THE STANDARD OF LIVING (_continued_)
The standard of living of any family or individual[222] is the resultant
of two principal factors. These are the desires and appetites of the
individual or family and the amount of income available for the
gratification of those desires and appetites. The casual observer, in
forming his estimate of the immigrant, is in danger of forgetting the
second of these factors, and of assuming that because the immigrant is
found living in a certain status, he is therefore satisfied with that
status and has no ambition to change it. It has already been hinted, in
the foregoing paragraphs, that this is not the case. A full
understanding of the limitations under which the immigrant is placed can
come only with a study of the customary wages or income of the class to
which he belongs.
AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS OF EMPLOYEES IN THE INDUSTRIES SPECIFIED[223]
═══════════════════════════════╤════════════╤══════════════════════════
INDUSTRY │PER CENT OF │ AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS
│ EMPLOYEES │
│FOREIGN-BORN│
───────────────────────────────┼────────────┼─────────┬────────┬───────
„ │ „ │Males, 18│ Male │Average
│ │ or Over │Heads of│Family
│ │ │Families│Income
───────────────────────────────┼────────────┼─────────┼────────┼───────
Iron and steel manufacturing │ 57.7│ $346│ $409│ $568
Slaughtering and meat │ │ │ │
packing │ 60.7│ 557│ 578│ 781
Bituminous coal mining │ 61.9│ 443│ 451│ 577
Glass manufacturing │ 39.3│ 574│ 596│ 755
Woolen and worsted │ │ │ │
manufacturing │ 61.9│ 346│ 400│ 661
Silk goods manufacturing │ │ │ │
and dyeing │ 34.3│ 431│ 448│ 635
Cotton goods manufacturing │ 68.7│ [224] │ 470│ 491
Clothing manufacturing │ 72.2│ 513│ 530│ 713
Boot and shoe manufacturing │ 27.3│ 502│ 573│ 765
Furniture manufacturing │ 59.1│ 575│ 598│ 769
Collar, cuff, and shirt │ │ │ │
manufacturing │ 13.4│ 637│ 662│ 861
Leather tanning, currying, │ │ │ │
and finishing │ 67.0│ 431│ 511│ 671
Glove manufacturing │ 33.5│ 625│ 650│ 904
Oil refining │ 66.7│ 591│ 662│ 828
Sugar refining │ 85.3│ 522│ 549│ 661
Cigars and tobacco │ 32.6│1.92[225]│ │
manufacturing │ │ │ │
═══════════════════════════════╧════════════╧═════════╧════════╧═══════
Footnote 223:
Compiled from Rept. Imm. Com., Imms. in Mfg. and Min., Abs.
Footnote 224:
Not given.
Footnote 225:
Daily wage only given.
The matter of wages is one of the easiest aspects of the life of the
immigrant about which to secure reliable data. It lends itself readily
to exact measurement, averaging, and tabulation. It is a subject upon
which the immigrant himself can give accurate information if he is so
inclined. As a result, there is a considerable mass of data in regard to
the earnings of the foreign-born, and it is possible to make trustworthy
generalizations thereupon. The latest and most inclusive figures on this
point are those furnished by the Immigration Commission in its various
reports. Foremost among these stands the report of Immigrants in
Manufacturing and Mining, which presents the results of a thoroughgoing
investigation of twenty of the leading industries of the country, and a
less detailed study of sixteen others, covering in all 17,141 households
and 503,732 individuals. The great majority of these are foreign-born,
but there is a sufficient number of native-born, both of native and
foreign parentage, to serve the purposes of comparison. The table on the
previous page gives the average annual earnings of employees and the
average family income in the different industries.
A noteworthy feature of the above table is the general excess of average
family earnings over the average earnings of heads of families, showing
the extent to which other members of the family besides the head
contribute to the family support.
The average weekly earnings of male employees, 18 years of age or over,
distributed according to nativity, are as follows. (The table includes
over 200,000 individuals.)
