CHAPTER VII_Japan and the California Problem

FACTS ABOUT THE JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA--POPULATION AND BIRTH RATE

A knowledge of the facts regarding the Japanese population in California

is important, because it has been a point of sharp dispute between those

who insist on exclusion and those who oppose it, the former arguing that

the Japanese are increasing at an amazing rate through immigration,

smuggling, and birth, threatening to overwhelm the white population in the

State, the latter contending that they are not multiplying in a way

menacing to the State of California. The fact that such a dispute prevails

in the matter of the number of Japanese suggests that it is, at least, one

of the crucial points on which the whole problem rests. This is true in

the sense that, if the Japanese in California were decreasing in number as

the American Indians are, it would be totally useless to waste energy in

an attempt to quicken the final extinction. If, on the other hand, they

were to multiply in a progressively higher rate so as to overwhelm the

white population, it would certainly be serious both for California and

for the United States.

Number of Japanese in California.

This being the case, it is but natural that the enemies of the Japanese

should exaggerate the number of Japanese living in California. The leaders

of the movement for excluding Japanese estimate their number as no less

than one hundred thousand. The report of the State Board of Control of

California, prepared for the specific purpose of emphasizing the gravity

of the Japanese problem in California, enumerated the population of

Japanese in that State at the end of December, 1919, as 87,279. This

number turned out to be 13,355 higher than the number reported by the

Foreign Office of Japan,[11] which was based on the Consular registrations

(including American-born offspring of the Japanese) and the count made by

the Japanese Association of America. Most fortunately, the preliminary

publication of a part of the United States Census for 1920 removed the

uncertainty arising from the discrepancy by stating the exact number of

the Japanese in California to be 70,196. The possible cause of the

over-estimation by the Board of Control is to be found in its method of

computation. Instead of counting the actual number of residents, it simply

added the number of net gain from immigration and the excess in birth over

death statistics to the returns of the census of 1910, overlooking the

fact that in the meantime a great number of Japanese were leaving

California for Japan as well as other States of the Union.

The present number of Japanese is a minor matter compared with its dynamic

tendency. The rate of increase of the Japanese population in California in

the past may be easily obtained by comparing the returns of the United

States Census.

The following table indicates the number and rate of decennial increase:

NUMBER OF JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES CENSUS.

===========================================

Year.|Number.|Decennial| Percentage of

| |Increase.|Decennial Increase.

-----|-------|---------|-------------------

1880 | 86| ..... | .......

1890 | 1,147| 1,061 | 1,234 %

1900 | 10,151| 9,004 | 785 %

1910 | 41,356| 31,205 | 307.3%

1920 | 70,196| 28,840 | 69.7%

===========================================

We see from the above table that after half a century of Japanese

immigration to the United States, California's net gain amounts to a

little over 70,000, the number having increased at an average rate of

14,025 per decade, or 1603 per annum. We also observe that the percentage

of decennial increase gradually decreased from 1234 per cent. to 69.7 per

cent.

It is useful to compare this development of the Japanese population with

that of California in general, because it gives an idea of the relative

importance of the Japanese increase. This is shown in the following table,

in which the decennial rates of increase between them are compared:

COMPARISON OF POPULATION INCREASE OF CALIFORNIA AND OF JAPANESE IN

CALIFORNIA.

==================================================================

-----|-----------|-----------|---------|---------|----------------

1880 | 864,694 | ......... | .... | .... | .0099%

1890 | 1,213,398 | 348,704 | 40.3% | 1234 % | .095 %

1900 | 1,485,053 | 271,655 | 22.3% | 785 % | .68 %

1910 | 2,377,549 | 892,496 | 60.0% | 307.3% | 1.73 %

1920 | 3,426,861 | 1,049,312 | 44.1% | 69.7% | 2.04 %

==================================================================

Thus we see that while the percentage of decennial increase of Japanese

has been fast decreasing since the census of 1890, descending from 1234

per cent. to 785 per cent. in the next census, and to 307.3 per cent. in

1910, and 69.7 per cent. in 1920, that of California is headed, on the

whole, towards an increase. We also notice that the percentage of the

Japanese population to the total population of California also shows a

tendency to slow growth, increasing only three tenths of one per cent.

during the last decade. As a general conclusion, therefore, we may say

that the rate of increase of Japanese in California is slowly declining

while that of the total population of California is steadily increasing.

