Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: The Conquest of a Continent - or, The Expansion of Races in America
Author: Grant, Madison
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "The Conquest of a Continent - or, The Expansion of Races in America" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



 THE CONQUEST OF
 A CONTINENT



 THE CONQUEST OF
 A CONTINENT

 OR

 THE EXPANSION OF RACES IN AMERICA

 BY

 MADISON GRANT

 PRESIDENT, NEW YORK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY
 TRUSTEE, AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY
 PRESIDENT, BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB
 COUNCILLOR, AMERICAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY
 AUTHOR, "PASSING OF THE GREAT RACE"

 WITH AN INTRODUCTION

 BY

 PROF. HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN

 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS

 NEW YORK      ·      LONDON

 MCMXXXIII



 Copyright, 1933, by

 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS

 Printed in the United States of America

 _All rights reserved. No part of this book
 may be reproduced in any form without
 the permission of Charles Scribner's Sons_

[Illustration]



 To

 MY BROTHER

 DE FOREST GRANT



INTRODUCTION


The character of a country depends upon the racial character of the men
and women who dominate it. I welcome this volume as the first attempt
to give an authentic racial history of our country, based on the
scientific interpretation of race as distinguished from language and
from geographic distribution.

The most striking induction arising through research into the
prehistory of man is that racial characters and predispositions,
governing racial reactions to certain old and new conditions of life,
extend far back of the most ancient civilizations. For example,
the characteristics which Homer, in the _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_,
attributed to his heroes and to his imaginary gods and goddesses
were not the product of the civilization which existed in his time
in Greece; they were the product of creative evolution long prior
even to the beginnings of Greek culture and government. This creative
principle--the most mysterious of the recently discovered phenomena
of evolution, to which I have devoted the researches of nearly half
a century--is that racial preparation for various expressions of
civilization--art, law, government, etc.--is long antecedent to these
institutions.

Ripley missed this point in his superb researches into the racial
constitution of the peoples of Europe. Grant partly based his _Passing
of the Great Race_ on Ripley's researches, but did not carry out the
purely anatomical analysis to its logical end-point, namely, that
moral, intellectual, and spiritual traits are just as distinctive and
characteristic of different races as are head-form, hair and eye color,
physical stature, and other data of anthropologists.

In the present volume, which I regard as an entirely original and
essential contribution to the history of the United States of America,
Grant goes much further and in tracing back the racial origins of the
majority of our people he lays the foundation for an understanding
of the peculiar characteristics of American civilization, which, all
agree, is of a very new type, something the world has never before seen.

Grant supports Ripley in his distinction between three great European
stocks--Nordic, Alpine, Mediterranean. He gives very strong additional
reasons for one of his own earlier inductions, namely, that the Aryan
language was invented by primitive peoples of the Nordic race before
its dispersal, in the third millennium B.C., from the Steppe country in
the southeast of Russia. This superb and flexible language doubtless
aided the Nordic race in its conquest of Europe, in its ever-westward
journey across the Atlantic, in its Anglo-Saxon occupation of our
continent, in its stamping of Anglo-Saxon institutions on American
government and civilization. We all recognize that, like all other
languages, Aryan is purely a linguistic and not a racial term, just as
French is spoken equally by the Norman Nordics of the north of France,
by the Alpines of the center, and by the Mediterraneans of the south.

My faith is unshaken in the ultimately beneficial recognition of racial
values and in the stimulating and generous emulation aroused by racial
consciousness. Let this stimulation be without prejudice to other
racial values--which should be duly recognized and evaluated--values
we Anglo-Saxons do not naturally possess. Moreover, I set great store
by the great mass of documentary evidence assembled by Grant in the
present volume. I think it explodes the bubble, of the opponents of
racial values, that they are merely myths. The theme of the present
work is that America was made by Protestants of Nordic origin and that
their ideas about what makes true greatness should be perpetuated. That
this is a precious heritage which we should not impair or dilute by
permitting the entrance and dominance of alien values and peoples of
alien minds and hearts.

Finally I would like to define clearly my own position on these very
important racial questions which arouse so much heat, so much bad
feeling, so much misrepresentation. I object strongly to the assumption
that one race is "superior" or "inferior" to another, just as I
object to the assumption that all races are alike or even equal. Such
assumptions are wholly unwarranted by facts. Equality or inequality,
superiority and inferiority, are all relative terms. For example,
around the Equator the black races and certain of the colored and
tinted races are "superior" to the white races and may be capable under
certain conditions of creating great civilizations. In a torrid climate
and under a burning sun witness the marvellous achievements of the
Mediterranean race in Mesopotamia, Egypt, North Africa, Cambodia, and
India between 4000 B.C. and 1250 A.D. Or, coming nearer home to the
cool mountain regions, witness the great achievements of the Alpine
race in engineering, in mathematics, and in astronomy.

It follows that racial superiority and inferiority are partly matters
of the intellectual and spiritual evolution which guides one race after
another into periods of great ascent too often followed by sad and
catastrophic decline. In this as in all other interminglings of science
and sentiment, let us not extenuate nor write in malice, but always in
broad-mindedness and a truly generous spirit.

It is with the greatest pleasure that I have written a few words
endorsing this book as the first racial history of America, or, in
fact, of any nation. I stand with the author not only in nailing his
colors to the mast but in giving an entirely indisputable historic,
patriotic, and governmental basis to the fact that in its origin and
evolution our country is fundamentally Nordic.

 Henry Fairfield Osborn.

  August, 1933.



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


First and foremost, the author desires to express his appreciation of
the assistance of his research associate, Doctor Paul Popenoe, who
collected authorities and statistics during an intensive study lasting
over four years.

He also desires to express his appreciation for the sympathy and aid
of Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn, and of Charles Stewart Davison,
Esq. The latter carefully revised the text and made many valuable
suggestions.

The author owes a special debt of gratitude to Doctor Clarence G.
Campbell for much assistance and to Doctor Harry H. Laughlin for many
of the statistics and analyses used in this book. His thanks are due
also to Captain John B. Trevor, whose masterly study of the early
population has been a great help, as have the studies of Messrs. Howard
F. Barker and Marcus L. Hansen. He also wishes to acknowledge the
assistance of Mr. A.E. Hamilton.

Colonel William Wood, of Quebec, has been of great assistance in the
data given regarding the origin of the French "Habitants" in Canada.

The writer is also obligated to Professor E. Prokosch, of Yale
University, for his assistance on several critical points.

The American Geographical Society and Mr. Ray R. Platt were
instrumental in providing the maps used in this volume and the author
takes this opportunity to express his thanks to them both.



CONTENTS

                                                                  PAGE

 Introduction, by Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn                    vii

 CHAPTER

 I.     Foreword                                                    1

 II.    The Cradle of Mankind                                      17

 III.   The Nordic Conquest of Europe                              39

 IV.    The Nordic Settlement of America                           65

 V.     The Puritans in New England                                81

 VI.    The Gateways to the West from New England and Virginia    102

 VII.   Virginia and Her Neighbors                                130

 VIII.  The Old Northwest Territory                               158

 IX.    The Mountaineers Conquer the Southwest                    183

 X.     From the Mississippi to the Oregon                        195

 XI.    The Spoils of the Mexican War                             208

 XII.   The Alien Invasion                                        223

 XIII.  The Transformation of America                             235

 XIV.   Checking the Alien Invasion                               268

 XV.    The Legacy of Slavery                                     281

 XVI.   Our Neighbors on the North                                296

 XVII.  Our Neighbors on the South                                320

 XVIII. The Nordic Outlook                                        347

        Bibliography                                              359

        Index                                                     379


MAPS


                                                            FACING PAGE

 Ireland                                                           68

 Highlands and Lowlands of Scotland                                82

 Ulster Scot and New England Origins                               84

 Puritan Emigration from England, 1620-1640                        86

 Territorial Growth of the United States                          122

 The Thirteen Colonies                                            144

 Roman Catholics, 1930                                            160

 Congregational Churches                                          218

 Negro Population, 1930                                           282

 Negro Population: Increase and Decrease, 1920-1930               286

 Dominion of Canada and Newfoundland                              300

 Mexico, Central America, and the West Indies                     324

 Distribution of Mexicans by States                               328

 South America                                                    334



THE CONQUEST OF A CONTINENT



I

FOREWORD


American public sentiment regarding the admission of aliens has
undergone recently a profound change. At the end of the nineteenth
century a fatuous humanitarianism prevailed and immigrants of all kinds
were welcomed to "The Refuge of the Oppressed," regardless of whether
they were needed in our industrial development or whether they tended
to debase our racial unity.

The "Myth of the Melting Pot" was, at that time, deemed by the
unthinking to be a part of our national creed.

This general attitude was availed of and encouraged by the steamship
companies, which felt the need of the supply of live freight. The
leading industrialists and railroad builders were equally opposed
to any check on the free entry of cheap labor. Restrictionists were
active, but in number they were relatively few, until the World War
aroused the public to the danger of mass migration from the countries
of devastated and impoverished Europe.

As a result of the problems raised by the World War, a stringent
immigration law was passed in 1924 and is now in force. This law[1] has
for its basic principle a provision that the total number of persons
allowed to enter the United States from countries to which quotas have
been assigned shall be so apportioned as to constitute a cross section
of the then existent white population of the United States. This is the
so-called National Origins provision.

A controversy immediately arose over this new basis, as it was to the
interest of every national and religious group of aliens now here
to exaggerate the importance and size of its contribution to the
population of our country, especially in Colonial times. This was
particularly true of immigrants from those nations, such as Germany
and Ireland, the quotas of which were greatly reduced under the new
law. The purpose of this opposition was to warp public opinion in
regard to the merits of various national groups and to exaggerate the
non-Anglo-Saxon elements in the old Colonial population.

This book is an effort to make an estimate of the various elements,
national and racial, existing in the present population of the United
States and to trace their arrival and subsequent spread.

In the days of our fathers the white population of the United States
was practically homogeneous. Racially it was preponderantly English
and Nordic. At the end of the Colonial period we had a population
about 90 per cent Nordic and over 80 per cent British in origin. In
spite of the intrusion of two foreign elements of importance, both
nevertheless chiefly Nordic, our population and our institutions
remained overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon down to the time of the Civil War.
Since that time there has been an ever-increasing tendency to change
the nature of this once "American" people into a mosaic of national,
racial, and religious groups. The question to what extent this
transformation has gone deserves careful study.

The draft lists for the American army in the large cities during the
World War showed an amazing collection of foreign names. These lists
are most dramatic indications of the substantial modifications of the
original Anglo-Saxon character of the population which have occurred. A
vivid illustration is found in a war poster issued by an enthusiastic
clerk of foreign extraction in the Treasury Department during one of
the appeals for Liberty Loans. A Howard Chandler Christy girl of pure
Nordic type was shown pointing with pride to a list of names, saying
"Americans All." The list was:

 DuBois
 Smith
 O'Brien
 Ceika
 Haucke
 Pappandrikopulous
 Andrassi
 Villotto
 Levy
 Turovich
 Kowalski
 Chriczanevicz
 Knutson
 Gonzales

Apparently the one native American, so far as he figures at all, is
hidden under the sobriquet of Smith, and there is possibly the implied
suggestion that the beautiful lady was herself the product of this
remarkable mélange.

Similar foreign names are beginning to appear and sometimes predominate
in the list of college graduates, successful athletes, and minor
politicians. In the words of the late President Theodore Roosevelt, we
are becoming a polyglot boarding house.

The modification of the religious complexion of the nation also is
very striking. In Colonial times Americans were almost unanimously
Protestants. Now the claim is made that one in seven is a Catholic and
one in thirty a Jew. To what extent this change is due to immigration
and to what extent to the differential birth rate should be carefully
considered.

In dealing with racial admixture, we should be certain that we are
not considering merely nationality, religion, or language. In popular
thought there is such a racial entity as the German, the Russian, the
Frenchman, or the Italian. These, however, are not racial, but national
terms. In a few cases of still unmixed peoples, like those of Sweden
and Norway, nationality, language, religion, and race coincide. But in
Germany, for instance, the Germans along the North Sea and the Baltic
coasts are Protestant Nordics, while those of Bavaria, of Austria, and
of other parts of the south are Catholic Alpines. Italy north of the
Apennines is largely Alpine, slightly mixed with Nordic, while Naples
and Sicily in the South are purely Mediterranean by race. In France,
where there is a mixed Nordic, Mediterranean, and Alpine population, a
single language and an ancient tradition have created an intense unity
of national feeling, and in recent decades there has been a marked
transfer of political control from the Nordic to the Alpine element,
as evidenced by the names and features of the present political
leaders. In Belgium there are two languages, in Switzerland four, to
say nothing of the medley of languages in the old Austrian Empire. Only
in Switzerland is there national unity, in spite of a diversity of
tongue.

In America the events of the last hundred years, especially the vast
tide of immigration, have greatly impaired our purity of race and
our unity of religion and even threatened our inheritance of English
speech. If our English language is saved it will be due in no small
degree to the growing world power of the language itself and of its
literature, as well as to the world-wide ocean commerce of Great
Britain and her overseas empire.

In the United States today this unity of language is vigorously
opposed by the foreign-language press. In all probability, however,
this foreign press is doomed to die out as the older generation of
immigrants passes from the scene. The fact that this non-English press
represents a score or more of different languages makes it impossible
for it in the long run to oppose successfully the English language.

In Canada the fact that the French language is officially recognized
in Quebec and, for that matter, in the Parliament at Ottawa, makes the
problem there more difficult. It may be here noted that the French
language as spoken in Quebec is sneered at and ridiculed by the
European French. The use of French speech in Quebec, like the attempted
use of Erse in Ireland and Czechish in Bohemia, is merely serving to
keep those speaking such language out of touch with modern literature
and culture.

The absurdity of attempting to revive an obsolete language such as
Erse is shown by its lack of literature of modern type. Sir Harry
H. Johnston once said to the author that Erse was a perfectly good
language, except for two facts--first, that nobody could pronounce it
and, second, that nobody could spell it.

In Louisiana French is still spoken by the Creoles of New Orleans
and by the French and Negro mixture called "Cajans." This linguistic
diversity will in due course of time also disappear. More serious
is the retention and use in New Mexico of the Spanish language by
its Mexican-Indian population. Few people know that New Mexico is
officially bi-lingual. Sooner or later this must be stopped, as it has
greatly hindered the development of the State.

As to race, as distinct from language, religion, and nationality, we
must consider our country today as being in large part a heterogeneous
mixture of racial groups and individuals. Since America's first duty is
to herself and to the people already here, she must weigh the effect
upon the present, as well as upon the future, of such racial admixture
as has already occurred and which promises to spread indefinitely.

A striking example of this was shown during the Washington Bicentennial
in 1932, when some historians, in their efforts to placate the
assertive groups of aliens in our midst, endeavored to show the
existence in the colonies of substantial groups of these same aliens.
For instance, they claimed that most of the Revolutionary personages of
Irish descent were the same as the South Irish Catholics of today. That
is wholly error. The so-called "Irish" of the Revolution were Ulster
Scots either from the Lowlands of Scotland or from North England, who
came to the colonies by way of the North of Ireland after having lived
there for two or three generations. These Ulster Scots were reinforced
by Protestant English who emigrated from Leinster and both were widely
removed, religiously and culturally, from the South Irish Catholics,
who did not come to this country in any numbers until the potato famine
in Ireland in the 1840's drove them across the seas.

To take an example: In the Convention of 1787, which formulated the
Constitution, certain individuals were put down as "Irish." These were
Protestant Ulster Scots. In the Senate of today, a few of the senators
are put down as "Irish." These are South Irish Catholics. To use the
same term for these two different types of population is erroneous.
They were widely separated religiously, racially, and culturally.
The same thing is true of that part of our population which was
referred to as "French." The French of the American Revolution and
of our Constitutional Convention were Huguenot French, who, though
few in numbers, took a prominent part in public affairs at the time
of the Revolution. They were, for the most part, Nordic and were
English-speaking. They were a distinguished group which had nothing
whatever in common with the "Habitant" French of Quebec, who are
Catholic Alpines. To call them both "French" is erroneous. A similar,
but less marked distinction, exists between the North Germans and the
Palatines, and they both differ from the South Germans in America, who
are mostly Catholic Alpines.

In this connection it should be clearly understood that in discussing
the various European races we are concerned only with such individuals
of those races as came to America, and not with the populations which
remained in the original homeland.

In Colonial times the Anglo-Saxon American avoided the danger arising
from intermarriage with natives, which ruined the Spanish and
Portuguese colonies in the New World and threatened the destruction of
the French colonies in Quebec. There was some crossbreeding between
Englishmen and Indian squaws along the frontier, but the offspring was
everywhere regarded as an Indian, just as a mulatto in the English
colonies was regarded as belonging to the Negro race. This racial
prejudice kept the white race in America pure, while its absence and
the scarcity of white women ultimately destroyed European supremacy in
the Spanish and Portuguese colonies.

At the time of the settlement of the Spanish and Portuguese colonies,
the Roman Church was dominant. Its chief motive was to save souls for
heaven rather than to perpetuate the control of Europeans. That church,
therefore, favored marriage of the Europeans, Spaniard and Portuguese,
with the native women and considered the children to be white. The
same was true of the mixtures of French and Indians in Quebec, and the
church recognized the resulting half-breed offspring as French and not
native.

This policy of the church was aided by the lack of race dignity which
is even today found sometimes among the French, the Spaniards, and the
Portuguese. For example, in the South of Portugal there was a large
Negro slave element introduced in the sixteenth century which is now
absorbed into the surrounding population. Similar conditions exist in
South Italy, where there is a substantial Negroid element, probably
descended from the Negro slaves introduced by the Romans from Africa
some two thousand years ago.

One of the unfortunate results of racial mixture, or miscegenation
between diverse races, is disharmony in the offspring, and the more
widely separated the parent stocks, the greater is this lack of harmony
likely to be in both mental and physical characters. Herbert Spencer,
in response to a request for advice, writing in 1892 to the Japanese
statesman, Baron Keneko Kentaro, stated this biological fact very
clearly when he said:

  "To your remaining question respecting the intermarriage of
  foreigners and Japanese, which you say is 'now very much agitated
  among our scholars and politicians' and which you say is 'one of the
  most difficult problems,' my reply is that, as rationally answered,
  there is no difficulty at all. It should be positively forbidden.
  It is not at root a question of social philosophy. It is at root a
  question of biology. There is abundant proof, alike furnished by the
  intermarriages of human races and by the interbreeding of animals,
  that when the varieties mingled diverge beyond a certain slight
  degree the _result is inevitably a bad one in the long run_.... When,
  say of the different varieties of sheep, there is an interbreeding
  of those which are widely unlike, the result, especially in the
  second generation, is a bad one--there arises an incalculable mixture
  of traits, and what may be called a chaotic constitution. And the
  same thing happens among human beings--the Eurasians in India, the
  half-breeds in America, show this. The physiological basis of this
  experience appears to be that any one variety of creature in course
  of many generations acquires a certain constitutional adaptation
  to its particular form of life, and every other variety similarly
  acquires its own special adaptation. The consequence is that, if you
  mix the constitution of two widely divergent varieties which have
  severally become adapted to widely divergent modes of life, you get
  a constitution which is adapted to the mode of life of neither--a
  constitution which will not work properly, because it is not fitted
  for any set of conditions whatever. By all means, therefore,
  peremptorily interdict marriages of Japanese with foreigners."

The relative diminution of Anglo-Saxon blood in America and the present
check to the expansion of the British Empire are due partly to a
curious sentimental quality of the Anglo-Saxon mind, the effect of
which is almost suicidal.

It is a striking fact that tragic and even fatal consequences may arise
from the noblest motives. The abolition of the obsolete institution of
slavery occupied the minds of some of the best men of the nineteenth
century and serfdom was only stamped out finally at immense cost to
the finest elements of our Anglo-Saxon stock. Looking back over these
events at a distance of a half-century there appear many considerations
which were neglected by those who were too close to the conflict to see
into the future. Let us consider the consequences in the world at large
of the abolition of slavery and of the breaking down of the barrier
maintained by that institution between the Whites and the Blacks.

For instance, in the British Empire, the abolition of slavery a hundred
years ago contributed in large part to the decline and finally to the
almost complete disappearance of pure Nordic blood in the West Indies,
where previously there had been rich and flourishing colonies of white
men employing black slaves.

In South Africa the revolt and outtrekking of Boers beyond the
Vaal River were due largely to the abolition of slavery and to the
sentimental treatment of the slaves by the Home Government. The
passions engendered at that time ultimately led to two bloody and
useless wars between the Nordic peoples of South Africa.

Other European nations suffered similarly from the abolition of
slavery in their American colonies. Undiluted white blood has almost
disappeared in Jamaica and Puerto Rico, while the natives of the Virgin
Islands are nearly all Negroes and Mulattoes.

The most tragic result of the loss of White control of the Blacks was
shown in the history of Haiti and Santo Domingo. The freeing of the
slaves and the disturbances resulting from the French Revolution had as
a consequence the massacre or exile of practically every white person
in the island. The French doctrinaires were responsible to some extent
for this. Even Lafayette was President of the "Société des Amis des
Noirs." Today the black inhabitants of this great island have reverted
almost to barbarism.

The islands and coasts of the entire Caribbean Sea with much of
the coasts of the Gulf of Mexico are fast becoming Negro Land and
apparently in the near future the European element will be more and
more in a hopeless minority.

In the United States we have a startling example of the effect of
sentimentalism upon Nordic survival. The North was entirely right in
endeavoring to keep slavery out of Kansas and the new States of the
West, to that extent avoiding the color problem there. The sentimental
interference with slavery, however, on the part of the Northern
Abolitionists helped to precipitate the bloody Civil War and to destroy
a very large portion of the best stock of the nation, especially in the
South. The Southerners also were greatly to blame for their utter folly
in seceding as a means of maintaining their peculiar institution, as
they termed it.

If the question of slavery had been left alone, the issue of the
preservation of the Union would have been postponed for at least a
generation. In time the overwhelming numbers and wealth of the North
would have made any serious question of secession an absurdity. As a
consequence of the Civil War hundreds of thousands of men of Nordic
stock were cut off in the full vigor of manhood, who otherwise would
have lived to propagate their kind and populate the West. Besides this,
slavery as an institution was outside of the pale of civilization long
before the Civil War and it would have been peacefully abolished in a
few decades through economic causes.

The Blacks themselves were raised by slavery from sheer savagery to a
feeble imitation of white civilization, and they made more advance in
America in two centuries than in as many thousand years in Africa. The
presence of slaves, however, was injurious to the Whites. Serfdom has
been a curse wherever it has flourished in the New World and it has had
a profoundly demoralizing effect on the masters.

American democracy at the start rested on a base of population that
was, as already said, homogeneous in race, religion, tradition, and
language, and in a relative equality of wealth. All these features
are things of the past and democracy has virtually broken down in
spite of the fatuous ecstasy which characterizes the utterances of
sentimentalists, who even claimed that the World War was fought "to
make the World Safe for Democracy."

It seems strange that this so-called liberal point of view is so
short-sighted that we have in our midst today organizations and groups
who, with the best intentions, are encouraging the Negro within and
the black, brown, and yellow men without, to dispute the dominance over
the world at large of Christian Europeans and Americans. Throughout
the world, there has gone forth a challenge to white supremacy and
this movement in Asia, Africa, and elsewhere has been fostered by the
Christian missionaries. It has even gone so far that it is openly
stated that any assertion of race supremacy, or even discussion of race
distinctions in this country, should be suppressed in the interests
of the spread of Christianity in foreign countries--notably Japan. In
the long run, however, these doctrines will work great injury to the
Protestant churches if they persist in taking an anti-national point
of view. While many of the individual ministers are well-meaning and
kindly, their education is undeveloped in world affairs and their
advice in such matters, on which they are uninstructed, is often very
dangerous.

Sentimental sympathy for other races of mankind is manifest today
all over the world, but especially among Anglo-Saxons. It received a
great impetus from President Wilson's doctrine of the right of Self
Determination. The fruits of this doctrine can be seen in the rise
of so-called nationalism everywhere, as in Ireland, Bohemia, Poland,
Egypt, the Philippines, China, and India.

The racially suicidal result of all this is the undermining of the
control of the Nordic races over the natives. The upper classes and, in
many cases, the peasantry in eastern Germany, for example, are Nordics.
One of the tragic consequences of the World War was the taking of
political power in this region from the Nordics and transferring it,
under the guise of democratic institutions, to Alpine Slavs. In Soviet
Russia, also, through the massacre and exile of the Nordic upper
classes, political power has passed into the hands of Alpines, exactly
as in France during the Revolution the Alpine lower classes destroyed
the Nordic nobility and assumed control of the state. The Revolutionary
and Napoleonic Wars which followed killed off an undue proportion of
Nordics in France and are said to have greatly shortened the stature of
the French soldiers.

The revolt against European control, especially in the Orient, is
becoming more and more pronounced. As said above it has been encouraged
unintentionally by the missionaries, who, in educating the natives,
succeed only in arousing them to assert their equality with the
European races. Probably the greatest tragedy in the world today is the
corrosive jealousy of the fair skin of the white races felt by those
whose skin is black, yellow, or brown. The world will hear more of this
as the revolt of the lower races spreads.

One of the manifestations of this jealousy of the fair skin of the
Nordics is shown in those numerous cases where members of the colored
races, or even dark-skinned members of the Nordic race regard the
possession of a blonde woman as an assertion and proof of race
equality. This has been true historically since the earliest times. It
is more than ever in evidence at the present day.

All the foregoing points to the value of a critical consideration
of the racial composition of the original thirteen colonies and an
analysis of the situation as it is today.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: This bill was framed and passed through the efforts
of Honorable Albert Johnson of Washington. "A new Declaration of
Independence," it has been happily called.]



II

THE CRADLE OF MANKIND


Man is an immensely ancient animal. Over a million years have elapsed
since he first made fire and more millions since he became a bipedal
prehuman. He left the forests, at the latest, at the end of the
Miocene, not less than seven million years ago and ventured out into
the plains of Central Asia as a savage, powerful, clever biped, hunting
in packs, or by sheer wit securing his prey single handed by pitfalls
and other devices, the invention of which marks the development of
growing intelligence.

Man's initial differentiation from his simian ancestry probably began
when he came down from the trees and began to walk erect. The hand was
then liberated from its use as an instrument of locomotion and was
devoted primarily to defense, attack, discovery, and invention. It is
by means of the opportunities afforded by the hand that the human brain
has evolved into man's most important factor in racial survival.

Clear evidence of man's remote arboreal ancestry is offered by his
stereoscopic or double-eyed vision. The great majority of ground
animals, especially those living in the forest, have eyes on the sides
of their heads; but in man's arboreal ancestors, by the recession of
the intervening nasal and facial bones, the eyes were brought around
to the front of the face. The resulting stereoptic vision enabled him
to judge distance far more accurately than most mammals. Such power of
determining distance is of course vital to an arboreal animal. Failure
to judge accurately the length of a leap from branch to branch would be
fatal.

One often hears it stated that man has lost his sense of smell; but
this sense was probably never better developed within the human period
than it is now. In the trees a sense of smell is not of much value. The
monkey can sit on a branch and jabber with impunity at the leopard on
the ground below. To forest animals, like the deer or boar, however,
the sense of smell is the surest protection against attack and is much
more highly developed than the sense of sight, which latter is often
quite feeble. In fact, in the thick jungle it is almost useless (and at
"black night" completely so).

Eurasia, where it is probable that mankind originated, was the greatest
land mass on the globe in Tertiary times. Modern Europe and North
Africa formed relatively small peninsulas in the extreme west of this
Tertiary land mass. It is probably from Eurasia that man spread out
to the uttermost parts of the habitable globe, carrying with him his
language and such cultural features as had developed at the time of
each successive migration. No race or language or cultural invention
seems to have entered Eurasia from adjoining land areas. All went out.
None came in. While the original center of dispersal of the Hominidæ
or human family was probably Eurasia, it was at a later date also the
center of the evolution of the higher types of man.

To the northeast of Eurasia lay the ancient land connection with North
America via Alaska, over which various species of animals passed back
and forth, some of them having their origin in Asia and others in
western North America. It was undoubtedly over this land connection
that man first entered America at a relatively recent period and
probably he came in successive waves. The American Indians appear to
have been derived from the Mongoloid tribes of northeastern Asia before
the latter had developed some of those extreme specializations which
characterize the typical Mongols of Central Asia and China proper
today. Judging from the culture which these American Indians brought
with them, this migration began before 10,000 B.C.

The existing races of mankind, and those either entirely extinct or now
absorbed in other races, had their distinctive areas of differentiation
and periods of radiation from Eurasia over the habitable globe. The
most primitive types are now found farthest from this original centre
of distribution in countries where through isolation they escaped
competition with the higher types which evolved later.

The weight of evidence appears to show that Africa, or Ethiopia, lying
far to the southwest of Eurasia, was peopled in earliest times, by way
of Arabia, by a most primitive negroid type of mankind. While north
of the Sahara migrations from Asia have continued until recent times,
the south was left for a vast period in possession of the Negro. Even
today, aside from the recent infiltration of Whites and Browns, Africa
south of the Sahara belongs to three negroid groups; the Negroes
proper, the Pigmies or Negrillos, and the Bushmen and Hottentots.
These three human types are characterized by very dark or yellow skin,
tightly curled hair, very scanty body hair, flaring nostrils, flattened
noses and an absence of supraorbital ridges.

Again, Australia, Tasmania, and some of the adjoining islands are,
or recently were, inhabited by what used to be considered one of the
great divisions of mankind, the Australoids. These people have the
black skin and certain features of the Negro; but differ from him in
the possession of abundant body hair and of marked supraorbital ridges.
Also the Australoid head hair is wavy, and not closely curled, a most
important characteristic. The profound cleavage between the Negroes and
the Australoids is now questioned in some quarters.

The differentiation of the human species into types so distinctly
contrasted as Whites and Blacks and the problems of the evolution
of higher types of man from original stocks bring us to a new
classification of the genus Homo. Some anthropologists still maintain
that all human beings are included in the species _Homo sapiens_; but
this is an old-fashioned grouping. Sooner or later a new system must
be formulated based on the same fundamental rules that are applied
to the classification of other mammals. For instance, the physical
differences between the Nordics and the Negroes, the Australoids and
the Mongols, if found among the lower mammals, would be much more than
sufficient to constitute not only separate species, but even subgenera,
and they are now so regarded by some anthropologists.

Race is hard to define. It consists in the presence of a collection of
hereditary characters common to the great majority of individuals in a
given group. It lies in the preponderance of such characters as color
of skin, hair, and eyes, facial and nasal contour, shape of skull, and
even mental characteristics, which are more difficult to classify, but
which are distinctly typical of specific human groups. Many individuals
possess all the hereditary characters of a given race. But man is so
ancient a being and intermixture has been so widespread that nearly
every race shows signs of blending with others. This is especially true
in Europe, where the intermingling of peoples has been extensive during
the past twenty centuries.

Just as the classification of man according to race needs revision in
the light of recent discoveries, so the definition of race must be
understood anew in the light of genetics. Thirty years ago we talked
glibly about the Aryan or Indo-European race, or the Caucasian or
Germanic race. All these terms must be discarded. Aryan, Indo-European,
and Germanic are only linguistic terms and Caucasian has no meaning
except as used in America to distinguish between whites and colored.

Language or culture may spread quickly and widely among the peoples
of the earth irrespective of race. For example, the bow and arrow
may have originated with some specific race of mankind, yet we find
this invention in use all over the globe and in the hands of the most
diverse peoples. The use of firearms and of horses by the American
Indians indicates nothing more than their contact with the Whites. It
is unsafe to attribute the inception of any cultural feature to a given
race.

Civilization itself, that is, agriculture and the domestication of
animals, probably arose in West Central Asia, spreading east, south,
southwest, and west. Although the earliest remains of the dog, the
first animal tamed, are found in the Maglemose in Denmark approximately
8000 B.C., it may have been domesticated far earlier in Asia.

There were two centers of the development of civilization--two foci.
The first was in southwestern Eurasia: the Valley of the Syr-Daria;
Mesopotamia and its city states; Chaldea, Babylonia, Assyria;
then Egypt, Crete, Greece, Rome, and modern Europe. There is the
possibility, or even the probability, of finding in the unexplored
portions of southern Arabia, connecting links of early culture between
the Valley of the Euphrates and the Valley of the Nile. Recent
discoveries indicate a very early civilization in the Valley of the
Indus, which apparently had been brought down from the north. All
these regions formed a single group and were the first center.

The second focus was an independent, but similar and parallel expansion
of civilization in southeastern Asia, now China. There was apparently
little intercourse until modern times between the Far East and the
Far West of Eurasia, except by caravan routes across Central Asia.
The Romans knew the silk of China and there was a certain amount of
trade in jewels, precious metals, and spices down through the Middle
Ages, but the extraordinary fact that these two cultures developed
independently with slight mutual influence of the one on the other is
little appreciated. Both cultures seem, as said, to have had their
origin in West Central Asia and to have radiated southwest, south, and
east.

One of the periodic cycles of drought desiccated the central area, and
separated the Western and Eastern worlds by an almost impassable series
of deserts, like the Gobi Desert of Mongolia. In the west, even as late
as the time of Alexander the Great, Bactria and Sogdiana, northwest of
India, were populous and flourishing states. Here it is that future
exploration may uncover the first beginnings of agriculture and the
domestication of animals--perhaps, also, the first written language.

Language, like culture, is not identical or co-extensive with race to
any great degree. Witness the neighboring islands in the West Indies
where Negroes speak Spanish in one, French in another, and English in a
third. The language of a given group at a given time, however, being
possibly a much more recent acquirement than its cultural inventions,
does show either that it was originated by those who speak it or that
it was imposed upon them by another race long in contact with them.

Since we are to deal principally with the racial groups of Europe,
namely the Nordic, Mediterranean, and Alpine, we might glance for a
moment in more detail at this distinction between race and language.
The Mediterraneans of Arabia speak a Semitic language, while the
Berbers of North Africa, also a people of Mediterranean stock, speak
a Hamitic language. This same Hamitic tongue was probably spoken all
around the coast of the inland sea and up the west coast of Europe to
the British Islands before Aryan speech was brought there by Nordic
invaders from the north and east. Meanwhile the Alpines spoke languages
related to Turki, a Ural-Altaic language--of course, non-Aryan--as they
still do in Turkestan, Hungary, and Finland.