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS OF MALE EMPLOYEES, 18 YEARS OF AGE
OR OVER, BY NATIVITY[226]
NATIVITY AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS
Native-born white of native father $14.37
Native-born of foreign father 13.89
Foreign-born 11.92
Footnote 226:
Rept. Imm. Com., Imms. in Mfg. and Min., Abs. p. 91.
There is a marked difference between races in this respect. The lowest
figures among the foreign-born were: Albanian, $8.07; Greek, $8.41;
Portuguese, $8.10; Syrian, $8.12; Turkish, $7.65. Some of the
foreign-born rank well above the natives, as, for instance: Norwegian,
$15.28; Scotch, $15.24; Scotch-Irish, $15.13; Swedish, $15.36; Welsh,
$22.02.
The average yearly earnings (approximate) of male employees 18 years of
age or over were as follows:
AVERAGE YEARLY EARNINGS (APPROXIMATE) OF MALE EMPLOYEES,
18 YEARS OF AGE OR OVER, BY NATIVITY[227]
NATIVITY AVERAGE YEARLY EARNINGS
Native-born white of native father $666
Native-born of foreign father 566
Foreign-born 455
Footnote 227:
_Ibid._, p. 131.
In this table, the decrease of earnings of approximately $100 from class
to class is striking.
The average family income was as follows:
AVERAGE ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME, BY NATIVITY OF HEAD OF
FAMILY[228]
NATIVITY AVERAGE FAMILY INCOME
Native-born white of native father $865
Native-born of foreign father 866
Foreign-born 704
Footnote 228:
_Ibid._, p. 136.
Comparing the last two tables, and noting that while the average yearly
earnings of native-born male employees of foreign parentage are $100
less than those of the native-born of native parentage, yet the family
income of the native-born of foreign parentage is $1 more than that of
the native-born of native parentage, the obvious conclusion might be
that the native-born of foreign parentage are more inclined to rely upon
some one besides the head of the family for part of the income than are
the native-born of native parentage. Closer examination, however, proves
that this is not the case. The following table gives the percentages of
families of different nativities which receive the entire income from
the husband.
PER CENT OF FAMILIES HAVING ENTIRE INCOME
FROM THE HUSBAND, BY NATIVITY[229]
NATIVITY PER CENT
Native-born white of native father 58.4
Native-born of foreign father 61.3
Foreign-born 38.0
Footnote 229:
Rept. Imm. Com., Imms. in Mfg. and Min., Abs., p. 139.
Thus there is a smaller proportion of families among the native-born of
foreign fathers who rely upon other members of the family than the
husband for part of the family income than of the native-born of native
father. It appears that the explanation of the peculiarity which has
been noticed must be either that only the more prosperous of the
native-born of foreign parentage are heads of families, or that those
families of this class which do receive income from other sources than
the husband receive a much greater total amount than among the
native-born of native father, so as to raise the average. The former
explanation seems the more probable, for while 67.3 per cent of the male
native-born white employees of native fathers, 20 years of age or over,
were married, only 56.5 per cent of the native-born of foreign fathers
of the same age were married. Native-born employees of foreign parentage
who are old enough to be the heads of families are predominantly
representatives of the old immigration, and hence stand high on the wage
scale. The very small percentage of families among the foreign-born
which derive their entire income from the husband indicates the extent
to which the children of this class contribute to the family support,
and also the extent to which boarders are taken.
Figures from other sources corroborate, in general, the showing made in
the foregoing tables, with some differences in detail. The Immigration
Commission in one of its other reports, namely that on Immigrants in
Cities, gives the average approximate yearly earnings of over 10,000
male wage workers 18 years of age or over as follows: native-born white
of native father, $595; native-born of foreign father, $526;
foreign-born, $385.[230] These figures are less, throughout, than those
presented in the foregoing tables, and seem to indicate that the average
of wages in cities is less than in the general run of organized
industries throughout the country. It is probable that a census of city
workers would include many in insignificant industries, and in
occupations which could hardly be classed as industries, where the wage
scale is low.