In the next place, how does the status of the Japanese population in

California compare with that in the continental United States? In the

following table, we compare the rate of increase in California and the

United States, and enumerate the percentage of the number of Japanese in

California to the total number of Japanese in the United States:

JAPANESE POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND CALIFORNIA.

=====================================================================

-------------------|-----------|---------|-----------|---------------

1880 | 148 | ...... | ....... | ...... | 58.1%

1890 | 2,039 | 1,891 | 1,277.7%| 1234.0% | 56.2%

1900 | 24,326 | 22,287 | 1,093.0%| 785.0% | 41.7%

1910 | 72,157 | 47,831 | 196.6%| 307.3% | 57.3%

1920 | 119,207 | 47,050 | 65.2%| 69.7% | 58.8%

=====================================================================

The table indicates that the percentage of Japanese in California to the

total number of Japanese in the United States is rather high, justifying

the complaint of the Governor of California that during ten years, between

1910 and 1920, "the Japanese population in California _increased_ 25,592,

but in all of the other States of the United States it _decreased_ 10,873.

Perhaps, in this last-named fact may be found the reason that makes

Oriental immigration a live subject of continued consideration in

California."[12]

The truth of this statement, which in other words means that the cause of

anti-Japanese agitation in California is due to congestion in that one

State, becomes almost indisputable. It is doubly apparent when we consider

the reason why the Chinese no longer constitute the objects of exclusion

in California while the Japanese do. The Chinese have shown, ever since

the launching of the agitation against them in the early '80's, a wise

tendency to disperse into other States, thus avoiding conflict with the

Californians. The Japanese, on the other hand, appear to cling tenaciously

to California, and the more they are maltreated and slandered the more

steadfastly they remain in that State. This is apparently due largely to

the recognition of the desirability of California, even with its

handicaps, over other States, but it is also due to their helplessness to

extricate themselves from the situation in fear of a great financial loss

involved in the change.

The Report of the State Board of Control of California uses the fact of

the decreasing number of Chinese and the increasing number of Japanese in

California as evidence of the success of the Chinese Exclusion Act in

accomplishing its purpose, and of the failure of the "Gentlemen's

Agreement" in restricting Japanese immigration.[13] But, in so doing, it

fails to take into consideration the very fact which it points out

elsewhere, which we have just quoted; namely, that the number of Japanese

has decreased in all of the other States combined while it has increased

in California. It also fails to take into account the fact that the number

of Chinese, contrary to the Japanese tendency, has shown a marked tendency

to grow in eastern and middle western States and to decrease in

California. Thus, for example, the number of Chinese in New England, the

Middle Atlantic, and Eastern and North Central States increased from 401,

1227, and 390 respectively in 1880 to 3499, 8189, and 3415, respectively,

in 1910, while it decreased in the Pacific division from 87,828 to 46,320

in the corresponding period.[14]

The foregoing examination establishes the fact that much of the

anti-Japanese agitation in California is due to the congestion of Japanese

in that one State, as pointed out by the authorities of California, and as

confirmed by the extinction of anti-Chinese sentiment in California,

consequent upon the exodus of large numbers of Chinese from that State.

We have seen that the Japanese population in California increased from 86

in 1880 to 70,196 in 1920 at the annual rate of 1403. We shall now see how

each of the three factors--lawful entrance of Japanese into the United

States, smuggling, and birth--has contributed to this increase.

Immigration.

Without question, the coming of the Japanese who are legally permitted to

enter the United States has been the largest factor contributing to their

increase in California. Of the total Japanese entering the continental

United States since its beginning up to the end of 1920, estimated at

180,000,[15] California claims to have received about two thirds,[16] or

approximately 125,000. Since California's present Japanese population is

70,196, of which about 25,000[17] are American-born children, it means

that out of the total number of Japanese immigrants (125,000) who entered

California, only 45,196 survive now in that State, the rest having either

migrated to other States, or died out, or returned home.

One reason why the Japanese immigration is viewed with so much

apprehension is because the facts of the situation are not rightly

understood. The number of Japanese coming to the United States has

decidedly increased in recent years, especially since the war, the annual

number reaching the ten thousand mark. This would certainly be alarming

were it not for the correspondingly large number of Japanese who returned

every year. The following table shows the percentage of those who returned

out of the total arrivals:

=======================================

Year.|Arrivals.|Returned.| Percentage

| | | of Returned

| | |Against Total

| | | Arrivals.