As to the Nordics, it would appear that this race originated the
so-called Aryan or Indo-European group of languages. The Aryan tongue
was probably developed in South Russia before the long isolation from
Asia had been broken. At a period in the third millennium B.C. the
Aryan language split into two groups: one, the Western or Centum group,
which pushed west and north; the other, the Eastern or Satem group
which pushed south and east. The Centum group included the Greek,
Latin, Celtic, and Germanic languages. Curiously enough, an outlying
member of this group, the Tokarian, was spoken in Turkestan as late as
the seventh century A.D. The Satem group, sometimes called Iranian,
included the Lithuanian, all the Slavic languages and those of ancient
and modern Persia and the various forms of Sanscrit spoken in India and
Burma.

Light-skinned invaders from the northwest appear to have entered India
in successive waves and to have introduced the Aryan language known
as Sanscrit. They were probably the Sacae or Scythians from South
Russia. These Nordics in India can properly be called "Aryans." As used
otherwise, however, the term Aryan is purely linguistic. Originally all
the tribes who spoke the languages of the Centum and Satem groups were
members of the Nordic race.

According to recent discoveries in the Valley of the Indus, a very
elaborate civilization flourished at least five thousand years ago
at Mohenjo-Daro, four hundred miles north of the mouth of the river.
This civilization was as elaborate as the corresponding culture of
Mesopotamia or of Egypt. The racial characters found in the bodies in
the burials indicate that the mass of the population was then, as now,
of Mediterranean race, but that the ruling class was long-headed and
long-faced, and of a tall stature and sturdy build--a type clearly
Nordic. In the earliest graves of Ur, in Mesopotamia, the skulls are
very clearly of a race akin to those on the Indus. All this would tend
to throw back the date of the invasion of men from the north by another
thousand years or more. The same appears to be true of the invasions
into Greece of the Achæans and of the Osco-Umbrians into Italy.

The wide distribution of the Satem or Iranian group to the south and
west of Asia shows that the Nordics in great numbers conquered the
aboriginal inhabitants of these countries and imposed on them the Aryan
speech. They invented the caste system to maintain the purity of their
blood. In fact, the Hindu word "varna" means both color and caste. In
spite of all their efforts, however, the conquering invaders died out
almost completely in India and Persia--leaving behind them only their
language, and, in some cases, their religion.

With this brief review of the essential difference between race and
language or culture, we may return to a consideration of humanity in
terms of essentially racial characters.

The world as a whole can be roughly mapped racially according to the
most obvious human differentiation--namely, color: white, yellow, red,
black, and brown. The white race at the present day dominates Europe,
northern Asia in part, Australia, and North America as far south as
Mexico, with outposts scattered all over the globe. Eastern Asia is
yellow. Southern Asia and northern Africa are brown. Africa south of
the Sahara Desert is black, and there is a black tinge across southern
Asia, as we shall see. The red men, or Amerinds, with but a small
remnant in the United States and Canada, inhabit Latin America, where
in some cases their blood is mixed with that of the descendants of
Negro slaves, and, of course, to a still larger extent with that of
South Europeans.

Color, however, is not the only character upon which a racial map of
the world could be based. Perhaps a more satisfactory division could
be made according to the cross section of human hair. However, in
dealing with the racial groupings of Eurasia, we find different types
of humanity arranged in definite zones according to certain outstanding
physical characters.

Farthest south on the great land area of Eurasia lies a belt of
Negroids, extending from Ethiopia with intervals through Arabia to the
South Seas. The principal racial characteristics of these people are
very dark or black skin, dark eyes, tightly curled black hair, and
long, _i.e._, dolichocephalic skulls. In southern Persia the population
shows a Negro admixture, and a distinctly Negroid type is numerous
among the Pre-Dravidians of India. The Hindus themselves are very dark
brown with wavy black hair.

A few decades ago there was much talk of the English officer and the
Hindu in the ranks being of the same Aryan blood, because they both
spoke widely diverse forms of the great group of Aryan languages. This,
of course, did not imply the slightest trace of blood relationship--the
Aryan speech of the Hindu had been imposed upon him by his conquerors
from the north. Such fallacies were common a generation ago.

To the eastward we find remnants of Negro types in the Malay Peninsula
and in the large islands to the east as far as the Philippines. This
Negroid type extends also eastward through Melanesia. From this
discontinuous distribution it would appear that the Negroes and
Negritos were the original population of southern Eurasia. It is
probable that from this region the true Negroes migrated westward into
Ethiopia.

At a date far earlier than this hypothetical migration westward,
an earlier type of Negroid pushed southeast to Tasmania, which was
thereafter cut off from the land mass of Australia. In Australia itself
these Tasmanians were absorbed or exterminated by the later coming
Australoids from whom they differed materially.

The racial tangle in Australia, Papua, and the islands of Melanesia
presents great difficulties in classification, but the basic element
appears to be Negro with a large admixture of later Mongoloids coming
from Asia.

The next zone of human population, superimposed in many cases upon the
Negroids, but south of the great central mountain ranges of Eurasia,
is constituted by the Mediterranean race. This race is characterized
by black, wavy hair, very dark eyes, oval face with fairly regular
features, dark olive skin, relatively short stature, and a somewhat
slight skeletal and muscular structure. This last character is in sharp
contrast with the powerful and sturdy build of the next two races to be
considered, the Alpine and the Nordic. The principal character of the
Mediterranean race, however, is its long (dolichocephalic) skull. The
Negroes, as we have said, have long skulls, but of quite a different
type.

The range of the Mediterraneans extends from the western part of the
British Isles, through Spain and along both coasts of the Mediterranean
Sea, down the east coast of Africa to Somaliland. In Asia it embraces
the Arabs, South Persians, most of the Hindus, with an eastward
extension. In Northeast Africa and India it is strongly mixed with
Negro.

Spreading everywhere throughout Europe north of the territory dominated
by the Mediterranean race, and often mixed with it, we find the
Alpines. This race is characterized by a somewhat short, stocky build
much sturdier than the Mediterranean, abundant dark, but not straight,
head and body hair, dark eyes and round (brachycephalic) skull.

The center of origin of the Alpines was somewhere in Central Asia
west of the true Mongols, north of the Mediterraneans, and east of
the Nordics--possibly in Turkestan. The Alpines and Mongols are both
characterized by a round skull but, as in the case of the long-skulled
Mediterraneans and the long-skulled Negroes, the type of skull differs
appreciably.

The Mongols and Alpines have been in close contact for ages. The
Mongols have issued again and again from East and Central Asia and
submerged the Alpines, driving them westward into Central Europe. There
has been a great deal of intermixture and the Slavic Alpine population
of eastern Europe frequently shows distinctive Mongol traits. However,
the two races, while perhaps remotely connected, differ widely. The
Alpines, like the Australoids and to a less extent like the Nordics,
have abundant body hair and copious beard, while the Mongols (like
their derivatives, the American Indians) are beardless and without body
hair. Alpine hair is wavy, that of the Mongols and Mongoloids straight.
Alpine features are rather coarse, often with a large prominent nose,
while true Mongols have an exceedingly flat face, depressed nose, and
a broad space between the eyes. This depressed nose, in adult Mongols,
is the retention of an infantile character, as babies of all races are
born with bridgeless noses. As to stature, most Alpines are of moderate
height, although those from the Tyrol to Albania, the so-called Dinaric
race, are decidedly tall.

It was a branch of tall Mongols, with a slight admixture of Alpines,
that crossed into America from Asia and became the ancestors of the
American Indians, who are of substantial height, often with prominent,
almost hawklike noses and high cheek bones.

We might mention here the Malays, who are essentially Mongols and
who pushed down into Indo-China and throughout the Malay Peninsula.
There are many traces of their blood in Polynesia. This expansion
was relatively recent and in those localities there are everywhere
indications of earlier races, especially of the very ancient Negroid
types known as Negritos. These Malays extended through the Philippines
as far north as Japan, where they met and mingled with a stream of
northern Mongoloid immigrants from Korea.

The Alpine domain at the present time extends from the center of France
eastward in an ever widening wedge as far as the Himalayas. It includes
the bulk of the population of Central France, North Italy, South
Germany, Switzerland, the provinces of the recent Austrian Empire,
and extends through the Balkan states, Russia, Asia Minor, and far
into Asia. This race penetrated into and overran Central Europe during
relatively recent times, probably at about the beginning of the Bronze
Age, approximately 1800 B.C.

East and north of the Carpathians, about 400 A.D., the Alpines had a
period of great expansion, chiefly at the expense of the Nordic race,
whose distribution we shall discuss presently.

As the Nordic tribes moved into the Roman provinces, the lands they
vacated were occupied by Alpine Slavs. All these movements may have
been caused by the pressure from the east of Asiatic Mongols, who, like
the Huns, were beginning their drive toward Europe. Our word slave
coming from Slav reveals the social relation of these Alpines to West
Europeans.

The westernmost of the Alpine Slavs were called Wends. In Charlemagne's
time they occupied what is now Germany as far west as the Elbe. In
its easternmost range these Alpines were called Turanians and were
confused with the Mongols of Central Asia, who had again and again
conquered them. The remnant of Wends in East Germany, the Bohemians,
most Poles and South Slavs are all Alpines. The great mass of Russians
are of this type, as well as the ancient Avars, Hunagars, Magyars,
Cumans, and the Bulgars, all more or less mixed with Mongols. The
Armenians are Alpines of an especially pronounced type and are probably
descended from the ancient Hittites. The East European Alpines are
saturated everywhere with Mongol blood, dating for the most part from
their conquest by the Tatars during the thirteenth century.

The fact that Asia, north of the main mountain ranges, is pre-eminently
the home of round skulls is very significant and suggests remote
relationship between Alpine and Mongol.

The Alpine skull reaches a most extreme form among the Armenians, who
have a very high skull, greatly flattened behind and somewhat like a
sugar loaf in shape.

The division of the races of mankind based on long and round skulls is
extremely ancient. We find both types among the fossil and semi-fossil
skulls at the end of the Paleolithic.

The first definite appearance of round skulls mixed with long skulls is
found in the burials at Offnet in Bavaria in the Azilian period at the
very end of the Paleolithic, some twelve thousand years ago.

From that day to this in France, Bavaria, and elsewhere in western
Europe as well as in eastern Europe the round skulls have expanded
their range. This steady increase of round-skull Alpines everywhere in
Central Europe in recent centuries is one of the most ominous racial
facts that confront us.

The great French anthropologist, deLapouge, stated in a recent letter
to the author that in France the cranial index has risen two points a
century since the Middle Ages, so that France is no longer a Nordic
land. This transformation is due, in the opinion of some observers,
to a mixture of race in which round-headedness is dominant over
long-headedness. In the opinion of the writer, however, it is due to
the replacement of one race, the Nordic, by another, the Alpine. The
Nordics not only incur disproportionate loss in war, but are also
highly nomadic in habit, while the Alpines, on the other hand, stick
close to the land and breed persistently.

Of the European races, there remains to be considered the Nordics,
a people greatly specialized, who have developed a fair skin,
light-colored eyes, tall stature of sturdy build, and long, _i.e._,
dolichocephalic skulls, and definite mental traits. The slow but
long-continued physical development of the Nordics has culminated in
a powerful skeleton and musculature in sharp contrast to that of the
Mediterranean race, to which the Nordic is more closely related than
to any other. In fact, the mixture of Nordic and Mediterranean in the
British Islands may possibly be one of the few advantageous racial
crossings.

As to the homeland of the original Nordic race, we have as yet only
guesswork on the part of the anthropologist. When we shall know more
about the condition of Central Eurasia during the glacial period and
immediately thereafter, we may get nearer to an answer to the question
of where and how this race originated and developed. It is certain,
however, that the Nordics were originally located west of the Alpines
and Mongols and north of the Mediterraneans.

We have fossil records of five or six extinct species or genera of man
and more are constantly coming to light in Asia and outlying regions of
the Old World. The impulse that forced the ancestors of man to develop
his high energy and intelligence probably arose from the onset of the
Pleistocene glaciation a million or more years ago. Mankind was then
forced apart into widely separated areas where specific characters
developed in isolation. The Nordics were most likely cut off from Asia
by the Caspian and Aral Seas, which extended far to the north, where
they met the oncoming ice. It was west of this barrier that the Nordic
race developed its peculiar characters.

Later, when the ice retreated and this watery barrier disappeared, the
Nordics were inundated again and again by floods of Asiatics, first
Alpines and then Mongols. Sometimes the Nordics became the aggressors
and expanded eastward in turn, conquering Persia, India, and Burma.
Blond invaders of East Asia, called "the green-eyed devils," attacked
the Great Wall of China as late as 200 B.C. They were also called
"Wusuns," a Tatar word meaning "the tall ones." In the long run,
however, the Nordics were forced westward.

When the retreating glaciers left habitable land in Scandinavia, it was
into this region that the first westward migration of the Nordics found
its way. This was probably as early as 8000 B.C. There it was, through
the fogs and long winters of the north, that they developed in complete
isolation their great stature and musculature, their fair or flaxen
hair, and their blue eyes. The continental Nordics, however, who moved
westward to settle around the Baltic and North Seas, retained the more
generalized characters of brown hair of various shades, and eyes which
tend to either brown, gray, or, to a less extent, blue. The light eyes
of the Nordics include light brown or hazel, and may be of any and all
shades of gray and green to the deepest violet blue.

The racial characters which most noticeably distinguish the Nordics are
the colors of the skin, hair, and eyes. As sharply contrasted with the
skin of the Mediterranean peoples, the color of the blood shows through
the fair Nordic skin except when tanned by exposure to the sun. The
light-colored hair is almost always blond in youth, turning darker with
age, although in many individuals extreme blondness is retained through
life. The brown hair, characteristic of the Nordics of the British
Isles and America, runs from light to very dark brown; but blue-black
hair, so rare in England and among native Americans, is never Nordic.
The blond hair may tend towards golden red. In fact, in classic times,
red hair seems to have been more common than now and may be more
characteristic of the Celtic Nordics than of the Teutonic Nordics. In
race mixtures between blond and black-haired peoples, the blondness
tends to be lost.

On the other hand, light-colored eyes are much more persistent, and
this sign of Nordic admixture is found about ten times more frequently
than is blond hair among such peoples as the Albanians, where all other
Nordic characters except stature seem to have been lost.

For thousands of years, Europe has been an arena of racial mixtures.
Over great territories, as we shall see, the Nordic race has been
dominant for the past thirty centuries, so that the majority of Alpine
and Mediterranean types shows the impress of Nordic characters. For
example, in Bavaria are found short, stocky, round-skulled Alpines
with extremely blond hair and blue eyes. The French, who are today
preponderantly Alpine, show outcroppings of profound Nordic characters
throughout the population. Thus, while pure types exist everywhere in
sufficient numbers to enable us to define race, nevertheless there has
been so much intermixture in the past that it is hard sometimes to
assign a given individual to a specific race. The definition of race,
in fact, cannot be based on any one character, but on a preponderance
of many racial characters which make up the resultant type.

We have now considered the main races of mankind, but should devote
space to the Mongols and their derivatives. The Mongol is undoubtedly
a very ancient and major subdivision of the Hominidæ, but appears to be
intrusive in much of its present range. In Southeast Asia and in the
Malay countries and islands it arrived later than the ancient Negroids.

The Mongoloids, as stated above, are characterized by a short, stocky
build and generally a round skull, very straight black hair with a
round cross section, a broad flat face with projecting malar bones, and
a slanting eye often marked by the Mongol fold. The last characters
distinguish them from the Alpine race, but are sometimes to be found in
such members of that race as have a Mongoloid admixture.

These Mongolian characters occur often in Bohemia, in Moravia, and
especially in Galicia, in which last province they probably date from
the Mongol invasions of the thirteenth century. Such traits, however,
are not found among the Alpines of southern Germany or France.

In the American Indians, Mongoloid blood undoubtedly predominates but
the high-bridged nose of some of the tribes and their high stature
undoubtedly point to admixture with other races.

The Mongol is not inferior to the Nordic in intelligence, as is the
Negro, but represents such a divergent type that the mixture between
Nordics and Chinese or Japanese is not a good one. The overflow of
these Asiatics into our Pacific Coast might have Mongolized the States
there, had not the American laboring man taken alarm and secured
legislation forbidding their immigration.

With the foregoing as a simple and generalized description of the
primitive races of mankind as we know them today, and with special
emphasis on the three principal European variants of the "white" race,
we shall proceed to consider the distribution and racial influence of
the Nordics in western Europe.



III

THE NORDIC CONQUEST OF EUROPE


About 1300 B.C. a blond, blue-eyed race of Libyans appears in Egyptian
sculptures. Whence these blonds came or how they got into Libya is
not known, but it is interesting to note that blond Berbers are to be
found today in the Atlas Mountains of North Africa. These, however, are
probably more recent arrivals from the north.

About 1800 B.C. traces of Nordic infiltration appeared among the
Hittites. These Nordic conquerors later entered Mesopotamia as the
Mitanni and the Kassites, although it may be that they were only the
ruling classes of these peoples.

In recorded history the Nordics first appear in the West as Achæans.
They came from the North from the Dacian Plains and conquered Greece
and Phrygia about 1400 or 1500 B.C.

About 1200 or 1300 B.C. a Nordic people, the Osco-Umbrians, sweeping
down from the northeast, entered Italy. They were kindred to the
Achæans and were the ancestors of the Latin tribes, including the early
Romans. The aboriginal Mediterraneans were driven into southern Italy,
where, in Calabria and Apulia, they persist to this day. The contrast
between the peoples of North and South Italy is still profound.[2]

The Continental Nordics, as Celtic tribes, entered Gaul in the ninth
century B.C. From the evidence of place names, they passed through
South Germany. All Gaul except Aquitania, in the southwest, was
overwhelmed.

Spain was conquered by Celtic Nordics about 600 B.C., but their
domination was never complete and they soon mingled with the natives.
The mixed inhabitants of the peninsula were called Celtiberians by the
Romans.

During this same period the British Isles were overrun and thoroughly
occupied by Celtic Nordics named Goidels and the Celtic tongue was
imposed upon the Mediterranean population, although the latter survived
as a race in large numbers, especially in the western parts of England
and Ireland. These Celtic-speaking Mediterraneans were, until recently,
called "Iberians"; but fifteen hundred years ago the invading Saxons
called all the people they found in England "Welsh."

In about 300 B.C. a new wave of Celts entered Gaul and Britain. This
time they came from the German plains, speaking a somewhat different
form of Celtic. On the Continent they were known as the Belgæ and in
the British Isles as the Brythons. They gave their name to the British
Islands. By Cæsar's time they had conquered the northern third of Gaul
and all of England; but the Roman armies put an end to their farther
advance. They did not reach Ireland.

Roman writers describe the Celts in Gaul as pure Nordics and speak of
them as forming the ruling classes and military aristocracy until their
virtual destruction by Julius Cæsar in his ten years of conquest. His
campaigns in Gaul are said to have destroyed a million men, chiefly of
the warrior caste.

At the time of their greatest expansion the Gauls sacked Rome (387
B.C.). They pressed no farther south and soon retreated to and remained
in Cisalpine Gaul, that is, the valley of the Po and the country north
of the Apennines.

The Nordic Gauls or Galatians--to use the Greek form of their
name--devastated Greece about 297 B.C. and passed over into Asia Minor.
There they settled in what was long known as Galatia, now Angora, the
present seat of the Turkish Government. These Galatians were the last
Nordics to enter Asia Minor, if we except the armies of the Crusaders.

From the description of the physical characters of the Celtic-speaking
tribes they closely resembled the Germanic tribes that followed them
into the Roman Empire. Some French anthropologists find that the
present-day population of France is nearly four-fifths Alpine and they
have decided to call the Alpines "Celts," to avoid admitting that the
Celts were physically the same as the hated Germans. This error is not
shared by the leading French anthropologists, such as deLapouge, but it
has been accepted by some anthropologists.

Careful study of the references to the Celts by classic writers leaves
no doubt that the Gauls, Galatians, Belgæ, and Brythons were Nordics
as were their successors the Visigoths, Suevi, Alemanni, Burgundians,
and, above all, the Franks. In fact, France down to the time of the
Reformation was a Nordic land.

Soon after the time when the Belgæ first appear in Europe, Nordic
tribes speaking a Germanic dialect are mentioned in history. The
first of these tribes to come in conflict with the Romans were the
Teutones and Cimbri, who after defeating several Roman armies, were
utterly destroyed in 103 B.C. These people were the forerunners of many
tribes and nations which emerged, one after another, from the swamps
and forests of the north. The original home of most of them seems to
have been in Scandinavia, where they had been developing for several
thousand years. These newcomers were the latest and final linguistic
group to appear in the history of Europe. As Teutonic Nordics they have
dominated the scene ever since. The use of the word Teutonic is here
purely linguistic in order to distinguish these late comers from the
earlier, Celtic-speaking Nordic tribes.

The Teutonic Nordics formed a substantial element among the Belgæ
and Brythons and their expansion may well have been the cause of the
westward thrust of the latter. The Teutons began to press southward on
the Roman Empire early in the Christian era and this pressure continued
for some three centuries until the Empire collapsed under their
successive invasions.

As said above, the Celts and the Teutons were identical physically and
the use of the word "Celtic" cannot be justified as a racial term at
the present day. Among living Nordics, those of Celtic origin cannot
be distinguished physically from those of German or Scandinavian
extraction. Possibly red hair and the psychical peculiarities
associated with it may be rather more Celtic than Scandinavian. We find
in classical writers the names and description of the barbarians beyond
the borders of the Empire. They were all described as blue-eyed, fair
or red-haired giants. Height, however, must be considered as relative
to that of the Romans, whose legions in the later years of the empire
were apparently composed of small men. With each generation the names
applied to the barbarian tribes change, but the description of physical
characters remains the same.

The finest of these Teutonic barbarians were the Goths who, according
to their historian, Jordanes, crossed over from Sweden about 300 B.C.
and settled on the banks of the Vistula, whence they expanded into
South Russia, which they occupied for centuries. In fact, a remnant
of their language (Krim Götisch) was spoken in the Crimea until the
seventeenth century. The Gepidæ were a branch of the Goths who lay to
the west of the main body, and the Alans, a closely related tribe, were
located well to the east. It is interesting to note that some of the
Alans, fleeing from the Huns, took refuge in the Caucasus where the
Ossetes to this day show occasional Nordic physical characters.

The main body of the Gothic nation was split in two in 375 A.D. by the
invasion of the Huns, a Tatar people from Central Asia. Those who took
refuge in the west, in South Germany and Gaul, were called Visigoths.
A part of the Visigoths, however, fled across the Danube, devastated
the provinces of the Byzantine Empire and slew the reigning emperor,
Valens, in 378 A.D.

The eastern branch, or Ostrogoths, were conquered by the Huns and
remained in Dacia. Later, after Attila's death and the disruption of
his empire, the Ostrogoths, under the great Theodoric, invaded Italy
and came near to building a unified Italian nation nearly fourteen
hundred years ago.

The Visigoths, who had been long in contact with Roman civilization,
occupied Gaul. When Attila crossed the Rhine in 451 A.D. they fought
on the side of the Romans at Chalons, one of the decisive battles of
history, and their king, the Visigothic Theodoric, fell in the battle.
The Ostrogoths, on the other hand, were the best troops of the Hunnish
host.

The Visigoths entered Spain in 412 A.D. Their allies, the Suevi,
conquered and ruled Galicia and the provinces on the Atlantic which now
constitute Portugal. The invasion of Spain by the Visigoths resulted in
the expulsion of a closely related Teutonic people, the Vandals, who,
with their allies, a remnant of the Alans, crossed over into Africa
in 428 A.D. On the site of Carthage the Vandals erected a kingdom
which lasted a hundred years. They ruled the African coast westward to
the Atlantic, conquered and settled in Corsica and under their king,
Genseric, sacked Rome in 455 A.D.

These Vandals, originally from Sweden, first appear in history on
the Baltic coast, thence they passed down through Central Europe and
westward into France and thence into Spain, where they settled and
remained until they were driven into Africa. They may have left behind
some of their blood to mingle with the later-coming Germanic tribes in
Spain. It is possible also, though not probable, that to them are due
some of the blond characters still found in the Atlas Mountains. As a
race, however, their disappearance is complete.

The Visigoths maintained their control in Spain until 711 A.D. when
the Mohammedan Arabs crossed the Straits of Gibraltar and completely
defeated the Visigothic armies. Why the power of this people collapsed
so suddenly and completely is one of the mysteries of history, but
after the great seven days' battle on the Guadalquivir in which their
king, Roderick, was slain, the whole peninsula was easily conquered by
the Arabs. At this time, it is true, the blood of the Visigoths had
been greatly mixed with that of the subject races, resulting perhaps in
a weakening of their fighting power.

One of the reasons for the easy conquest of the Visigoths by the
Moors lay in the hatred for them as Arians by the old Orthodox
Catholic population who regarded their conquerors as heretics, and the
assistance rendered by the Jews whom the Visigoths had treated harshly
and who are reputed to have induced the Moors to make their invasion.

A remnant of the Visigoths fled northerly into southern Gaul, which
was called Gothia Septimania. There the name Visigoths was corrupted
into Vigot or Bigot, which was a term of reproach used by the orthodox
natives.

It is important to note that the relations between the populations
of the Roman Empire and the invading Teutonic Nordics were greatly
affected by the fact that the latter were the followers of the
schismatic monk Arius who, about 350 A.D., converted the Goths to
a Unitarian form of Christianity. The denial of the Trinity by the
Barbarians roused a fierce hatred among their subject peoples.
Ostrogoths and Visigoths, Vandals and Alans, Burgundians and Lombards,
all were Arians. The Franks alone among the Barbarians were converted
directly to Orthodox Christianity. This greatly facilitated their
conquest of Gaul. In consequence, France for more than a thousand
years was regarded as the eldest son of the church.

Down to our time, the aristocracy of Spain, and more especially that of
Portugal, shows a marked inheritance of blondness coming down largely
from Visigothic and Suevic ancestry. The province of Galicia still
retains very appreciable marks of Gothic blood, especially in a high
percentage of light-colored eyes.

The Visigoths left behind them in Spain a legacy of names which now are
regarded as most typically Spanish, as for instance Rodrigo, Alfonso,
Alvarez, Guzman, and Velasquez. In the same manner we find a Nordic
legacy of names reaching from Italy into France even where little
Nordic blood is left. In other words, while blood dies out, names
persist.

At the time of Spanish greatness the predominant blood in the peninsula
was still Gothic,[3] and the adventurers who went overseas and were
lost to the race were of this blood. In Portugal, the one great
poet, Camoens,[4] and in Spain Cervantes, who was his contemporary,
were descendants of the old Gothic nobility and had marked Nordic
characteristics, as had the Cid Campeador. The case was the same
in Italy[5] at this period. The great men were from the northern
part of the peninsula. Dante, Michaelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, and
virtually all of the leading men of the Renaissance were blond Nordics.
Columbus himself, supposed to have come from Genoa, is described as
having blue eyes and fair hair. In southern France, in the so-called
Gothic Septimania and in the country around Toulouse, the home of the
Troubadours, Gothic names abound.[6] A similar condition prevails
throughout France. French names are Gothic, Frankish, or Burgundian
today, though disguised by their spelling, as, for example, Joffre
from Gotfrid. In the opinion of Count deLapouge, France as late as the
settlement of America was more Nordic than is the Germany of today.

The main body of the Visigoths who survived the conquest by the Arabs
took refuge in the northwestern part of Spain where they maintained
some small kingdoms which ultimately coalesced and became the nucleus
of a Christian Spain, which in the course of a seven-hundred-year
crusade gradually reconquered the peninsula and finally expelled the
Moors in 1492.

The Arabs who conquered Spain, and the Islamized Persians and Moors,
had a wonderful period of intellectual expansion during the seventh and
following centuries. This amazing outburst of genius, which preserved
for us much of the science and learning of the Greeks, came to an end
when the Mediterranean Mohammedans began mixing their blood with that
of their Negro slaves. Mohammedanism has always appealed to the lower
races, especially the Negro, because when they became followers of
the Prophet they were admitted to social and racial equality with the
superior race. This and the lure of the Negro women ruined the Arab
race. Today, all through Africa and Egypt and in parts of Arabia, the
so-called Arabs are often Negroid in appearance. In this case polygamy
was a racial curse because the richer and abler men had the most slave
women and left a larger progeny of half-breed children than did their
poorer countrymen.

The exact reverse happened in the case of the Turks, who were
originally Alpines from Central Asia strongly mixed with Mongol. They
conquered Asia Minor and the nations of Southeast Europe up to and
including Hungary. Everywhere they seized the most beautiful women and,
being polygamists, the ablest Turks had the most children by the finest
women of the subject countries. Thus the Turks bred up as the Arabs
bred down. To this day the Turks are the superior race in Asia Minor
and have eliminated, at least from the ruling classes, practically all
the physical traces of their Asiatic origin.

The women of the Caucasus, especially the Circassians and Georgians,
who retain some remnants of the Nordic Alans, have always been noted
for their physical beauty. They were in great demand in Turkish Harems.

Incidentally the Kurds are, or rather were, Nordic and it is
interesting to note that Saladin, of Crusading fame, was a Kurd.

Concerning other Teutonic Nordics, we need mention only those whose
blood enters largely into modern nations. Of these, one of the most
interesting peoples were the Burgundians, who settled on the western
bank of the upper Rhine in what is now Alsace, and in Burgundian
France and French-speaking Switzerland. They were a very promising
and flourishing nation until their overthrow in the middle of the
fifth century by Attila and his Huns, a tragedy which supplies the
subject matter of the Niebelungenlied. Appollonius Sidonius refers to
the Burgundians as being seven feet high; while this is an obvious
exaggeration, it is interesting to note that in the old Burgundian
provinces we find the tallest stature in France today.

When the Lombards first appear in history about 165 A.D. they were
in northern Germany. They entered Italy in 568 A.D. and conquered
the Peninsula even more thoroughly than had their predecessors, the
Ostrogoths. They not only occupied Italy north of the Apennines for
three hundred years, but also established several large duchies in the
south. The valley of the Po, where they settled, had been for centuries
Cisalpine Gaul, and this Lombard territory is today the backbone of
modern Italy. The percentage of light-colored eyes around Milan is
high, and blondness through this district is as common a characteristic
of the peasantry as it is of the aristocracy throughout the rest of
Italy.

The Lombards were Arians and were in constant conflict with the Popes
and their Orthodox followers and were consequently generally maligned.
Just as a similar situation facilitated the conquest of Spain by the
Moors, so the destruction of the Lombard Kingdom by the Franks was made
the easier by this antagonism.

In passing, we need only remark that there were small bands of other
Nordics, who entered Italy as Saxons, Alemanni, and Suevi, and who
entered France as Alans and Saxons. These small bands differed in few
respects from the larger Nordic peoples and were quickly absorbed in
them. All these barbarian tribes were closely related racially.

Before we leave the Alemanni who occupied southwest Germany with Alsace
and German-speaking Switzerland, we may note that their name, Alemanni,
did not mean 'All Men' in the sense of a mixed company, but rather _The
Men_ "par excellence,"--the German "_All_" being the analogous of the
Greek "_Pan_."

We come next to the Franks, who appear in history about the time of
the Battle of Chalons in 451 A.D. in which they took an unimportant
part, but in the following centuries they rapidly gained the ascendency
throughout Gaul and western Germany. The conquests by the Franks were
the most important and enduring of those of the Teutonic Nordics in
Continental Europe. We know very little about the Franks from the
Romans, although they may have been the Varini, who were located in
northwestern Germany in classic times. As a result of the Crusades,
Roman Orthodox, as contrasted with Greek Christians, are known as
"Ferangi" to this day in the Levant. Being Orthodox Christians and not
Arians, the Franks had the support of the Roman Church in all their
conquests.

The Flemings of Belgium are remnants of the original Franks who
retained their own language. Most of these invaders, like the Franks,
Visigoths, Lombards, and Normans, adopted the Latin language of their
subject peoples when they settled within the confines of the Roman
Empire.

Except in eastern England and northern France the numbers of the
conquering Nordics were not sufficient entirely to evict and replace
the conquered populations, but they everywhere formed the upper classes
and land-owning aristocracy and to this day these same classes in all
European nations continue to show, in more or less purity, the physical
characters of the Nordic race.

During the Middle Ages, the dominating and war-like Nordics paused long
enough from fighting each other to carry on the Crusades and to beat
back the onrush of the Saracens at Tours in 732 A.D. They saved Europe
from the Mongols in 1241 A.D. at the Battle of Liegnitz (now Wahlstatt)
in Silesia where the Duke of Liegnitz and the Nordic nobility,
outnumbered five to one, lay dead upon the field of battle; but checked
the advance of the Asiatic hordes and saved the budding civilization of
Europe from the fate of Asia.

This race supplied the navigators of the expansion period, when the
world was for the first time opened up in the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries, and since then they have formed the fighting men, soldiers,
sailors, explorers, hunters, adventurers, and frontiersmen of Europe
and her colonies.

After mastering the north of France, the Franks subjugated the remnants
of the Burgundians and destroyed the Visigothic kingdom which still
flourished in the south of Gaul. They also conquered the country on
the east bank of the Rhine known as Franconia, and under Charlemagne
seized northern Italy. In 800 _A.D._ Charlemagne revived the Western
Roman Empire, which under various guises lasted down to 1807.

Charlemagne's greatest and most difficult conquest, however, was that
of the Saxons, who were pure Nordics. They occupied the districts of
northwest Germany, centering in Hanover, and even today this part of
Germany is still the most Nordic portion of that country.

When Charlemagne reached the Elbe in his conquests he found beyond it
the heathen Alpine Wends and from his day down to the World War, the
history of Central Europe has been the pushing back of the frontier of
Alpine Asia from the Elbe eastward toward the Urals.

These eastern lands were conquered and little by little Christianized
and civilized from the west. This process went on as far as the
Vistula, where it met the culture, and Greek Orthodox religion, of the
Byzantine Empire, which had followed up the rivers of Russia from the
Black Sea and had given to Moscovia and to the Ukraine their religion,
alphabet, and art.