The earnings of agricultural laborers on the farms of western New York
range from $1.25 to $1.75 per day of ten hours. South Italian families
of four or five members, engaged in this kind of work, average from $350
to $450 for the season, extending from April to November. Poles, working
as general farm laborers the year round, earn from $18 to $20 per
month.[231] Among the anthracite coal miners of Pennsylvania, the
average yearly wage of the contract miners, who make up about
twenty-five per cent of persons employed about the mines, is estimated
at about $600 per year, while “adults in other classes of mine workers,
who form over sixty per cent of the labor force, do not receive an
annual average wage of $450.”[232] In the extensive array of wage
figures given by Mr. Streightoff, distinction is not made between
natives and immigrants, but the general showing harmonizes so well with
what has already been given as to obviate the necessity of going into
this question in further detail.[233] We are justified in setting down
the average earnings of wage-working adult male immigrants as from $350
to $650 per year, and the average annual income of immigrant families at
from $500 to $900.
The figures given for individual immigrant incomes have been confined to
male workers, for the reasons that they are representative, and are of
primary importance in determining the status of the immigrant family in
this country. The wages of female workers range on the average from 30
to 40 per cent below those of males. Full comparisons are given in the
volume of the Immigration Commission Report on Immigrants in
Manufacturing and Mining.
The next question which arises is, to what degree are these incomes, of
individuals and families, adequate to furnish proper support to an
average family of five persons? This problem involves the determination
of the minimum amount on which a family can live in decency under
existing conditions in America. Numerous efforts have been made to solve
this question. The estimate of the Bureau of Statistics of Massachusetts
is $754.[234] The Charity Organization Society of Buffalo regards $634 a
year as the “lowest tolerable budget which will allow the bare decencies
of life for a family of five.”[235] A special committee of the New York
State Conference of Charities and Corrections in 1907 made the following
estimates as to the income necessary for a family of five persons in New
York City.
“$600–$700 is wholly inadequate to maintain a proper standard of living,
and no self-respecting family should be asked or expected to live on
such an income.”
“With an income of between $700–$800 a family can barely support itself,
provided it is subject to no extraordinary expenditures by reason of
sickness, death, or other untoward circumstances. Such a family can live
without charitable assistance through exceptional management and in the
absence of emergencies.”
“$825 is sufficient for the average family of five individuals,
comprising the father, mother, and three children under 14 years of age
to maintain a fairly proper standard of living in the Borough of
Manhattan.”
Mr. Streightoff summarizes the evidence in the following words: “It is,
then, conservative to set $650 as the extreme low limit of the Living
Wage in cities of the North, East, and West. Probably $600 is high
enough for the cities of the South. At this wage there can be no saving,
and a minimum of pleasure.”[236]
The close correspondence of these various estimates gives them a high
degree of credibility. If we fix these standards in mind, and then look
back over the wage scales given on the foregoing pages, we are struck
with the utter inadequacy of the annual incomes of the foreign-born to
meet even these minimum requirements of decency. It is obvious that an
enormous number of immigrant families, if dependent solely on the
earnings of the head of the family, would fall far below any of these
standards, and that many of them, even when adding to their resources by
the labors of wife and children, and the contributions of boarders,
cannot possibly bring the total income up to the minimum limit. Even the
average income in many occupations is far below this minimum, and it
must be considered that while an average indicates that there are some
above, there must also be many below, the line. What must be the
condition of those below! The average family income of the foreign-born
studied in the Immigration Commission’s investigation of the
manufacturing and mining industries was $704. Mr. Frederic Almy states
that 96 per cent of the Poles under investigation in Buffalo earn less
by $110 than the $634 per year which was set as the “lowest tolerable
budget.”[237]
A vast amount of information covering a number of miscellaneous aspects
of human life, which fall under the general head of the standard of
living, is furnished by the Immigration Commission, in its report on the
manufacturing and mining industries. Some of the most important of these
facts are summarized in the following tables.