-----|---------|---------|-------------

1916 | 9,100 | 6,922 | 76%

1917 | 9,159 | 6,581 | 72%

1918 | 11,143 | 7,696 | 69%

1919 | 11,404 | 8,328 | 73%

1920 | 12,868 | 11,662 | 90%

=======================================

The growing number of Japanese coming into America and the increasing high

rate of their return, as shown in the above table, clearly indicate the

fact that the character of the Japanese now entering the United States has

decidedly changed. The explanation of the high rate of Japanese entrance

is to be sought in the growing business, diplomatic, intellectual, and

other relations between America and Japan which the recent war brought

about. In the field of business, the number of branch offices of Japanese

firms employing Japanese clerks and managers rapidly increased in the

large cities of the United States. Students who formerly went to Europe

for study now flock to America and enter the large universities of this

country. Many of the newly rich whom the unique opportunity of the World

War has created, have taken it into their heads to see the post-war

changes in America and Europe. But these Japanese visitors are not

immigrants; they are not coolies; they do not come to America to work and

settle. They will give America no trouble, for they stay in this country

only a brief period of time. They are America's guests, as it were, and

they should not be treated as immigrants. The rough handling of these

visitors, as sometimes happens in the Western States, gives them a bad

impression of the American people at large.

That most of the Japanese now coming to this country are temporary

visitors is shown by the following table which distinguishes non-laborers

from laborers:

===================================================

Year.| Total.|Laborers.|Non-Laborers.|Percentage of

| | | |Non-Laborers

| | | |Against All.

-----|-------|---------|-------------|-------------

1916 | 9,100| 2,956 | 6,144 | 67.5%

1917 | 9,159| 2,838 | 6,321 | 69 %

1918 | 11,143| 2,604 | 8,539 | 77 %

===================================================

"Gentlemen's Agreement."

It is useful to remember the above fact when discussing the workings of

the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement." It is often alleged that Japan has

not been observing the agreement in good faith. Thus Governor Stephens

states:

There can be no doubt that it was the intent of our Government by this

agreement (the "Gentlemen's Agreement") to prevent the further

immigration of Japanese laborers. Unfortunately, however, the

hoped-for results have not been attained. Without imputing to the

Japanese Government any direct knowledge on the subject, the

statistics clearly show a decided increase in Japanese population

since the execution of the so-called "Gentlemen's Agreement." Skillful

evasions have been resorted to in various manners.

Such an accusation appears plausible when it is examined solely in the

light of the high number of annual Japanese arrivals. The accusation,

however, falls to the ground when we consider two other facts already

pointed out; namely, the correspondingly high and ascending rate of

departures, and the increasingly high percentage of non-immigrants against

immigrants.

It is provided in the "Gentlemen's Agreement" that "the Japanese

Government shall issue passports to the continental United States only to

such of its subjects as are non-laborers, or are laborers who in coming to

the continent seek to resume a formerly-acquired domicile, to join a

parent, wife, or children residing here, or to assume active control of an

already possessed interest in a farming enterprise in this country."

Accordingly, the classes of laborers entitled to receive passports have

come to be designated "former residents," "parents, wives, or children of

residents," and "settled agriculturists." Of these, the last item, the

"settled agriculturists," has practically no significance, because under

that class only four entered America since the conclusion of the

agreement. According to the agreement, then, only two classes of

immigrants, former residents and the families of residents, are admitted.

This agreement leaves the question of the admittance of non-laborers

entirely untouched, permitting the Japanese Government to decide as to

who may be classed laborers and who non-laborers. The lack of concrete

understanding between Japan and the United States in this respect is a

grave defect in the agreement. True, the executive orders issued in

connection with the "Gentlemen's Agreement" provide a definition of term

"laborer," and state:

For practical administrative purposes, the term "laborer, skilled and

unskilled," within the meaning of the executive order of February 24,

1913, shall be taken to refer primarily to persons whose work is

essentially physical, or, at least, manual, as farm laborers, street

laborers, factory hands, contractors' men, stablemen, freight

handlers, stevedores, miners, and the like, and to persons whose work

is less physical, but still manual, and who may be highly skilled as

carpenters, stone masons, tile setters, painters, blacksmiths,

mechanics, tailors, printers, and the like; but shall not be taken to

refer to persons whose work is neither distinctively manual nor

mechanical but rather professional, artistic, mercantile, or

clerical--as pharmacists, draftsmen, photographers, designers,

salesmen, bookkeepers, stenographers, copyists, and the like.[19]