The Northmen were the last of the Nordic barbarians to appear on the
scene. In the ninth and tenth centuries they raided the coasts of
Europe from England to Greece. They established themselves as permanent
settlers on all the Scottish islands and on many parts of the Scottish
coast. In Caithness, the northernmost corner of Scotland, Norse was
spoken as late as the seventeenth century. They formed settlements and
left place names all around the coasts of Wales and England. In the
tenth century as Danes they subjugated northeastern England and imposed
their rule east of the line of Watling Street, which runs from London
to Chester. These Danes had barely been overcome by the Saxons when
a new group of Nordics arrived as Normans from France and conquered
England in 1066.

Ireland was attacked by the Norse who came in from the north and by the
Danes who entered from the south. The island was overrun by these two
peoples who have left many traces in the place names and in the blood
of Ireland.

On the Continent the coasts of France and Germany were harried by the
Northmen and the country since called Normandy was conquered by them in
911 A.D. The Danish conquest of England, referred to above, must have
been largely Norse while, in France, Rollo's followers were probably to
an overwhelming extent Danes.

The Norman element in England and to some extent in America down to
this very day has supplied a very large proportion of the conquerors,
seamen, explorers, and frontiersmen. This same ruling and restless
strain showed itself in the individual adventurers who went to South
Italy and Sicily, which they thoroughly conquered in the twelfth
century. They even attacked the Byzantine Empire. To this day blue
eyes in Sicily are called "Norman eyes" and are to some extent
characteristic of the upper classes there.

It was in this period that the Norse rovers under Leif Ericson
discovered the northeast mainland of America about 1000 A.D., nearly
five hundred years before Columbus, who probably knew of their voyages,
crossed the Atlantic.

At the time of this Norwegian and Danish expansion, there was a
similar outpouring of Swedes who, as Varangians, crossed the Baltic
into Russia, which they conquered and ruled for many centuries. The
name Varangian is strongly suggestive of Varini or Franks and the name
"Russian" means "rowers." The Varangians came across the seas precisely
as their ancestors, the Goths, had done a thousand years earlier. After
the expansion of this so-called Viking period, Scandinavian activities
came to an end.

       *       *       *       *       *

Man undoubtedly crossed back and forth on dry land from Europe to
England in Neolithic and earlier times. In fact, some of the earliest
records of man have been found in England and the recent discoveries
in Norfolk of chipped implements and hearths show that man made
tools and used fire in England before the appearance of the first
glaciers--something over a million years ago.

These early species and genera of men largely died out or were
exterminated and were succeeded at the beginning of Neolithic times by
invasions of the small, dark, long-skulled Mediterranean race which
for many thousands of years formed the basis of the population of
England, Scotland, and Ireland.

About the beginning of the Bronze Age, some 1800 B.C., a tall,
round-skulled type from the Continent called the Beaker Makers appeared
on the scene in England. They resembled somewhat the present Dinaric
race, a tall, round-skulled branch of the Alpines now found from the
Tyrol southward to Albania on the east side of the Adriatic. It is
clear that the Beaker Makers entered from the east across the narrow
seas and their remains indicate a tall, masterful type which seems to
have disappeared to a large extent, although some of the round-skulled,
heavily built Englishmen, found numerously among the commercial
classes, may be their representatives today.

The racial composition of the British Isles when the Nordic first
appeared on the scene may be safely said to have been composed of
small, brunet Mediterraneans interspersed with a small number of
round-skulled types and including, very probably, remnants of still
earlier races.

The Celtic-speaking Nordics appear to have crossed the Rhine into
France and the countries to the southwest about 800 B.C. At about
the same time they forced their way into the British Isles which
they thoroughly conquered. These Nordics were called Goidels or "Q"
Celts and their language is represented today by the remnants of Erse
in Ireland, Gaelic in Scotland, and Manx on the Isle of Man. These
"Q" Celts, as contrasted with the later coming "P" Celts, are now
represented by the Macs (meaning son) just as the later Cymric or
Brythonic Celts are called "P" Celts because in their language Ap means
son.

The aborigines were called Picts in Scotland. These Mediterranean Picts
spoke a language related to Hamitic or Egyptian, and many place names
of this origin are still to be found.

It is not definitely known whether the Gaelic speech of Scotland is a
remnant of early Goidel invasion or whether it was reintroduced from
Ireland in the early centuries of our era. The latter appears probable,
because the second conquest by the Celts was nearly complete throughout
Britain, although it did not reach Ireland. This second subjugation of
Britain was by the "P" Celts or Brythons, speaking a Cymric form of
Celtic. It occurred in the fourth century B.C. and was so thorough that
it is not probable that remnants of the earlier Goidelic speech could
have survived in Scotland.

These Brythons were represented on the continent by the Belgæ, who, in
Cæsar's time, occupied Gaul between the Rhine and the Seine. A remnant
of their speech survives in Brittany as Armorican.

The "P" Celts gave their speech to all England and remnants of it are
found in the recently extinct Cornish in Cornwall and in the Cymric of
Wales. Both the "Q" Celts and the "P" Celts were, on their arrival in
Britain, pure Nordics, but in many cases they soon merged with the
aboriginal population. They were everywhere the ruling military class,
in Britain as well as in Gaul.

Having imposed their language on the conquered people, they died out
almost completely, leaving, as in Wales, their speech on the lips
of the little Mediterranean native. Whatever truth there is in the
legends of King Arthur and his resistance to the Saxons they clearly
indicate a blond, Celtic aristocracy ruling over an underclass of small
Mediterraneans. The same condition is indicated in Irish legends where
the Celts appear as a distinct, fair-haired military class.

The next Nordic invasion of Britain was by the Saxons from the country
around the present duchy of Holstein and by the Angles and Jutes from
farther north on the mainland of Denmark or Jutland. These tribes which
entered England in the fifth century were probably more purely Nordic
than the continental Teutons and this also was true of the Norse and
Varangians of a later date. Their conquest was almost completed during
the century after their arrival but there was sufficient resistance
in the western part of England to postpone its final subjugation for
several centuries. However, gradually the population of practically all
England and the lowlands of Scotland became purely Nordic. This racial
stock was reinforced by the invasion of Danes, who occupied most of
northeast England.

The Norsemen settled around the coasts of Ireland, Scotland, England,
and, especially, Wales, and added a very considerable contribution to
the pure Nordic element of the population.

The next and last invasion of Britain by the Nordics was the Norman
conquest in 1066. The Norman leaders and soldiers were pure Nordics
from the most Nordic part of France. In fact, the Normans were heathen
Danes speaking a Teutonic tongue when they arrived in Normandy in 911
A.D. so that on coming to England they had been in France only a little
over one hundred and fifty years. In those years they had accepted
Christianity, had learned French, and had become the exponents of the
highest culture in Europe. Into England they brought with them many
followers of Alpine origin, and the clergy whom they imported was also
composed very largely of Latinized Alpines.

At this point we may remark that Wales, especially along the coasts,
has a very large Nordic population. It is absurd to distinguish between
England, Scotland, North Ireland, and Wales as is done in the census
of the United States. We might just as well distinguish between North
England and South England on the ground that the first is Anglian and
Danish and the other Saxon and Jutish. The lowlands of Scotland are
pure English territory and have been such for a thousand years. The
Ulster Scots who came to America were only two or three generations
removed from the Scottish and English borderers and had not mixed with
the native Irish. It is also to be remarked that the Norman conquest
of England was that of one Nordic people by another, and that Great
Britain and Ireland constitute a group, the membership of which is
overwhelmingly Nordic in its racial inheritance.

At the time of the discovery of America, all Europe was far more Nordic
than it is today. Germany at that time had not witnessed the expansion
of the Alpines of the south and east which is characteristic of the
present era. In England, before the industrial revolution created a
demand for little brunet Mediterraneans to drive spindles, the Nordic
had the field to himself. As farmer, soldier, sailor, explorer, and
pioneer he was pre-eminent. The brunet Mediterranean element, formerly
called Iberians, had been forced back into the extreme west of England
and into Wales, and was not an important economic or political factor.
Nor was there any considerable immigration of that racial stock into
the American colonies. These were settled primarily by the descendants
of the Normans, Saxons, Anglians, and Danes coming from the distinctly
Nordic districts of the mother land.

Norfolk and Suffolk were settled by the Angles and afterwards formed a
part of the Danish kingdom. As said above the lowlands of Scotland and
the English borders were Anglian and Dane, while the coasts and islands
of Scotland were everywhere Norse. The Highlands were Celtic with an
admixture of Norse, Anglian, and Norman. There were also remnants of
the old Mediterranean populations, probably Picts. Curiously enough
these Mediterraneans contributed their dark eyes and hair color,
but not their short stature. The population of West Scotland has the
greatest height of all the peoples of Europe.

Ireland, like England, was settled as we have seen originally by
the Neolithic Mediterraneans. They in turn were conquered by the
Goidelic or "Q" Celts, blond Nordics who imposed their language on the
aborigines. In the ninth century, Ireland was overrun by the Norse and
Danes, whose descendants today constitute a very considerable portion
of the population. The very name Ireland is Danish. Most of the big
blond Irish of today, although they like to claim "Celtic" descent,
are, in fact, of Norse, Danish, Saxon, Norman, or Scotch derivation.

The Nordic elements in Ireland were reinforced again and again by
the English and Normans, who, from the days of their original entry
into the island down to our day have formed the great majority of the
nobility and upper classes of the country. The Celtic Goidel in Ireland
today is a negligible quantity which cannot be racially identified.
The brunet elements in western Ireland, though to some extent Celtic
in speech, are descended from the old Neolithic or Mediterranean
population of the British Isles, mixed with a primitive, aboriginal
race of great antiquity, the Firbolgs.

Ireland has shown a singular power of absorbing its conquerors.
The descendants of Danish, Norman, and English settlers consider
themselves pure Irish "Celts." It is a strange fact that the English,
Scotch, Norman, Danish, and even the French Huguenots who have
settled in Ireland have acquired and have handed down an extraordinary
temperamental unity. As to language, by the time of Elizabeth the
English Pale constituted a part of eastern Leinster, and there English
was uniformly spoken. The English language ultimately spread over the
whole of Ireland, leaving only a few remnants of Celtic speech in the
extreme west.

From the times of James I to those of William III, large numbers of
English and Scotch borderers passed over to the northeast corner of the
island into the province of Ulster. They were fervent Presbyterians
and hated the native Catholic Irish. It was the sons and grandsons of
these immigrants who came to America in the eighteenth century and are
sometimes miscalled the "Scotch Irish." They had special grievances of
their own against England on account of economic restrictions imposed
upon their industries.

Before this time a large number of Cromwellian soldiers had settled in
Leinster, but not having their own women with them they intermarried
with the Catholic Irish and their descendants today are most intensely
Irish in national feeling. The Reformation never had much hold
on Ireland, so that the Catholic Irish today represent the mixed
population of Ireland before the sixteenth century, together with
numerous converts from the Scotch and English immigrants.

With this brief survey of the distribution of the Nordic race in Europe
down to the time of the discovery of America and the beginning of
emigration to the colonies of the New World, we can pass on to one of
the most dramatic mass-migrations of man.

From West Central Asia where it was in contact with the Mongoloids on
the _east_, the Nordic race pushed across Europe to the extreme western
coasts. We shall show how it traversed the Atlantic Ocean and then in
three centuries subdued a continent. Generation after generation it
fought its way westward, until it reached the Pacific Ocean, where
today it stands confronting Asia and its immemorial rivals, the
Mongols, this time on the _west_.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 2: In _Geographical Lore of the Time of the Crusades_, by
J.K. Wright of the American Geographic Society, p. 320, the author
says: "In these authorities we find that the differences between the
inhabitants of the northern and southern parts of Italy were fully
appreciated in the twelfth century. 'The Lombards,' Gunther says, 'are
a keen, skillful, and active people; foresighted in counsel; expert
in justice; strong in body and spirit, full of life and handsome to
look upon, with slight, supple bodies that give them great power of
endurance; economical and always moderate in eating and drinking;
masters of their hands and mouths; honorable in every business
transaction; mighty in the arts and always striving for the new; lovers
of freedom and ready to face death for freedom's sake. These people
have never been willing to submit to kings.... But what a contrast the
people of Apulia in the south present to the Lombards. Dirty, lazy,
weak, good-for-nothing idlers that they are.'"]

[Footnote 3: The Spanish popular heroes, Don Rodrigo and the Cid
Campeador, were Gothic, to judge by their names, as was the brave
crusader, Count Raymund of Toulouse. L. Wilser has called attention
to the number of Gothic names still in use in the Iberian peninsula:
Alfonso or Affonso, Alonzo (Gothic Athalafuns); Alvaro and Alvarez
(Gothic Alavair); Bermuy (Gothic Berimud); Bertran (Gothic Bairhtram);
Diego and Diaz (Gothic Thiudareiks, Dietrich); Esmeralda; Fernando and
its genitive Fernandez (Gothic Ferdinanths); Froilaz and Fruela (Gothic
Fravila); Gelmirez (Gelimer); Gomez (Gothic Guma); Gonzalo and Gonzalez
(Gothic Gunthimir, Gundemar); Guilfonso (Gothic Viljafuns); Guzman
(Gothic Godaman, Gutmann); Ildefonso (Gothic Hildifuns); Isabella;
Marques (Gothic Markja); Menendez (Gothic Herminanths); Mundiz and
Munnez (Gothic Mundila); Pizarro (Gothic Pitzas); Ramiro (Gothic
Radomir or Ragnimir); Ramon and Renmondez (Gothic Ragnimund); Rodrigo
and Rodriguez; Ruiz (Gothic Rudoreiks); Sesnandes (Gothic Sisenand);
Vasco and Vasquez (Nordic Wasce); Velasquez (Gothic Vilaskja?). See p.
107, vol. II, of book _Die Germanen_, by Doctor Ludwig Wilser.]

[Footnote 4: Describing Camoens, George Edward Woodberry (_The Torch_,
pp. 203-4; New York, 1920) says: "He was of the old blue blood of the
Peninsula, the Gothic blood, the same that gave birth to Cervantes. He
was blond, and bright-haired, with blue eyes, large and lively, the
face oval and ruddy--and in manhood the beard short and rounded, with
long untrimmed mustachios--the forehead high, the nose aquiline; in
figure agile and robust; in action 'quick to draw and slow to sheathe,'
and when he was young, he writes that he had seen the heels of many,
but none had seen his heels. Born about the year 1524, of a noble and
well-connected family, educated at Coimbra, a university famous for the
classics, and launched in life about the court at Lisbon, he was no
sooner his own master than he fell into troubles."]

[Footnote 5: Wilser cites Woltmann's essay, "Have the Goths disappeared
in Italy?," which shows that even in the latter part of the Middle Ages
many people lived according to Gothic law; that in some cities there
even existed Gothic sections; and that many Gothic names can be traced,
as Stavila, Nefila, Leuuia, Hermia, Hilpja, Ansefrida, Gilliefredus,
Totila, Vila.]

[Footnote 6: In fact, almost all the names of the Troubadours are
Teutonic, says Wilser, giving the following examples of French names,
with the Teutonic original in parentheses: Arnaut (Arnold); Aimeric
(Emerich); Bernart (Bernhard); Bertrand (Bertram); Gaucelm (Walchelm);
Gautier (Walther); Guillem (Wilhelm); Guiraut (Gerold); Gunot (Wido);
Jaufre or Joffre (Gotfrid); Raimon (Raginmund); Rambaut (Raginbald);
Rudel (Rudolf); Savaric (Sabarich). See p. 107, vol. II, of _Die
Germanen_, by Doctor Ludwig Wilser.]



IV

THE NORDIC SETTLEMENT OF AMERICA


Before considering the question of the origin of the English settlers
of the Atlantic seaboard, it is important to understand the motives
that actuated the newcomers.

The impelling motive of the settlers who crossed the ocean to America
from the earliest Colonial times down to 1880 was land hunger, and just
as we speculate in stocks today, so down to one hundred years ago our
ancestors speculated in lands on the frontier.

It is difficult to realize the extent to which the ownership of the
land in Europe was monopolized, largely through the exercise of
Royal favor, by the upper classes in the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. This established English tradition and practice, brought
to America by the early settlers, coupled with the favoritism of the
royal governors in land grants, was one of the causes which led to the
Revolution. After the American victory much land was confiscated on the
plea that the owners were Loyalists.

The distribution of free land in the United States came substantially
to an end about 1880, when the public domain became exhausted. Up
to that date, the immigration into America had been assimilated
readily. Certain exceptions will be dealt with later. Practically all
of it was from northwestern Europe, and the immigrants came mostly
of their own volition. It took some degree of enterprise to leave
home, cross the Atlantic, and establish oneself in a new country amid
strange surroundings. Settling new land meant clearing the forests and
destroying the game, as well as buying off or fighting the Indians,
whose ideas about land ownership were vague. To the frontiersman in
early days, the term "a clearing" was synonymous with "a settlement."

Religious motives and the desire for political and economic
independence, of course, were also great factors in the Pilgrim and
Puritan migration to New England from 1620 to 1640.

The New England Puritans represented only a part and relatively a
small part of the exodus from England. They were pure English from the
most Anglo-Saxon part of England and consisted largely of yeomen and
the lesser gentry, who found the religious and political conditions
in England under the Stuarts intolerable for freemen. They were
essentially dissenters, who refused to bend the knee to prelate or to
king.

In 1640, under the Commonwealth the Puritans seized the reins of
government in England and only permitted the return of royalty in
1660 under conditions which established for all time the supremacy of
Parliament. In fact, during the Commonwealth the power of Parliament
had become so great that many of the best minds of England felt that a
restoration of the monarchy was needed as a check.

The settlers of New England may be regarded as essentially rebels
against established religion and established authority when the
religion and authority were not of their own choosing. This
non-conformist spirit persisted in the successive new frontiers as
they were settled by New Englanders. The early New England settlers
of western New York and the old Northwest Territory gave birth to an
astonishing number of new sects, religions, "isms," and communities,
ranging all the way from Mormonism to Shakers and the Oneida Community.
They were, however, law-abiding in their own way and murders and crimes
of violence were relatively infrequent.

This is in sharp contrast to the southern frontiersmen, who were and
are addicted to killings and physical violence. That, however, is
chiefly true of the inhabitants of the Appalachian valleys, who always
have been lawless. The dissent and predisposition to rebellion among
the New Englanders dates back to the Puritans in England and the
lawlessness and violence of the Ulster Scots to the endless border
warfare on the Scottish frontier. The southern frontiersman was
originally a Presbyterian, but he found his religion too intellectual
for isolated communities and turned in many cases to the more emotional
creeds of the Methodist and Baptist. The hatred of England by the
Ulster Scotch frontiersmen dated back to the unjust and oppressive
interference with their industries in the north of Ireland, as well as
to a deep-seated impatience of all authority.

After the Revolution this hatred of authority was transferred to the
tidewater aristocrats and was accentuated by the debtor complex, which
has characterized all our frontiers.

The character of the frontier from the very beginning remained the
same. Each generation of the restless, the discontented and the
failures pushed West, carrying with them some of the fine qualities
of the original settlers of the seaboard, but more often developing a
new complex of intolerance for the restraints and usages of the older
communities.

There is an amusing and significant evolution of these traits in
families who settled around Massachusetts Bay and then moved to
the Connecticut Valley; thence to Vermont, western New York, Ohio,
Illinois, Iowa, and Los Angeles, where they now flourish.

At the time of the Revolution the intense hatred in New England of
the mother country was due partly to a desire to confiscate the lands
of the Loyalists and partly to that which they considered unfair
restrictions on their overseas trade, as well as to an unwillingness to
being taxed to pay a part of the great cost of conquering Canada.

The net result of these forces was a widespread anti-British and,
later, anti-governmental complex, which has characterized our country
ever since. In contrast to England and to Canada, we are an essentially
lawless people.

[Illustration: Ireland.]

In the North the Revolution was largely a movement of various Calvinist
communities. The few Episcopalians in New England and the more numerous
adherents of that church in New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were
almost all Loyalists. In Virginia, however, and further to the south
the numerous Church of England planter class took the American side
and as a result retained their leadership as an aristocracy down to
the time of the Civil War. Even at the time of the Revolution this
church contributed more than its quota of leaders. Of fifty-six signers
of the Declaration of Independence, thirty-four are classified as
Episcopalians, twelve as Congregationalists, five as Presbyterians,
two Quakers, one Baptist and one Roman Catholic. Of the Continental
Congress which ratified this Declaration, nearly two-thirds are said to
have been Episcopalians.

In the North following the expulsion of the Loyalists, the Church of
England was left prostrate, and it was some time after the Revolution
before it was successfully reorganized and was definitely designated
as the _Protestant_ Episcopal Church to become, after a century, the
fashionable church of the Atlantic seaboard. The Protestant Episcopal
Church has never had any substantial hold in the Middle or Far West
and even today it is there largely a missionary church with a tendency
towards ritualism, which has checked its normal development.

The Roman Catholic population of the colonies was negligible. In 1790
out of a white population of a little over 3,000,000, there were not
more than 35,000 Catholics in the United States. This number included
5000 Negroes and some Germans. They were located for the most part in
Maryland and Pennsylvania, showing that the South Irish Catholics had
not come over in appreciable numbers during Colonial times. Many of the
colonies legislated against Roman Catholics.

The Revolution itself was political and social, carrying to an extreme
development the political theories of the English Whigs. The distrust
of officialdom in power, engendered by the Revolution, led to all
manner of constitutional and legal restrictions, in place of a reliance
on the personal character of office holders as in England.

During Colonial times two distinct types of population developed.
First, the older communities along the tidewater districts, closely in
touch with Europe and having a long tradition of culture and wealth.
Second, a type grew up on the frontier which from the very beginning
showed itself intolerant of the control of the older and richer
settlements. This found its expression in Shays's Rebellion in West
Massachusetts in 1786-87, in the Whiskey Rebellion in Pennsylvania
in 1794, and, still earlier, in 1770, when the "Regulators" in North
Carolina were in open rebellion. After the Revolution this tendency
became more and more marked until the then West under Andrew Jackson
took over the control of the country and, with many unfortunate
results, carried Jefferson's ideals to an extreme.

The Revolution emphasized this second attitude of mind and resulted
in the loss, by expulsion, of some of the best Nordic blood in the
country. The Loyalists from Boston, for instance, comprised many of the
oldest and most distinguished families. The representative families
of that city today are not descended wholly from the aristocratic
Colonial families, but largely from the population of the small towns
and villages in its neighborhood. It is said that a total of eighty to
a hundred thousand Loyalists left the colonies and went to Canada and
England and to the English West Indies.

New England to a greater extent than any other colony had been at
war with France and her Canadian Indians for the best part of one
hundred and fifty years, but the memory of this prolonged and bloody
struggle was obliterated by the Revolution. In its place there arose
in America a sentiment for France, caused largely by the romantic
personality of Lafayette, which survives to this day. The Jeffersonian
emotional sympathy with the French Revolution also played a large part.
The fact nevertheless is that we had a naval war in 1798 with the
French, although no formal war was declared. It was caused by French
depredations on American commerce, resulting in several duels between
American and French frigates. All this is conveniently forgotten or
ignored in some of our school text-books.

       *       *       *       *       *

The earliest permanent settlements of importance in New England were
around Massachusetts Bay, and in Virginia along navigable streams.
From such centers settlements spread up and down the coast until
all the desirable lands accessible to salt water became occupied.
In New England the coasts of southern Maine, of Rhode Island, and
of Connecticut were quickly occupied. Migration then went overland
from Massachusetts Bay, westward to the Connecticut River. This was
our first real northern frontier, and it took more than a century to
populate southern and western New England.

The settlement of Connecticut westward was blocked by the colony of New
York, while the Indians delayed the advance of Massachusetts to the
north. Connecticut in turn threw out colonies at an early date, such as
Newark in New Jersey in 1666.

Vermont was not settled until just before the Revolution, owing to the
danger from the Indians and a serious dispute between New Hampshire
and New York as to its ownership. At the time of the Revolution it was
a typical frontier with all of its bad features. At that time it was
about as rough and tough as Kentucky or Tennessee. After the Revolution
some of the best of its population migrated to western New York, along
with settlers from all over New England who went for the most part
through Vermont.

Early in the eighteenth century nearly all the desirable lands within
reach of salt water had been occupied from New Jersey southward, and
later coming immigrants were forced back into the uplands of the West
beyond the so-called Fall Line at which the Atlantic rivers cease to be
navigable.

New York interposed an absolute bar to westward migration because the
Iroquois Indians held almost all the fertile lands to the west of the
Hudson River. The east bank of the Hudson was more or less filled up
with New Englanders and the west bank with its undesirable lands was
turned over to late coming immigrants, chiefly Germans. The Dutch
population of New York was but small. The total population of the
colony at the time of its seizure by England in 1664 was little more
than 10,000 and there were already many English among them.

The English settlers occupied both banks of the Delaware around
Philadelphia, forcing the later-coming Germans and Ulster Scots to the
west. The Swedish settlement along the river was trifling and was soon
absorbed. There is very little trace of it left in place or personal
names. On the upper reaches of the Delaware River, in Pennsylvania, and
in New York, there were some small settlements of French Huguenots, who
suffered severely from Indian depredations during the Revolution.

Delaware and the country east of Chesapeake Bay are purely English, as
was Maryland, except that western Maryland was really part of western
Pennsylvania and western Virginia.

Virginia itself was the mother of States and in Colonial times extended
in fact, as other colonies did in theory, to the Mississippi, without
mentioning claims to the South Sea. The tidewater population of
Virginia differed profoundly from that of the western part of the
State, including the Shenandoah Valley, which was settled largely from
western Pennsylvania.

There was a marked difference between the settlement of New England and
that of Virginia. To New England the earliest settlers brought their
women and families, while in Virginia the early arrivals were nearly
all males. Women were afterwards sent over by the shipload, but this
was only during the early days of the colony.

Like Virginia, North Carolina in Colonial times extended nominally to
the Mississippi. Its population lacked the tidewater aristocrats of the
Old Dominion and contained many Scots, straight from the Highlands,
who, strangely, took the British side during the Revolution, as well as
a very large number of Ulster Scots in the western mountains, and in
the counties which were afterwards Tennessee.

Kentucky and Tennessee were both settled from the colonies immediately
to the east, but largely by the Ulster Scots, coming from western
Pennsylvania through the mountainous districts of Virginia and North
Carolina. These Ulster Scots came south along the Appalachian valleys,
which trend in a southwesterly direction. They were reinforced by the
numerous groups of the same people, who came up from South Carolina.
Kentucky was much more purely English than Tennessee.

It is a fact but little understood, that the frontier was not much
reinforced from the coast but extended itself. In other words, the
frontier from the beginning was pushed onward by the backwoodsmen, each
generation advancing a little farther westward and making new clearings.

The people along the coast, after a couple of generations of severe
privation, became relatively rich as compared with the frontiersmen.
The inhabitants of the coast cities for the most part preferred a
sea-faring life rather than the hewing out of a homestead in the
wilderness. There have been many cases in our Colonial history where
men went from the coast towns to the wilderness, but for the most part
they were content to stay at home.

As to the original racial complexion of the colonies, New England was
purely Nordic and English. The handful of Ulster Scots in New Hampshire
was not to be distinguished from the English, and the individual
Huguenot families around Boston were only trifling in number. This
remained true of all New England during the Colonial period.

In New York, however, conditions were different. Dutch New Amsterdam,
afterwards English New York City, was always an important port and
attracted to itself from the earliest times a substantial number of
foreigners. In addition to the Dutch founders a considerable number of
French Huguenots were among the earlier settlers. There were also a few
Germans and Portuguese.

The west bank of the Hudson was less accessible and desirable than the
east bank, but there were some substantial colonies of Palatine Germans
settled there and up the valleys of the Mohawk and its connecting
streams. These last played a creditable part in the heavy fighting
which raged in this district with the British settlers, who were for
the most part Loyalists. There were also some small colonies of pure
Scotch along the Mohawk.

One of the results of the Revolution was the expulsion of the Iroquois
Indians, who had occupied New York westward from near Albany to
Buffalo. They had sided with the British and had committed many
atrocities. Their lands were immediately occupied by New Englanders,
coming chiefly from or through Vermont, so that New York State west of
Albany became little more than an extension of New England, except that
the settlers had become Presbyterians.

Many of the colonists who came to New York from Holland were refugees
from the provinces now included in Belgium--in other words, they were
either Flemings or French Huguenots. The real Dutch in the province
came from the north of Holland and were mostly Nordic Frisians.

In addition to the large migration from Ulster very many English
Protestants from Leinster came to America by way of New York
immediately after the Revolution. The Catholic Irish did not come in
any numbers until after 1845.

The Huguenots were pre-dominantly Nordic. For example, New Rochelle in
New York was settled directly from Old Rochelle which is, even today,
one of the purest Nordic districts remaining in France. It is entirely
safe to say that the Huguenots from Brittany, Normandy, and Picardy,
who came to the American colonies by way of England and Holland were
overwhelmingly Nordic. Some of those from southern France were probably
Mediterranean.

Outside of the Port of New York the Dutch population was confined to
the Hudson River towns, chiefly on the east bank, up to and including
Albany and Schenectady. The Dutch element of New Jersey was very small.

New Jersey was almost all English, except a few Scotch settlements. It
was settled directly from England by way of Perth Amboy, Elizabeth,
and Freehold in the north. South Jersey was settled from Pennsylvania.
There were a few German communities scattered throughout the
north-central part of New Jersey, but, on the whole, the State can be
counted as purely English.

The case of Pennsylvania was somewhat different. The original settlers
on the west bank of the Delaware, around Philadelphia, were English
Quakers with a certain number of Welsh, who probably were for the most
part Nordic. This section was the most cultured and important part
of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia was the port of entry of two important
migrations in the eighteenth century. First, the Ulster Scots, who
came in great numbers after 1720. In fact, most of the Ulster Scots
in America entered the colonies through Philadelphia and, to a less
extent, through Charleston, South Carolina. These late comers found
the desirable land along the Delaware had been taken up, so they
moved westward to the Indian frontier. They were a restless, brave,
and pugnacious people, and immediately assumed the burden of the
Indian fighting, often without the support or even the sympathy of the
Philadelphia Quakers. They were numerous and soon spread along the
foothills and valleys of the Appalachians southwestward through western
Maryland and Virginia into North and South Carolina, whence they again
crossed the ridges westward, until, by the time of the Revolution, they
had laid the foundations of Kentucky and of Tennessee. They were, of
course, pure Nordics and of North England and Lowland Scotch origin.
They had resided for two or three generations in North Ireland. Being
fervent Presbyterians, they had not mingled with the Catholic Irish.

In 1790 these Ulster Scots in the colonies numbered about 200,000 and
the pure Scots about 300,000 and taken together they were, next to
the English, the most important element. They were, as said above,
pre-eminently pioneers and Indian fighters and the same fact appears in
the history of practically every frontier of British colonies during
the next century. They were a highly selected group when they first
went to Ireland, which was at that time to all intents a frontier.
Since that time the Scots and the Ulster Scots have everywhere shown
the characteristics of the ideal pioneer. They played a predominant
part in the settlement of the southern part of the Middle West.

The next most important racial element was the Germans. In fact, it
was the only non-British element of importance in the colonies. At
the time of the Revolution the Germans numbered about a quarter of a
million and by 1790 they have been computed to have been about 9 per
cent of the total population of the colonies. They settled in the
districts of Pennsylvania immediately west of Philadelphia around York
and Lancaster, where they are to be found today. They were a peaceful
and industrious people, and have to some extent retained their language
and customs down to the present time. A very few of them joined their
neighbors, the Ulster Scots, in the migration to the Southwest. They
were not particularly loyal to the American cause during the Revolution
nor in the preceding French Wars, and their presence in the colonies
excited much hostility. They were refugees, who had fled down the
Rhine from Alsace and the Palatinate to escape the French when Louis
XIV invaded and devastated their country. With them were many refugees
from German-speaking Switzerland together with Hussites from Moravia.
While there were some Lutherans and Calvinists among them, most of the
"Pennsylvania Dutch," as they were called by the English colonists,
belonged to small and obscure sects. Dunkards, Schwankenfelders, Amish,
and Mennonites still maintain their special religious communities.
Their language is Alemannish and this German dialect is still spoken in
Alsace and Switzerland. In addition to their colonies in Pennsylvania,
there was a small settlement of Moravian Brothers in the western part
of North Carolina.

Maryland was originally settled under a charter to Lord Baltimore as a
refuge for English Catholics, but from the beginning these latter were
very few in number and by 1690 were so thoroughly outnumbered that they
were deprived of the franchise.

Virginia, the most important of the colonies next to New England, if
the latter be taken as a whole, was pure English in the tidewater
district, that is, as far west as Richmond. Beyond were many Ulster
Scots, who, it must be remembered, were very largely English.

North Carolina was much the same, except that the Ulster Scots were
relatively more numerous.

South Carolina had an English planter aristocracy and was much purer
English and had less Ulster Scotch than her northern neighbor. It had
also a considerable French Huguenot element, by far the largest and
most influential in the colonies. These Huguenots, while not very
numerous, were nearly all men of culture and social standing and played
a large part in the development of the country.

Georgia was substantially of the same racial complexion as South
Carolina.



V

THE PURITANS IN NEW ENGLAND


Taking up the settlement of the colonies more in detail, we may
commence with New England. The first inhabitants of Massachusetts were
pre-dominantly from the eastern half of England. This contains the
counties in which Nordic influence had probably been the strongest, and
the early settlement of Massachusetts was by an overwhelmingly Nordic
stock, judging alike by place of origin and by family and personal
names. A study of the origin of the pioneers of Plymouth, Watertown,
and Dedham shows that two-thirds of them came from a region along the
English coast between London and the Wash and mostly from the southern
part of that stretch of territory.

Although given an important position by historians because of its
priority and the romantic incidents connected with its founding,
Plymouth Colony, because of its small size, played only a minor part in
the early development of the American nation. Its settlers, as shown by
the detailed accounts available concerning many of them, were people of
the lower and middle classes, mostly of good character but attracting
to their numbers also adventurers and men of more doubtful quality.

