughout the country is impossible, there must be either city colonies or rural colonies. The latter are less in the public eye than the former, but are they better schools for American citizenship? Is not the attrition of city life, with its more frequent contact with the native American, more likely to promote

a knowledge of the English language and with it the ability to participate in the general life of the community, than the selfcentered existence of rural communities? In this connection it is at least suggestive that in 1900 the number of native white persons of foreign parentage who could not speak English was greater in Wisconsin (5,024) and in Minnesota (2,740) than in New York (2,498); and that 19,103 natives of native parentage, who could not speak English, were enumerated in Pennsylvania. Among the scanty evidences bearing upon the willingness of the immigrant to adapt himself, we may consider the statistics of naturalization. In 1900 there were enumerated 1,001,595 aliens,' or 24.6 per cent of all the adult foreign born males who made. returns on the subject of naturalization (14.9 per cent of all having failed to make any return). The following statement as to length of residence is significant:

This shows that the larger proportion of aliens is found among the more recent arrivals, and it might be anticipated that the aliens should be more numerous among the nationalities which characterize the modern immigration than among those which contributed more largely to the foreign born population in earlier years. Still, and despite the probability that the census of 1900 included a larger number of persons who had no intention of permanently remaining in the country than were included in prior enumerations, the influx of these newer elements shows as yet no appreciable influence upon the tendency towards naturalization. A comparison of the census of 1890 (the first which took note of naturalization) and that of 1900, gives the following percentages:

1 The Census Reports designate as aliens all persons who have taken no steps towards naturalization. Persons who have taken out their first papers, but are not fully naturalized, are not classed as aliens.

While the unknown element is larger in 1900, the total of unknown and aliens is slightly less than 1890.

If we turn now to the other phase of the question, the capacity of the immigrant to adapt himself to new conditions, the outlook is hardly reassuring. On the average the immigrant is a man who has nothing to lose by expatriation. He stands on the lower levels of the society from which he springs, and brings to the new country only a scanty endowment of intellectual attainment or of industrial skill. The recent statistics of the Immigration Bureau - for our detailed information in regard to new arrivals dates only since 1891 - may well give rise to apprehension.

As it is not the function of this paper to recite well known facts, but to bring out if possible certain aspects of the immigration question which have frequently been neglected, we need only note briefly the facts as to the illiteracy of the immigrants. An interesting chart accompanying the Immigration Report of 1903 shows the illiteracy of the immigrants over fourteen years of age to have been as follows:

Among the races which contributed largely to the immigration

of 1903 we may note the following percentages of illiteracy:

It would naturally be supposed that the shifting of the bulk of immigration from the races with a low rate of illiteracy to those with a high rate, would affect materially the average illiteracy of the foreign white population of the United States. This is reported as follows:

we believe is largely due to the number of temporary immigrants among the races with a high rate of illiteracy. Whatever it may do in the future, the immigration of recent years has not as yet increased the proportion of persons destitute of the rudiments of an education. Nor is the ignorance of the parents perpetuated among the children. This is shown in the fact that the children of foreign parents utilize the school facilities of the country as fully as do those of native parents.

In the average of the United States, the greater illiteracy of the Southern states materially affects the average for the native white of native parentage, and we have accordingly cited separately the Northern regions where the two classes are found side by side. The advantage in favor of the children of foreign parents is doubtless fully explained by the superior school facilities of the cities where this class is most numerous. It will be noted that in all cases there is improvement between the census of 1890 and that of 1900.

It is moreover worthy of note that among the foreign born of ten to fourteen years of age the illiteracy is 5.6 per cent, while among those of 65 years of age and over it is 19.3 per cent.