The weakness of the provision, however, is in the difficulty it gives rise

to in practical application and in the liability of wrong construction to

be placed by the American public in the administration of the "Gentlemen's

Agreement." The difficulty lies not at all in the lack of mutual

understanding between the American and the Japanese Governments in respect

to this question. The _modus operandi_ arrived at between these two

Governments has worked satisfactorily. But because of the lack of a

specified definition of "non-immigrants" and "immigrants," the distinction

to be made between them, and, consequently, the granting of passports, as

already stated, is left in a large measure to the discretion of the

authorities of the Foreign Office of the Japanese Government.

The foregoing defect and the confusion on the part of the American people

suggest that the adoption of a specific definition of "immigrants" and

"non-immigrants"--in other words, laborers and non-laborers--on the basis

of whether a person is coming to America for work and settlement or for a

temporary visit, seems quite essential.

The Japanese method of distinguishing non-immigrants from immigrants,

however, has not been altogether irrational or arbitrary. The established

custom is that the Government issues two kinds of passports, one with a

lavender color design on the front page with the word "non-immigrant"

stamped on it, and the other with a green color design with the word

"immigrant" printed on the front page. The former is given to those who

desire to go to America for business, educational, or traveling purposes,

expecting to return home after a brief stay, and who have strong financial

assurance. The latter passports, namely, the immigrant's, are given to

those who are entitled to enter America, according to the already

specified provisions of the "Gentlemen's Agreement," viz. "former

residents," "parents, wives, or children of residents," and "settled

agriculturists." The passports, however, are not granted even to these

classes unless they file a petition to the Government with a certificate

from a Japanese Consulate in America certifying the breadwinner in America

to be an honest man, with a clean record, who is capable of comfortably

supporting a family. In this way, although without a definite standard of

regulation, the Japanese Government faithfully adheres to the provisions

of the agreement, even to the point of being charged with an extreme

rigidity. The following table given in the Report of the

Commissioner-General of Immigration shows in detail how the agreement has

been operating:

JAPANESE LABORERS ADMITTED TO CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES 1910 TO 1919.

_According to Annual Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration._

=========================================================================

| In possession of proper passports. |

Fiscal| Entitled to passports under |

Year | "Gentlemen's Agreement." |

Ending|------------------------------------------------------------------

| | and | | to |Passports.|

| | of | | | |

------|----------|----------|---------------|----------|----------|------

1910 | 245 | 373 | 1 | 47 | 39 | 705

1911 | 351 | 268 | .. | 88 | 25 | 732

1912 | 602 | 224 | .. | 60 | 27 | 913

1913 | 1,175 | 178 | .. | 41 | 13 | 1,407

1914 | 1,514 | 119 | .. | 84 | 51 | 1,768

1915 | 1,545 | 585 | 1 | 54 | 29 | 2,214

1916 | 1,695 | 1,199 | 2 | 39 | 78 | 3,013

1917 | 1,647 | 1,115 | .. | 36 | 87 | 2,885

1918 | 1,774 | 507 | .. | 88 | 235 | 2,604

1919 | 1,265 | 422 | .. | 48 | 241 | 1,976

|----------|----------|---------------|----------|----------|------

Total | 11,813 | 4,990 | 4 | 585 | 825 |18,217

=========================================================================

The table indicates that out of the total immigration of 18,217 from 1909

to 1920, 11,813 of this number were people who temporarily visited Japan;

4990 belonged to the families of residents; 4 were "settled

agriculturists," and 585 were persons not entitled, for reasons

unexplained, to passports. It also shows that 825 were persons without

proper passports. The latter category included immigrants bound for

Canada, Mexico, and South America who were sidetracked on the way, those

who lost their passports, as well as deserting seamen and smugglers. For

these cases of illicit endeavors to enter America, the Japanese Government

can hardly be held responsible. It would be absurd to put forth the

negligible number of 585 cases, that are recorded during the period of ten

years as persons who are not entitled to passports, as an evasion of the

"Gentlemen's Agreement" on the part of the Tokyo Government. It is one

thing to point out the defects of the agreement, but it is an entirely

different matter to charge bad faith in its execution.