First, as to the situation of young children in the homes of immigrants.
PER CENT OF CHILDREN 6 AND UNDER 16 YEARS OF AGE[238]
══════════════════════════════════╤════════════════╤════════════════
│ MALE │ FEMALE
──────────────────────────────────┼────┬──────┬────┼────┬──────┬────
„ │ At │ At │ At │ At │ At │ At
│Home│School│Work│Home│School│Work
──────────────────────────────────┼────┼──────┼────┼────┼──────┼────
Native-born white of native father│ 5.4│ 90.9│ 3.6│ 6.9│ 90.5│ 2.6
Native-born of foreign father │10.2│ 83.9│ 5.9│12.6│ 83.5│ 3.9
Foreign-born │13.2│ 77.0│ 9.9│19.1│ 73.6│ 7.3
══════════════════════════════════╧════╧══════╧════╧════╧══════╧════
Footnote 237:
_The Survey_, Feb. 4, 1911, p. 767.
Footnote 238:
Rept. Imm. Com., Imms. in Mfg. and Min., Abs., pp. 194–195.
Among the following races the following per cent of foreign-born male
children of the specified age were at work: German, 13.9; south Italian,
13.3; Lithuanian, 14.3; Portuguese, 15.7; Ruthenian, 14.6; Scotch, 19.0;
Syrian, 22.6.
The following table, showing the per cent of literacy of the employees
studied in these industries, is based on information for 500,329
employees, and hence has a remarkable trustworthiness:
LITERACY OF EMPLOYEES IN MINING AND MANUFACTURING[239]
══════════════════════════════════╤═══════════╤═══════════
NATIVITY │ MALES │ FEMALES
──────────────────────────────────┼───────────┼───────────
„ │ PER CENT │ PER CENT
│ WHO │ WHO
──────────────────────────────────┼─────┬─────┼─────┬─────
„ │ │Read │ │Read
│ │ and │ │ and
│Read │Write│Read │Write
──────────────────────────────────┼─────┼─────┼─────┼─────
Native-born white of native father│ 98.2│ 97.9│ 98.8│ 98.4
Native-born of foreign father │ 99.0│ 98.7│ 99.0│ 98.8
Foreign-born │ 85.6│ 83.6│ 90.8│ 89.2
══════════════════════════════════╧═════╧═════╧═════╧═════
Footnote 239:
_Ibid._, pp. 162–165.
Foreign-born male employees of the following races have the following
literacy, as shown by the per cent who can read and write: south
Italian, 67.6; Macedonian, 67.1; Portuguese, 46.1; Ruthenian, 63.6;
Servian, 69.5; Turkish, 54.1.
From the foregoing table it appears that in respect to literacy the
native-born employees of foreign fathers are superior to the native-born
whites of native fathers, and that the foreign-born females are superior
to the foreign-born males.
The important matter of ability to speak English is forcibly portrayed
in the following table:
PER CENT OF FOREIGN-BORN EMPLOYEES (EXCLUSIVE OF THE
ENGLISH-SPEAKING RACES) WHO SPEAK ENGLISH[240]
═══════════════╤═══════════════╤═══════════════╤═══════════════
NATIVITY │ MALE │ FEMALE │ TOTAL
───────────────┼───────────────┼───────────────┼───────────────
Total │ 55.6│ 38.6│ 53.2
Bulgarian │ 20.3│ 80.0 (only 5)│ 20.6
Danish │ 96.5│ 98.3│ 96.6
German │ 87.5│ 80.2│ 86.8
Greek │ 33.5│ 12.3│ 31.5
Hebrew, Russian│ 74.7│ 75.7│ 75.0
Herzegovinian │ 14.6│ │ 14.6
Italian, south │ 48.7│ 25.8│ 44.4
Magyar │ 46.4│ 24.0│ 45.2
Norwegian │ 96.9│ 91.8│ 96.5
Polish │ 43.5│ 15.5│ 39.1
Portuguese │ 45.2│ 27.0│ 37.8
Slovak │ 55.6│ 26.6│ 55.1
Slovenian │ 51.7│ 30.3│ 50.9
Swedish │ 94.7│ 94.2│ 94.7
═══════════════╧═══════════════╧═══════════════╧═══════════════
Footnote 240:
Rept. Imm. Com., Imms. in Mfg. and Min., Abs., p. 198.
