+----------+-----------+--------+----------+-------+
| |Kensington.|Hackney.|Islington.|LONDON.|
| | | | | |
+----------+-----------+--------+----------+-------+
|=All ages=| =149·8= |=122·4= | =113·3= |=112·3=|
|Under 5} | | | | |
| years } | 99·9 | 102·0 | 97·9 | 99·9 |
| 5-10 | 105·1 | 103·3 | 100·4 | 101·1 |
| 10-15 | 122·1 | 110·2 | 104·3 | 103·9 |
| 15-20 | 172·9 | 145·0 | 123·4 | 114·7 |
| 20-25 | 195·9 | 142·3 | 118·9 | 112·9 |
| 25-30 | 187·2 | 128·1 | 115·3 | 110·7 |
| 30-35 | 171·9 | 120·0 | 111·9 | 114·5 |
|=35-45= | =152·2= |=118·9= | =111·7= |=111·8=|
| 45-55 | 153·6 | 125·1 | 120·4 | 117·0 |
+----------+-----------+--------+----------+-------+
+----------+--------+-----------+----------+--------------+
| | St. |Shoreditch.| Bethnal |_Whitechapel._|
| |Pancras.| | Green. | |
+----------+--------+-----------+----------+--------------+
|=All ages=|=109·9= | =105·2= | =102·9= | _93·4_ |
|Under 5} | | | | |
| years } | 97·2 | 102·3 | 99·1 | _103·6_ |
| 5-10 | 104·5 | 101·3 | 98·6 | _101·9_ |
| 10-15 | 105·4 | 102·2 | 102·5 | _102·1_ |
| 15-20 | 107·3 | 98·3[1] | 98·1[1]| _100·0_ |
| 20-25 | 108·5 | 104·5 | 101·7 | _83·0_ |
| 25-30 | 109·4 | 100·8 | 105·0 | _82·1_ |
| 30-35 | 108·1 | 102·7 | 102·5 | _82·4_ |
|=35-45= |=110·3= | =104·8= | =101·6= | =89·4= |
| 45-55 | 118·3 | 111·6 | 110·8 | _92·4_ |
+----------+--------+-----------+----------+--------------+
[1] I have made no attempt to estimate the error introduced into the
Census by falsehood.
Taking the Census returns for 1881, and comparing England and Wales
with London, we find that, whereas in the former there were 105 females
to 100 males, in the latter there were 112 females to 100 males. Here
at once we have a marked local difference, and if we take special
districts of London and compare them with each other we shall find a
greater disparity.
According to Mr. Charles Booth’s classification in “Labour and
Life,”[2] Kensington has 30·4 per cent. of middle and upper class
people (classes _G._ and _H._), Hackney 24·2, Islington 20·9, London
17·8, Pancras 15·2. The percentage of these classes in Shoreditch,
Bethnal Green, and Whitechapel is too small to be taken into account,
but Shoreditch has 59·8 per cent. “in comfort,” while Bethnal Green
has 55·4. The order of these districts is, therefore, exactly the same
whether we arrange them according to preponderance of females over
males, or according to well-being. Whitechapel is set apart from the
rest, most probably by the peculiar effects of the Jewish immigration.
Putting aside for the moment the question whether the preponderance
is entirely due to the servant class, there can be little doubt that
it is connected with the servant-keeping classes. Between the ages
of thirty-five and forty-five the merely migrant portion of the
community seem to have disappeared, large numbers of shop-assistants,
domestic servants, etc., having married and settled down amongst their
own class. Between these ages but a small percentage of unmarried
people marry; they are, or should be, in the prime of life, and for
several reasons it is a period to notice, especially in estimating the
proportion of men or women who remain unmarried.
[2] For brevity I use the letters assigned by Mr. Booth to the various
classes, with the signification he has attached to them, viz.:
_Poor._
_A._ The lowest class of occasional labourers, loafers and
semi-criminals.
_B._ Casual earnings.
_C._ Intermittent earnings.
_D._ Small regular earnings.
_In Comfort._
_E._ Regular standard earnings.
_F._ Higher-class labour.
_G._ Lower middle class.
_H._ Upper middle class, etc.
It is difficult to decide whether we should compare the number of
unmarried women with the number of married women only, or with the
number of married women and widows. If our object is to find the
percentage of women who marry, widows should be included with married
women; if we wish to estimate the number of women who may have to
support themselves, a large number of widows should be added to the
number of spinsters. Except for the age period from 35 to 45, widows
are not considered here at all.[3]
[3] No allowance has been made for false returns as to civil condition.
Men in the wealthier districts who return themselves as single,
although supporting women in another class, should be regarded as
married; but the women themselves for the present purpose are rightly
treated as married or widowed in accordance with their Census returns.