By way of summary, then, it may be stated that ever since the "Gentlemen's

Agreement" was put into effect in 1907, the number of immigrants has

gradually decreased, those admitted having been mostly former residents,

although the total number of Japanese coming to the United States has

increased, due to the growing number of tourists and business men. The

agreement, as far as its execution is concerned, has been carried out with

the utmost scruple, but it is defective in that it does not clearly

distinguish immigrants from non-immigrants, and this leads to confounding

visitors with immigrants, and hence to the unfounded claim that it is

being ignored, evaded. Judging from the sentiment prevailing in

California, and in other Western States, against the Japanese, it is

desirable that the agreement be so amended as to forbid the advent of all

Japanese, except well-defined non-immigrants and former residents

temporarily visiting Japan. This will prevent the further increase through

immigration of Japanese settlers in California or elsewhere in the United

States. This step is deemed advisable, not that a handful of immigrants as

such is serious, but that the main question at issue--the treatment of

Japanese already in America--becomes thereby liberated from further

complication. It will go far to reduce the fear of Californians, and

thereby alleviate the difficulty of the main issue.

Smuggling.

There is no room for doubt that smuggling is responsible for a part of the

Japanese population in California. From the nature of the case, it is,

however, impossible to estimate the number of Japanese who have entered

the United States through this illegal method. During the visit to

California last summer, of the House sub-Committee on Immigration and

Naturalization for the investigation of Japanese conditions, a rumor was

circulated and published in the principal papers of the country to the

effect that the Committee had discovered amazing facts as to the

systematic smuggling of Japanese into this country through Guaymas. Later,

it was made clear that the rumor owed its source to the machinations of

certain anti-Japanese agitators who willfully concocted the canard. While

it is possible that from the Mexican and Canadian borders a few scores of

Japanese may be smuggled in every year, it is absurd to imagine that any

wholesale smuggling is being practiced through the connivance of Japanese

officials and under the noses of competent officers who patrol the borders

and coasts.

It may also be remembered that Japan and Canada have an agreement

restricting the number of Japanese entering Canada. This renders the

northern borders of the United States comparatively free from the danger

of smuggling. Except through desertion of seamen, which numbered 315 cases

during the past ten years, it is almost impossible to enter secretly by

way of the Pacific Coast. The only danger zone is the Mexican border. But

here again there are good reasons for believing that smuggling from Mexico

cannot be practiced on a large scale. In the first place, the number of

Japanese in Mexico amounts only to 1169,[20] and no passports have been

granted by the Japanese Government since 1908 to laborers who wish to go

to Mexico.[21] In the second place, the American Government would take

care to see that its border-patrol is efficient enough to arrest

smugglers. The Mikado's Government, too, has been sincere in cooperating

with the American authorities to prevent the evasion of the law.

Birth Rate.

The cardinal question relating to the Japanese population in California is

the question of birth rate. Immigration can be restricted, smuggling may

be completely prevented, but the fact of the high birth rate is something

which cannot be very easily combated without infringing upon traditionally

sacred principles and personal freedom. It is quite true that the high

birth rate among the Japanese in California would not have been a serious

matter if the nationalism of America were as broad as that of Ancient

Rome, or if the Japanese were a race which will readily and speedily lose

its identity in the great American melting pot. But the fact remains that

the United States of America is not merely a mixture of different races

and colors; she is a solid, unified, composite country, although she draws

race material from all over the world. Nor are the Japanese a race likely

to amalgamate completely with Americans in a few generations. Thus the

question of Japanese birth rate in America becomes a vital matter,

touching the fundamental questions of national and racial unity in the

United States.

With the importance of the question clearly kept in mind, we shall see

what are the facts as to births among the Japanese in California. The

following table, prepared from the reports of the California State Board

of Health, Bureau of Vital Statistics, shows the number of annual births

of Japanese from 1906 to 1919, and its percentage of the total number of

births in California:

NUMBER OF BIRTHS.

========================================================

Year. |Total Births |Japanese Births| Japanese

|in California.|in California. |Births--Percentage

| | | of Total.

------|--------------|---------------|------------------

1906 | ...... | 134 | ....

1907 | ...... | 221 | ....

1908 | ...... | 455 | ....

1909 | ...... | 682 | ....

