[A] Does not include proprietors, salaried officers, clerks, etc.

[B] 1880, Tenth Census, Manufactures, pp. xxiv, xxv; 1890 and 1900, 11th Census, Manufactures, Part ii, pp. 7, 108, 115, 134, 279, 300, 335, 831, 848, 908; 1905, 12th Census, vol. viii, Manufactures, Part ii, pp. 20, 142, 152, 179, 339, 361, 403, 1025, 1056, 1127.

[C] No return for 1880.

[D] Figures for 1905 are less and are not comparable with preceding figures, because in 1905 all neighborhood work and establishments for custom work and repairing were excluded.

[E] Does not include cotton compressing in 1900.

[F] Fourteen cities; Chattanooga and Birmingham are omitted.


The industrial pull of Southern cities, then, is shown both by the increase in the average number of wage-earners and in the total value of manufactured products.

There is no reason to doubt that commercial enterprise has operated and kept pace with industrial activity in causing the growth of these urban centers. Figures for the trade of these sixteen Southern cities are not available. However, we have side lights upon the commercial life in the amount of railroad building that has taken place in the South since 1860. In 1860, there were only 8,317 miles of railroad in the thirteen states from Maryland and Delaware to Arkansas and Texas. In 1900, there were 46,735.86 miles in the same territory, an increase of 461.9 per cent. From 1900 to 1905 this increased to 55,239.22 miles or 18.2 per cent in the five years.[10] Likewise the traffic operations, including total tonnage, and freight, passenger, express and mail earnings of selected groups of railways covering most of this territory, increased very rapidly from 1890 to 1900. In the ten years, from 1890 to 1900, the tonnage increased from 63,597,120 tons to 121,180,317 tons or 90.5 per cent; and total earnings went from $113,616,184.45 in 1890 to $168,606,233 in 1900, an increase of 48.4 per cent in ten years.

As these industrial and commercial forces affect the population, the Negro without doubt shares to a considerable extent the influence. That the Negro has been a large labor factor in the South is a patent fact. All the data available indicate that he has been affected by economic influences similar to those which have moved the white population toward the urban centers.

The most decisive set of facts is the growth in the number of whites and Negroes in gainful occupations in Southern cities. The census returns of 1890 and 1900 for a number of Southern cities were sufficient for an inference. For some occupations figures for 1890 were not available, and in other occupations some cities were not reported in 1890. So a selected list of occupations was taken.

The comparisons of those occupations selected are striking. Among the males, for domestic and personal service occupations, from 1890 to 1900, the white wage-earners increased 42.3 per cent and the Negro wage-earners increased 31.1 per cent. Here we see the influence of the growth of wealthy classes in the industrial and commercial centers, who require increasing numbers to supply their developing wants. In trade and transportation occupations, while the number of white wage-earners increased 25.2 per cent from 1890 to 1900, the Negro wage-earners increased 39.1 per cent during the same decade. For the same period, in manufacturing and mechanical pursuits, the white workers increased 6.1 per cent and the Negro workers increased 12.1 per cent. This indicates the dependence of the growing industry of the South upon its black male workers and shows how strong upon them is the economic pull.

For the females, the increases are no less telling, especially for Negro workers. In ten selected occupations for Southern cities, the white female workers decreased 29.1 per cent and the Negro female workers increased 36 per cent from 1890 to 1900. The decrease for the whites was due to an excessive decrease among dressmakers, milliners and seamstresses, which may be a discrepancy of the census returns.

The full list of selected occupations in Southern cities for 1890 and 1900 are given in full in Table IV, following:


Table IV. Increase of White and Negro Wage-earners in Selected Occupations, Southern Cities, 1890-1900.[A]