Within five or six years after the landing at Plymouth Rock, the
Plymouth settlers were already outnumbered by other settlers in New
England, while Plymouth itself was the parent of a number of other
settlements that outstripped it. During the decade 1630-40 it became
a province of eight small towns, seven of them stretching for fifty
miles along the shore of Cape Cod Bay, from Scituate to Yarmouth,
with Taunton lying twenty-five miles inland. The entire colony would
probably have moved to the Connecticut River valley, had not the
competition of settlers from Massachusetts Bay been too strong.
Two generations after the original settlement there the number of
inhabitants of Plymouth was no greater than it was at the start.

In the decade of 1620-30 there was a rapid but sporadic settlement of
small towns on or near the Massachusetts coast, but the first great
migration was that represented by the arrival of Governor Winthrop's
fleet in Massachusetts Bay in 1630. The new arrivals settled Boston,
Charlestown, Medford, Watertown, Roxbury, Lynn, and Dorchester. During
the next decade the Puritan emigration from England continued, again
largely from the northern and eastern counties, overwhelmingly of as
nearly pure Nordic stock as Great Britain could show.

[Illustration: Showing Highlands and Lowlands of Scotland.]

The difference in antecedents of the Massachusetts Bay Colony from
that of Plymouth is reflected in the differences in geographical and
social origin. The Pilgrim Fathers, as every one knows, took their
start from Scrooby in Yorkshire at the point where this county joins
Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire, under the leadership of Bradford,
the local postmaster and Robinson the clergyman. The capital for the
enterprise was almost all subscribed in London, and only one-third
of the first settlers were members of Robinson's congregation. The
part of Scrooby and Holland in that colony has therefore often been
exaggerated. The English founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were
on the other hand not merely religious dissenters, but powerful members
of the Puritan nobility. The group attracted to their enterprise was
therefore one of a somewhat wider social outlook. It was distinguished
for the same reason from most of the later emigration.

The people who settled in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the decade of
1630-40 doubtless had every desire to better their condition, and their
zeal in seizing land from the Indians showed that they were able to
put this desire into effect successfully. Their motive in emigrating,
however, was more political than was that of many later colonists, most
of whom came frankly to find fortune in a new country.

There were among them a sprinkling of members of the important county
families and even a few representatives of the Puritan gentry. Alumni
of Cambridge were liberally represented among the clergy, together
with a few from Oxford, although few other professional men seem to
have been in the group. Many of the settlers were from families of
merchants, among whom Puritanism had made great progress in England.
The bulk, however, consisted of more or less well-to-do yeomen and
artisans.

Since a large part of this Puritan migration, which probably amounted
to 20,000 between 1620 and 1640, came in groups often following their
local clergymen, it is fairly easy to determine from what parts of
Great Britain the early population of Massachusetts came. The evidence
all indicates that little of it was from the far north of England
where Puritanism had made comparatively slight progress. The greater
proportion of the settlers came from the Puritan stronghold of East
Anglia comprising the counties of Suffolk, Essex, Norfolk, and eastern
Hereford. Next to this was the emigration from Wessex including Dorset,
Somerset, and eastern Devon. Following came contributions from Kent,
from the midland counties of Buckingham, Northampton, and Leicester,
a considerable group from the borders of Wiltshire, Hampshire, and
western Berkshire with some from as far west as Gloucestershire near
the Welsh border. A large Boston group came from Lincolnshire (which
was the home of the ancestors of the Boston-born Benjamin Franklin)
and of course there was a strong contingent from London, which was
largely Puritan and Presbyterian. Towns in Massachusetts tended to
be settled by people who were all from the same region in England;
and as the expansion of Massachusetts was very largely in the form of
congregations from given towns, these populations often kept together
for a long time. Frequently the town's name indicates the old home.
Thus Gloucester was settled by men from that county and Dorchester was
named for the town in Dorset from which its early settlers came with
the Rev. John Maverick, although it contained an element of Lancashire
people from the neighborhood of Preston, Liverpool, and Manchester.

[Illustration: Ulster Scot and New England origins--1, heaviest; 2,
heavy; 3, light; 4, very light; 5, uncertain; 6, English definitely
present.]

Along with the desire of these settlers to better themselves, to
acquire the ownership of land, and to seek fortune in new countries,
the disturbed political conditions in Great Britain particularly
urged Puritans to migrate. British documents of the period throw many
sidelights on the nature and scope of this movement. Thus Lord Maynard,
in a memorandum to Archbishop Laud in 1638, laments "the intention of
divers clothiers of great trading to go suddenly into New England." He
hears daily of incredible numbers of persons of very good abilities
who have sold their lands to depart and says there is danger of divers
parishes being impoverished.

Since some of them liked the Massachusetts government no better than
the one at home, the tide of emigration turned strongly toward the West
Indies, the British islands of which were rapidly filled with Nordic
stock. The history of Nordic settlement in the West Indies is little
known and is exceedingly instructive in connection with a study of the
peopling of the New World. Bermuda was colonized in 1612, Saint Kitts
in 1623, Barbadoes and Saint Croix in 1625, and Nevis three years
later. By 1640 Massachusetts had about 14,000 settlers; but Saint
Kitts had almost as many and Barbadoes decidedly more. The number of
Englishmen who migrated to the West Indies was perhaps three times as
large as the number who went to all New England.

Down to the end of the eighteenth century the West Indies were
flourishing, populous, and wealthy, but these islands then ceased to
have any world-wide importance--not merely because of economic and
agricultural changes, such as affected the sugar industry, but because
the white man in the tropics could not compete on even terms with
the Negro. It will be pointed out later that these islands are now
virtually Negro territory, and they have become centers of emigration
into the United States of a black population of low economic and
social status--the Nordics having died out, or lost their original
characteristics, or gone elsewhere.

From 1640 the emigration from Great Britain to New England almost
stopped and the tide turned the other way; many settlers in
Massachusetts either returning to England or going to the West Indies.
The natural increase of the population from then on accounts for most
of the growth of the New England colonies. Even here, however, the Bay
State fell behind Virginia in rate of increase of white population.

[Illustration: PURITAN EMIGRATION FROM ENGLAND

1620 TO 1640

SHOWING A TOTAL OF ABOUT 67,300

  _New England 17,800_

  _Maryland and Virginia 9500_

  _West Indies including Bermuda about 40,000_]

Almost as soon as they had established themselves around Massachusetts
Bay, groups of settlers began to push out in all directions, partly
to get better or cheaper land, and partly to get greater independence
of action. In this way the settlement of Connecticut was begun as
early as 1634. In the next year emigrants arrived in Connecticut from
Dorchester and Watertown in Massachusetts and in 1636 from Newton.
They established settlements in the Connecticut River valley bearing
the names of the Massachusetts towns from which they came until the
names of Windsor, Wethersfield, and Hartford were substituted. In 1638
came the settlements at New Haven, Guilford, Milford, and elsewhere.
Stratford, Fairfield, Norwalk, and Stamford were established not many
months later as a challenge to the Dutch from New York who regarded
that part of Connecticut as their own domain. By 1640, at least a
couple of thousand settlers were in Connecticut; Hartford, New Haven,
and New London becoming in their turn the main gateways of immigration
into the whole back country. The settlement of New England was, in
general, however, from south to north, proceeding along the river
valleys.

The fisheries and the excellent supply of timber for naval construction
led to scattered settlements on the coast of Maine even earlier. The
lack of navigable rivers delayed penetration into the interior--but
during the seventeenth century the Massachusetts people had settled
along most of the river valleys. Even to this day the interior of Maine
is very largely backwoods. This territory was claimed by Massachusetts
as a part of its own dominion, from which it did not separate until in
1820 when it was admitted as an independent State to offset Missouri in
Henry Clay's famous compromise.

As Indians were gradually dispossessed, the population of Massachusetts
continued to push westward. In 1676 the end of King Philip's War
removed the fear of Indians for a time and led to particularly active
movements of population inland. Meanwhile settlements had been made in
New Hampshire and Rhode Island. The first settlement in New Hampshire
had been made by David Thomson, a Scotsman who established himself on
the coast; but its population came from Plymouth Colony and later from
other parts of Massachusetts. The spread of the English in the New
Hampshire mountains and forests, where the Indians continued hostile
for a long time, was slow, and even at the time of the Revolution,
New Hampshire contained few settlements of any size. The greatest
development came toward the end of the period here considered. In
1700 it held but 5000 or 6000 souls. Up to 1760 only the coast towns
had any considerable population, but the peace of 1763, which finally
removed the French and Indian menace, resulted in a rapid penetration
of settlers largely from Connecticut. In the next fifteen years 30,000
people are said to have entered New Hampshire from Connecticut alone,
and a hundred new towns had been planted.

Rhode Island already had a few settlers before Roger Williams founded
Providence (1636), though that is generally regarded as the beginning
of the colony. Portsmouth was founded in 1638, Newport and Warwick in
1639, and in 1644 these settlements were united under one government.
Because of its small size, Rhode Island plays in a sense only a minor
part in the history of the formation of the early population of North
America. But it served as a place of entry for colonists from all
sources, and it likewise attracted settlers from the other colonies,
due to its conspicuous policy of political and religious toleration. In
another way the small size of Rhode Island led to its being a source
of colonization. Its available land resources were so small that large
families soon exhausted them and there was no recourse except to get
out of the colony. It was therefore an incubator for colonists and
furnished more emigrants in proportion to its population than did other
colonies which had greater resources wherewith to care for their own
people. It may be said that while Massachusetts is the parent of all
New England, the whole of New England is in some sense a parent of
Rhode Island. In either case, the racial homogeneity of the population
is conspicuous, the little groups of settlers who represented other
than Nordic stock being insignificant in numbers however much they may
appeal through sentiment to the pride of their descendants.

Vermont was settled late, its main occupation not coming until after
the Revolution. At first a part of New Hampshire, it attracted
occasional settlers from that State and its neighbors, but there could
hardly be said to have been a permanent settlement until Brattleboro
was founded in 1740.

The settlement of Massachusetts west of the Connecticut River began
in 1725, when the Berkshires were invaded and Sheffield established.
Settlers steadily pressed north and west, and gradually took possession
of the territory between the Connecticut River and Lake Champlain. The
Connecticut River was the first American frontier, as Alaska was the
last.

At the time of the Revolution Vermont was very much of a frontier, in
which a lawless and defiant lot known as the Green Mountain Boys held
possession and yielded allegiance to no one. Within six weeks after
the collapse of Shays's Rebellion, more than 700 families are said
to have migrated from western Massachusetts into Vermont. Many New
England soldiers who had fought over this ground in the Revolution had
marked it as offering desirable home sites, and came into it to take
up land and clear it, to bring their families, and establish isolated
settlements which gradually coalesced into something like a settled
country. The increasing influx of New Englanders led to the surrender
of New York's claims on the territory, so that it took its place as
an independent State in 1791, the first to be added to the original
thirteen.

The picture of New England then is that of a community which received
the bulk of its foundation stock in a very short period of time, 1620
to 1640, and almost wholly from a single source; that is, England,
and specifically from the most Nordic districts of England. It was
no mere figure of speech when Captain John Smith bestowed upon the
region the prophetic name of New England. During the eighteenth
century, scattered groups of other origins came to add themselves
to the descendants of these early settlers; but in most cases they
represented only drops in the bucket. Doubtless one of the reasons why
the study of genealogy and the pride of ancestry have flourished most
conspicuously in New England is that so large a proportion of the old
population traces its ancestry back to the same period and to the same
group of people. Even as early as the Revolution, the great bulk of the
settlers of New England represented families that had been four or five
generations on American soil.

If there was a conspicuous absence of immigrants of very distinguished
families into New England at that time, it may be said, on the
other hand, that the general level was sound and intelligent. The
immigrant population of New England was composed of a small group of
families dominant in business and the professions, and an overwhelming
proportion of representatives of the English yeomanry, owners of small
freeholds, whose sons often sailed ships or went to the fisheries. This
same type made up the bulk of the population of the middle colonies
and peopled the back country of the southern colonies. As most of the
settlers in New England in the early migration were men who brought
their families, the foundation stock thus established was on a better
level than that in some other colonies where men arrived without
bringing wives and therefore were forced to marry women of any kind
whom the colony could furnish. The definitely Nordic character of New
England stock, its early establishment, and the survival of the able
and vigorous in a region where nature took a heavy toll of weaklings,
have produced in New England a population that has left its stamp on
subsequent American history as has no other group.

As to the Ulster Scots we must bear in mind that the Irish question was
as serious a thorn in the side of English statesmen in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries, as it was before or since, and numerous
attempts were made to alleviate the situation, if not to end it, by the
colonization of Protestant people in Ireland. In 1611, James I began
to encourage the emigration of people from the lowlands of Scotland,
particularly from the western part, and from the north of England,
into Ulster. He looked forward to establishing in Ireland a staunch
Protestant population that might ultimately outnumber the Catholics
and become the controlling element politically. For this reason the
settlers were picked with some care. The plan succeeded so well that in
a generation or a little more, about 300,000 people had been colonized
in the northern part of the island, and by the end of a century their
number had risen to nearly a million.

These are the "Scotch Irish" of American history. The name is a
grotesque misnomer suggesting to the popular mind a sort of hybrid
origin and hybrid character which has no basis in reality. They were
not Irish in any sense of the word, and while most of them were Scotch
a great many were English. They are designated in this book as "Ulster
Scots."

Following the planting of Ulster in the north of Ireland, there was a
heavy British emigration into the east of Ireland. This was due partly
to economic factors and partly to the desire of Cromwell, in his turn,
to solve the Irish problem by colonization, after the precedent which
James I had established. These English Protestants in eastern Ireland
have too often been ignored. They, too, had nothing in common with the
older Roman Catholic population of the eastern part of the Island. Many
of the Protestant "Irish" were Quakers.

These adopted children of Ireland also migrated freely to the American
colonies and have been assumed far too easily to have been Roman
Catholics. While it is extremely difficult to arrive at exact figures
on this point, there is some reason to believe that the number of
Protestant English in the east of Ireland during the seventeenth
century was as large as the number of Protestant Scotch in the north,
and this former group contributed its quota of English population to
the colonies. It was this group which imposed the English language on
the Irish. Until the later 1840's the Leinster Protestants and the
Ulster Presbyterians were practically the only immigrants from Ireland
to this country.

The great movement of Ulster Scots to America, although of an entirely
different degree of magnitude, has been perhaps second only to that
from the English counties in its influence on the subsequent history
of the Continent. It began in the latter part of the seventeenth
century but did not reach its height until the first quarter of the
eighteenth. Five shiploads arrived in the summer of 1718, giving Cotton
Mather the chance to note in his diary with anticipatory pleasure the
merit that would accrue to him from showing "kindness to ye indigent."
Thereafter, one finds in most histories such items as "In 1719 there
came one hundred and twenty Presbyterian families from the north of
Ireland who settled in Massachusetts" or "In the years 1719 and 1720
more than one hundred Presbyterian families came from the north of
Ireland and settled at Londonderry in New Hampshire," and so on.

The Congregationalists of the seaboard were not too hospitable to
these Presbyterians, and forced them to move inland in almost every
case, away from the long-settled territory over which the Boston
theocracy attempted to maintain its rule, and mostly to New Hampshire
and Connecticut. Londonderry recalls its origin by its name and the
Scotch who settled it not only introduced their manufactures into
New Hampshire but brought along with them a still more valuable
importation, the so-called Irish potato, which, having been taken
from South America to Ireland long before, had, in this round-about
way, been brought back to its own hemisphere. Other groups went to
Worcester, to Pelham, to Palmer, to Andover, and to other communities
in small numbers; while many others went to Maine. The total numbers,
however, were very small.

Massachusetts had a definite policy at this time of encouraging, if not
requiring, immigrants of this sort to settle on the frontiers. They
furnished less competition in this way and played a useful part in
keeping off the Indians.

The emigration of the Scotch and North English who had been in Ulster
for a generation or two or at the most for three generations, was
due to discontent with their situation there. They had built up an
important manufacture of woollens and linens which has ever since
been famous throughout the world; but in 1698 the jealousy of rival
industrialists in England led to Parliamentary legislation which
crippled the industries in Ulster and threw many men out of employment.
In 1704 and the following years a religious persecution of these
Presbyterians was also carried on. These economic and religious
handicaps were so great that after a few years of patient waiting the
population gave up hope, and within half a century about half of the
entire number had moved to the New World. The most important stream
went into the middle and southern colonies and will be traced later.

This exodus was a cause of alarm in the old country as well as in the
new. "The rumour [of going to America] has spread like a contagious
distemper," laments an Irish letter writer in 1728; "and the worst is
that it affects only Protestants, and reigns chiefly in the North";
while another laments that "there are now seven ships at Belfast, that
are carrying off about 1000 passengers thither; and if we knew how to
stop them, as most of them can get neither victuals nor work at home,
it would be cruel to do it."

Reference will recur frequently to this immigration of Ulster Scots.
At this point it is necessary to emphasize in the first place that it
was little different in racial background from the preceding English
settlement, both groups being definitely Nordic in their make-up. In
the second place it was a valuable addition to the colonies in the
quality and energy of its members. In the third place it was always
small in proportion to the English element.

New England in 1790, regardless of numerous non-English groups, many of
them of good individual quality though insignificant in total numbers,
is to be considered definitely as a transplanted English population,
most of which had been settled in North America so long that its
habits of thought and action had become differentiated--one might say
definitely American rather than English.

A third source of New England settlers during this period, small in
numbers but valuable in quality, is represented by the French Huguenots
who arrived for the most part in the decade or two following the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.

The Huguenot migration to America falls in two general epochs. From
1555, when Admiral Coligny had a vision of a Protestant France in the
New World, to the Revocation in 1685 of the Edict of Nantes, the French
charter of Protestant liberty, is the first epoch, during which the
immigration was scattering. From 1685 up to about 1750 is the second
epoch, when the Huguenots, fleeing from oppression and death, sought
refuge in many countries. During this period their immigration to North
America reached considerable proportions. Providence and Boston were
points of entry for many, though more went to the Southern colonies,
and to them many an American family of the present day is proud to
trace its ancestry.

These French Huguenots seem to have come pre-dominantly from the middle
class or artisan stratum of the population with a mixture of the lesser
gentry. But their energy, ability, and character earned for them an
important rôle in their adopted country, out of proportion to their
small numbers. Unlike some of the other non-English groups they did not
tend to establish colonies or settlements of their own, but scattered
widely and merged freely into the general population. This was the less
difficult in that they came from the most Nordic parts of France and in
racial composition are scarcely to be distinguished from the English.

In the same way those northern and eastern counties of England, which
supplied a large part of the migration to America, had, during the
preceding century, received a continuous infusion of continental
Huguenots to a total sometimes estimated as high as 250,000, who there
also became by admixture and hereditary similitude indistinguishable
from their neighbors.

The Indian population of New England though never great was largely
exterminated by war, disease, whiskey, and the breaking up of their
cultural and economic background. In the century before the settlement
of Plymouth, smallpox, introduced from the Spanish Main, had flickered
up and down the New England coast and had so decimated the natives that
only a weakened remnant remained to oppose the Whites.

In contrast, in the eleventh century the Norsemen who attempted
to found settlements on the New England coast had met with savage
resistance from the natives, whom they called Skrellings.

Intermarriage between Whites and Indians was almost unknown save in the
occasional case in which a colonist was carried into captivity. The
antipathy of the English settlers to the Indians was far too great to
lead to the sort of miscegenation which was encouraged by the French in
their part of the continent, and to which reference will be made later.
In the British colonies the half-breed was looked upon as an Indian,
whereas in the French colonies, as generally in all Colonial countries
that had the Roman imperial tradition and the Roman Catholic religion,
the half-breed was assimilated to the European group. Some of the
remaining Indians along the Atlantic coast mixed with the runaway Negro
slaves, but few of them contributed to the white population, and the
term "half-breed" was in general a term of contempt. It was not until
within the life-time of those now living that an infusion of Indian
blood became a subject of pride, particularly in Oklahoma, unless
one makes exception for such isolated tales as the somewhat grotesque
Pocahontas tradition in Virginia.

The predominant influence of Massachusetts at the time of the
Revolution is easy to understand. It possessed, to an unusual degree,
unity in the various fields in which unity is most valuable to a
nation--unity of race, unity of language, unity of culture, unity
of religion, unity of institutions--and, more than anywhere else in
the United States, its unity was attained through a long-continued,
independent growth on American soil.

The French and Indian menace held back the rapidly multiplying
population of New England for at least a generation. The agricultural
areas were carrying more population than they could support, and
they were waiting for a favorable opportunity to spread out. This
opportunity came in the overthrow of Montcalm at Quebec in 1759.
The Peace of Paris in 1763 left the road open, and the New England
population began to push north, west, and south with a vigor that was
reflected in the activity of the communities at home. The succeeding
half-century is correctly regarded as the golden age of New England.
Its country districts were more densely populated when the first census
of the United States was taken in 1790 than they have been since. The
decline, which will be traced in the next section, then began and
decade after decade thereafter the New England towns and villages are
found in a surprisingly large percentage of cases either standing
still or actually declining in number of inhabitants.

The history of American colonization is usually written only in terms
of the additions to population. The subtractions from it may be no less
important. Subtractions by migration westward were less significant
because in many cases the frontier merely proliferated itself by
sending its surplus out without diminishing its own standards or
numbers.

The first national loss of population occurred after 1640 when the
changing political conditions in England, and the tyranny of the
Massachusetts Bay authorities, drove many people out of Massachusetts.
This loss, serious as it was, is insignificant compared with the
tremendous loss of superior stock at the time of the Revolution. The
Loyalists made up an undetermined part of the population, perhaps
as much as one-third. Those who had been most conspicuous or most
active were obliged in many cases to flee, and persecution with the
confiscation of their property was carried on even after the war.
Most of the Loyalists who left the colonies went either to Canada or
to the West Indies. Altogether the loss from this source may have
been as great as 100,000 people representing on the whole a superior
selection of the population. It is comparable in the racial damage done
the American population with the loss which France suffered from the
expulsion of the Huguenots.

By the Revolution, the colonizing impulse of New England had not
merely begun to fill up western New York, as will be described
shortly, but had led to the formation of speculative land companies
for settlement in the Wyoming Valley of Pennsylvania, and even on
the lower Mississippi. The hard times following the Revolution led
to a great increase in migration, which, in general, has been rapid
in hard times, slower in periods of prosperity. Vermont, as already
said, felt the impulse markedly. Maine also seems to have grown most
rapidly in the decade or two following the Declaration of Independence,
though Portland and Falmouth were the only towns worthy of the name.
New Hampshire, likewise, slower in its development than other parts
of New England, had begun to catch up by attracting those ready to
better themselves by a change of location. Connecticut had made a
steady growth and had fewer non-English elements than almost any other
of the New England colonies, small as these elements were everywhere.
The growth of Massachusetts had been largely in the interior, Boston
having made less progress than many other cities. People were moving
from Massachusetts to other colonies. Many were moving through Boston
but not staying there. Politically and culturally important, the Hub
of the Universe stagnated industrially until the beginning of the
manufacturing era.



VI

THE GATEWAYS TO THE WEST FROM NEW ENGLAND AND VIRGINIA


In 1609, the English navigator, Henry Hudson, had explored the river
which now bears his name, acting on behalf of the Dutch East India
Company. During the next decade, small Dutch settlements, trading
posts, were established along the river; but the first real settlement
is generally dated 1623 when thirty families of Walloons arrived. These
were people from northern France and the southern Netherlands who had
been driven into Holland by religious persecution and wanted to escape
from the unsympathetic treatment which they were receiving in the
southern part of Holland. Their language was not Dutch but French.

Speaking at large the Dutch settlement of New Netherland was, at the
beginning, a trading venture and was based on a stronghold at the
mouth of the river and another one at the head of navigation. For many
years the latter settlement, originally called Fort Orange and later
Albany, was much more important than the little town of New Amsterdam
on Manhattan Island.

Restrictions on land tenure held back colonization, and at no time
during the Dutch occupation did its reach extend much beyond the
fertile farm lands of the Hudson valley northerly to Fort Orange,
though an outpost to the west was established at Schenectady and
scattering settlements had also been made in New Jersey and on Long
Island.

In all these outlying regions, the pressure of New England migrants was
too strong for the scanty Dutch population to withstand, and even in
Manhattan the New Englanders had become early an important part of the
population.

The immigration of respectable Dutch families did not begin in general
until after 1638 when the monopoly of the West India Company was
abolished. Many of the families who became great land owners in the
northern part of the Hudson River valley were from Gelderland, east of
the Zuyder Zee, the town of Myjerka being one of the principal centers
of emigration. While many of these Dutch families were of excellent
mercantile stock, it is a mistake to suppose that they represented the
social élite of the home country.

Although the Dutch have left a permanent mark on the Hudson River
valley, the contribution which they made to the future population of
the State was small. When England captured the colony in 1664 and the
Dutch immigration ceased, there were probably not many more than 10,000
inhabitants in the whole region, and of these from a quarter to a third
were English.

Holland at the time was not at all a colonizing nation. Its overseas
ventures were for the purpose of trade, and it had not sufficient
surplus population to settle colonies permanently.

The amount of Dutch and Huguenot blood that was perpetuated in the
later history of the colonies was, therefore, small by comparison with
the English, but was for the most part of the same racial stock. Six or
seven thousand Dutch in the present State of New York in 1664 are to be
compared with 35,000 English in Virginia and 50,000 in New England at
the same date.

There was no further general and organized emigration from Holland
to America until the close of the Revolution. At that time some
of the Amsterdam bankers, who had loaned millions of dollars to
the Revolutionary government, decided to try to capitalize their
investments and bought nearly 4,000,000 acres of land in New York
and Pennsylvania. Most of the settlers on this tract were not Dutch;
and while Dutch names may still play an important part in the Social
Registers of New York and Albany, Dutch blood is insignificant in the
present make-up of the population of the United States.

The southerly tide of New Englanders, which washed over the Dutch
colony and others to the South, was in the first instance made up
largely of those who did not find the religious convictions of their
associates in Massachusetts and Connecticut to their liking.

The little "Forts" of the Dutch in the Connecticut valley were swamped
shortly after 1630, and by 1639 the Connecticut people of English
ancestry had established themselves at Greenwich within thirty miles
of New Amsterdam and in other towns even nearer. Long Island was
settled from the same source, and Thomas Belcher took up a tract upon
the present site of the City of Brooklyn in the same year in which the
English began to build at Greenwich. Brooklyn, until the twentieth
century, has been a typically New England community, entirely distinct
from the other boroughs of Greater New York. The eastern end of Long
Island was long separated from the western end and was settled directly
from Connecticut. The Hamptons are virtually still a part of New
England.

The development of the southern part of New York State, and
particularly of the Hudson River valley, was delayed indefinitely by
the great land holdings of the so-called "patroons" or great landlords.
New York City continued to be a cosmopolitan and nondescript town,
built up on commerce and trade and without any particular racial
complexion. Even at the time of the Revolution, it was inferior alike
in size and in influence to Philadelphia and Boston, and New York State
was but seventh in population among the thirteen colonies.

The real foundation of the greatness of the Empire State was the New
England colonization of northern and western New York, which created
a territory that was, and has ever since remained, quite distinct in
political complexion and economic and social interests from the Hudson
River valley and the metropolis at its mouth.

The commercial greatness of the City of New York dates from the opening
of the Erie Canal in 1825, which made New York the outlet of the lake
States. Meanwhile, however, several other foreign invasions had taken
place.

The French Huguenots, racially Nordic and almost identical with the
British, began to arrive in Colonial New York after 1685, founding the
town of New Rochelle to commemorate the French city from which so many
of them had come. Here, as elsewhere, their influence was far in excess
of their proportionately small number.

In 1711, Governor Hunter of New York became imbued with grandiose ideas
about developing the resources of his Province and began to look for a
source of cheap labor for its exploitation. He found this in the German
districts on the Rhine, broadly known as the Palatinate, where various
national elements, not merely German and Alsatian, but French, Swiss,
Moravian, and miscellaneous, were gathered, and where the religious
persecution to which they were subjected as Protestants, and the
excessive hardships which they were compelled to endure from invasions
of the armies of Louis XIV, had reduced them to great misery.

The population was ripe for emigration and furnished the only
substantial element of non-Nordic origin in the Colonial history of
America. It is not necessary to trace in detail the innumerable petty
sects and national elements, often two or three times removed from
their original home, of which this "Palatine" emigration was composed.
For the present purpose it was pre-dominantly German-speaking, and
largely of the round-headed Alpine stock in racial make-up.

About 1709, these Palatines began frantic efforts to escape from their
misfortunes, and within a few years some 30,000 had gone over into
Holland and even into England, where they were not welcome. The British
Government was only too glad to subsidize their further emigration, and
several thousand of them were transported to the Hudson River valley.
They soon became discontented there and were finally colonized on the
Schoharie River in New York. Here, in turn, they were ousted by what
they considered political jobbery and many of them moved on to the
Mohawk River, a tributary of the Hudson, while others continued down
the Susquehanna River to Pennsylvania. On the whole, therefore, the
Palatines are to be considered merely temporary inhabitants of New
York State. Although a good many of them remained, the reports they
sent out as to their treatment were so unsatisfactory that thenceforth
the Palatine immigration mostly avoided New York and landed in
Pennsylvania, where it will be encountered later.

The next influx, particularly after 1719, was of Ulster Scots,
similar to that already mentioned as invading New England. Much of
Orange County on the west of the Hudson River was settled by these
Ulstermen, beginning as early as 1729, and for the next half-century
the infiltration of this Nordic element was continuous, although more
of it came through New England than directly into New York harbor. By
the time of the Revolution the Ulster Scots had spread over much of the
eastern part of northern New York, having enough representatives in
Albany in 1760 to establish a Presbyterian church there.

At about the same time Sir William Johnson, who had received a grant
of 100,000 acres of land north of the Mohawk River for his valor in
defending the colonies against the French at Crown Point and Lake
George in 1755, began to look about for suitable tenants and hit upon
the idea of importing Scotch Highlanders of Roman Catholic faith. Some
hundreds of these arrived just before the Revolution, and like Sir
John Johnson, son of Sir William, espoused the cause of the Loyalists.
After the Revolution, they moved northward to Ontario where the town of
Glengarry recalls their earlier home in Inverness. There, such families
as the MacDonnells, McDougalls, Camerons, McIntyres, and Fergusons
became an important element of strength to Canada.

As noted, New York State at the time of the Revolution was still
distinctly an unimportant colony, and its greatness dates from the
invasion of New Englanders immediately after the war. Connecticut, by
virtue of its proximity, was the principal source of these settlers,
although almost every part of New England contributed. The crossing
over of the Ulster Scots has already been mentioned, but it must not
be inferred that that was the principal element in the settlement of
the State. The main immigration was of the old Puritan English stock
which still dominates all of upper New York, except where subsequent
colonies of recent immigrants in some of the larger industrial cities
have altered the local scene.

The western shores of Lake Champlain and some of the older towns of the
Hudson River valley could scarcely be recognized, after a few years, by
those who had known them previously. A mere Dutch farm in 1784 had been
changed in four years to the thriving city of Hudson, a typical New
England commercial town with warehouses, wharves, Yankee shipping, and
stores filled with Yankee notions.

A visitor to Whitesborough on the Mohawk River, in 1788, reported
that "settlers are continually pouring in from the Connecticut hive."
Binghamton was settled jointly by Connecticut and Massachusetts. The
same spirit caused a mixing up of the population within the limits
of New England so that, to take a single illustration, the men of
Middlefield, a small hill town in western Massachusetts, were found on
inquiry to come from nearly sixty different towns in Massachusetts and
Connecticut.

After the Revolution the more enterprising young men of Massachusetts
and Connecticut began to leave their home towns. Of those who departed,
a half went to other places in New England, a quarter to western New
York, and a quarter to Ohio and other points in the then "Far West."

The extreme western part of New York State had not begun to develop
as early as the period of which we are speaking. Canandaigua was the
largest town in 1790, and it had but a hundred inhabitants. Pioneers
came from New Jersey and Pennsylvania by way of the Susquehanna and
Tioga Rivers, went to Seneca Lake, and thence to Cayuga; others from
Connecticut had entered the valley of the Mohawk by way of Albany and
Fort Schuyler. Small settlements sprang up at Bath, Naples, Geneva,
Aurora, Seneca Falls, Palmyra, Richmond, Fort Stanwix, and Marcellus.
The Erie Canal was as yet undreamt of.

The population picture of New York State in 1790 is then a double one.
The great bulk of the State, so far as area is concerned, was a colony
of Anglo-Saxon origin almost identical with the New England States. The
Hudson valley formed a less important appendage to this, with New York
City at its mouth--a miscellaneous settlement of people of all sorts
whose interests were largely commercial.

New York was one of the States that lost most heavily by the Loyalist
migration at the end of the Revolution. This superior Nordic element
left in two great streams; one by sea to Nova Scotia, and the other
overland to Canada. Long Island was a particularly heavy loser, 3000
people going in one fleet in 1783. The influx of Loyalists into Nova
Scotia, amounting to some 35,000, was a severe burden on that little
colony. Those who went into Canada overland from New York were more
easily assimilated, and many of the important settlements along the
northern shores of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, such as Kingston,
date from that time. To these Ontario settlers was given, by Order in
Council in 1789, the honorary name of "United Empire Loyalists," and
they formed the backbone of Upper Canada, as the Province of Ontario
was then called, and were a main element in defeating the plans of
American strategists in 1812 to capture Canada and annex it to the
Union.

Although New York is generally credited with having more Loyalists
during the Revolution than any other colony, she also furnished
more troops for the patriot army than did any other State except
Massachusetts.

New Jersey, in contrast to its neighbors on either side, was one of the
most thoroughly English of all the colonies. The settlements of the
Dutch in the north, and the squabbles of a few hundred Dutch, Swedes,
and Finlanders in the south, left little trace on the population when
colonization once started in earnest. The real history of the colony
begins in 1664 when the English proprietors, to whom it had been
granted, began to colonize it seriously.

Northern New Jersey was a chaos of rugged hills and forests which
offered little to the settler and is still largely waste land. The
southern part of the State is also largely waste land, consisting
chiefly of pine barrens so that early settlement was virtually limited
to two areas. On the North River, as the Hudson was called, the lands
along the meadows opposite Manhattan Island were inviting, and on the
South River, as the Delaware was originally designated, there was a
broad strip of fertile farm land which attracted the early settlers.
Among other centers New Haven had established a colony there about
1640, but had been driven off by the Dutch. There was also some
extremely fertile land around Freehold and other towns on the line
between New York and Philadelphia.