It is thus apparent how large a proportion of our foreign-born laborers
have not even taken the first essential step toward assimilation. This
evil is, of course, practically overcome in the second generation.
Almost all of the native-born persons of foreign fathers, six years of
age or over, speak English, though some races show from 6 to 8 per cent
who do not.
The percentage who can speak English naturally increases with the length
of residence in the United States, until a percentage of 83.1 is reached
for all foreign-born employees who have been in the United States ten
years or more. But even in this group a very low percentage is found
among the Cuban and Spanish cigar makers, of whom almost three fifths
are unable to speak the English language.
The age of the immigrant at the time of arriving in the United States
has a great deal to do with the ability to speak English. The percentage
of those who were under fourteen when they arrived who can speak English
is nearly twice as large as that of those who were fourteen or over. The
reasons for this are the greater adaptability of the younger immigrants,
and their greater opportunities of going to school. The relatively poor
showing of the females is probably due to their greater segregation,
which prevents them from coming in touch with Americans or older
immigrants of other races.
One of the special reports of the Immigration Commission deals with the
children of immigrants in schools and brings out some very significant
facts. Practically all of the information was secured in December, 1908.
Naturally this investigation involved a study of the children of
native-born fathers also. A general investigation was made in the public
schools of thirty cities, including the first twenty cities in point of
population, as shown by the census of 1900, with the exception of
Washington, D.C., Louisville, Ky., and Jersey City, N.J. An
investigation was also carried on in regard to parochial schools in
twenty-four cities, and an investigation of the students in
seventy-seven institutions of higher learning. In addition to this
general investigation, an intensive investigation was made in twelve
cities, including seven cities not in the previous list, making a total
of thirty-seven cities in which public schools were studied. The total
number of public school pupils for whom information was secured was
1,815,217. Thus the investigation was a very inclusive one, and the
results may be taken as representative of educational conditions in the
cities of the entire country.
Of the total number of public school children studied in the
thirty-seven cities, 766,727 were of native-born fathers, and 1,048,490
of foreign-born fathers. The children of native-born white fathers
constituted 39.5 per cent of the total, while among the children of
foreign-born fathers there were the following percentages of the total
number: Hebrews, 17.6; Germans, 11.6; Italians (north and south), 6.4;
total, native-born father, 42.2 per cent; total, foreign-born father,
57.8 per cent.
The different cities show a marked difference in the proportion of
children who come from foreign-born fathers, as the following table will
show:
PER CENT OF PUPILS IN
PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF
FOREIGN-BORN FATHERS
IN SPECIFIED CITIES
CITY PER CENT
Chelsea 74.1
Duluth 74.1
New York 71.5
New Bedford 68.8
Chicago 67.3
Fall River 67.2
Shenandoah 67.1
New Britain 65.3
Boston 63.5
New Orleans 18.1
Kansas City 21.3
Johnstown 24.8
Cincinnati 27.1
Baltimore 28.5
St. Louis 31.9
Los Angeles 32.0
Cedar Rapids 34.2
Haverhill 39.1
“In only 7 of the 37 cities is the proportion of pupils who are children
of native-born white fathers as high as 60 per cent.” Four cities have
less than 30 per cent. The children of German foreign-born fathers are
most numerous in Milwaukee, Detroit, Buffalo, Cleveland, Meriden,
Chicago, Cincinnati, and St. Louis; those of foreign-born Russian Hebrew
fathers in Chelsea, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Newark, and
Baltimore, those of foreign-born south Italian fathers in Providence,
Newark, New York, Yonkers, Buffalo, and Boston.