Occupation. Male.
No. of cities. Native white. Negro.
1890. 1900. Per cent increase. 1890. 1900. Per cent increase.
Domestic and personal service 29,407 41,854 42.3 54,179 71,047 31.1
Barbers, hairdressers 10 1,436 2,208 1,946 2,317
Bartenders 8 1,688 2,486 277 389
Laborers (not specified) 10 19,843 27,759 35,868 51,346
Restaurant and saloon keepers 9 1,577 2,107 377 474
Servants and waiters 10 1,395 1,128 15,358 16,071
Watchmen, policemen, detectives, etc. 10 3,441 6,166 353 450
Trade and transportation 71,291 89,294 25.2 18,305 25,459 39.1
Agents, collectors and commercial travelers 10 8,571 13,031 287 411
Bankers, brokers and officials (bank) 8 2,309 1,824 76 13
Draymen, hackmen, teamsters 10 6,385 8,117 11,246 14,545
Messengers, packers, porters, etc.[B] 9 3,302 4,486 3,554 6,225
Steam railway employees 10 11,033 11,532 2,213 3,048
Street railway employees 8 1,987 3,366 85 170
Bookkeepers, accountants, etc.[C] 10 37,704 46,638 844 1,057
Manufacturing and mechanical pursuits 55,236 64,288 16.3 11,548 12,887 11.6
Bakers and butchers 9 4,111 4,512 632 640
Blacksmiths[D] 10 3,722 4,003 852 935
Boot and shoemakers and repairers 10 2,195 1,816 1,184 965
Carpenters and joiners 10 12,947 12,394 3,029 2,762
Cotton and textile mill operatives 7 2,648 2,534 258 281
Engineers, firemen (not locomotive) 10 3,379 5,151 881 1,224
Iron and steel workers 9 3,366 4,808 779 752
Machinists 10 5,086 8,088 92 174
Marble and stone cutters 5 1,009 906 150 149
Masons (brick and stone) 6 2,663 2,362 731 1,264
Painters, glaziers, varnishers 10 6,807 7,372 875 782
Plasterers 7 672 633 886 811
Plumbers, gas and steam fitters 7 1,925 2,646 113 151
Saw and planing mill employees 7 2,543 4,409 749 1,062
Tailors 10 2,163 2,654 337 307
Total 155,934 195,436 25.3 84,032 109,393 30.2

Occupation. Female.
No. of cities. Native white. Negro.
1890. 1900. Per cent increase. 1890. 1900. Per cent increase.
Housekeepers and stewardesses 10 1,475 1,956 752 513
Laborers (not specified) 10 332 712 676 901
Laundresses 10 1,543 2,409 25,968 41,386
Nurses and midwives 10 781 2,472 1,097 3,691
Servants[E] 10 10,176 9,983 47,198 56,729
Saleswomen 7 2,633 4,808 37 28
Dressmakers, milliners, seamstresses 10 41,313 22,007 6,528 6,859
Tailoresses 6 2,814 2,950 164 131
Total 61,067 47,297[F] 29.1[F] 81,027 110,238 36.0

NOTES FOR TABLE IV.

[A] Figures for 1890 from Eleventh Census, Pop., Part ii, pp. 630-703; for 1900, Twelfth Census, Occupations, Table 43. The cities are from the list in Tables III and IV supra.

[B] Includes office-boys, shippers, and helpers in stores in 1900, probably not separated in 1890.

[C] Includes clerks and copyists.

[D] Includes some wheelwrights for all cities except one.

[E] Includes waitresses in 1900.

[F] Decrease.


The evidence, then, that the economic call of Southern cities has received response from Negroes as from whites is fairly conclusive. That the economic motive of the Negro has had a large place in causing his migration to urban centers is further shown by the testimony of Negro wage-earners in a Northern city.

In a personal canvass in New York City, 365 wage-earners were asked their reasons for coming to New York City. In reply to the question put in this direct manner 210 out of the total 365 wage-earners gave replies; of these, 99 or 47.1 per cent gave answers that are easily classified as economic. The other replies have been grouped under "family" reasons, 68 or 32.4 per cent, and "individual" reasons, 43 or 20.5 per cent. Many cases in the last two groupings, as appear below (pp. 31-32), would probably be seen to have an underlying economic cause, if we knew more of their history. The 99 answers classed as economic were as follows:


Table V. Economic Reasons Given by 99 Wage-Earners for Coming to New York City, 1909.

To "get work" or "find work" 38
To secure "better wages" or "more money" 19
With former employers 18
To complete trade training 2
To engage in work previously assured 4
To "better my condition" 15
"Business low at home" 1
"Wanted to buy house at home by (with) money made here" 1
"Seeking business" 1
Total 99

This evidence is further corroborated by a record of the wages of 64 of the 365 wage-earners before and after their coming to New York City. For 38 males and 26 females statements of the wages received just previously to their coming to New York City and of their present wages were secured. These figures are presented because they suggest that a wider survey of such facts would probably be in line with the body of data given above. For instance, of 37 men, the median weekly wage before their coming to New York City was in the wage-group $6.00 to $6.99, and after coming, the median weekly wage increased so that it was in the wage-group $10.00 to $10.99. Of the 26 women, the median weekly wage was in the wage-group $4.00 to $4.99 before their coming to New York City and advanced so that it was in the group $6.00 to $6.99 after coming. These facts indicate a decided response to the higher wage attraction of New York City. It should be remarked that the wage-earner in his migration to secure higher wages seldom takes into consideration the higher cost of living in New York City. Table VI, following, gives the details of the comparison:


Table VI. Weekly Wages Received by 64 Individuals Before and After Coming to New York City, 1909.