1910 | 32,138 | 719 | 2.24%

1911 | 34,828 | 995 | 2.86%

1912 | 39,330 | 1,407 | 3.73%

1913 | 43,852 | 2,215 | 5.05%

1914 | 46,012 | 2,874 | 6.25%

1915 | 48,075 | 3,342 | 6.95%

1916 | 50,638 | 3,721 | 7.35%

1917 | 52,230 | 4,108 | 7.87%

1918 | 55,922 | 4,218 | 7.54%

1919 | 56,527 | 4,378 | 7.75%

|--------------|---------------|

Totals| 459,552 | 29,469 |

========================================================

The table indicates in the first place that the birth rate of California

as a whole is steadily growing, and in the second place that the birth

rate of the Japanese was very low until 1906 or 1907, but since then it

has been rapidly growing. The relative percentage of Japanese births in

the total births of California, however, indicates the tendency to

diminish, having reached the highest mark in 1917, when it was 7.87 per

cent., but decreasing slightly in the last few years.

The exceedingly high birth rate of the Japanese in California becomes

clearer when considered in terms of the rate of birth per thousand of

population. In the year 1919, the number of births in California was 1.79

per thousand population. In Japan, where the birth rate is high, it was

2.53 during the past decade. The birth rate of Japanese in California is

more than three times as high as that for the total of California, and

more than double that in Japan.

There are several reasons for this abnormally high birth rate among the

Japanese in California. In the first place, a large portion of these

Japanese are in the prime of life, and moreover they are selected groups

of vigorous and healthy individuals. Commenting on the age distribution of

Japanese in this country, the report of the Bureau of Census states[22]:

The most noteworthy fact about the age distribution of the Japanese is

their remarkable concentration on the age groups 25 to 44, nearly

two-thirds of the Japanese being in this period of life. Only 4.5 per

cent. of the Japanese are over 45 years of age, as compared with 44.7

per cent. of the Chinese. The explanation is, doubtless, to be found

in the fact that the Japanese represent more recent immigration than

the Chinese.

The truth of this statement was borne out by the recent investigation

conducted by the Japanese Association of San Francisco, which obtained the

following result in thirty-six northern counties of California:

AGE DISTRIBUTION OF JAPANESE IN MIDDLE AND NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 1920.

==========================================

Age. |Male. |Female.|Total. |Percentage

| | | | of Age

| | | | Group.

--------|------|-------|-------|----------

Under 7 | 4,078| 3,786| 7,864| 18.%

8 to 16| 2,035| 1,663| 3,698| 8.%

17 to 40|17,037| 8,535| 25,572| 59.%

Above 40| 5,683| 805| 6,488| 15.%

--------|------|-------|-------|----------

Total |28,833| 14,789| 43,622| 100.

==========================================

Thus, out of the total number of 43,622 investigated, 25,572 or nearly 59

per cent. are between the ages of seventeen to forty, only 5 per cent. of

females being those who passed the age of fertility.

Another reason for the high birth rate of the Japanese in California is

the high percentage of married people. The rate of married people among

the Japanese in California suddenly rose since some ten years ago when a

great number (between 400 and 900 per annum) of wives began to come in

under the popular name, _picture brides_. The ratio maintained between

male and female among the Japanese in California was one to six ten years

ago, but at present, it is one to two.[23] Since it is estimated that

there are 16,195 Japanese wives in California,[24] it is obvious that

there are double that number, or 32,390 married Japanese, in California,

which means that 46 per cent. of the total population are married. This is

apparently a high rate, since it is 17 per cent. in Japan, 36 per cent. in

Great Britain, 37 per cent. in Italy. Although exact data is lacking,

judging from the fact that only less than a half of California's white

population are of ages above twenty-one,[25] it may not be too far-fetched

to estimate the percentage of married people at 25 per cent. of the total

population.

From the foregoing considerations we can deduce this, that the Japanese

are mostly at the prime of life, and that the percentage of married people

is exceedingly high. Now, in comparing the birth rates of two groups such

as those of the Japanese and of the Californians in general, a mere

comparison of rates without taking into consideration the difference in

age distribution and marital conditions is not only useless, but it is

absolutely misleading. California has only 20 per cent. of people between

the ages of eighteen to forty-four,[26] while the Japanese group has 59

per cent.; California has about 25 per cent. or less of married

population, including those who have passed the fertile period; while the

Japanese community has 46 per cent. of married population, all of whom are

in the zenith of productivity. No wonder, then, that the Japanese in

California have three times as high a birth rate as that of California as

a whole.