A smaller proportion of the total number of children of foreign-born
fathers are in the higher grades of the public schools than of the
children of native-born white fathers, as the following table shows:
PER CENT OF PUPILS OF SPECIFIED NATIVITY IN
THE SPECIFIED GRADES
══════════════╤══════════════╤══════════════
GRADE │ NATIVE-BORN │ FOREIGN-BORN
│ WHITE FATHER │ FATHER
──────────────┼──────────────┼──────────────
Kindergarten │ 4.3│ 4.4
Primary grades│ 52.1│ 57.6
Grammar grades│ 34.5│ 33.3
High school │ 9.1│ 4.7
│ —————│ —————
Total │ 100.0│ 100.0
══════════════╧══════════════╧══════════════
The Slovaks, south Italians, and Magyars have the largest percentages in
the kindergartens, and the Portuguese, Lithuanians, Slovaks, south
Italians, and Polish the largest percentages in the primary grades. In
the high schools, the Canadians, other than French, the Scotch, the
native-born white, the Welsh, Germans, Hebrews, and English stand
highest. This is due to two main facts,—the longer residence of these
latter races in the United States, and their greater desire for a high
education for their children, coupled with a greater ability to give it
to them. Especially in the case of the kindergartens are the newer
immigrating races very eager to have their young children looked after
so that the mother can be free to work, or otherwise occupy herself.
Another interesting set of figures is that referring to the amount of
retardation among the pupils of different nativities. By “retardation”
is meant that a pupil is above the “normal” age for the grade in which
he is. In this respect the children of foreign-born fathers of the newer
immigration are decidedly inferior to those of the older immigration.
The latter, in fact, are on the whole superior to the children of
native-born white fathers. Of the total number of children of
foreign-born fathers for whom this information was secured, 77.2 per
cent were born in the United States, and 28.8 per cent were born abroad.
There is a considerably larger proportion of retardation for those
children eight years of age or over who were born abroad than among
those born in the United States. The proportion retarded increases as
the age at the time of arrival in the United States advances. The
proportion of retardation is greater among those children whose fathers
cannot speak English than among those who can, and greater among those
whose fathers have not taken out naturalization papers than among those
who have.
When we turn to the institutions of higher learning, we find a
comparatively small number of foreign-born students, as might be
expected.[241] The percentages for a total of 32,887 students are as
follows:
NATIVITY OF STUDENT PER CENT OF TOTAL
Native-born white of native father 64.0
Native-born of foreign father 25.3
Foreign-born 10.2
The Hebrews stand foremost among the foreign-born.
Of the 221,159 pupils included in the parochial school investigation,
36.5 per cent are children of native-born fathers (36.3 per cent of
native-born white fathers), and 63.5 per cent of foreign-born fathers.
Children of foreign-born Irish fathers number 26.9 per cent of the total
number of pupils, foreign-born German fathers, 9.7 per cent, Polish, 7.1
per cent, and Italian, 7 per cent. In the twenty-four cities in which
information was secured for both public and parochial schools, there
were 1,322,053 pupils in the public schools, and 221,159 pupils in the
parochial schools. In Philadelphia nearly one fourth of the pupils were
in parochial schools.
Information was also secured for teachers in the kindergartens and
elementary grades of the public schools in thirty cities, including
49,067 individuals. Of these, 49.8 per cent were native-born of native
white fathers, and 42.8 per cent native-born of foreign fathers, and 5.8
per cent foreign-born. Of the foreign-born, only six races were
represented by as many as one hundred teachers each, viz. Hebrew,
English, Irish, German, Canadian (other than French), and Scotch.