Wages. Males. Females.
Before. After. Before. After.
Less than $3.00 9
$3.00-$3.99 8 3 3
$4.00-$4.99 3 3 3
$5.00-$5.99 6 3 6 3
$6.00-$6.99 6 3 1 7
$7.00-$7.99 1 8 2 6
$8.00-$8.99 4 2
$9.00-$9.99 4 2 2
$10.00-$10.99 3 5
$11.00-$11.99 1 4
$12.00-$12.99 1 2
$13.00 and over 4 9[A]
Total 37 38 26 26

[A] One individual replied "less than now in New York City."


In the economic movement to the Northern cities, the activity of employment agencies (especially for female domestic help) with drummers and agents in Southern communities has served to spread tales of high wages and to provide transportation for large numbers.[11] Again, many who have been to the urban centers return for visits to their more rural home communities with show of better wages in dress, in cash and in conversation[12].

The conclusion of the matter, therefore, is that the Negro is responding to the call of commerce and industry and is coming to the urban centers under economic influences similar to those that move his fellows.

III. Secondary or Individual Causes of the Negro's Movement Cityward.—It requires only a brief survey of the legislation in several of the Southern states to understand that this has played a part in uprooting the population from the soil and transplanting it in the urban centers.

The trend of legislation everywhere has been to make the city attractive at the expense of the rural districts. First among these measures have been the improved educational facilities provided by municipal authorities. In the South, this has come since 1865. Parks and recreation centers are rapidly being added. General regulation of rights and privileges has been made with the city in the foreground, and many another measure has favored the urban centers.

Labor legislation in the South that affects the Negro population has been of two kinds, aside from the laws to regulate or prohibit the exodus of laborers through the activity of labor agents or runners[13]: (1) that applying to the industrial centers and serving to make conditions of labor on railroads, in mines, and other places where Negroes are employed more attractive and payment of wages more certain and frequent than in the case of labor upon the farm and plantation; (2) that dealing with the relations of landlord and tenant which in practical operation often makes the life of the tenant and farm-hand very hard. Coupled with the ignorance of the usual Negro peasant, these laws are sometimes tools of coercion.[14]

Another line of secondary or individual causes is shown in the reasons for coming to New York City given by wage-earners mentioned above (p. 27). The tabulation of answers indicates that the influences drawing individuals to New York City are, on the one hand, family relationships. These cases, 68 or 32.4 per cent of the 210 replies noted above, have been classified as those who came because of parents, because of husband or wife, or because of other relatives. On the other hand, there are the individual inclinations. The latter, 43 or 20.5 per cent of the 210 replies, are grouped under restlessness, attraction of New York City, unattractiveness of former residence, and miscellaneous. These groupings and designations are given as suggestive only to facilitate the understanding of the mental attitude of the Negro wage-earner. Their more or less economic tinge may be seen. The reasons classified as "family" and as "individual" are reported in detail in Table VII, following:


Table VII. Reasons given in 1909 By Wage-earners Showing why they Came to New York City, 1909.

Family reasons (68 or 32.4 per cent, of 210). Total.
On account of parents. On account of husband or wife. On account of other relatives.
"Brought here by parents" 12 "Relatives of wife here" 1 "A son here" 2  
"With mother" 6 "Wife here" 1 To visit a brother and remained" 5  
"Came with mother who was here" 4 "To follow husband" 1 "Had a sister here" 9  
"Father was here" 2 "Came with husband" 7 "My health was bad and came to live with sister" 1  
"On account of death of father" 1 "My husband was working on a ship coming here" 1 To live with other relatives on account of death of mother 4  
"Father transferred in revenue service" 1     Through influence of other relatives 10  
Total 26 Total 11 Total 31 68