Since these two areas were so inaccessible to each other by direct
communication, the State grew up in two distinct settlements; that
along the western side of New York harbor, then known as East Jersey,
and that on the Delaware, known as West Jersey. While these two were
consolidated administratively in 1702, they have never been wholly
consolidated in actual character, and the two ends of the State are,
even today, diverse enough to show their somewhat divergent origin.

The land along the Delaware was colonized, for the most part, directly
from England by the Quakers who had secured an interest in it, and who
established the only two towns of importance in West Jersey during
the Colonial period--Burlington in 1667 and Salem in 1675. Those
who established Burlington were mostly from Yorkshire with a large
group also from London, and they took opposite sides of the town, the
Yorkshire people spreading north and the London people spreading south.
Geographical difficulties checked the southward spread so that Cape May
was settled separately by people from Connecticut and from Long Island.
Later, some of the French Huguenots went down into West Jersey, but
it always remained essentially an English colony, largely of Quaker
complexion and influenced by the close proximity of co-religionists in
Pennsylvania.

East Jersey, like western New York, represents more directly a New
England outpost. Elizabethtown had been established in 1665 by
emigrants sent direct from Great Britain, but Newark had at almost
the same time been colonized by people from Connecticut, who at first
gave to it the name of their old home, Milford. The Elizabethtown
Association somewhat later sold part of its territory to people from
New Hampshire and Massachusetts who established the two hamlets of
Woodbridge and Piscataqua, now New Brunswick.

In 1666, Connecticut Puritans also established on the Passaic River
first Guilford, and later Branford, both of which with Milford merged
in the town of Newark. The New England overflow continued until the
shores of Newark Bay had become another New England colony. Such
communities as the Oranges were chiefly transplanted Puritan towns.

The proprietorship of East Jersey shortly passed into the hands
of Scotsmen and a steady immigration of these began about 1684.
The capital of East Jersey, Perth Amboy, was named for one of the
proprietors, James Drummond, the Earl of Perth. The colony soon
became, and has ever since remained, one of the strongholds of Scotch
Presbyterianism in America, which found its intellectual center in the
establishment of Princeton University.

For a long time the two sections of New Jersey were of about equal
size and importance. As the country between them gradually filled
up, the State grew slowly until at the time of the Revolution its
population was estimated at about 120,000. Another fifteen years saw a
healthy growth, the first census, in 1790, showing 184,139 inhabitants.
The somewhat complicated details of its development should not obscure
the fact that New Jersey was one of the most purely white, Protestant,
Nordic settlements in the colonies.

Although prior to the arrival of William Penn there were several
thousand settlers on the Delaware River, in the territory now covered
by Pennsylvania and Delaware, the real settlement of that region
is generally dated from the beginning of his operations in 1681,
when Upland, now Chester, was settled as his headquarters. A year
later Philadelphia was founded, and in spite of this late start grew
so rapidly that William Penn, the Quaker, at his death, had the
satisfaction of knowing that the City of Brotherly Love was the largest
in North America.

While the foundation stock was made up of English Quakers, Penn had
ambitious ideas of establishing a headquarters for other like-minded
persons, and with this idealism was apparently mixed a solid commercial
ambition which led him and his agents to advertise the merits of
the colony widely. The land system, unlike that of Virginia or New
Netherlands, favored the settler with small means. English and Welsh
farmers rapidly appropriated to themselves the country along the west
side of the Delaware River from Trenton to Wilmington.

Penn maintained friendly relations with the Protestant leaders
in southern Germany, and he and his agents seem to have had an
extraordinary flair for finding obscure and peculiar sects and getting
them to emigrate to the new colony. A mere list of the odd religious
denominations that soon flourished in Pennsylvania is bewildering, and
an attempt to define the characteristics, which to them seemed more
than matters of life and death, is quite beyond the capacity of the
present-day student not steeped in the knowledge of seventeenth-century
theology.

Germantown was established in October, 1673, the first outpost of the
Alpine race in the present territory of the United States. Its founders
were Mennonites; but they were later joined by Dunkards or Tunkers,
that is, Dippers, who held to the efficacy of baptism by immersion.

Generally speaking, the Germans who came to Pennsylvania during the
first quarter-century of its settlement belong to these distinctive
sects, while after that time the immigration was made up of a somewhat
more uniform mass of adherents of either the Lutheran or the Reformed
Church. This difference soon became a recognized one for an easy
division of "the Pennsylvania Dutch," as this mixed group of Alpines
came to be called, not very correctly, from an assimilation of
_Pennsylvanische Deutsche_. One would ask, on hearing such a person
mentioned, "Does he belong to the sects or to the church people?"

A few of these such as the Labadists from Friesland who settled in New
Castle County, Delaware, were either from Holland or parts of Germany
bordering Holland, but the great bulk of the "Pennsylvania Dutch" came
from the Rhine Provinces, particularly from Alsace and the Palatinate,
with a liberal sprinkling of northern French Protestants who had been
forced over the border, while others came from Austria and Prussia and
even from northern Italy. As a matter of fact, down to the time of the
World War, Americans called, colloquially, all Germans "Dutchmen."

While the Palatinate furnished only a part of the immigration its name
was soon given to all similar newcomers, so that the term Palatine
became a general description for a German-speaking immigrant; and one
even finds in the old records such anomalies as an allusion to "a
Palatine from Hamburg." An important centre of their dispersion was the
town of Crefeld near the border of Holland.

The colonies in general, being overwhelmingly and typically British,
looked with suspicion on any alien groups, and New England, in
particular, probably would not have encouraged these Alpines to
enter at all. Virginia with its Church of England establishment and
its self-conscious English attitude was likewise not disposed to be
hospitable to such a large group of foreigners.

Governor Oglethorpe attracted some of them to Georgia, but not very
successfully, as will be mentioned later. One important group of his
settlers, in particular, the Moravians, left Georgia about 1739
because they were required to take up arms against the neighboring
Spanish in Florida. They moved to Pennsylvania where they founded, in
1741, the town of Bethlehem, which has been their headquarters ever
since.

While New York originally welcomed the Palatines, it soon treated
them so badly that thereafter almost all the vessels bearing German
immigrants came directly from Dutch ports to the Delaware, and if by
chance an occasional ship was forced to make a landing in New York,
its passengers quickly made their way across the Jerseys into more
hospitable territory.

Even in Pennsylvania the invasion of the Germans eventually began
to cause alarm among the English-speaking and dominant part of the
population. In Virginia this attitude of exclusion of supposedly alien
races had been maintained ever since the first permanent settlement.
Inspired by visions of building up a great industry, the proprietors of
that colony had sent out with their "second supply" a little group of
eight artisans from Germany and Poland who were skilled glassmakers.
The English colonists charged them with treasonable dealings with the
Indians and the Chronicler of the settlement refers to them disgustedly
as those "damned Dutchmen."

Benjamin Franklin, who, in 1753, expressed his opinion of some of his
fellow citizens in a letter to Peter Collinson, was merely reflecting
an attitude which the English stock had more or less generally taken
when he declared:

  "Those who come hither are generally the most stupid of their own
  nation, and, as ignorance is often attended with credulity when
  knavery would mislead it, and with suspicion when honesty would set
  it right; and as few of the English understand the German language,
  and so cannot address them either from the press or the pulpit, it
  is almost impossible to remove any prejudices they may entertain.
  Their clergy have very little influence on the people, who seem to
  take a pleasure in abusing and discharging the minister on every
  trivial occasion. Not being used to liberty, they know not how to
  make a modest use of it. And as Holben says of the young Hottentots,
  that they are not esteemed men until they have shown their manhood
  by beating their mothers, so these seem not to think themselves
  free, till they can feel their liberty in abusing and insulting
  their teachers. Thus they are under no restraint from ecclesiastical
  government; they behave, however, submissively enough at present to
  the civil government, which I wish they may continue to do, for I
  remember when they modestly declined intermeddling in our elections,
  but now they come in droves and carry all before them, except in one
  or two counties.[7]

  "Few of their children in the country know English. They import
  many books from Germany; and of the six printing-houses in the
  province, two are entirely German, two half German, half English, and
  but two entirely English. They have one German newspaper, and one
  half-German. Advertisements, intended to be general, are now printed
  in Dutch and English. The signs in our streets have inscriptions
  in both languages, and in some places only German. They begin of
  late to make all their bonds and other legal instruments in their
  own language, which (though I think it ought not to be) are allowed
  in our courts, where the German business so increases that there
  is continued need of interpreters; and I suppose in a few years
  they will also be necessary in the Assembly, to tell one-half our
  legislators what the other half say.

  "In short, unless the stream of their importation could be turned
  from this to other colonies, as you very judiciously propose, they
  will soon so outnumber us that we will, in my opinion, be not able
  to preserve our language, and even our government will become
  precarious. The French, who watch all advantages, are now themselves
  making a German settlement, back of us, in the Illinois country, and
  by means of these Germans they may in time come to an understanding
  with ours; and, indeed, in the last war,[8] our Germans showed a
  general disposition, that seemed to bode us no good. For, when the
  English, who were not Quakers, alarmed by the danger arising from
  the defenseless state of our country, entered unanimously into an
  association, and within this government, and the Lower Counties
  raised, armed, and disciplined near ten thousand men, the Germans,
  except a very few in proportion to their number, refused to engage
  in it, giving out, one amongst another, and even in print, that, if
  they were quiet, the French, should they take the country, would not
  molest them; at the time abusing the Philadelphians for fitting out
  privateers against the enemy, and representing the trouble, hazard,
  and expense of defending the province, as a greater inconvenience
  than any that might be expected from a change of government. Yet I
  am not for refusing to admit them entirely into our colonies. All
  that seems to me necessary is, to distribute them more equally,
  mix them with the English schools, where they are not too thickly
  settled, and take some care to prevent the practice, lately fallen
  into by some of the shipowners, of sweeping the German gaols to
  make up the number of their passengers. I say I am not against the
  admission of Germans in general, for they have their virtues. Their
  industry and frugality are exemplary. They are excellent husbandmen,
  and contribute greatly to the improvement of a country."

By 1727, the English in Pennsylvania had become sufficiently alarmed
over the proportions of the Palatine invasion to demand a careful
record of the numbers arriving each year so that from then on there
is full official record of all foreigners entered at the port of
Philadelphia. By that time there were probably fifteen or twenty
thousand Germans already in the province, and the record mentioned
indicates that between 1727 and 1745 approximately 22,000 arrived by
ships. To this number should, of course, be added the high natural
increase of those already settled.

Since the English had pre-empted much of the desirable land along
the Delaware and around Philadelphia, the Germans, with whom the
acquisition of farming land was a dominant passion, mostly went
westward of the English settlement and formed a belt where their
language was and, in scattered groups to this day, is spoken. They
filled the Lehigh and Schuylkill valleys and occupied a band of
fertile soil beginning in eastern Pennsylvania on the Delaware, passing
westward toward the Susquehanna through the towns of Allentown,
Reading, Lebanon, Lancaster, and thence down to the Cumberland valley
on the Maryland border where they had a natural outlet to western
Virginia and to the south. The tier of counties north of this belt and
along the borders of New York was comparatively neglected by them, and
was filled largely by settlers from Connecticut. The influx of English
and German sectaries was so rapid that within three years from its
founding, Penn's province had made a growth as great as that of New
Netherlands in its first half-century.

The early Quakers who belonged to the privileged group grew prosperous,
and many of them finding the strict ordinances of their sect somewhat
oppressive became Anglicans. Thus the Church of England gained an
important position in Philadelphia which it retained up to the
Revolution. In general, it represented the Loyalist element and
therefore partly disintegrated when they left at the end of the war.
The Revolution was largely Calvinistic, and the Established Church was
in most of the northern colonies regarded with disfavor as "loyalist."

The invasion of Ulster Scots into Pennsylvania began shortly after the
German immigration was well under way. Within a few years the great
majority of the Ulster immigrants to America were making directly
for the Delaware shores. Presbyterian congregations existed in
the important towns of the colony about 1700, and within the next
decade the Scotch had made numerous settlements in New Castle County,
Delaware, and on both sides of the Pennsylvania-Maryland boundary at
its intersection with the Delaware line.

When the great tide of emigration from Ulster set in about 1720,
the Scotch found the best and most accessible soil in Pennsylvania
occupied by the English and the next belt held firmly by the Germans.
In general, therefore, they were obliged to pass over these two
territories and settle still farther west, particularly in the
Cumberland valley of which Gettysburg, York, and Carlisle are now
important centers. In this district geographical isolation led later to
the establishment farther south of a distinct church, the Cumberland
Presbyterian, somewhat different in its tenets from the Presbyterianism
of the Philadelphia region and Delaware.

The number of Scotch who thus left Ulster for Pennsylvania is
uncertain, but may have exceeded 40,000 or 50,000. Taken in connection
with the Palatine immigration at the same period the influx to
Pennsylvania in the 1730's formed the largest migration from Europe to
the New World that ever took place until the steamship era arrived.

[Illustration: TERRITORIAL GROWTH of the UNITED STATES]

Seeking newer and freer land, the Scotch together with some Germans
began to follow the mountain valleys trending southwestward from
Pennsylvania. They not only filled the Shenandoah Valley in a few
years, but filtered down to the back country of the southern
colonies and to the eastern portion of what is now Tennessee.

A good illustration of this migration is Daniel Boone, himself of
English stock, who was born on the Delaware only a few miles above
Philadelphia. The Boone family soon moved to Reading. Thence drifting
southwestward with his compatriots, Daniel Boone settled in the North
Carolina uplands, along the valley of the Yadkin, then passed beyond
into Kentucky, and, after that location began to be civilized, went on
as a pioneer to Missouri. His son appears a little later as one of the
early settlers of Kansas, his grandson as a pioneer in Colorado.

When the land west of the Alleghanies was opened for settlement about
1768, the Ulster Scots began to throng the mountain passes. In addition
to their aptitude for frontier life, and the insatiable desire to find
new and cheap land, they wanted to get away from their neighbors, the
Pennsylvania Dutch, with whom they usually did not live on very good
terms. Pittsburgh rapidly became a Nordic territory settled mainly by
the Ulster Scots.

These streams of immigration were sufficient by 1740 to enable
Pennsylvania to overtake and pass the population of every other colony
except Maryland, Massachusetts, and Virginia, although most of them
had been started a generation earlier than Penn's settlement. A decade
later Maryland was passed and just after the Revolution Massachusetts
was outstripped, while Philadelphia remained the metropolis of the
United States until finally excelled by New York City in the first
half of the nineteenth century.

Benjamin Franklin's offhand estimate that at the end of the Colonial
period one-third of the population of his adopted State was English,
one-third Scotch, and one-third German, was not far from the truth.
Though the population was then by a safe majority British in origin
and English-speaking, the Germans remained an element impossible to
assimilate, so long as they continued to be segregated in their own
communities of which Lancaster was the largest inland town in the
thirteen colonies.

Such of the Germans as went to the frontier States were assimilated
by the Nordic groups without much difficulty; but the experience of
the Pennsylvania Dutch farming communities is like that of some of
the city slum districts of the last century, in presenting groups
almost impossible to Americanize. Even at the present time this Alpine
island of population still retains many of its alien characteristics.
For this, among other reasons, the German element in Pennsylvania
at the time of the Revolution played a relatively unimportant part
in the affairs of the State, as suggested by the quotation from
Franklin above. The dominant element was formed by the group around
Philadelphia composed mainly of the original English Quakers; but the
Pennsylvania-Dutch, on their farms, and the Scots on the frontier,
furnished a large contingent with which the politicians had to deal,
though they were seldom represented in the government and leadership
of the colony. The German element was inclined to follow the leadership
of the Quakers under whose invitation it had come to Pennsylvania. The
Scots, on the other hand, were apt to be in a state of rebellion when
occasion arose, as conspicuously in the Whiskey Rebellion, which formed
one of the first tests of the power of the Federal Government under
Washington's presidency.

The claim that half of the Ulstermen were adherents of the Established
Church, rather than Presbyterians, is doubtless extreme, but emphasizes
the typically non-Irish and Protestant character of this whole element
of the population, as also the fact that many of the Ulstermen were
not Scots, nor even Lowland Scots, whose ancestors had moved northward
across the border from England; but were direct emigrants from England
to Ireland, some indeed as late as and even after the time of Cromwell.

Delaware has been dealt with incidentally in what has been said
concerning Pennsylvania, because it was part of Pennsylvania during the
first period of colonization. Unimportant attempts had been made by
the Dutch and Swedes, of whom the Swedes are the best known, to settle
there but the population of the region when Penn arrived was mainly
composed of English who had moved in under the regime of the Duke of
York.

In 1633, an English nobleman, Lord Baltimore, who had for years been
seeking favor with the Stuart monarchy, announced that he had become a
convert to the papacy, and, with the zeal of a new convert, desired
to establish a colony in the New World where Catholics, then laboring
under heavy disabilities in Great Britain, could enjoy religious
freedom. He applied for, and Charles I granted, a charter for the
foundation of a semi-feudal proprietorship, with the stipulation that
freedom of worship should prevail.

If one stops to consider what a howl of outraged virtue would have been
raised by the people of Great Britain, and what a hurricane would have
descended upon the head of the monarch, had he granted the Catholics a
charter without stipulating for freedom of worship, it will be realized
that the much-vaunted "toleration" of Lord Baltimore's colony was
not entirely an evidence of his own broad-mindedness. However, this
toleration had its limits. Disbelief in the doctrine of the Trinity was
a capital offense.

In 1634, the little town of St. Mary was established as the center
for the new colony. Few Catholics of the home country seem to have
been anxious to take advantage of the opportunities offered, and Lord
Baltimore began to seek tenants elsewhere. As early as 1634, he was
writing to Boston and urging Massachusetts people to emigrate, but the
first great invasion of Puritans came in 1649.

Inspired by enthusiasm for the cause of the King, after he had lost his
head, the Virginians under the leadership of Governor Berkeley passed
ordinances expelling non-conformists from their colony, and a thousand
of these who had previously gone from New England to Virginia were
driven out and took refuge in Maryland, establishing the settlement
which later became Annapolis.

During the next generation most of the arrivals in Maryland were
either Puritans or Quakers. The policy of tolerance was not held to
apply to Quakers, who, by a law of 1659, were to be whipped out of any
town which they entered, but this measure does not seem to have been
enforced very long, and English Quakers from other colonies soon formed
an important part of the population.

In 1689, word reached the New World of the expulsion of James II, and
the occupation of the British throne by the uncompromisingly Protestant
House of Orange. While James II was on the throne a general alarm
had arisen throughout the colonies over the prospects of Catholic
aggression.

Many of the colonies contained a sprinkling of the Huguenot refugees
who had been driven out of France only a few years before because of
their Protestantism, and there were thus in every colony men who knew
the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and the terrible persecution
which followed. The tragedy of the Thirty Years War was also still
fresh in the minds of many.

There was no disposition in America, therefore, to look upon the
Catholics as a group who, if in power, would distinguish themselves
by a policy of broad toleration, and the one colony in which there
was any appreciable number of Catholics, namely, Maryland, naturally
felt the situation most keenly. The number of Catholics in the
colony at that time, however, even including Negroes, was only a few
thousand, and their capital of St. Mary was a hamlet of scarcely
sixty houses. Probably eleven-twelfths of the population of Maryland
were Protestants, and of them a majority were Puritans. These lost
no time in taking steps to protect their freedom which they knew the
Catholic church would never tolerate if able to do otherwise, and by
a homemade revolution turned out the proprietary government and set
up a staunch Protestant regime. Under this new rule, however, the few
Catholic residents were subjected to no harm, but were placed under
approximately the same disabilities as they had long lived under in
Great Britain. Thereupon the little Roman Catholic principality in the
United States was at an end, and the then Lord Baltimore, fourth of
that title, shortly conformed by returning to his ancestral Protestant
faith.

The Revolution of 1689 cost St. Mary its existence, for the Puritans
transferred the capital to their own town of Providence (rebaptized
Annapolis), and the headquarters of the Roman Catholics soon relapsed
into the wilderness.

Maryland continued to be almost wholly an English colony, with more
than its share of Negroes and transported convicts, and with a very
slight sprinkling of aliens, much as all the colonies had. When the
Acadians were transported from Nova Scotia in 1755, a considerable
number of them were landed in Maryland.

Baltimore, founded in 1729, languished for a quarter of a century, but
in the decade before the Revolution it began to grow with such rapidity
that in a few years it was one of the half dozen most considerable
towns of the continent.

The back country of Maryland was settled independently from
Pennsylvania, to a considerable extent by Ulster Scots and Palatines,
though there was also a steady encroachment on this cheap land by men
from the tidewater who could not get possession of farms in the more
expensive and fashionable as well as prosperous region.

By the Revolution, Maryland had reached a population of 250,000.
Perhaps one-seventh of this was in Frederick County, where Palatines
had begun to settle as early as 1710, and into which they began to
enter in large numbers after about 1730. Despite this back-country
element, Maryland must be recognized as being, at the time of the first
census, an Anglo-Saxon colony in culture, in traditions, in language,
and in population.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 7: He is writing of Pennsylvania.]

[Footnote 8: The French and Indian War.]



VII

VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBORS


The settlement of Virginia, beginning with Jamestown in 1607, was of
a different character from that of the northern and middle colonies.
It was not a colonization project undertaken by families, but an
exploitation by adventurers. In a sense it may be compared with the
Klondike Gold Rush at the end of the nineteenth century. Men went forth
seeking fortune and expecting to return in a few years with newly
acquired wealth. The motley array of colonists sent to Jamestown by the
Company during the first decade of activity seems to have been drawn
from every part of the British Isles and every stratum of society.

After ten or a dozen years, the proprietors recognized that the wealth
of their plantations would not consist in gold and pearls but that
they were facing an actual colonization project, which could only be
built upon the foundations of family life. An early recognition of
this fact has been one of the principal sources of strength in all
British colonization, and the proprietors of the Virginia colony, while
continuing to encourage men of all sorts to go to their settlement
on the James River, undertook one of the famous eugenic enterprises
of history by sending over several shiploads of young women to make
homes for their settlers. The undertaking seems to have been carried
out in good faith and with good judgment and the result was notably
successful. A little later, however, the continuing demand for wives
led to a sort of traffic that probably produced a less carefully
selected feminine population for the plantations. On the whole, it
would probably be fair to say that the "First Families of Virginia"
represented a higher social standard in the male than in the female
lines.

The year 1619 was racially eventful. It saw the arrival at Jamestown
both of the first shipload of "uncorrupt maydes for wives," and the
landing of the first cargo of Negroes. The next half-century brought
the development of the plantation system and the spread of Negro
slavery and the problem of miscegenation between Negro women and
the lowest and most unintelligent type of white servant came into
prominence. In this way originated the mulatto group which has ever
since been a characteristic feature of the Negroes in the United
States. Those admirers of the Mulatto who boast that he carries in his
veins the blue blood of the aristocratic families of the South, would
do well to read the actual records of Virginia and other colonies
during the seventeenth century and see what sort of white stock
actually formed the foundation of that half of this hybrid group.

The colony continued to grow for the first quarter of a century by
attracting voluntary adventurers from whom the rule of the survival of
the fittest exacted so heavy a toll that probably the survivors were
a fairly fit lot. The abandonment of the original proprietary company
in 1624 led to a marked change in the manner of populating the colony,
and for the next generation the bulk of the immigrants were assisted in
one way or another to get to Virginia and allowed to work out the money
advanced them by their labor after their arrival.

At its best, there was little difference in the colonization plans
that British colonies have always used to get desirable settlers from
"home." In the case of Virginia it brought a vigorous population of
all sorts, and the name of "indentured servant" covers not merely
the domestic in the kitchen and the laborer in the tobacco field
but artisans' apprentices and medical students. Under the extremely
trying conditions many of these immigrants were unable to survive.
Governor Berkeley asserted that four out of five died during the first
year of residence, while Evelyn, the diarist, declared that five out
of six succumbed. Such statements at least point to an excessively
high mortality which must have spared most frequently those who were
physically and mentally superior and well adapted to be among the
founders of a new colony. Hence it seems clear that the importance of
these indentured servants in the later development of Virginia, as of
other colonies, is not to be reckoned in proportion to the number who
arrived, but to be estimated upon the much smaller number who survived
and founded families.

Another type of assisted immigrant of which a great deal has been
heard was the deported convict. Some of these were evidently men who
had cheated the gallows, for the Virginians continually protested
against their arrival. Apparently much the larger number, however, were
men of superior quality in many respects. When nearly three hundred
offenses were punishable by the death penalty in England, many of those
convicted were not persons marked by great moral turpitude, and the
so-called "transported convict" might have been equally well a pirate,
or a preacher who persisted in expounding the gospel without proper
license from the ecclesiastical authorities so to do.

Large numbers were political prisoners who found themselves
temporarily on the losing side; still more were mere prisoners of
war. During the Protectorate, victories like Dunbar and Worcester
and the suppression of the Irish Rebellion by Cromwell in 1652 were
followed by deportations of prisoners of war to the colonies, and the
government felt fully justified in recovering part of the expense
of transportation by selling the services of these able-bodied and
intelligent men for seven years to the highest bidder. Unquestionably
most of the foundation stock of this kind that survived to perpetuate
itself would be entirely fit for colonization. During the same period
many cavaliers took refuge in Virginia.

When the royalists were again in power after 1660, a similar stream
of Commonwealth soldiers and non-conformists began to come into the
colonies. The Scotch Rebellion of 1670 brought another accession to
Virginia, and in 1685 many of the captives at the Battle of Sedgmoor
were exiled here. Such labor was welcomed by the Virginians in marked
distinction to the real criminals, of whom there were apparently only
a few thousand in all. After about 1700 the spread of Negro slavery
reduced the demand for white indentured labor and less of it arrived.

In the great diversity of men and women brought over in these and other
ways, there are some who figure in the ancestry of the best families of
Virginia at the present time, and others who, from the beginning, were
misfits in the colony. Such of the latter as survived the trying ordeal
of the tobacco fields either ran away, or, when their term of service
expired, drifted out to the borders of the settlement.

The Virginia holdings were large and far beyond the reach of an
ordinary man without capital, in marked contrast to conditions in
New England, where the great majority of the settlers were small
landowners. The freed bondsmen therefore had to go to the frontier or
drift down into North Carolina or some other region where they were
not handicapped by their lack of funds. The most shiftless and least
intelligent of them tended to collect in the less valuable lands at the
fringe of civilization, or to drift along to other similar settlements
farther west and south. In this way originated one of the peculiar
elements of the Southern population, the "poor white trash." Their
numbers were recruited generation after generation by others of the
same sort while the able, enterprising, and imaginative members were
continually drained off to the cities or sought better land elsewhere.
These "poor whites" in the Alleghanies and through the swamp lands
of North and South Carolina have been an interesting feature of the
population for three centuries. Largely of pure Nordic stock, they are
a striking example to the eugenist of the results of isolation and
undesirable selection.

During the Stuart period Virginia was the refuge of many Puritans. They
were, however, looked upon with disfavor by the prevailing royalist
sentiment and the activities of Sir William Berkeley as Governor
were such that not less than a thousand left the colony. Their place
was taken by Royalists, invited by the Governor to find a refuge in
Virginia as soon as news arrived of the execution of Charles I. Within
the next twelve months probably a thousand Royalists appeared bringing
many of the family names which have been conspicuous in the Old
Dominion ever since. Richard Lee came a little earlier, in 1642, but
it is after the death of Charles I that one begins to meet in Virginia
such names as Randolph, Cary, Parke, Robinson, Marshall, Washington,
and Ludwell.

The place of origin in Great Britain of most of the Royalists is
not so easily traced as is that of the Massachusetts Puritans who
came to America in groups, sometimes as entire congregations, but
random samples of families which afterwards furnished distinguished
leadership show that they came from practically all over England and
Scotland: Washingtons from Northamptonshire, Marshalls and Jeffersons
from Wales, Lees from the part of Shropshire adjoining Wales, and
Randolphs from Warwickshire. James Monroe's ancestors were Scotch
and Patrick Henry's father was born in Aberdeen. They had at least
one thing in common, that they were of English and Nordic stock.
Examination of lists in the land office at Richmond indicates that
fully 95 per cent of the names of landowners during the seventeenth
century were unmistakably Anglo-Saxon.

The tidewater population was fecund and spread steadily up to the
fall-line of the rivers, by its own multiplication. Men and women
married early. Colonel Byrd described his daughter, Evelyn, as an
"antique virgin" when she was twenty. "Either our young fellows are
not smart enough for her or she seems too smart for them," he moaned.
With a high death rate second marriages were common. It has been the
custom of late for sentimental feminists to refer to the large families
of the Colonial period as having been produced by husbands who thus
killed off one wife after another. Such nonsense is easily refuted by
an examination of genealogies and of tombstones. Many a husband had to
marry several wives because of the high death rate, but equally many
wives had to marry several husbands apiece for the same reason.

The toll taken by hard work, unhygienic conditions, and childbirth
without proper care among pioneer women, was no greater than the toll
taken by hard work, unhygienic conditions, and Indian warfare among the
men. If Colonel John Carter married five wives successively, in an age
when divorce was unknown, Elizabeth Mann married six husbands.

While a purely Nordic population was thus occupying tidewater Virginia
east of the Blue Ridge, another Nordic invasion from a wholly different
source was entering upland Virginia on the other side of the mountains.
The Shenandoah Valley is virtually an extension of the interior valleys
of Pennsylvania; and while an occasional pioneer pushed his way to it
through the mountains from the eastern front, the real settlement came
through the side door beginning about 1725 and reaching the proportions
of an invasion about 1732.

Ulster Scots coming down through Pennsylvania began that penetration
of the Piedmont from north to south which is such a striking feature
of the history of the South Atlantic coast during the next century.
With them were some Alpines, mostly Germans from the Palatine,
representative of the so-called Pennsylvania Dutch stock.

When General Braddock, whose army was nearly wiped out by the French
and Indians in 1755, sighed, "Who would have thought it?" and expired,
he nevertheless had cleared a road for the rapid spread of this
immigration along the mountain valleys, not merely into Virginia but
on through the Carolinas and to Georgia. His road was followed a few
years later by General Forbes' road through the same country, and the
way was open.

The upland and mountain sections of Virginia therefore came to be
represented by a group with a very different outlook from those of the
tidewater, dominated as it was by large landholders. This diversity of
original settlement, which was of sufficient importance to effect in
the Civil War a cleavage of the State and establish West Virginia as
free soil, is still apparent and makes itself felt in the twentieth
century.

       *       *       *       *       *

North Carolina represents an overflowing from Virginia to the South. It
was a frontier for the Old Dominion where landless men could find new
homes more easily than to the westward, where they encountered the Blue
Ridge. In 1653 a settlement was begun at Albemarle by Virginians who
were not in accord either with the established religion or else with
the political control of their colony. Most of these were Quakers.

By adopting a remarkably liberal code of laws, which welcomed insolvent
debtors by cancelling their indebtedness, this colony attracted an
element which the more conservative Virginians regarded with suspicion.
A continual infiltration of landseekers led to steady colonization,
and gradually the tidewater section of North Carolina developed as a
separate region, not very thickly settled, not very prosperous, not
very distinguished in any way. A few French Huguenots drifted in after
the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. In 1710 a group of Palatines,
who had left their German homes because of religious persecution, and
had sought refuge in England, was passed on to North Carolina through
the enterprise of a couple of Swiss promoters who were looking for
colonists. As a courtesy to the promoters the settlement was given
the name of New Bern, which has led to a general supposition that the
population were Swiss. In fact, they were nearly all German Alpines.

Another immigration, this time of Nordics, began a few years later
when Scotch Highlanders, disappointed at the results of the 1715
uprising on behalf of the Old Pretender, fled the country and came to
North Carolina, starting a settlement on the Cape Fear River. Later,
following the collapse of the Young Pretender in 1745, the Highlanders
again found themselves in a bad situation at home. Shipload after
shipload landed at Wilmington in 1746 and 1747. This emigration of
Scotch Highlanders continued until the Revolution, during which time
they showed themselves, strangely enough, loyal to the Hanoverian
dynasty and mostly fought as Loyalists against the Continentals.

The general breakup of the clan system with the accompanying distress
in the Highlands caused most of this emigration, although some of the
Scots were deported as prisoners of war. Campbelltown was the centre
of their settlement, and it is unfortunate that its present name of
Fayetteville conceals its interesting history. Some of the Highlanders
are said to have brought cattle with them, and they pushed on into the
interior of the State because of the great areas of succulent grass and
peavine stretching toward the mountains which provided excellent fodder
for their herds.

The sympathetic patronage of Gabriel Johnston, the Governor of the
Province from 1734 to 1752, was largely responsible for the welcome
extended to these Highlanders. Himself a Scotchman, he was under
strong suspicion of not being too loyal to the Crown. At any rate, his
hospitality to the Highlanders brought to North Carolina the largest
group of Highland Scotch that came to the colonies. These men of the
purest Nordic blood form a selected group anthropologically. It is no
mere coincidence that the tallest average height of a population in the
United States at the present time is in these North Carolina counties
that were settled by the Scotch Highlanders after "Bonnie Prince
Charlie" ceased to be a political possibility.

While the back country of North Carolina was thus being penetrated from
the seacoast by the Highland Scots, the Lowland Scots were drifting
into it along the foot of the mountains from Pennsylvania and Maryland
through Virginia. This was the principal source of increase of the
population during the eighteenth century, and still gives to the State
its characteristic complexion. Along with the Ulster Scots came, as
said above, some of the German settlers, thus bringing a small Alpine
element to the State. The southern tidewater region also developed at
the same time as a northern extension of settlement from South Carolina.

       *       *       *       *       *

South Carolina was settled only a little later than North Carolina by
the establishment of Old Charles Town in 1665. This settlement, shortly
moved across and up the river to a better location, prospered and
expanded until it became South Carolina.

Originally a sort of offshoot from the West Indies, this region caught
the attention of the Huguenot refugees a few years later, perhaps
because Coligny had marked it out a century before as a desirable home
for them. It attracted a larger proportion of the French refugees
than any other colony; and although they were unwelcome at first to
the English who were in possession, they soon assimilated themselves
to the Anglo-Saxon population with which they were racially identical
and became an important element in the upbuilding of the State.
In Colonial and Revolutionary times, Gendron, Huger, LeSerrurier,
deSaussure, Laurens, Lanier, Sevier, and Ravenel were all Huguenots who
distinguished themselves in the service of the State.