There is another factor which accounts for the high birth rate of the

Japanese. It is the sudden rise of the standard of living. It is an

established principle of immigration that when immigrants settle in a new

country and attain a much higher standard of living than they were

accustomed to at home they tend to multiply very rapidly through high

birth rate. Among the European immigrants in this country, a birth rate of

fifty per thousand is not rare.[27] In the careful researches made in

Rhode Island concerning the fertility of the immigrant population,[28] it

was found that their birth rate was invariably high, 72 per cent. of the

married women each having upwards of three children, with an average of

4.5 children for each one of them. This fact holds equally good for the

Japanese immigrants, most of whom came from the poor quarters of the

agricultural communities, where not only economic handicaps but customs

and social fetters operate to check their multiplication. When, therefore,

they come to California, where food is abundant, work easy, climate

salubrious, and personal freedom is incomparably greater, they naturally

tend to multiply.

What we May Expect in the Future.

We have seen, then, that the high birth rate among the Japanese settlers

in California is due primarily to the facts that the largest portion of

them are in the prime of life; that the percentage of married people is

remarkably high, the larger part of them, especially the women, being at

the zenith of productivity, and that their standard of living suddenly

improves when they settle in California. The question naturally arises as

to what will be the future development of Japanese nativity. Remembering

that a prediction, however scientific, cannot at best be more than a

possibility, we shall venture to forecast the future of the Japanese birth

rate in California.

In doing so, the proper way would be to examine any possible future change

in the causes which constitute the present high birth rate. How, then,

about the age distribution of the Japanese? It has been shown that 59 per

cent. of them are between the ages of seventeen and forty, and that 15 per

cent. of them are above forty. In other words, 74 per cent. of the

Japanese are mature, while only 26 per cent. are minors. Now, we are all

mortals, and grow old as time passes; even the Japanese do not have

magical power to retain perennial juvenility, as some agitators seem to

think. They grow old, the Japanese in California, as years come and go,

passing gradually into the age when childbearing is no longer possible.

Therefore, if fresh immigration is checked, which we have already

indicated is desirable, it is manifest that a large portion of the present

Japanese in California will die out without being reinforced by youths

save those who are born in America, and hence are citizens thereof. That

this tendency has already set in may be seen from the increase of the

death rate among the Japanese in California, as the following table

indicates:

DEATH RATE OF JAPANESE IN CALIFORNIA.

========================

Year.|Number.|Percentage

| | of Death

| | per 1000.

-----|-------|----------

1910 | 440 | 10.64%

1911 | 472 | .....

1912 | 524 | .....

1913 | 613 | .....

1914 | 628 | .....

1915 | 663 | .....

1916 | 739 | .....

1917 | 910 | .....

1918 | 1150 | .....

1919 | 1360 | 20.00%

========================

The rate of death per one thousand population increased twice during the

past ten years.

When the age distribution becomes normal by the passing away of the

middle-aged group which constitutes the majority at present, rendering the

population evenly distributed among the children, middle-aged, and the

old, the present high percentage of married people also will disappear,

descending to the normal rate ruling in the ordinary communities, which is

but half as high as that now prevailing among the Japanese living in

California. When the number of young people relatively lessens, and that

of married people also decreases, what other result can we expect but the

marked fall in numbers born?

Improved standards of living as a cause of the high birth rate will also

cease to operate as new immigrants will no longer enter; and the

American-born generations will gradually take their parents' place. The

younger generations of Japanese are as a rule higher in culture and ideals

than their parents. Accordingly, it is unthinkable, other things being

equal, that they should go on multiplying themselves as their parents did.

It is an established principle proved conclusively by the thoroughgoing

Congressional researches in Rhode Island,[29] that the birth rate among

foreign-born immigrants is exceedingly high, and that it steadily

decreases in successive generations, reaching the normal American rate

within a few generations. We are, then, on a safe ground in inferring that

a similar tendency will also manifest itself among the Japanese in the

United States.

Our discussions concerning future birth rate then, seem to point decidedly

to the conclusion that since the present high percentage of the middle-age

group and the married group is bound to diminish as time passes, and since

the fertility of the future generations is not likely to be as high as

that of their parents, it will decrease markedly by the time the present

generation passes away. It is, therefore, only a question of time. The

present is a transitional period, a turning-point, in the history of the

Japanese in America. It is surely unwise, then, to become unduly excited

over the passing phenomenon, and thereby defeat the working of a natural

process which promises to bring about a satisfactory solution in the not

distant future.