Individual reasons (43 or 20.5 per cent of 210). Total—43.
Restlessness.—16 Attraction of New York City.—15 Former residence, unattractive.—6
"Thought I would like the place as a change;" wanted "to be goin somewhere." "I wanted to come out this way." "To say I was leaving home like everybody else." (From St. Martin's Island.)  
"Was in Rhode Island and wanted a change." "Wanted to come to a larger (place); to travel to see the world." "Got tired of Boston and came to New York."  
"Thought I'd like to make a change." "Passing through several summers; stopped." "Got tired of Virginia; came to visit friend; remained."  
"Wanted to make a change." "Came out with friends who were coming; been back and forth." "Got tired of Baltimore; thought I'd see some of New York."  
"To change cities and see New York." "Was running on the boat to New York and stopped for a while." "Got tired of home, that's all."  
"Thought I would like change; to be going somewhere." "Just to see New York; was traveling and stopped." "To get away from home for a change."  
"Just for a change." "Took a notion to come; wanted to come North." Miscellaneous.—6  
"Just for a change." "Liked New York after seeing it as a sailor in the Navy." "Came to get married."  
"Thought I'd make a change; came North to try it." "Thought I would like New York." "Stopped on way to Boston, robbed in Jersey City."  
"Just to be coming." (To New York) "Thought I'd like New York." "Came to America to go to school." (From S. Hampton, Bermuda.)  
"For recreation; to change cities." "Wanted to see the place." "To learn architecture."  
"Traveling and stopped." "To see the place and be with sister." "To visit friends; got married."  
"Split the difference of time." "To see the city; friend wrote me of sights of the great city." "To see and learn and improve my ability."  
"Felt like traveling." "Heard talk of enjoyable life here."    
"Had a roaming mind—came here from Chicago." "Came here from Cincinnati; had read a great deal of New York City and wanted to see it."    
"Felt like traveling."      

Another individual cause operates especially upon the more able and intelligent classes and sends them to Northern cities. The restriction by "Jim Crow" legislation and by custom of the rights and privileges of persons of color in Southern communities leads some of them to migrate North. They long for a larger liberty for themselves and particularly for their children, which the hard conditions of Southern communities do not give. They come North to gain this and to escape the proscriptions.[15] They settle in the cities. A similar force probably operates in a few sections of the South to send Negro families to the security of the urban centers.[16]

The final conclusion from these facts concerning the causes operating upon the Negro population has been clearly indicated in the above discussion. Such fundamental economic and social causes do not cease to operate suddenly. So far as the development of the South is concerned, the agricultural, industrial and commercial movement is in its infancy, and it will doubtless be of an indefinite growth. The secondary and individual causes will continue to play their part. The Negro will be affected in a manner similar to that of the Southern white population. Any rural improvement or "back-to-the-land" movement should recognize that along with the whites, Negroes will continue to migrate to the urban centers and that they will come to the cities in comparatively large numbers to stay. The problem alike of statesman, race leader, and philanthropist is to understand the conditions of segregation and oppositions due to race prejudices that are arising as a sequel to this urban concentration and to co-operate with the Negro in his effort to learn to live in the city as well as the country.

Although it requires serious attention, the situation is a hopeful one. Improvement in the living and working conditions has its effect upon the health and morals of Negroes just as it has in the case of other elements of the population. Intelligence is essentially a matter of education and training. Good housing, pure milk and water supply, sufficient food and clothing, which adequate wages allow, street and sewer sanitation, have their direct effect upon health and physique. And municipal protection and freedom from the pressure of the less moral elements of the environing group go a long way toward elevating standards of morality. In spite of the limits which the neglect and prejudice of a white public sets to opportunities for improvement, Negroes do show progress along these lines.

Speaking first of the health of Negroes in cities, an index is given in the general death-rate.[17] In the period from 1871 to 1904, the death rate for the white and Negro populations of several Southern cities is summarized by Mr. Hoffman.[18] Of the consolidated death-rate of the white population, he says,

For only two cities are the returns complete for the entire period of thirty-four years. The tendency of the rate has been persistently downward from 26.7 per 1,000 in 1871 to 20.6 in 1886 and 17.4 in 1904. Commencing with the rate for the year 1871, the general death-rate of the white population of Southern cities shows an upward direction at different times during twelve years, and a downward direction during twenty-one years, following in this respect practically the same course as the corresponding death-rate for Northern and Western cities combined. The year of maximum mortality was 1878, due to a yellow fever epidemic, while the year of minimum mortality was, as in the case of the Northern and Western cities, 1903.