The establishment of large-scale agriculture with plantations devoted
to rice or indigo sharply limited the possibilities of settlement in
the tidewater region of South Carolina, and it became a country of
large holdings worked by Negro slaves in charge of overseers. Meanwhile
the owners largely made their homes in or near Charleston, and brought
it to the position of the fourth city of the colonies in importance.

The growth of the colony would have been slow had it not been for the
influx of the Ulster Scots coming along the foot of the mountains from
the north after the middle of the eighteenth century. The upcountry
thus became quite different from the tidewater, so different, that in
South Carolina as in North Carolina and Virginia it was a question
whether the State might not split on slavery a few years before the
Civil War, and the Upland population was only whipped into line for
secession by sharp practice on the part of the political leaders in the
slave-holding regions.

Other small elements were incorporated easily in the Nordic population
of the State, but the loss to the colony was heavy when the Loyalists
left after the Revolution. On the 13th and 14th of December, 1782, 300
ships set sail from Charleston carrying not merely the soldiery but
more than 9000 civilians and slaves. Half of these went to the West
Indies, and most of the others to Florida where such of them as had not
subsequently removed were presumably reincorporated into the United
States a generation later. On the other hand, hundreds of Hessian
deserters stayed in the community, as also occurred in others of the
colonies, thus introducing the first noticeable immigration of Nordic
Germans into the State. As previously noted, most of the so-called
Palatine immigration of Germans in the eighteenth century was Alpine,
in sharp contrast to the North German Nordics, who came to this
country in large numbers in the middle of the nineteenth century after
the futile revolutions of 1848.

       *       *       *       *       *

Georgia was the last of the thirteen colonies to be settled. Even
at the Revolution it was so weak that it was regarded by many of
the Colonial leaders as more of a liability than an asset to the
confederation. Its establishment in 1732 by Oglethorpe was on a basis
appealing more to sentiment than to practical views. As in the case
of some other similar schemes in contemporary times, Parliament was
persuaded to appropriate nearly a hundred thousand pounds to aid the
oppressed of all countries. Most of the few thousand persons who were
settled by the original trustees were English, and were selected with
as much care as possible from among those who were apparently "down on
their luck," and who might prosper if relieved of their debts and put
back on land. Many of these insolvent debtors were doubtless victims of
political and economic changes, but it soon transpired that in too many
cases the man who did not have sufficient capacity to make a living in
England, likewise lacked sufficient capacity to make a living in the
newer and more difficult conditions of Georgia.

In addition to these English debtors, Oglethorpe enlisted on the
Continent small bodies of oppressed Protestants and established several
other little settlements. Waldenses from Piedmont in Italy were
settled in one place, a colony of Scots in another, German Moravians
at still a third point, and a few French families elsewhere, as well
as a colony from Salzburg, made up of a pre-dominantly Alpine stock
that had suffered for its religious principles enough to deserve all
the sympathy it received. The hardy Nordics (Scotch Presbyterian
Highlanders) who had been settled on the southern frontier, to afford
protection for Georgia from the Spaniards and Indians, were almost
exterminated by the Spaniards and of all these various undertakings
Savannah was the only one that prospered.

It was necessary to abandon the attempt to create a prosperous colony
by means of establishing a refuge for the oppressed. Unfortunately
the change was accompanied by the introduction of Negro slavery.
Nevertheless, when Georgia became open to outside settlers, there
was a valuable accession from colonies to the north, one of the most
interesting of the groups being the Dorchester Society, which came in
1752. This Protestant congregation had left England in 1630 and founded
Dorchester in Massachusetts. In 1695 a part of them had moved to South
Carolina and, two generations later, some of these went still farther
south to midland Georgia.

Their example was followed, or perhaps indeed preceded, by many other
Carolina planters, so that the influx from this source became a real
element of strength to the more southerly colony. Shortly thereafter
the flood of Ulster Scots, rolling along the Piedmont, began to reach
the uplands of Georgia and assured its future.

[Illustration: THE THIRTEEN COLONIES]

The Georgians of the present day are descendants of the Oglethorpe
colonists in only insignificant proportions. The Nordic settlers who
came in through North Carolina, English from the tidewater region, and
Ulster Scots from the Uplands, are the real founders of the State.

After the Revolution, Georgia benefited by the prevalent unrest and the
tide of migration that flowed in all directions. It received settlers
from all of the Southern States and some of the Northern ones, as well
as new arrivals direct from Europe.

       *       *       *       *       *

Kentucky for a generation prior to the Revolution had become known
through hunters of game bringing back glowing accounts of the beauty
and fertility of the level lands of central Kentucky. Access in the
one case was down the Ohio River by boat, and in the other by a long
and hazardous trip through the mountains, entering by the Cumberland
Gap, the most practicable of several difficult passes. The danger
from Indians was so great on the Ohio River that most of the invaders
preferred those dangers of a different type to be encountered by the
Cumberland Gap entry. It was the route which Daniel Boone, acting for
a land company, had blazed: the narrow trail, six hundred miles long,
that has become famous as the Wilderness Road.

By the time of the Revolution several hundred people were in Kentucky,
and more were coming each year from the inland portion of Virginia,
and, to a less extent, from Pennsylvania. During the Revolution the
population rose and fell in accordance with local conditions on the
frontier and the ravages of the Indians. With the end of the Revolution
a great tide of immigration set in, composed in part of soldiers who
were given land grants by the Virginia Government. With them was an
element of Loyalists, as well as many families from Maryland, both
seeking to get away from unpleasant associations in the East.

From 1780 onward the route down the Ohio began to be more used. The
Indians were driven back or the boatmen learned how to cope with their
ruses, and the annual migration began to be counted in thousands. In
the year 1786 as many as 3000 went down the river, in 1788, 10,000, and
in 1789, 20,000. Meanwhile, the immigration through the Cumberland Gap
continued steadily. The growth of Kentucky was on a scale unparalleled
in North America up to that time. Within a few decades from the
day when the first cabins were erected in the region, a population
of 70,000 people had entered the State, and it had half as many
inhabitants as Massachusetts.

Compared with the Scotch tone of Tennessee, Kentucky was overwhelmingly
English in aspect. Virginia was definitely its progenitor, a large part
of its early population having come through the Shenandoah Valley. Next
as feeders were Pennsylvania and North Carolina, while other regions
contributed but small minorities, those from Maryland being probably
the most numerous. The government of Virginia was seriously concerned
by its losses of population from this cause. After the Revolution,
officers who had served with the Virginia forces were compensated
by allotments of land in the Kentucky region. The State attracted
other settlers of a superior social and economic status. These gave a
tone to its society and laid the foundation of a local aristocracy.
Kentucky long remained distinctive because of its conspicuously English
atmosphere and the social refinements which it showed in contrast to
some of its neighbors. Kentucky remained part of Virginia until 1792
when it was admitted as a State.

       *       *       *       *       *

Tennessee was, in fact, only the western part of North Carolina which
originally stretched beyond the Appalachians as far as the Mississippi.
The French had established a trading post on the site of Nashville as
early as 1714. But the State was actually settled from the East rather
than from the West, and, indeed, its western third was not settled
until well into the nineteenth century. The first area of settlement
was in the river valleys near the North Carolina border, and this
remained the principal area during the period here considered. A second
and less important point of growth was in the center of the State. In
northeastern Tennessee the earlier settlements were from Virginia, and
the settlers supposed that they were still within the limits of the Old
Dominion.

The settlers from North Carolina soon began to push through the
mountain passes and established the groupings that go in history
by the name of the Holston and Watauga settlements. Many of the
early settlers, of whom some hundreds were present before the
Revolution, were, as noted, from the upland portion of Virginia,
and were Presbyterians from Scotland, often by way of Ulster, while
the principal early influx from North Carolina was connected with
the uprising in the Piedmont section of that colony about 1770. An
insurgent element known as the Regulators put itself in opposition to
the royal governor, and, being beaten, fled over the mountains for
safety. A large proportion of these were from Wake County. They brought
in an element of Baptists contrasting with the Presbyterianism which,
on the whole, characterized the State from the beginning and still does
so owing to the predominance of the Scotch in its settlement.

While the eastern community was growing, settlement began in the
central portion of the State in what is known as the Cumberland
district. This was for years almost isolated from the neighboring
settlement to the east, the center of which was Nashville, while the
eastern settlement headed in Knoxville, which became the capital.

During the Revolution the settlement of this territory continued
steadily until the State had 10,000 or 12,000 inhabitants. North
Carolina made liberal allotments of Tennessee lands to its soldiers
who had fought in the Revolution, and this continued the stream of
immigration. By the time that President Washington was inaugurated
the eastern section of the State had some 30,000 inhabitants, the
Cumberland district about 7000, and both were growing steadily. Western
Tennessee was still Indian territory.

The population of Tennessee in 1790 was typical of the upland
population of the South in its racial make-up. It is definitely a mere
extension of the western part of North Carolina, though its inhabitants
were often born in Virginia, and to a less extent in other States, as
was true of the inhabitants of North Carolina itself.

In the Mississippi Valley at this period there were a few settlements
established under the French and Spanish regimes, which had attracted
a miscellaneous crowd of adventurers and traders. Since this territory
did not become part of the United States until the Louisiana Purchase
of 1803, it will be dealt with more fully in the next section. In this
period we are dealing with comparatively small numbers for this entire
region.

Of nearly 4,000,000 people, both white and black, in the United States
in 1790, at the time of the first census, 95 per cent were living east
of the Appalachians.

In territories of the present United States other than the settlements
already covered, there were three little islands of population. One
lay along the Mississippi in southwest Illinois, a remnant of the old
French settlements with some English and American additions. A second
was around Vincennes, Indiana, with a population like that of the
Illinois settlements but more strongly American. A third was in Ohio,
where settlement was just beginning, the first serious colonization
being that made in 1788 at Marietta by New Englanders.

Although the Revolution grew out of economic and political causes, it
represents primarily one of those costly and unfortunate internecine
wars in which the Nordics have been prone to indulge at intervals for
two or three thousand years, and which have done so much to weaken them
as a race.

Had there been no complications the effects of the Revolutionary War
might have been less permanent. Winner and loser would have lived
on terms of peace with each other, as they did in England after the
Civil War and in the United States after the Rebellion. But the hard
feeling that goes with any conflict was intensified by several factors.
The Ulster Scots, in particular, had reason to feel themselves badly
treated by England, and they carried into, and through, the Revolution,
an unusual animosity. This feeling of resentment was shared and kept
alive by many other Americans through the injudicious behavior in
Canada of a number of the English governments after the Revolution.

The tradition of one hundred and fifty years of common action of the
colonies and the mother country in opposing France was forgotten
overnight and a sentimental attitude for which there was astonishingly
little actual basis led to a glorification of France and everything
French for a generation or more--an attitude that has not entirely
disappeared to this day. The antagonism toward Great Britain was
maintained for political reasons during the next century mostly by
Irish agitators. This ill feeling prevented the close co-operation
between the two greatest sections of the English-speaking races, which
would have meant so much for world peace and harmony, and which would
have laid the basis for a closer co-operation of all the nations of
predominant Nordic stock, in the interest of the progressive evolution
of mankind. A first object of statesmanship should now be to regain
that solidarity of the Nordics, in the interests not merely of world
progress, but of the very survival of civilization.

Denominational questions in the United States were scarcely an issue
after the Revolution, for the bitter sectarian feeling that had
existed earlier was rapidly disappearing, and the Roman Catholics had
not yet been able to raise the issue of bigotry, for the country was
overwhelmingly Protestant. Of approximately 4,000,000 persons in the
United States in 1790, Catholic writers make varying claims running
as high as 35,000 or 45,000 persons of their faith. Without stopping
to inquire how many of those claimed for Rome were merely nominal
adherents, and how many were Negroes, one may remark that at the most,
about one American in each one hundred might have had some affiliation
with the Roman Church. When the Catholic hierarchy was established for
the first time in the United States by the appointment of the Jesuit
John Carroll as bishop of Baltimore in 1789, he reported to his
superiors that there were about 16,000 Catholics in Maryland, including
children and Negroes; something over 7000 in Pennsylvania, some 3000
French around Detroit, and about 4000 scattered through the rest of the
country. To this total of 30,000 might be added the unknown but small
number of nominal Catholics on the frontier, in the Mississippi Valley,
and in other regions where there were no priests to minister to them,
and where their children, at least, were fairly sure to grow up outside
the church. It is probably accurate to say that there never has been
a nation which was so completely and definitely Protestant as well as
Nordic as was the United States just after the American Revolution.

The total white population found in the United States by the first
census (1790) was 3,172,444. To this should be added, for the present
purpose, the population of parts of the continent that are now, but
were not then, in the United States, that is Louisiana and Florida.
The latter had but a few thousand inhabitants. The Louisiana Purchase
territory may be credited with 36,000, of whom nearly one-half were
Negroes. The French are estimated at about 12,000. Professor Hansen
gives the figure of Whites only for the Louisiana Purchase area in
1790 as 20,000. The addition of Negroes would probably increase these
population figures considerably. Texas may be allotted 5000 (Spanish)
Whites, New Mexico and Arizona 15,000, and California 1000 at this
period. But it will be shown later that the use of the word "White"
in these Spanish-American lands is frequently largely a "courtesy
title." Finally, the census enumerators did not reach the Old Northwest
Territory, where there were already some 11,000 residents, about
equally divided between American and French. The total white population
of the territory now comprised in the continental United States may
therefore be put at approximately 3,250,000 in 1790.

Disregarding the French and Spanish in the outlying regions, the only
race, aside from the Nordic, that was important enough to be counted
at this period was the Alpine, represented by the Germans. In Maine
one in a hundred of the population might have been German, but in the
other New England states the Alpines were negligible.[9] In the middle
colonies they were an important element, perhaps one in every ten
or twelve in such States as New York, New Jersey, and Maryland, and
one-third of the whole population in Pennsylvania. Through the Southern
States they formed perhaps one in twenty of the population, confined
mainly to the upland regions and, having spread over from these uplands
and from Pennsylvania into the west, they amounted to about one in
seven in Kentucky and Tennessee.

Nine-tenths of the whole white population of 1790 was therefore
Nordic in race, and ninety-nine hundredths of it Protestant in
religion. It was all English-speaking, save for the little island of
Pennsylvania Dutch, and for the French and Spanish on the frontiers.
It was all living under a political and cultural tradition that was
characteristically British.

At the time of the Revolution there were about 6,000,000 people in
England and about half that number in the colonies.

       *       *       *       *       *

The preceding pages have been devoted to describing the conditions in
the English colonies at the end of the Colonial Period. Let us now
consider the situation of the continent as a whole.

Never before in the history of the Nordic race had there been an event
comparable in importance to this occupation of North America, north of
the Rio Grande, by the English and Scotch. The Canadian French were too
few to be a serious obstacle to the development of the country and, as
will be seen in the following pages, the rest of Canada was in race,
language, religion, and cultural traditions identical with the original
British colonies.

Thus we have the most vigorous race in existence, with a few outside
elements which were entirely in sympathy with the dominant type, in
possession of the richest and most salubrious continent in the world.
That this country was healthy and well fitted to breed a highly
selected race is shown by the comparison of the fate of the colonists
who went to the West Indies with those who went to New England.

These Puritan migrations were in their general nature identical,
but the enervating climate of the Caribbean Sea proved fatal to the
Nordics who went there, while the vigor of the New Englanders as a
body was increased by the elimination of weaklings through a harsh but
beneficent climate.

To appreciate how highly selected a race the Americans were at that
time, one has only to consider the extraordinary group of men of
talent and ability, some fifty-five in number, who represented the
colonies at the Convention of 1787 at Philadelphia. Those men framed
the Constitution of the United States, which after a hundred and fifty
years of stress and strain still remains the model for such documents
throughout the world.

Let the reader consider whether our 110,000,000 whites of today could
produce the same number of men with corresponding ability and equally
high motive, in spite of the fact that our population is more than
thirty times as large as in 1787.

So we find in 1790 a practically empty continent, its eastern half
buried under a mantle of forest, with a coast line broken by ports
and short navigable rivers. Across low mountain ranges we first find
a vast central valley traversed for hundreds of miles by wide rivers;
then a belt of treeless plains covered with succulent buffalo grass;
next a region long called the "Great American Desert"; then a range
of mountains dimly known to the Colonials as the "Stony Mountains";
beyond them a great alkaline desert, next the Sierra range, and lastly
the genial Pacific Coast. The western half of the continent abounded
in mineral wealth, while in the central valley the virgin soil awaited
the plow. These conditions had their counterpart in Canada. Wild game
abounded, inviting the fur traders to explore the remoter places and
enabling the settler to find ready food, while he built his log cabin
and planted his crop.

Such was the continent and such the opportunity. In the following pages
we shall see what has been done with these opportunities by the British
race.

       *       *       *       *       *

Before leaving the Colonial Period, it is well to call attention, once
more, to the history of the frontier. For a hundred years and more the
frontier was beset by savages often instigated by the French in Canada.
The Indians killed and tortured the lonely settlers and burned their
log cabins. This desultory warfare cost the English many hundreds, if
not thousands of lives along the frontiers of New England as well as of
Pennsylvania and Virginia.

The Indians found by English settlers on their arrival in America were
probably, as to many of their tribes, the most formidable fighting
men of any native race encountered by the Whites. Not only were they
redoubtable warriors in their own surroundings, but they were beyond
question the cruelest of mankind. The Assyrians, of all ancient
peoples, were reputed to be the most fiendishly cruel, but bad as they
were, they did not compare with the American Indian. The details of
the torture of prisoners taken in open warfare are too revolting to
describe. These tortures were carried out by the squaws while the bucks
sat around and laughed at the agony of their victims. There is nothing
like it in history in any part of the world and the result was that
the aboriginal Indians were regarded as ravening wolves or worse and
deprived of all sympathy, while the Whites stole their lands and killed
their game. No one who knew the true nature of the Indian felt any
regret that they were driven off their hunting grounds. This attitude
was found wherever the Whites came in conflict with them and explains
why they were scarcely regarded as human beings.

The effect of the existence of the Indians on the frontier was to
slow down the advance westward of the settlements and to compel the
backwoodsman to keep in touch with his countrymen in the rear. If
there had been no hostile Indians, the settlers would have scattered
widely and would have established independent communities, such as
were attempted in Kentucky and Tennessee after the Revolution. In this
respect the Indians were a benefit to the Whites.

At the close of the period ending in 1790, despite the loss of many
valuable elements at the time of the Revolution, the American race was
homogeneous and Scotch and English to the core. It was bursting the
bonds of the old frontier and ready to pour a human deluge over the
mountains and inundate the West.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 9: Studying the percentage of various nationalities in
Colonial times, and later, one is guided partly by records of
immigration, partly by the names of the inhabitants, as recorded
in census and other returns. There was always a tendency, in an
Anglo-Saxon region, to corrupt names of other nationalities,
occasionally in such a way as to make them appear English. This fact
must be allowed for in all calculations in this field.]



VIII

THE OLD NORTHWEST TERRITORY


The second period to be dealt with covers the years from the first
census, 1790, to the eve of the Civil War, 1860, and deals with the
organization of our government and the extension of settlement westward
to the Pacific. Free land and a very high birthrate among native
Americans led to a great increase of the population, so that the white
inhabitants of the United States, about three millions and a quarter
in 1790, became twenty-seven millions and a half, in 1860, though
immigration during the seventy-year period was not over four and a
quarter million.

From 1790 to 1820, no official record of immigrant arrivals was kept.
Thousands certainly arrived during those thirty years, but it seems
probable that they were nearly all English and Scotch.

Just as the termination in 1790 of the preceding period was marked by
a racial loss, caused by the expulsion of the Loyalists, so this later
period was terminated by an internecine Civil War, costing the country
three-fourths of a million Nordic lives, counting killed and died of
wounds only. The descendants of those men who gave their lives for
their country on both sides would have filled up the West, instead of
its being largely populated by the immigrants we recklessly invited to
our shores.

During the period referred to (1790-1860), there was, as said, no heavy
immigration except from two sources, Ireland and Germany, and both of
these occurred in the later portion of the period.

The displacement of agriculture by sheep in Scotland at the beginning
of the nineteenth century dispossessed thousands of farmers who moved
to America, sometimes with the active assistance of their landlords.
The population of some districts, as Perthshire, Argyllshire, and
Inverness-shire, fell sharply, because the people, no longer able to
make a living, moved away. North America was the favorite destination.

Southern England experienced a similar movement. The price of
agricultural products, which had been forced up during the Napoleonic
wars, fell steadily for a long time. Farmers could not make a living.
The counties of Kent, Hampshire, Somerset, and Surrey were the chief
centers of emigration. These people also turned their faces toward
North America.

Ireland, too, was in perpetual ferment and the emigration from that
island was increased as the result of the abortive revolutionary
attempts of the United Irishmen in 1798 and 1803. After the leader of
the latter, Robert Emmet, was executed, his elder brother, Thomas A.
Emmet, came to New York, practised law, and within a decade became the
attorney-general of the state. The Emmets, like most others of these
Irish refugees, were Protestants in religion.

Later, in 1845, the potato crop failed in Ireland, and soon after
the starving peasantry, many of them from the lower types of western
Ireland, swarmed over here. The women became domestic servants and the
men day laborers, doing the heavy work of ditch digging and railroad
building. They were Roman Catholic and that fact excited animosity in
many sections of the country. They were not welcome in the West when
they drifted there. It was not unusual to see on the frontier railroad
stations and in advertisements in New York newspapers, "No Irish need
apply." There was some violence and an American party was organized to
check their entrance into local politics, for which they showed great
aptitude.

Since then, these Irish have been forced upward in the social scale by
later arriving immigrants over whom they had the advantage of speaking
English. They became the nucleus in America of the present Roman
Catholic Church, which has spread rapidly in this country. The Irish
did not take to agriculture and have never shown much liking for the
larger industries.

The total number of Irish immigrants during the forties and fifties
amounted to more than a million and a half, and that first migration
has been followed by a continuous stream of southern Irish down to the
last few years when the quota restrictions went into effect.

[Illustration: ROMAN CATHOLICS

1930]

As soon as they secured a certain amount of wealth and rose in the
social scale, they established schools and colleges of their own, the
teachings and, indeed, the existence of which conflict with those of
the public-school system of the United States, and to that extent they
have impaired the unity of the nation. Some regiments of Irish fought
on the Northern side in the Civil War, but the draft riots of New York
were caused by the Irish who did not want to fight for the Union. In
addition to the shanty Irish there came over some middle-class families
of importance.

The second immigration of importance occurred a few years later when
a large number of Germans were forced over here by the failure of the
Revolution in Germany in 1848. These Germans were very different from
those who migrated to Pennsylvania in the eighteenth century. Many of
them were from northern Germany and were Nordics, including individuals
of some culture and distinction. They settled in certain cities of
the West, notably in Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Saint Louis. For the
most part, however, they took up public land and became hard-working
farmers. They did not in the mass improve the population already here
intellectually, racially, or physically, and they impaired our national
unity, at least for the time being, by the introduction of their own
language.

At the end of the period here considered there were in the United
States more than one and a quarter millions of German-born, of whom
about one-fourth were Roman Catholics. This church, which in 1790
controlled not one in a hundred of the population, could in 1860 count
upon one in every nine of the Whites.

Outside of the Irish and Germans, who were preponderantly Nordic, there
was not much immigration of importance. The census of 1860 enumerated
4,138,697 foreign-born persons out of a total of nearly 27,000,000
Whites. England, Scotland, and Canada accounted for most of those who
were neither Irish nor German. Thus at the end of this period the
racial unity of the United States was still virtually unimpaired.

The French in the old Northwest Territory were negligible in number,
amounting to but a few thousands. The number of Mexicans in Texas,
Arizona, and New Mexico when we took over those countries was but a few
thousand more. These Mexicans considered themselves Spanish; but as a
matter of fact, the veneer of religion, language, and culture was very
thin, and racially most of them were at least seven-eighths Indian. The
same condition prevailed in California in 1846; the number of Mexicans
being even smaller than in Texas.

       *       *       *       *       *

Many of the original Colonial charters granted by the English kings
provided for a north and south boundary by latitude, but the western
boundary was often defined as the "South Sea," and not unnaturally
many of these boundaries overlapped. After the Revolution, the
original colonies were induced to cede to the Federal Government
their indefinite and conflicting claims to the western lands. This
general and important cession of territory had two results: it gave the
impoverished Federal Government lands which could be sold for its own
benefit, and it led to the establishment of communities which looked to
the Federal Government for everything they needed, which in itself was
a long step toward unity of government.

In 1787 the western boundaries of New York and Pennsylvania were fixed
as they are at present, and out of the country south of the Great
Lakes, north of the Ohio River, and east of the Mississippi was erected
the Northwest Territory under the special guardianship of the Federal
Government.

This "Northwest Territory" had been seized during the Revolution by
an extraordinary group of adventurers and frontiersmen under General
George Rogers Clark. Thereby the Thirteen Colonies were in physical
possession of these districts south of the Great Lakes when the Treaty
of Paris was signed in 1783. Without such actual possession of the
Old Northwest, it would have remained part of Canada, an outcome
which would have limited the growth of the United States westward or,
more probably, have led to another war. The reluctance of the British
authorities in charge of the outposts in this territory to surrender
their forts in accordance with the terms of the treaty, and their
alleged backing of the Indians, were among the causes underlying the
War of 1812.

As population increased, new States were created in succession out of
this territory--Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan
(1837), and Wisconsin (1848).

       *       *       *       *       *

Ohio's first straggling settlers had pushed northwesterly across
the Ohio River during the Revolution, but the first real, permanent
settlement was by the New England Company which established Marietta
in 1788. This New England immigration, though soon swamped by that
from other States, played an important part in the organization of the
territory and in the shaping of its future policies.

Scarcely had the Massachusetts group, led by General Rufus Putnam,
taken possession of its vast grant around Marietta, when a new group
led by Judge J.C. Symmes of Kentucky occupied a grant of a million
acres between the Great and Little Miami Rivers, including the sites
of Cincinnati, Dayton, and many of the most important of the early
settlements of the territory.

Virginia had reserved a military district of more than four million
acres to reward its soldiers of the Revolution, and this quickly began
to be settled largely by veterans from Kentucky which was at that time,
it will be remembered, still a part of Virginia.

Connecticut on the other hand had stipulated for its own Western
Reserve of nearly 3,000,000 acres, extending in an oblong, 120 miles,
from the boundary of Pennsylvania along Lake Erie, and the settlement
of Cleveland marked its nucleus.

Thus Ohio, within a few years after the Revolution, started with four
different growing points. The Virginia element increased the most
rapidly, partly because of its proximity to Kentucky, partly because of
its easy access by the Ohio River, so that the English and Ulster Scots
of the southern part of the State soon dominated the whole.

A similar element was continually coming across the Pennsylvania
border from the Monongahela country, and before long the Pennsylvania
emigration to Ohio became the greatest from any one State, filling up
the central part which comprised the great wheat belt. Even as late as
the Mexican War, one-fourth of the members of the Ohio Legislature were
natives of Pennsylvania, exceeding the members born in any other State,
or in all the New England States combined, or in Ohio itself.

Through Kentucky came not merely Virginians but a steady stream of
Ulster Scots from North Carolina, many of whom, however, had previously
been Virginians. The southern parts of the State, therefore, took on
some of the complexion of the slave-holding States, while the northern
part was tinged by the culture of New England and the Central States,
many coming in from western New York, which from the present point of
view is to be regarded as merely an extension of New England.

Thus for a score of years the population of the States to the south and
east of Ohio, which, dammed back by hostile Indians, had been ready to
overflow for some time, poured into the new territory. Then the flood
slackened until after the close of the War of 1812, when it was renewed
with vigor. Men from all parts of the United States who had served
with the western and northern forces in the War of 1812 had seen the
beauties of the new country and determined to settle there as soon as
peace was declared and they could dispose of their holdings at home. So
far as New England was concerned this tendency was accentuated by two
remarkably cold winters in 1816 and 1817, which surpassed the memories
of the oldest inhabitants. General economic and social conditions were
favorable for a widespread movement of population. The northwestern
part of Ohio had been cleared of Indians and was then thrown open to
settlement.

This second great flood of immigration into Ohio was in general of
the same character as the first, bringing into the State from all
sides an almost purely Nordic population of British ancestry, except
for the small element of Pennsylvania Dutch who for a while kept much
to themselves, maintained their own customs and their own language,
and thus cut themselves off largely from the march of progress. Their
Alemannish dialect was rapidly becoming almost as far out of line with
the literary language of Germany as it was with the English language of
their adopted home.

Later Ohio received a quarter of a million of German and Irish
immigrants. But of the 2,339,511 inhabitants whom the State contained
in 1860, a million and a half were born in the State itself.

       *       *       *       *       *

Indiana, a typical American State, owes nothing worth mentioning to the
original French population. In early days it must be considered little
more than an extension of Kentucky. Virginia had set aside a large
tract for rewarding the men of George Rogers Clark's expedition and
these were the original land agents, so to speak, for the territory.
But all along the border a frontier population drifted there across the
Ohio River. As late as 1850 there were twice as many Southern people
in Indiana as there were from the Middle States and New England put
together. A good share of these were from Kentucky, which means that
they or their parents were previously from Virginia or North Carolina.

That Indiana was in sympathy a Northern State bears testimony to the
fact that these migrants had little in common except original racial
stock with the older slave-holding population. The Ulster Scots were
the largest element, although there were also many Quakers from North
and South Carolina, some of whom were of Huguenot descent. It was this
element which made of Indiana a principal route of the "Underground
Railroad," as the system of smuggling runaway slaves out of the slave
States was called. But in the southern part of the State there was much
sympathy with the slaveholders.

The settlement of Indiana falls almost entirely in the nineteenth
century, the number of people there prior to 1800 being negligible and
confined for the most part to lands under the protection of the little
post of Vincennes. On the northerly side of the Ohio River, at the
Falls, the settlement of the tract of 149,000 acres, which Virginia had
conveyed in 1786 to General Clark and his soldiers, was well under way.

The rapid settlement of Indiana was a part of the great westward
movement beginning with the panic of 1819, and the hard times that
followed. The price of cotton was steadily declining in the South
and it was easy for the poorer farmer heavily in debt to sell out or
simply pack up and quit, moving on to free and richer land in a new
country. Many of the Ulster Scots in the South were hostile to slavery,
while others of them, strongly Jacksonian in politics, were opposed
to nullification and shared the reputed death-bed regret of the hero
of New Orleans that he had not hanged John C. Calhoun. South Carolina
therefore sent a large contingent of Ulster Scots to the new territory,
in addition to the general immigration which has already been mentioned.

The Southern stream was met in the old Northwest Territory by the
stream of New Englanders coming over the line of the Erie Canal after
crossing the Hudson at the great break in the highlands near Albany.
Many of the settlers of northern Indiana had tarried for a season in
Ohio and moved westward as they had a chance to harvest the unearned
increment by selling their farms at a profit and migrating to take up
cheaper land and start again.

Indiana missed the main flood of foreign immigration in the generation
before the Civil War. The Germans were going elsewhere because of
clannishness, while the Irish avoided Indiana because of its lack of
great cities. By the time the Scandinavian flood began to come in, land
values in Indiana were already high and the new settlers went farther
west and north.

Indiana, therefore, of the States in the Northwest Territory is the
most nearly Nordic in population and the most nearly American, and,
at the end of the period under consideration, it represented an
overwhelmingly native-born population originating, in not very unequal
parts, from the Northern and Southern States, respectively. Though
the foreign element was rapidly gaining ground, it had not begun
to make itself felt even as late as 1833 when northern Indiana was
a wilderness, while southern Indiana was already well peopled from
Kentucky, Tennessee and the Carolinas.

The development of internal improvements together with the general
migration from Northern States to all points west brought a complete
change in the political complexion of the State. In 1836, alone, land
sales in Indiana amounted to 3,000,000 acres and in the decade from
1840 to 1850 the population of counties bordering the new Ohio canal
increased 400 per cent, while the State began to look to New York as an
outlet for its products rather than to New Orleans.

From 1820, the date of the founding of Indianapolis, to 1860, Indiana
had twice quadrupled her population and from almost purely American
stock. During these forty years, it is calculated that a million
people came to the Northwest from the slave States of the South. At
the outbreak of the Civil War, Indiana had a population of 1,350,000
of which only about one in eleven was foreign-born. More than half
of the aliens were from Germany, and Indiana seems to have attracted
particularly the Nordic element, since Prussia contributed the largest
quota. Ireland was represented by only 24,000 persons at that time and
like the smaller French and English groups, they were scattered through
the State and soon became lost in the general mass.

This distinctive character of Indiana, almost purely American,
Protestant, and Nordic in 1860, gives the key to much of its history
since then. As elsewhere the immediate surrounding States had
contributed the bulk of the population. The census returns showed that
the ten States constituting the birthplace of the largest number of
Hoosiers in that year were, in order of importance: Ohio, Kentucky,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, New York, North Carolina, Tennessee, Maryland,
New Jersey, and Illinois. So far as the New England element was
represented, it had come almost wholly through other States.

       *       *       *       *       *

Illinois, like Ohio, had attracted a few settlers before the
Revolution, mainly to the neighborhood of the half-dozen little French
trading posts. The French population of this district had never been
large, and when it was taken over by Great Britain in 1763, most of
the French inhabitants who could get away hastened to do so, either
returning to Canada or going down the river to Saint Louis or New
Orleans.

With the withdrawal of the little French garrisons only a few hundred
persons of French ancestry were left in the territory. These were of
two different origins. Part had come down from Canada and represented
the "Habitant" French, who were largely Alpine. The remainder had come
up the river from New Orleans and represented a more heterogeneous and
probably inferior group. Some of the Canadians brought their families;
but for the most part the French element was made up of single men who
formed loose alliances with Indian squaws. For these various reasons
the French influence on the subsequent population of the region is too
negligible to justify consideration.