In reference to the table for the Negro population he says,[19]

Without exception, the death-rates are materially in excess of the corresponding death-rates of the white population, but there has also been in this case a persistent decline in the general death-rate from 38.1 per 1,000 in 1871 to 32.9 in 1886 and 28.1 in 1904. Commencing with the rate for the year 1871, the general death-rate of the colored population of Southern cities at different times assumed an upward direction during fifteen years and a downward direction during eighteen years, departing in this respect from the corresponding mortality of the white population of Southern cities and the general population of Northern and Western cities, the tendency of which was more distinctly towards a definite improvement. The year of maximum mortality for the colored population was 1873, while the year of minimum mortality was 1903.

The general correspondence and few divergencies of the two death-rates are more clearly seen from the following diagram,[20] adapted from Hoffman's study already cited:

Diagram II.

Diagram II: The General Death Rate of American Cities 1871-1904 (after Hoffman)

Other data[21] for two of the cities investigated by Mr. Hoffman, and for three other cities (Atlanta, Ga., Charleston, S.C., and Richmond, Va.) from 1882 to 1905 furnish results similar to his and indicate likewise that while the general death-rate for the Negro population is uniformly in excess of that of the white, there is a tendency downward. For example, in Atlanta, Ga., the death-rates from 1882 to 1885 were for the white population, 18.22 per 1,000, Negro, 37.96; from 1886 to 1890, white, 19.25, Negro, 33.41; from 1891 to 1905, white, 18.03 per 1,000, Negro, 32.76. Baltimore, Md., Charleston, S.C., Memphis, Tenn., and Richmond, Va., show a similar decrease, except that the white and Negro populations of Baltimore show an increase in the third period, 1891 to 1905, and the rate of the Negro population of Charleston increased in the second period, 1886 to 1890.

We see, then, that while the death-rate of Negroes in Southern cities has been considerably in excess of that of the whites, there has been at the same time a similar tendency toward improvement.

And where there is unprejudiced effort the death-rate among Negroes is affected favorably by improved living conditions. The chief health-officer of Richmond, Va., Dr. E.C. Levy, has sounded a note which is not mere prophecy.[22] He said, in 1906, "There is no doubt whatsoever but that the introduction of better sanitation among the colored people would have great influence on their high death-rate, but whether, after all, it can be brought down as low as the white rate, is a matter which can not be foretold." Again, in 1907, he says,

We must clearly face the issue that the first fruits of improved sanitation in Richmond will most probably be seen in a lowering of the death-rate among the colored people, as conditions among them are so much worse at present, but this in turn will gradually react on the white race.

And, in 1908, this significant paragraph occurs in his report:

The white death-rate in Richmond during 1908 was 17.48 per 1000; the colored rate was 29.21 per 1000. Although the colored rate was thus 67 per cent higher than the white rate, the decrease in the colored rate from 1907 was greater than the decrease in the white rate, the 1907 rates being 18.11 for whites and 32.99 for Negroes.

Out of a total decrease of 166 in the number of deaths in 1908 compared with 1907, the white decrease was 27, while the colored decrease was 139. From the time that I entered office I have predicted that improved sanitation would benefit the Colored race more quickly than the white, and the figures above given justify this conclusion.

The statement of this health officer points to experience rather than to prejudiced notions about the physical weaknesses of Negroes.

From both the statistician and the sanitarian, therefore, comes the word that while the health of Negroes in cities is worse than that of whites, it shows a tendency to improve similar to that of the white population when a fairly impartial treatment is accorded.

As with health, so with other phases of the Negro's city life. There is no place for pessimism. Improvements in intelligence and in moral conditions can not be counted by case and set down in figures and tables.[23] But any one at all familiar either by reading or recollection with the condition of the Negro at the beginning of his freedom, who now takes an impartial and unprejudiced view of his intellectual and social life in urban communities, will come to no other conclusion than that in the face of peculiar whims and prejudices a large and increasing number in the group is arising to the full consciousness of a freeman and has assimilated the best that America affords in morals and intelligence; and that they are vitally concerned for the uplift of themselves and their people, persistently seeking to partake of all that makes for progress.[24]

For the whole Negro population in cities some light is thrown upon developments by the few facts at hand on crime among Negroes.[25] Statistics of crime are, of course, of limited worth in judging of moral conditions. Arrests and prison commitments have many factors which figures do not show and are quite as much a commentary upon the white communities at large as upon the unfortunate Negro law-breakers. Yet, along with other facts, these records of crime are a part of the social barometer.

An analysis of three periods of crime (prior to 1866-1867; 1867 to 1880, and 1880 to 1903) made by Mr. Monroe N. Work gives indicative results. Speaking of arrests per thousand of the Negro population in nine cities, he says,[26]