The raid made by the Kentuckians under George Rogers Clark during the
Revolution had given the Americans a more detailed knowledge of this
region, and by 1800 several thousand of them had already drifted across
the border and started settlements. This immigration increased up to
the outbreak of Indian hostilities in 1811 followed by the War of
1812 which almost completely checked settlement along the old western
frontier.

After the declaration of peace and the opening up of land sales in 1814
and 1816, Illinois began to have a real boom. By this time the choicest
locations in Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky had either been taken by
settlers or bought by speculators, so that the new arrival looking for
a bonanza turned to Illinois or Missouri.

Following the general rule of migration in the United States, which
was not broken until the gold rush to California in 1849 introduced
new conditions, the settlement of Illinois was mostly from the States
closest to it, and at the beginning was almost wholly from the South,
particularly from Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. Insignificant
little Shawneetown, on the Ohio River just below the mouth of the
Wabash, gave easy access to the lower end of Illinois--that "Egypt"
which is still a Southern Democratic stronghold. For a short time it
was even the seat of government.

In this population the presence of a sprinkling of Northerners from
Pennsylvania was resented and an occasional stray Yankee was scarcely
tolerated. The settlement of the northern part of the State by New
Englanders was made to a marked extent by colonies or organized
groups, and from the early thirties one reads continually of the
movement of caravans from all the New England States and western New
York. Here again the opening of the Erie Canal gave easy access to
northern Illinois by water. Prior to that time the lead mines in the
northwestern part of Illinois and the southwestern part of Wisconsin
had been the main attraction, and had been developed almost entirely by
the Southerners.

In general, it may be said that up to that time three-fourths of the
population of Illinois came from south of the Mason and Dixon line,
with Kentucky making the largest single contribution, although a small
foreign element was already arriving, mainly from the British Isles.

At the date of Statehood in 1818, Illinois may be said to have been
dominated by the Ulster Scots who had come in from the southern
Piedmont. These represented, on the whole, a class which for lack
of wealth and other reasons had not been slaveholders, and had no
particular sympathy with slavery, having found by personal experience
that the presence of slave labor was disadvantageous to a large part of
the white population. As a matter of fact, probably not more than one
Southern family in four ever owned a slave.

The population required of a new State for admission to the Union in
1818 was 40,000. By the beginning of the Civil War the population of
Illinois had increased to a million and three quarters. Obviously this
change in little more than a generation represented only in small
part the natural increase of the original settlers from Kentucky
and Virginia. So rapidly, indeed, did the forces of progress act in
Illinois that many of the old-timers packed up and moved on, as had
happened during the previous generation among their parents, and
Illinois in the following generation will be found strongly represented
in the early migration to California, Kansas, Nebraska, and Colorado.
To show how little slave-holding sentiment there was in the early
Illinois population, in spite of its Southern origin, it is interesting
to note that most of the Illinois contingent in Kansas were Free-State
men whom the South regarded as enemies to its cause.

For every one of the old-timers who moved farther west, a dozen
Yankees arrived along with many Pennsylvanians, while the Southern
immigration almost entirely stopped, having been diverted to Texas or
to territories beyond the Mississippi.

The people who left the slave-holding States in the decade prior to
the Civil War were largely seeking free soil themselves. This movement
of some of the best Nordic stock out of the South just before and at
the beginning of the Civil War has not been given as much importance
as it deserves. It was a factor in the weakening of the South and the
strengthening of the North. While slavery was a curse in the opinion of
many an owner of a great plantation, he was caught in the system and
felt that he could not get away. The poor man, on the other hand, found
conditions less and less to his liking and many of the more intelligent
decided to get out of a country where they were obliged to compete
with Negro slaves and were looked down upon by their white neighbors.
In this way the lands along the Illinois Central Railway became a
lode-stone for ambitious and dissatisfied farmers from Tennessee,
Alabama, and even from Georgia. With the outbreak of hostilities this
trickle became temporarily a torrent as political refugees who did not
care to remain in a slave-holding republic at war with the American
Union began to seek freer air.

The railroads developed a new specialty in transporting whole families
with their furniture and agricultural implements to points in Illinois,
Iowa, and Wisconsin, while steamers made their way up the Mississippi
crowded with refugees and great numbers of Missourians crossed the
river to Illinois with all their worldly goods. Many of the latter
returned home after Missouri was cleared of secession, but their place
was taken by new streams of Southerners released by the victories of
Union armies and coming to join friends and relatives in southern and
central Illinois.

The decline of leadership in the South after the war was not due
entirely to the loss of its men on the battle-field. Although this
was by far the principal factor, another important one was the flight
from the South of many of those who were not in sympathy with the
fire-eating politicians who had forced secession upon often unwilling
communities.

Before this time, however, the streams of foreign-born which poured
into the Mississippi Valley had already begun to influence the
composition of the population of Illinois, so that even in 1850 one in
four was of alien birth. The largest element was German, who formed
farming communities, mainly in the northern and central part of the
State. By 1860 there were 130,000 of them in Illinois, together with
others who had also come from Pennsylvania.

Ireland sent the group of second importance, and the great internal
improvements in this period were largely the product of their labor. As
elsewhere the Irish showed little inclination for farming, which had
proved so ruinous to them in Ireland, and they made a restless floating
population in the large cities. In 1860 they represented four times
as large a proportion of the population of Chicago as they did of the
State as a whole.

The State attracted a large English immigration. The Illinois Central
Railroad had been built to a considerable extent with English capital,
and the stockholders saw a chance to increase the value of their shares
by promoting emigration to the lands owned by the company, so that by
1860 there were 41,000 English-born in the State.

Another large element of English descent, which had come into the
State in an extraordinary way, had already left. This was the group of
Mormon converts who were brought over from 1840 onward. By 1844 it was
estimated that of the 16,000 Mormon arrivals, 10,000 were English. Most
of these went west to Utah later, or were scattered within a few years.

The last important Nordic element in the State was that of the
Scandinavians who had only begun to come before the Civil War, at which
time there were little more than 10,000 of them in the State as against
87,000 Irish.

       *       *       *       *       *

Michigan, owing to its proximity to Canada, and the importance of
Detroit as a headquarters, had a distinct French atmosphere in its
early days. Unlike those in some of the more distant settlements, the
French inhabitants at Detroit did not intermarry frequently with the
Indians, and they represent therefore a relatively pure French Canadian
stock. American immigration was slow, and not until 1805 did the
inhabitants become numerous enough to warrant a separate territory. As
late as the beginning of the War of 1812 four-fifths of the 5000 people
in Michigan were French. In 1817 the first steamboat appeared on the
waters of Lake Erie and the Erie Canal was begun, and from that time
the Americanization of the territory was rapid.

By 1830 a hundred ships, both steam and sail, were on the Lakes, and
a daily line ran between Buffalo and Detroit. In 1836 when the State
Constitution was adopted the population was nearly 100,000, mainly from
New England and its extension in western New York. The Empire State can
very definitely be called the parent of Michigan.

Many of the New England farmers who had bought farms from the great
land companies in western New York found themselves unable or unwilling
to complete their payments and sold their equities for enough to buy
government land in Michigan and move their families, while from the
rocky hills of Vermont a steady stream came without any intervening
stop. By this time many of the French Canadians had moved out, and of
eighty-nine names signed to the Constitution of 1835, not more than
three can be identified as French.

The tide of alien immigration at this period was late in reaching
Michigan. A group not found elsewhere was that of Dutchmen who came
like some of the earlier settlers, seeking religious tolerance and
freedom. The town of Holland has been a centre for them since 1847.
Of the 749,113 inhabitants of the State in 1860, one-fifth were
foreign-born, divided not unequally between English, Irish, Germans,
and mixed Canadians.

       *       *       *       *       *

Wisconsin's first settlement was at the lead mines of the southwestern
part and attracted largely Ulster Scots from Virginia, Kentucky, and
Tennessee. A little later these were reinforced by another Nordic group
of Englishmen from Cornwall who formed an important element in that
region.

The second migration scattered agricultural communities throughout the
southeastern part of Wisconsin along the lake shore. This immigration
was almost wholly from the New England States and the New England
part of New York State, and was accomplished roughly in the years
1835 to 1850. By 1847 when Statehood was achieved the territory had a
population of nearly 250,000 and was virtually a New England colony.

Of the seventy-six men who composed the second Constitutional
Convention, one-third came from New York, one-third from New England,
and the rest were a scattering.

During the decade which ended with the Federal Census of 1850, the
growth of the State had been nearly 900 per cent, a record rarely
exceeded in America. This extraordinary surge was due largely to the
sudden arrival of a foreign element which has ever since made Wisconsin
a State apart from all the others. Even as early as 1850 one-third
of the population was actually foreign-born. Of the foreign-born who
came to the State during the territorial period, the British Isles
contributed about one-half and foreign-language groups the other
half. The English-speaking immigrants soon blended with the native
population, with the exception of the Roman Catholic Irish who were
less easily assimilated. In the decade before the Civil War there was
a stream of Belgian immigrants amounting to at least 15,000. Some
hundreds of Russians also came in and the Scandinavians had begun to
arrive, although they did not play an important part until after the
Civil War. Danes and Norwegians were beginning to come in some numbers
but few Swedes as yet.

The great immigration of this period was the German, which introduced
another partly Alpine element into the overwhelmingly Nordic population
of the United States. These had begun to come after 1830, when the
Revolution in France had stirred up similar, but less successful,
political upheavals in the parts of South Germany adjoining France.
Many of the politically discontented decided to leave the country
or were obliged to do so, and they found in Wisconsin conditions
particularly to their liking. In the first place the State offered a
variety of climate and soil that was not dissimilar to that in which
they were brought up. In the second place land was cheap and good and
there was much forest land for which the Germans showed a notable
preference. Not only was the possession of timber an asset, but it was
to the German immigrant a mark of social status. Forests had largely
disappeared in Germany, except on the great estates of the nobility.
Hence, to own a piece of forest land was a mark of superiority. Only
the few could afford the forest land in Germany but in Wisconsin every
small farmer could feel himself as good as the Duke or Prince whose
yoke he had renounced. A third important attraction after Statehood was
a provision that the alien could vote after only one year's residence.
This gave the Germans a political importance without delay which they
lost no time in using.

German settlement in the United States follows a belt beginning with
Pennsylvania and running due west through Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin,
Iowa, and Missouri. This was partly due to an avoidance of the Southern
States with whose products they were not familiar and with whose land
system and slave labor they were not sympathetic. Being in this belt
Wisconsin immediately took and retained such a prominence that patriots
from the "Fatherland" seriously urged that it become a genuine German
colony.

The Pennsylvania Dutch had already shown how little disposed the
German-speaking peoples were to become citizens of a new country with
a whole heart, and the new tide of immigration followed this example.
They attacked the public-school system from the beginning and insisted
on having their own schools and on having their children taught German
in the American schools. They kept their own social organization and
even went so far as to get the State laws published in the German
language in Indiana in 1858. This tendency toward hyphenation has made
the Germans a less valuable element in the American population up to
the present time than they should have been.

The early German immigration to Wisconsin was on the whole from
southern and central Germany, and was pre-dominantly Alpine in race and
Roman Catholic in religion. Statehood in Wisconsin coincided with the
unsuccessful Revolution of 1848 in Germany which started the real flood
of German immigration that reached its maximum numbers in 1854, and
continued with noticeable strength for more than a generation longer.

The principal Nordic emigration in the '40s was from Pomerania and
Brandenburg, and many of the South Germans, while largely Alpine, were
Protestants rather than Catholics. In 1863, just after the end of the
period here considered, the church authorities reported that Wisconsin
contained 225,000 German Lutherans as against 105,000 German Catholics.
After that the Germans pressed more and more into the northern and
central regions of the State.

Wisconsin then at the end of the period here considered (1860) had
probably the largest non-Nordic population of any of the American
States, although even here the Nordics were in a great majority. With
one-third of its population foreign-born, it was surpassed in this
respect only by California.



IX

THE MOUNTAINEERS CONQUER THE SOUTHWEST


Meanwhile the States of the lower Mississippi Valley were coming into
existence at a rapid rate.

       *       *       *       *       *

Alabama had no American settlement until after the Revolution, save for
the sporadic appearance of adventurers or traders. But in 1798, when
the Mississippi territory was formed, including the present State of
Alabama, there was already a movement of settlers from the adjoining
States on the east and north, and this continued rapidly until checked
by the war with the Creek Indians in 1813 and 1814. This war advertised
the territory. Its termination threw the land open to settlement, and
more than 100,000 people located in Alabama within five years. The
slight French and Spanish element in Mobile and two or three other
places was soon reduced to insignificant proportions.

The State was settled either by those who came down some of the
rivers of that region, particularly from Tennessee, or by those
who came through Georgia, stopping long enough at the land office
in Milledgeville (then the State capital) to make the necessary
arrangements for acquiring title to real estate. An unimproved but
passable trail ran thence through Montgomery to Natchez, and over
this "Three Notch Road" (so-called from the blaze which marked it)
a stream of settlers from the Atlantic seaboard States passed into
the broad belt of rich blackland which quickly made Alabama and
Mississippi the heart of the Cotton Kingdom. Alabama is, for the most
part, the offspring of Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and
Tennessee, and therefore represents almost entirely Scotch and English
blood. Its foreign-born population was negligible in 1860, amounting to
little more than 12,000, almost half of whom were Irish, in a total of
virtually a million.

       *       *       *       *       *

Mississippi: As in most others of this group of States, the supposed
influence of the earlier French and Spanish settlements is more
sentimental than real. American settlers began to filter in after
1763, some coming even from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New England.
A few Loyalists drifted down to the Mississippi country during the
Revolution, joining the British who were attached to the district at
that time in military or administrative capacities. One of the elements
of this Loyalist immigration consisted of Scotch Highlanders from North
Carolina.

The census of 1850 furnished the first opportunity to ascertain the
origin of the population. The main immigration naturally was from
other Southern States which contributed 145,000 against 5000 from the
Northern States. In the same year 18,000 natives of Mississippi were
residing in other Southern States, principally in Louisiana, Texas,
Arkansas, Alabama, and Tennessee.

At the census ten years later the Mississippi natives, then located in
other Southern States, had almost doubled in number. The enumeration
gives an interesting picture of the way in which population was flowing
backward and forward between adjoining States at that time as it has in
almost every other period in American history.

Since the population of Mississippi before the Civil War was almost
identical in composition with the population of the other Mississippi
Valley slave States, most of which owed their inhabitants originally to
Virginia and subsequently to the States which Virginia had colonized,
it was not surprising that these people found it easy to move from
one part of this region to another. Of nearly 800,000 population at
the outbreak of the Civil War, the foreign-born, still mainly Irish,
constituted only one in a hundred. But nearly half of the population of
the State was colored, and thus no element of racial strength. In this
respect Mississippi's record was surpassed only by Georgia and South
Carolina. This latter State was the only one in which Negroes actually
outnumbered Whites at that time. Other Southern States later reached
the same unenviable situation, and it continued in South Carolina until
after the shift of Negro population which followed the World War.

       *       *       *       *       *

Louisiana at the time of the Purchase in 1803 presented among its
50,000 residents a more varied group than could be found in any other
American State. The foundation of this population was French, the
Spanish element never having been important. These French seem to
have represented a much more heterogeneous lot than did the early
French-Canadians. One colonization scheme after another had been
launched in Paris, and settlers had been recruited by all sorts of
means, many of them of more than doubtful merit.

Here, however, as in other colonies, it must be remembered that the
final population represented not those who arrived, but those who both
survived and left posterity. This fact has too often been disregarded
in the accounts of the origins of the American population. If France
shipped prostitutes to New Orleans to provide wives for its soldiers,
nevertheless this is now of importance only in so far as such persons
left descendants. In one case, of which the details exist, forty-four
girls were sent out from France in 1722. They all married, but only one
left offspring.

Another element in the population was the Acadian refugees, who,
uprooted by the New England militia in 1758, were driven to almost
every part of the colonies. Some made their way to Louisiana, as
Longfellow has described, though drawing a very erroneous picture, in
_Evangeline_. Others were scattered through Maryland, Virginia, and
the Carolinas, in fact on almost every part of the Atlantic coast.
The total number of persons expelled from Nova Scotia at this time
probably did not exceed 6000, and many of these certainly died from
hardships. In any case only a minority was directed to Louisiana, so
that the original settlement of Acadians must represent a very small
part of the population. The so-called "Cajan" population of some of
the southern parishes of Louisiana is, at the present time, largely of
other origins, chiefly Negro.

Another group of French refugees came from Haiti by way of Cuba after
1800, when the Negro uprising there drove out the Whites. Many of these
were persons of good quality but as many as could do so went elsewhere
after peace returned.

Still another source of population was the notorious Mississippi
Bubble sponsored by the Scotchman John Law about 1717. This was the
period at which the Germans from the Palatine and adjacent regions
were emigrating in large numbers, as has been previously set forth in
detail, and 10,000 or more of them were persuaded to go to Louisiana.
According to accepted accounts, not more than 2000 of these Alpines
actually arrived, and when the bubble burst, they settled along the
Mississippi above Baton Rouge in a region which is still known as the
German Coast.

An ill-natured English traveller, John Davis, visiting Louisiana in the
year before the Purchase of 1803, has left the following picture of
these two elements as they appeared to him:

  "The Acadians are the descendants of French colonists, transported
  from the province of Nova Scotia. The character of their
  fore-fathers is strongly marked in them; they are rude and sluggish,
  without ambition, living miserable on their sorry plantations, where
  they cultivate Indian corn, raise pigs, and get children. Around
  their houses one sees nothing but hogs, and before their doors great
  rustic boys, and big strapping girls, stiff as bars of iron, gaping
  for want of thought, or something to do, at the stranger who is
  passing.

  "The Germans are somewhat numerous, and are easy to be distinguished
  by their accent, fair and fresh complexion, their inhospitality,
  brutal manners and proneness to intoxication. They are, however,
  industrious and frugal."

A small Spanish settlement, New Iberia, was made in 1779 of colonists
largely from Andalusia and the Canary Islands. At least the former
element doubtless contained Moorish blood.

Finally, there was an immigration from the American colonies which had
been coming in for a generation previous to the Purchase. One of the
first groups was from North Carolina. From time to time other small
bodies of settlers crossed the mountains to the Tennessee River, where
they constructed flat boats and floated down to the Ohio and thence
to the Mississippi. A few years later a group of Scotch Highlanders
from North Carolina arrived, settling near Natchez. The early American
immigration to Louisiana came on the whole from the upland parts of
the Southern States, and was therefore Scotch and English. After the
Purchase a similar immigration increased greatly in numbers.

The census of 1860, which credited the State with 708,002 people,
revealed that only 81,000 of these were foreign-born, the Germans and
Irish being in about equal numbers. Nearly all of the remainder who
were not natives of the State were born in adjacent States of the
Mississippi Valley, the Whites being made up in about equal proportions
of native-born and those born in nearby States. The former contained
much of the old French and mixed stock; the latter was almost entirely
of British antecedents.

       *       *       *       *       *

Arkansas, at the time of the Louisiana Purchase, did not contain 500
white people. The current of immigration down the Mississippi had gone
past the Post at the mouth of the Arkansas River without taking the
trouble to turn aside. Settlement can scarcely be said to have begun
before 1807, and at the census three years later there were only 1000
people in the territory.

It was not until after the passage by Congress in 1818 of the Land Act
that the pioneers, each carrying in a leather wallet a certificate
which entitled him to a homestead, began to work their boats up the
current of the Arkansas River. There was a steady though not rapid
arrival of settlers from Virginia, the Carolinas, Kentucky, and
particularly Tennessee--which has often been regarded as the original
parent of Arkansas.

Attempts have been made to trace a line of migration from the first
settlement in North Carolina, the undesirable character of which was
mentioned earlier, through Tennessee and down into Arkansas, and to
attribute to this element of the population the backwardness of some
parts of the last-named State. A few settlers came from Georgia or
Alabama up the Mississippi River but this involved a long struggle with
a strong current and it was easier for them to settle in the blacklands
of Mississippi or Louisiana.

There were about 14,000 persons in Arkansas in 1817 when it was created
a Territory. Thereafter it made a steady growth, derived generally from
all the Southern States of the Mississippi Valley, until nearly the
time of the Civil War when Indiana and Kentucky began to contribute
some settlers. Its population therefore was in general made up almost
wholly of British stock. Its 1860 population of 435,350 was one-fourth
black, the Whites being almost wholly native-born, a thousand Germans
and a thousand Irish being lost in the mass.

       *       *       *       *       *

Missouri must be considered from a double point of view. As a French
outpost, St. Louis had become the refuge of much of the French
population of the whole Northwest Territory when that passed under
English control, and for many years the city remained a foreign
settlement. Scattered settlers began to occupy the river banks after or
even during the Revolution. In the westward march of population down
the eastern slope of the Mississippi Valley small groups soon began to
enter Missouri, until at the census of 1810, they amounted to 20,000
persons occupying a strip of land along the Mississippi with a small
isolated settlement at the lead mines.

On the other hand, as a territory where slavery was permitted, Missouri
naturally attracted emigrants from Virginia and North Carolina,
Kentucky and Tennessee. Within ten years after the Louisiana Purchase
it was estimated that four-fifths of the people in Missouri were
Americans and they were rapidly moving from the river back into the
interior.

The Missouri River was naturally an avenue of access for these people.
The interior of the State soon began to have the collective name of
"Boone's Lick" because the Boones had made salt in that district in
1807. A real rush into this region began about 1817, and Kentucky
showed its loyalty to its adopted son (who it will be remembered was a
Pennsylvanian by birth) by contributing 90 per cent of the immigration.
The State has been called the daughter of Kentucky and within
limits this is not inappropriate. Tennessee, however, was strongly
represented. The whole population was in general of the upland element
originally from Virginia and North Carolina, largely Ulster Scotch in
its more remote origin.

By 1830 the movement of population had reached the western border
of the State. Until this time the settlement was purely British
in character save for the now negligible remnant of French on the
Mississippi. Missouri then began to get a part of the immigration of
German Alpines which makes Saint Louis still one of the American cities
with a most marked German tinge. At the same time some of the old
American stock who objected to slavery and its influences were passing
north and west of Missouri into Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska. On the
whole, however, at the close of this period Missouri remained a Nordic
community mostly of Virginian stock going back eventually to Great
Britain. Its population of well over a million was nine-tenths white
and eight-tenths American-born, the Germans outnumbering the Irish
two to one among the foreigners. Kentucky had been by far the largest
contributor, Tennessee came next, followed by Virginia, while Ohio,
Illinois, and Indiana together accounted for only about as many as
Kentucky alone, that is, 100,000.

This Missouri population, with its Ulster Scotch tinge, played an
important part in the settlement of the trans-Missouri West. It
contributed a large percentage of the plainsmen and mountain men of
later date, as well as of the cowboys on the cattle ranges, to say
nothing of the gun-men and bad men of the frontier.

       *       *       *       *       *

Florida missed the establishment of one of the earliest and what might
have been one of the greatest of Nordic colonies in North America when
Coligny's settlement of Huguenots was massacred by the Spanish on
September 20, 1565. The latter made no effective use of the territory
which was looked upon by the government of Mexico probably in about the
same light as the Virgin Islands are now looked upon by the government
in Washington. In 1763 Spain ceded Florida to England in return for
Havana, which had been captured during the Seven Years' War.

A second Nordic invasion of Florida occurred at the time of the
American Revolution when the English Loyalists from the Southern
colonies sought refuge there to the number of more than 13,000. If
these had remained as permanent settlers the State would have benefited
immensely, but most of them left in 1784, when the Spaniards reoccupied
the territory and abolished religious freedom. Some went to England
and others to the West Indies or Nova Scotia. The development of the
peninsula was thereby long delayed.

East and West Florida became part of the United States in 1819. A
Florida colonization scheme, of little importance numerically, deserves
mention in passing because it represented the first real establishment
in American territory of the Mediterranean peoples who have formed such
an important element in the immigration of the last half-century. This
was a colony established by British promoters to which they brought
1,500 Greeks, Italians, and Minorcans about 1767. Sickness soon greatly
reduced their numbers, but a few of the descendants of these people are
in the State at the present time.

As late as the Civil War, Florida was one of the weakest of the
American States, with but 140,000 population, of which well over a
third was colored. Nearly all of the Whites represented a southward
thrust of the Atlantic seaboard states, from or through Georgia.
Foreigners were a scattered lot, constituting but one in twenty-five of
the white population.



X

FROM THE MISSISSIPPI TO THE OREGON


After the Old Northwest Territory was filled up, it began to overflow
into the territories across the Mississippi which the Louisiana
Purchase had provided.

       *       *       *       *       *

Minnesota's early settlers were French and half-breeds, who came over
the border from Canada, together with a small number of Scots escaping
from the breakup of the Red River Colony in Manitoba in the first
quarter of the last century. This Red River is, of course, the Red
River of the North which forms the present boundary between Minnesota
and the Dakotas.

Beginning in 1837 treaties were made with the Indians which gradually
opened up the land to settlement; but in 1849, when a territorial
organization was effected and the first official census taken, there
were less than 5000 persons in the region.

Meanwhile the flood of immigration was reaching the nearby States, and
Wisconsin and Iowa were growing with tremendous spurts. The tide soon
began to flow up to Minnesota, coming by four principal routes. Some of
the invaders came from Milwaukee across Wisconsin by land. Others from
Chicago by land through northern Illinois and southwestern Wisconsin.
Still others from Chicago to Galena, embarking there on the river
steamers. Another group embarked at Saint Louis and came 800 miles up
the Mississippi to Fort Snelling, the nucleus around which the Twin
Cities began to develop.

When the Rock Island and Pacific Railway was built through to the
Mississippi in the early summer of 1854, the gateways really opened.
The next season saw 50,000 persons in the territory of Minnesota.
That number was doubled in 1856. In 1854 the sales of public land
had amounted to 300,000 acres, in 1856 to 2,300,000. Most of this
population, which evidently came to stay, was from the Middle States.
The States of the Old Northwest and New England were not far behind,
but little of the Southern emigration came this far north. The years
1855, 1856, and 1857 marked the high tide of the flood of immigration
of territorial days which has not since been duplicated.

The Scandinavian immigration, which has colored Minnesota so strongly,
began in this decade, and brought a steady stream of hardy Nordics who
avoided the cities, their objective being to acquire land, establish
a home, develop a farm, and become American citizens. A substantial
part of the German migration also reached Minnesota, so that in the
census of 1860 one-third of the foreign-born population was German.
By this time the Canadian elements had been completely swamped. The
Federal Census of 1860, three years after the territory had been
admitted to Statehood, found 170,000 inhabitants, of whom 58,000 were
foreign-born. The Germans at this time still somewhat exceeded the
Scandinavians in number. The native-born were overwhelmingly of British
ancestry and represented a prolongation of the westward movement of
population from New England that had been going on for more than two
centuries. Minnesota at this time had a Nordic population and was
pre-dominantly Anglo-Saxon in character.

       *       *       *       *       *

Dakota was included in Minnesota in 1860 when a few settlers had
already begun to enter the region. Dakota Territory, however, scarcely
deserves consideration until the final period is herein reviewed.

       *       *       *       *       *

Iowa had no real settlement until the spring of 1833, when several
companies of Americans from Illinois and elsewhere settled in the
vicinity of Burlington, although John Dubuque established a settlement
in 1788 on the site of the city which now bears his name, and, with his
descendants, carried on a business of mining lead and trading with the
Indians for a generation or more. Settlements then began to be made at
other points along the Mississippi, and in 1838 the country was cut off
from Wisconsin and established as a separate territory.

As in the States of the Old Northwest Territory, the early population
of Iowa was made up principally from the Southern States; and when
Dubuque was formally declared to be a town in 1834 its 500 citizens
were mostly from Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina.

The delay in the settlement of Iowa, as compared with that of the
States east of the Mississippi, was due mainly to the fact that it was
held by the Indians. The Black Hawk War kept the country disturbed for
three years. At the end of that time the chief was utterly routed and
ultimately captured, and in September, 1832, a treaty was signed in
which the Indians relinquished what was afterward known as the Black
Hawk Purchase, comprising about one-third of the present State of Iowa.

At that time there were probably not fifty white men in Iowa, but
thenceforward the settlement was extraordinarily rapid. The pioneers
from the South came up the Mississippi, while those from the East could
go down the Ohio. But since the purpose of most of the settlers was to
take up farm land and since the livestock and implements necessary for
this purpose could not be transported easily on the small river boats,
the great bulk of the immigration was overland in wagons drawn by oxen,
horses, or mules.

In 1836 there were 10,000 Southerners in the territory. In the
following two years this number had more than doubled and the census of
1840 made it 43,000.

Foreign immigrants began to appear in small numbers, but the new
arrivals were still largely of Southern upland stock, mainly of
Scottish ancestry. By the Federal Census of 1850 Iowa had nearly
200,000 people and, although the settlement had begun at the most only
seventeen years before, one-fourth of the population was Iowa-born.

As in the Old Northwest Territory, the direct contribution of New
England was small. Most of the settlers came from adjoining States,
and, while many of them went back to New England in pedigree, a still
larger number in the early years came from the Southern States. This
was true in Iowa nearly up to the time of the Civil War.

The ebb and flow of population in these States was so rapid as to make
the task of tracing its details difficult. Thus in 1843 meetings were
held in various points in Iowa to form companies of emigrants for
Oregon. In 1849 the territory contributed its share to the California
gold rush. Whole communities were depopulated almost as fast as they
had been populated a few years previously, but many of these travellers
probably returned after failing to find fortune ready to hand in the
Golden State. Ohio was sending on settlers to the three States beyond
her. Indiana and Illinois were attracting large bodies of settlers
from Ohio but sending on others to Iowa. Iowa itself was contributing
heavily to the population of Utah and Oregon. But these were all of the
old native English Nordic stock.

By 1860 Iowa had a population of 674,913. The foreign-born made up
nearly one-sixth of the total, two-thirds were German or Irish, and the
remainder English or Scandinavian.

Iowa, by the outbreak of the Civil War, had become a Northern State,
not so much from the direct New England immigration (only 25,000
of its people were New England born) as from the general drift of
population, and from the fact that, as pointed out previously, many of
the Southerners who came into the Northwest Territory had very little
sympathy with the slave-holding point of view.

Iowa then entered the Union as a State almost completely Nordic and
overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon, populated by settlers from all parts of
the original States who were moving westward in the hope of finding an
advantage. What an immigrant of the 1830's said about Iowa pioneers
he encountered, holds good of most of the westward movement--that it
was made up of three classes: "men with families seeking to ameliorate
fortune, men with families seeking to retrieve fortune, and young men
attempting fortune." While the first pioneer surge into a new territory
often contained a surplus of bachelors, the permanent settlement was
made by men who brought their families.

       *       *       *       *       *

Kansas-Nebraska's settlement in the decade before the Civil War is a
familiar episode to every one who remembers his American history.

Daniel Morgan Boone, a son of the Kentucky Pathfinder, is often alleged
to have been the first American settler in Kansas, having been sent
there by the government in 1819 to aid the Indians in agriculture. But
the settlement of the State did not begin seriously until 1854, when
treaties were made with the tribes of what was at that time an Indian
territory.

Missouri, adjoining Kansas to the east, had then nearly 600,000
inhabitants, and the counties bordering on the Kansas line contained a
population of some 80,000 whites, as shown by the census of 1850. These
naturally were the most available material for settlement of the new
land and in a short time they had staked out the best claims in the
river bottoms. While they do not bear a good reputation in the Kansas
histories, where they generally go by the name of "border ruffians,"
they represented, worthily or not, pure Nordic American stock. Most
of the Missourians who had moved into Kansas at that time were simply
seeking new homes and were not even in favor of slavery. The trouble
that was made on the border was due to small organized gangs of quite a
different complexion.

Kansas represented a real battleground for the slavery and free-soil
elements, and colonies were organized in a number of the Southern
States, but particularly in Alabama and Kentucky, to move to the new
territory and insure its retention for the cause. Most of the Southern
settlers naturally stayed as close to the Missouri border as possible.
The Free-State settlers on the other hand tended to get away from the
border, to leave the belt of pro-slavery settlers behind, and to stake
out their claims well within the interior of the territory.

The New England Emigrant Aid Company was the principal crusader in the
campaign to make Kansas free soil, and proclaimed widely that it would
send 10,000 men into the region. Its funds, however, were scanty, and
beyond advertising the opportunities of the country, it gave little
substantial aid to the emigration. Contrary to what is generally
supposed, the number of settlers who came directly from New England to
Kansas was small. As had been the history elsewhere in this country,
most of the settlers came from nearby States such as Illinois; though
often of New England ancestry.

In the first census of the territory, in 1855, more than half of the
population was found to be from the South, although the Slave States'
representatives made strong protests against the manner of taking the
census which was sudden and in mid-winter when many of the Missouri
settlers had returned to their old homes. The high-water mark of the
Southern immigration was in 1856. Thereafter the emigration from the
Free States increased until by 1860 it outnumbered the Slave-State
natives nearly three to one. That year's census, crediting Kansas with
107,000 population, also revealed that Missouri and Kentucky were
the principal sources of the pro-slavery immigration, while the main
sources of the free-soil immigration were in the following order: Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and New York, with only 3000 direct
from all the New England States together. Indeed, there were almost
as many natives of North Carolina in Kansas as there were natives of
Massachusetts.

Kansas was at the end of this period a western State, of almost wholly
British complexion. The streams of Scandinavians and Germans which
afterward entered the State had scarcely begun at this period. Kansas
was, to a marked degree, the offspring of New England through the
Central States, while not much more than one-fourth of its population,
arriving from the border States, had ancestral lines running back to
Virginia.

       *       *       *       *       *

Nebraska, like many other Western States, was first settled by
trappers, traders, missionaries, and soldiers. In 1845 the Mormons,
driven out of Illinois and Iowa, stopped in the Nebraska country, but
most of them afterward moved on to Utah. Meanwhile, the State was
being traversed each year by hundreds of emigrant trains on their way
to the Pacific Coast, and thus became known to people from all parts
of the Union. During the years 1849 and 1850 it was estimated that
more than 100,000 people crossed the Nebraska plains in this way. Some
of them would stop there for various reasons, while others came into
the section to cater to the needs of the emigrants. Thus Nebraska was
gradually built up out of the overland traffic. The early migration
to Utah and to Oregon was succeeded by the rush to California, and
that had scarcely died down when the boom days in Colorado brought
new contingents to the region. Before this had disappeared the
Transcontinental Railway opened up the territory in real earnest.

The first boom year in the territory was in 1856 when a large number
of permanent settlers came in. In 1860 the population numbered 28,841,
and even at this time relatively few of the settlers depended upon
agriculture, most of them still "living off of the tourists," which
became a recognized profession in some States half a century later.

       *       *       *       *       *

Utah, when Brigham Young led his Saints there in 1847, was a desert as
to the region of the Great Salt Lake, with scarcely even a population
of Indians. The early population was almost wholly Nordic, made up of
people from the New England States, New York, and those States in which
the Mormon Church had temporarily settled, or through which it had
moved successively to Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, and Nebraska.

The Mormon authorities made a determined effort from the outset to
bring converts from Europe, the first one arriving from Liverpool in
1849. At that time the English mission was said to have 30,000 members.
In the fall of 1849 the Mormon leaders established the famous Perpetual
Emigrating Fund which was used thenceforth to aid the transport of
converts.

The Mormon Utah settlement by 1850 had a population of 11,000. The
number of converts brought from abroad during the first ten years is
put at 17,000, mostly from England. By 1887 the Mormons are said to
have brought more than 85,000 of the working classes from England and
northern Europe to the Great Basin of the Rocky Mountains.

Brigham Young in 1849 organized his territory as "The Provisional
State of Deseret," including what is now Utah and Nevada, and parts
of Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. This had
but a short existence even on paper, for in 1850 Congress passed a law
organizing the territory of Utah which also included what is now Nevada.

Toward the end of this period the discovery of rich silver mines in the
Nevada section began to attract a miscellaneous population from all
parts of the West. By 1863 a Mormon census of Utah gave the territory a
population of 88,206, of whom probably a majority were foreigners. The
great bulk of these were English, particularly from the factory towns,
but Brigham Young boasted that fifty nationalities were represented in
his territory a few years later. On the whole, however, the population
was almost entirely Nordic.

       *       *       *       *       *

Idaho's first settlement is supposed to have been made by a party of
Mormons in 1855 when it was still a part of Washington territory.
At the close of the period here considered it was still a part of
Washington and was just beginning to get a population of its own
because of a gold rush in 1860.

Its early settlers were from Oregon, Washington, and northern
California, and included an unusual proportion of men bred in the
Southern and Southwestern States.

       *       *       *       *       *

Montana had scarcely begun to receive settlers at this time.

Meanwhile the tides of colonization were flowing over the "great
plains" to deposit their load on the Pacific Coast.

       *       *       *       *       *

Oregon's settlement may be conveniently dated from the expedition of
Marcus Whitman in 1836. The few trappers and traders who had arrived in
early days may be disregarded. Thus began the short-lived race between
the United States and Great Britain to colonize the country and to have
their claims to possession based on effective occupation. American
immigration did not commence in earnest until 1842 or 1843, but
continued steadily, until the discovery of gold in California diverted
many to that territory.

Most of the early American settlers came from Missouri or Iowa, and
represented therefore either the Southern or New England pioneer stock.
In general it may be said that Oregon at that time was settled from the
Mississippi Valley, and mainly by men who came as genuine settlers with
their families, in striking contrast to the adventurers who invaded
California.

Meanwhile, the British colonizers were coming from Canada, many of
them French-Canadians, while the rest were mostly of Scotch ancestry.
But the American population grew so much more rapidly that by 1846,
when the Treaty was made defining the parallel of 49° as the boundary
between the two nations, there were nearly 8000 American settlers in
the Oregon territory as against about 1500 of British allegiance.

In 1860, of the 30,500 native immigrants in the State 40 per cent
were of Southern birth. Nearly half of these were from Missouri, and
a large part of the others from Kentucky or Tennessee. The remainder
represented principally the New England stock which has always been
considered to be the foundation of Oregon.

The actual permanent settlement of the Puget Sound country began in
1845, but progress for some years was slow. Scarcely had a start been
made here when the gold rush turned everyone's attention to California.
Following this came the Indian war of 1855 to 1856, and shortly
afterward the Civil War upset all plans, leaving the few scattered
inhabitants of the Puget Sound region in the midst of a wilderness,
surrounded by hostile savages, and inevitably neglected by the
government to which they naturally looked for attention.

       *       *       *       *       *

Washington was separated from Oregon and established as an independent
territory in 1853. The census found there only 3965 white persons, a
small number to assume the responsibilities of a separate political
existence. Walla Walla Valley was opened up in 1859, when the removal
of a military interdict and a survey of public lands allowed a waiting
population of some 2000 to rush in and spread over the whole of eastern
Washington within a short time.



XI

THE SPOILS OF THE MEXICAN WAR


It has been remarked often that it was a mere accident that gave
North America to the Nordics instead of to the King of Spain, when
Columbus turned from his course to follow a flock of birds and thus
sighted the West Indies instead of the mainland, but several other
incidents played an equally important part in giving this empire to
the British. The defeat of the Invincible Armada by the captains of
Elizabeth stopped the expansion of Spain and thus gave the British an
opportunity to begin their colonization, and the Louisiana Purchase
by Thomas Jefferson's administration virtually made certain that by
far the larger part of the North American continent should belong to
British stock, rather than to French or Spanish. Jefferson himself,
who believed that the Purchase was illegal, saw its tremendous
possibilities, but no one in his day could realize just what this
action would mean in extending a Nordic civilization to the Pacific
Ocean.

The settlement of the Louisiana Purchase by Americans made certain
the conquest of Texas, which was extraordinarily aided by the fact
that in the period after the War of 1812 there were not many more
than 5000 Mexicans in that vast territory. The great Plains stretched
southward as a wide-open domain, inviting settlement by those who were
far-sighted and aggressive enough to possess themselves of it.

The beginning of the American settlement of Texas is always dated
from 1820, when the Connecticut Yankee, Moses Austin, started his
colonization scheme. Austin himself had lived for some years in
Missouri, but most of his settlers, like most of the other early
pioneers of Texas, came from the lower Mississippi Valley or from
Tennessee and Kentucky, with a sprinkling of adventurers from the
Central and New England States and even from Europe.

By 1835, when the Americans so outnumbered the Mexicans that the
throwing off of the Mexican yoke was inevitable, there were 30,000
or 35,000 Nordics settled in the territory. The original background
of these can easily be remembered from what has been said before in
these pages about the settlement of their respective States. They
were overwhelmingly English and Scotch and pre-dominantly from the
trans-Appalachian part of the United States.

The idea that most of these settlers went to Texas as a deliberate plan
to acquire this region for the extension of the slave-holding States
seems to have little basis. Most of them went, just as most of them
or their fathers had gone to Tennessee or to Louisiana a few decades
previously, in search of better and cheaper land, freer opportunities,
and a possible fortune. It was the accident of geographical location
that gave to Texas its importance as slave-holding territory, and that
led indirectly to the war with Mexico.

On technical grounds there was little justification for a declaration
of war in 1846, but from a larger point of view it was one of the
most important and most beneficial acts ever taken by the American
Government, in spite of the feeling of the Abolitionists, because it
formed the final procedure in the spread of American sovereignty to the
Pacific Ocean.

The United States was indeed deprived a few years later, at the time
of the Gadsden Purchase, of the outlet to the Gulf of California which
it should have had. Whether this was due to the climate of that region
which made the surveyors shirk their duty, as one story goes, or to the
drunkenness of the mapmakers which led them to draw the boundary line
crooked, as another story has it, the result is unfortunate and might
yet perhaps be rectified by a further purchase. The Southwest should
have an outlet on the Gulf in the logic of the case.

This does not involve any desire to take over Lower California
which is a peninsula of negligible value for Nordic purposes, and
contains a Mexican population which under no circumstances should be
incorporated in the United States. From a racial point of view it is
indeed fortunate that the desire of James K. Polk's Administration to
include the whole peninsula of Lower California in the transfer of
sovereignty was not accomplished. Still more disastrous would have been
a realization of the wishes of an important element in Congress which
desired to annex a large part of northern Mexico.

Similarly, one can scarcely avoid being grateful nowadays that Cuba
did not get its independence in the first quarter of the nineteenth
century instead of at the end. Henry Clay and others, encouraging
the Cuban patriots, had virtually arranged to have the island taken
over by the United States. In this instance abolitionist sentiment in
the North, which prevented an extension of slave territory, was more
beneficial to the true interests of America than it was a generation
later--for the acquisition of Cuba would have brought into the union an
indigestible mass of Mediterraneans and blacks.

When the suspicions and jealousies of international relations abate
somewhat, it may be possible to make a slight rectification of the
Arizona boundary which will give the Southwest its intended outlet
on the Gulf of California. Such a step would doubtless promote the
prosperity of the adjoining Mexican territory in every way. If Mexico
could be persuaded to accept a gift of some of the United States'
possessions in the West Indies, in return for this favor, the whole
transaction would be most satisfactory.

It is now easy to see that Mexico could not have retained Texas under
any circumstances, but the catastrophe (from the Mexican point of
view) was made quick and certain by the encouragement of American
immigration, in spite of refusals to discuss a sale of the whole
territory to the United States, and by an attempt to fasten an
objectionable State religion on the immigrants they had invited.

In the days of the Lone Star Republic, immigration increased rapidly.
The Mexican War not only gave unlimited advertising to the region but
furnished many Northerners with an opportunity to see something of it
first-hand, and by the close of that conflict there were some 200,000
Americans in Texas. During the decade from 1850 to 1860 the growth of
the State was exceeded by few in the Union.

Unfortunately much of this population was made up of Negroes who have
ever since formed one of the real handicaps of this immense American
Empire. As we have seen, the great bulk of the population of eastern
and southern Texas came from the adjoining slave States, and it was not
until the time of the Civil War that the northern counties had begun to
attract settlers from Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas. The war put a
stop to this movement, but it was resumed later.

Meanwhile southern and western Texas had been attracting a German
emigration made up largely of Alpines from the States along the Upper
Rhine. This reached serious proportions as early as 1842, when a group
of noblemen with uncertain motives fostered an Emigration Society Land
Company. The movement continued in force up to the Civil War and indeed
had not ceased altogether until the outbreak of the World War. Though
Texas had but 20,000 German-born in 1860, these were so concentrated
that half of the entire population of the southern part of the State,
in the region surrounding San Antonio, was German. Here, as elsewhere,
the Germans greatly diminished their value to their adopted country by
an unwise insistence on retaining the customs and the language of the
Fatherland.

The history of any country demonstrates that national unity is a
necessary condition of national survival. Those who have come to the
United States of their own will, to profit by what opportunities they
find may well be expected to yield a whole-hearted allegiance to the
country which thus benefits them, or to move elsewhere.

       *       *       *       *       *

New Mexico, when it became a part of the territory of the United
States, had a population made up of native and Mexican Indians, some
of the latter having enough Spanish blood to cause them to consider
themselves white men. The self-styled Spanish-American population
of the present day is, properly speaking, composed of those whose
ancestors were in the territory at the time of the Mexican War. The
Spanish part of the description must be considered largely a courtesy
title, for the amount of real Spanish blood in this hybrid population
was always from a biological point of view nearly negligible, and the
American part must be understood to mean native American Indians. The
persistence of the Spanish language and culture is of course only a
passing phase.

The Federal Census of 1850 credited New Mexico with 61,000 population
not counting Indians, but the territory at that time included all of
Arizona and Southeastern Colorado. By 1860 the population of the same
territory was given at 82,979, plus 55,100 Indians. At this time there
were less than 1200 natives of the United States in the whole territory.

       *       *       *       *       *

Arizona had a fluctuating white population dependent upon the
prosperity of the mining industry, but when the Federal troops were
withdrawn at the outbreak of the Civil War most of the white men had to
leave also. At that time the only real settlement was Tucson, where a
few hundred Mexicans lived under mediæval conditions.

       *       *       *       *       *

California had a population of Indians when the Spaniards coming
from Mexico entered it. Most of them were of a very low order of
intelligence and social development. The Spanish invaders were largely
soldiers, and few of the members of these early expeditions brought
their families. Hence, there was undoubtedly some mixing with the
Indians from the very first days. In accordance with the custom
elsewhere, those who had any white blood called themselves white,
and the figures given by early writers for the number of Spanish
in the colony must be understood in that light. The amount of real
Spanish blood was extremely small and much of it was in the veins of
missionaries who left no offspring.

The permanent population was made up of ex-soldiers who had settled
down, married Indian women, and taken up land, together with occasional
traders, vagabond sailors, and adventurers. The population of 1820
other than Indian could hardly have represented more than 500 men.
The Mexican administration made an effort to supply women of Spanish
ancestry to the colony in order to prevent too much matrimonial mixture
with the Indians, which, even at that time, was regarded as somewhat
disgraceful; but the number of brides who could be sent into a colony
of that sort was small.

The population grew mainly by its own natural increase, and the
small size of the Mexican population in California was one of the
main factors that led to the incorporation of the territory in the
United States. It has been computed that the "Spanish" population,
most of which was of Indian blood, never exceeded 3000 persons. Prior
to the American occupation there were not more than 1200 foreigners
in California, three-fourths of whom were American and most of the
remainder British. Thus this immense territory, which became a part
of the United States in 1848 as a result of the Mexican War, was
relatively empty. The amount of Spanish blood in the California
population of today must therefore be quite negligible.

The whole trend of migration was changed by the discovery of gold at
the end of 1848. In February of that year there were not more than 2000
Americans in all California. By the end of December there were 6000.
By July of 1849 this number had grown to 15,000 and six months later
it had climbed to 53,000. The earliest arrivals naturally came from
the nearby regions. Oregon alone contributed more than 5000 from its
scanty population. But every seaport of the Pacific sent a contingent,
and the stream of men that poured into the gold fields was the most
cosmopolitan group that had ever been seen in North America. In _The
New York Tribune_ for December 15, 1849, appears the following item
from San Francisco:

  "Foreign flags in the harbor: English, French, Portuguese, Italian,
  Hamburg, Bremen, Belgium, New Granadian, Dutch, Swedish, Oldenburgh,
  Chilean, Peruvian, Russian, Mexican, Hanoverian, Norwegian, Hawaiian,
  and Tahitian."

When the territory became a State, on September 9, 1850, its population
was at least 150,000, and a year later had probably reached a
quarter of a million. Many of the Argonauts stayed but a few months,
and, failing to become rich at a stroke, went elsewhere, so that
the composition of the population changed markedly from week to
week. It was almost exclusively a population of males. Few brought
their families; and while prostitutes went to San Francisco from
all accessible seaports, they contributed little or nothing to the
permanent population.

The first Chinese immigrant found his way into California in 1847, but
by the summer of 1852, 20,000 others had followed him. Probably 5000
Mexicans also had come into the territory which they had so recently
lost.

By the census of 1860 it appears that most of the riff-raff had
drifted out of the State again, and the basis of the permanent
population had been laid. The total population was 380,000 of which
nearly 40 per cent was foreign-born; the percentage reaching this
high mark partly because of the number of Chinese. California had a
population more nearly representative of the entire Union than did
any other State--about equal numbers were contributed by New England,
by the Middle States, by the Northwest, and by the lower Mississippi
Valley. This population, it will be remembered, was almost entirely in
the northern half of the State. The more homogeneous settlement of the
southern half did not get under way until about the middle of the next
period.

California differs profoundly from the other frontier regions of the
United States in that it was settled from all sections of the country
and not mostly from the adjoining States. The vast mineral wealth of
the new State supplied it from the very beginning with abundant capital
for local enterprises so that it was free from the debtor complex, so
characteristic of the other frontier communities.

California faces westward on the Pacific and has developed into a
unique and more or less self-sufficient section with a definite
self-reliant character of its own.

       *       *       *       *       *

While the West was thus filling up and the United States was reaching
the Pacific Ocean, the States on the Atlantic continued to grow in
power and population, largely through their own natural increase, but
partly through the immigration of the period. French Canadians began to
drift down into New England, as they have continued to do to this day.
The single State of New York had by the end of the period a million
foreign-born in its population, of whom half were Irish and one-fourth
German. New Jersey had become one-fifth foreign-born, Connecticut
one-sixth, Pennsylvania one-seventh. The racial character of this
immigration was not particularly harmful, as it was mostly Nordic, but
the large Roman Catholic element excited widespread alarm.

The arrival of large numbers of ignorant and destitute South Irish
Catholics, who occupied the lowest social status here, led directly
to the formation of a native American secret political party,
nicknamed the "Know Nothings," because of their refusal to discuss
or divulge their aims or actions. For the purpose of membership they
defined the name Native American to mean a person all four of whose
grandparents were born in this country. This party's policy, in
the early stage of its career, was to act secretly, supporting the
candidate who most nearly represented their views, regardless of his
party affiliations. The party at once developed great strength, and
in 1854 and 1855 carried State elections in Massachusetts, New York,
Kentucky, California, and several other States. It played a large part
in national politics in 1856, but its organization was disrupted by the
increasing virulence of the slavery issue.

[Illustration: CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES

Showing distribution of the 4447 Congregational Churches in the
United States. Figures indicate number of churches in shaded areas
in which there are too many to be shown by dots and circles. As the
Congregational Church is largely identified with New England, the map
shows in a general way the westward movement of people of New England
origin.]

The principle of the Know Nothing party was opposition to the political
power of the large masses of newly arrived aliens. This was especially
directed against the Catholic Church, because it was felt that their
establishment of parochial schools was inimical to the public-school
system, which the Americans of that time regarded as the palladium
of their liberties. This hostility to Catholics was aggravated by
the attempted use of public funds derived from general taxation for
parochial schools and even more by the exemption claimed and often
obtained from taxation of large ecclesiastical institutions as well as
churches.

Further opposition to aliens arose from their organization into compact
political units which quickly demoralized our municipal governments, a
scandal which has existed down to this day.

All this led to the widespread belief that these immigrants, now
arriving in large numbers, refused to accept wholeheartedly the
customs, principles, and institutions of the country in which they
had sought refuge. This belief still persists and has given rise in
each generation since the days of the Know Nothing party, to similar
powerful and secret anti-foreign organizations. Our alien elements are
to this day extremely sensitive to the public discussion of any of
these matters. In this respect, Americans probably have less freedom
of speech and freedom of press than exist in any of the countries of
Europe.

       *       *       *       *       *

During the colonial period the natural increase of the Anglo-Saxon
stock in New England had made it a continual source of population
for the rapidly opening West. No one State, however, contributed such
a large element of the population of the subsequent United States as
did Virginia, the largest and most populous of the thirteen Colonies.
One cannot read the history of the movement westward of the American
frontier without being impressed by the importance of the Old Dominion
in supplying settlers for the West, first to Kentucky, thence to the
States of the upper and lower Mississippi Valley, later to the Great
Plains, and finally to the Southwest and the Pacific Coast.

But if Virginia has been the most fertile source of settlers, New
England has more nearly put its stamp on American civilization; and
this was made possible largely because there was an available emigrant
stock in Massachusetts and her sister States, to carry this impress in
person. Before the Civil War, however, the birth rate of the old white
stock in New England had declined to the point where it was probably
not replacing its own numbers.

       *       *       *       *       *

In 1860 the religious unity of the United States had been somewhat
impaired. The unity of language was as yet scarcely menaced. The unity
of institutions, traditions, and culture was breached only temporarily.
The racial unity of the country was little changed from 1790. The
United States was still nine-tenths Nordic.

       *       *       *       *       *

Earlier in these pages a description is given of the empty continent
which lay open to settlement by the British stock on both sides of the
Canadian border.

Let us see what use was made of this opportunity in the period from the
end of Colonial times to the Civil War.

A continent was occupied and the territory of the Union was swept
westward to the Pacific. The forests were cut down and the wild life
destroyed. The Indians were evicted. The mineral wealth of the western
mountains was ransacked. The coal was exploited, and the once fertile
soil of the Southern States greatly depleted through the reckless
growing of tobacco and cotton. Waste was the order of the day in
America.

All this was perhaps inevitable, but never since Cæsar plundered Gaul
has so large a territory been sacked in so short a time. Probably no
more destructive human being has ever appeared on the world stage than
the American pioneer with his axe and his rifle.

In 1860, at the end of this period, we find the essential elements
of national unity still unchanged, but we were about to engage
in a fratricidal war, which was to destroy the best blood of the
nation. We had admitted large numbers of Irish and German immigrants
who impaired, in the case of the Irish, our religious system and
introduced certain undesirable racial elements. The Germans who came
were largely Protestants and only temporarily disturbed our unity by
clinging to their foreign language. Both of these elements, however,
were pre-dominantly Nordic, and it was not until the next and final
period that the unassimilable Alpines and Mediterraneans came here
from southern and eastern Europe. The tragedy of the Civil War and the
introduction of cheap labor were still to come, so that in 1860 the
United States was at its high-water mark of national unity.

The Indians had been ruthlessly swept aside, as was unavoidable because
a few hunting tribes could not be allowed to possess a continent, but
the Negro question could have been postponed, and the men who died
needlessly on Southern battle-fields could have been used to populate
the States of the Far West.

In the next chapter we shall study the swamping of this American
civilization, which reached its zenith in 1860.



XII

THE ALIEN INVASION


The period 1860-1930, with which we are now dealing, is characterized
by the end of free public land in the West about 1880. It is also
marked by the great development of industries in the North and
East, which created a demand for cheap labor, and attracted a mass
immigration of non-British and non-Nordic workmen from southern and
eastern Europe. This immigration for the most part went to the cities
and industrial districts.

The Southern States, which had not entered upon an industrial expansion
before the Civil War, did not welcome immigrants of the low-grade
factory type, hence the South has remained characteristically American.
One of the strange results of the Civil War has been that while the
victorious North sold its birthright of culture, religion, and racial
purity for a mess of industrial pottage, the South, though defeated and
impoverished, retained its racial inheritance unimpaired.

Some of the earlier immigrants in this period sought the lands in
the West, while they were still to be had. The land hunger having
carried most of the energetic, ambitious, and able Nordic immigrants
westward, the industrial expansion of New England, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
and of some of the adjacent States resulted in an unfilled demand
for low-grade factory labor in the East. This demand was quickly
recognized by the steamship companies, which began scouring Europe for
immigrants to transport to America.

The most fertile recruiting ground for this type of humanity was in
South Europe, Italy, the Balkan countries, and the provinces of the
then Austrian Empire and Russia. Inducements were offered potential
immigrants to come to America. There was no discrimination as to type
or quality. Many criminals were rounded up, especially in southern
Italy and Sicily, with the connivance if not the actual initiative of
their governments.

As to the ratio of criminals to the native American population, some
interesting figures have been compiled through a first-hand survey of
242 State and federal prisons in the United States during 1931-32.
Most of the criminals referred to were committed for serious offenses.
The criminals from northwestern Europe were well under (sometimes only
one-quarter) their ratio to the general population. South Europe and
eastern Europe were very much higher. The Filipinos were over twice
as many as the proper allowance, native-born Negroes were two-and
three-quarters above their allowance and the Mexicans were six and
one-half times as many as their ratio to the general population would
entitle them to be.

It was in this period that the Polish Jews began their tumultuous and
frantic invasion, a flood which only recently has been checked, and
that with the greatest difficulty. The great mass of immigrants from
South Poland, Galicia, and Russia were Ashkanazim Jews, descendants
in part of Alpine Khozars, with a Mongol admixture, who entered the
eastern Ukraine from Asia in the early centuries of our era. Many of
the Khozars and their Khan were converted by Jewish missionaries and
they formally accepted Judaism in 740 A.D. It is doubtful whether there
is a single drop of the old Palestinian, Semitic-speaking Hebrew blood
among these East European Jews. They are essentially a non-European
people. The language they speak, Jüdisch, or Yiddish, is a corrupt
German of the Franconian dialect mixed with Slavic and Hebrew elements,
which fact strengthens the tradition of a large migration of German
Jews into Poland in the Middle Ages. It may be that the strain of these
German Jews has died out, leaving only their language behind, but in
any event the Polish Jews are now distinctly Alpine--a mixture of Slavs
and of Asiatic invaders of Russia.

Exact figures of Jewish immigration are not obtainable until 1899, when
this group was listed separately. Prior to that year probably 500,000
Jews had arrived; after that date nearly 2,000,000. From the beginning
of this century the Jews made up 10 per cent of the total immigration
into this country, and there are now more than 4,000,000 of them here,
half of the number being in New York City. This is more than one-fifth
of the Jews of the world.

Because they speak Yiddish, they are often colloquially referred to as
"German Jews." But, in fact, the number who come from Germany is small,
and, as said, the great bulk of them are more properly described as
"Polish Jews" and are much despised socially by the true German Jews.
Many of them are from those parts of Poland which were held by Russia
prior to the World War. Immigration figures show the last place of
residence of Jewish arrivals, 1899-1924, to be as follows:

        _Countries_
 Russia and Poland       1,243,000
 Austria-Hungary           260,000
 Rumania                   103,000
 United Kingdom             73,000
 Turkey                     20,000
 Germany                    15,000
 British North America      57,000
 All other countries        67,000
                         ---------
                         1,838,000

Meanwhile the immigration from northern Europe declined, not only
relatively but absolutely, and at the same time the native American,
whose ancestry was pre-dominantly Nordic, began to be crowded to the
wall. In certain sections of New England that progressive change soon
became all too evident and has made them no longer American but foreign
communities. The French Canadians, Irish, and Poles took over whole
districts and occupied the abandoned farms. The Polish Jews, settling
almost entirely in the larger cities, built up a Ghetto population
similar in most respects to the congested urbanism of their homeland.

Americans were so obsessed with the idea of a "Refuge for the
Oppressed" that they even welcomed the draining into our country of
that morass of human misery found in the Polish Ghettos. When the
objection arose that there were already 1,000,000 Jews in New York
City, an effort was made to divert this migration into Texas, where the
wide-open spaces were supposed to provide room for the 7,000,000 Polish
Jews.

The German Jews, who also came into this country in smaller numbers
at the end of the last century, were of the Alpine type, closely
resembling those from Poland, Galicia, and Russia. All of these Jews
are in sharp contrast to the Sephardim Jews, a superior group, largely
Mediterranean in race, a very few of whom came from Holland to America
in Colonial times. These latter had reached Spain by way of North
Africa and later fled to Holland to escape the Inquisition.

The immigration from Scandinavia was entirely Nordic. Sweden is purely
Nordic, and Norway and Denmark are overwhelmingly so. Lithuania and
North Poland are also Nordic lands, as are the German provinces along
the Baltic; but South Poland and Galicia are Alpine, as are the
majority of the immigrants who come from South Germany. Those from the
provinces of the former Austrian Empire are mostly Alpine, although a
few Nordics came from the Tyrol.

The Balkans, Greece, Asia Minor, and Armenia sent over practically
only Alpine immigrants. French-speaking Switzerland was originally
Burgundian territory and contributed some very valuable Nordic racial
elements to America. Those from German-speaking Switzerland were
largely Alpine.

The period of the great European migration to the United States covered
just a century. Prior to that time, since the founding of the Union,
most of the immigration had been English and Scotch. Up to 1860, as
will be recalled, this British character of the immigration continued,
except for the beginning of the great stream of Germans who have been,
next to the English, the largest single element in our population.

The early Germans in the United States were, as previously described,
mostly Alpines from the upper Rhine--the Palatinate and Swabia. In the
'40's the area of the German emigration spread. At first to the western
states and provinces, which were much more Nordic in character (Hesse,
the Rhineland, Westphalia, Thuringia). All this region had an easy
outlet by the Rhine to the seaports; moreover emigration was stimulated
by the result of revolutionary activities, which forced many to leave.

After transportation began to be improved by railways, the main
currents of emigration began to flow from central and eastern Germany.
Emigration reached its first crest in the southwest and west of Germany
in the middle of the '50's, its second in Central Germany toward the
end of that decade, its third in the eastern part of the empire in the
'70's and '80's. This later emigration was, on the whole, more Nordic
than the earlier stream.

After the World War, when business conditions in Germany brought about
some years of active emigration with the United States as its main
objective, the current of emigration shifted again to the northwestern
and southwestern districts (the former Nordic, the latter mainly so)
and away from the northeast, which was even more Nordic.

The Scandinavian immigration, another main source of the Nordic
population of the United States, dates almost entirely from the period
since the Civil War. The largest volume was between 1877 and 1898, when
more than 1,000,000 arrived. One-fifth of the entire population of
Norway and Sweden moved to the New World, nearly all of them seeking
farms in the States of the upper Mississippi Valley. There has been
also an active immigration from Scandinavia since the end of the World
War. In general, the United States was the only destination which a
Scandinavian emigrant considered. Of those who left the homeland, not
one Swede in fifty directed his course elsewhere than to America. No
other emigrant population has shown such a single-minded interest in
the United States, though the Norwegians have not been far behind, with
96 per cent of their departures destined to the United States; and the
Danes, with 88 per cent.

Arriving at New York or sometimes Quebec, the immigrants made their way
to Chicago or Detroit, and thence were distributed to the States west
of the Great Lakes. The Norwegian movement was the earlier, beginning
with the southern and central counties of that kingdom and gradually
working its way north until arrivals were giving as their birthplaces
little towns far north of the Arctic Circle.

In a few decades Norwegians owned six times as much farming land in
the States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, and the
Dakotas (four-fifths of the immigration being found in the States
named) as did all the farmers in the "Old Country." No nationality has
sent such a small percentage of its people into the cities--one in
five of the whole, as compared with a half of the Germans, and a still
higher percentage of the Irish and Italians, who seek an urban life.

This tendency to agricultural life and to prompt and whole-hearted
Americanism has made the great body of Scandinavian immigrants one of
the most valuable that America has received.

Meanwhile there continued a steady immigration of English and Irish.
The latter envenomed our political life up to the last few years, by
introducing into the United States their old political and religious
feuds with Great Britain, and endeavoring to involve this country in
their plans for Irish freedom. As a consequence, the friendly relations
which should exist between the two great Anglo-Saxon nations have been
kept disturbed, and a systematic policy of twisting the lion's tail
was pursued, not merely by the Fenian agitators, but by American
demagogues anxious to cultivate the "Irish vote."

Prior to 1880 only 5 per cent of the immigration was from southern and
eastern Europe. Between 1860 and 1880 less than 250,000 immigrants from
eastern and southern Europe came over. Then came the rush, and between
1890 and 1910 more than 8,000,000 immigrants reached our shores from
southern and eastern Europe.

A group not homogeneous with the old native American population is
the Italian. It began arriving after 1870, but did not reach large
proportions until after 1890. Then it soon became a flood. From 1900
until the World War cut down immigration, the Italians far outnumbered
all other peoples arriving on our shores.

Northern Italy has furnished us some fine types of immigrants. They
are mostly Alpine with a Nordic admixture. Southern Italy, that is,
Naples and Sicily, sent us almost exclusively a Mediterranean stock,
which formed the great mass of Italian immigration and was of extremely
inferior type. They are derived to some extent from the slaves whom
the Romans gathered along the coasts of the Mediterranean from Syria
to Morocco and employed on their large estates or latifundia. Among
them, however, are to be found remnants of the pre-Nordic Mediterranean
population of Italy.

In earlier decades the emigration from Italy was mostly of North
Italians, commonly spoken of as "Genoese," but mainly from the crowded
Italian Riviera west of Genoa. These went to neighboring countries,
particularly France, and to South America, few of them reaching the
United States. When Italian mass emigration to this country began,
it was from central and southern Italy and Sicily, who are of quite
different racial stock from those of the more northerly districts.

The northern Italians are well thought of in the countries to which
they have gone. The southern Italians seem to be far inferior in
quality. While the country of their origin, Magna Græcia, two thousand
five hundred years ago was the source of a large part of the world's
progress in civilization, it is doubtful whether the reader can name a
single man produced in that region during the last two thousand years,
whose ability or eminence was such as to give him a worthy place in the
world's history.

Add to this that the United States did not receive even the best of the
southern Italian population, but in some instances rather the part that
the local authorities were most happy to get rid of, and it is easy to
understand how the Italian children in the American schools have shown
themselves in almost every test to be a group apart, widely separated
from every other white racial group and close to the Negro-Mulatto
children in their ability.

Of the non-English-speaking peoples who have arrived in the United
States during the last century, the 4,500,000 of Italians are
outnumbered by only one group, namely, the nearly 6,000,000 Germans.

The Italians have been more inclined to return home than some others.
In all the immigration, it has been observed that a considerable
proportion of the immigrants stayed only temporarily, sometimes
for a season of work, sometimes for a generation or until they had
accumulated enough money to return to the "Old Country" and live on
their investments. It is usually figured that the arrivals should be
diminished by about one-third to give the net of permanent immigration.
There are of course exceptions--thus it is relatively rare for a Jew
who came to the United States to move out of the country later.

During the sixteen years, 1908-23, the total alien emigration from the
United States was 35 per cent of the total alien immigration, and the
differences between the racial groups in respect to this tendency were
immense.[10]

This ebb and flow of migration is often overlooked. It is impossible to
understand the population figures without bearing it in mind.

While the departure of so many unassimilable aliens is highly
favorable, the fact that migratory cheap labor thus floats into and
out of the country to compete with the native white, may of course
have most serious effects socially and economically on the older stock.
Fortunately, this has now been stopped by suitable restrictions.

Taking a long view over the whole history of immigration into the
United States in the century and a half before 1930 one sees that
approximately half of the total was from the countries of northern
and western Europe, which are largely and some distinctly Nordic in
population, and which sent us people who, in most cases, were easily
assimilated by the Native Americans. Most of these came in during the
first century of the Republic's life, as pointed out above.

After 1890 the tide turned strongly to southern and eastern Europe, the
countries of which in 1913 (the last year of unrestricted immigration)
sent 85 per cent of the total as against 15 per cent from northern
and western Europe. The main contributors to this later stream, often
called the "new immigration" as distinct from the "old immigration"
were, in order of importance, Italy, Austria-Hungary, and the Russian
Empire.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 10: The Chinese stood at the head of the list, emigrants from
here exceeding immigrants by 30 per cent--that is, none were coming in
as permanent residents, because of legislative restrictions; and some
of the earlier arrivals were going home to stay. In a number of groups
the outflow was more than half of the inflow--Bulgarians, Serbians,
Montenegrins, 89 per cent; Turkish, 86 per cent; Koreans, 73 per cent;
Rumanians, 66 per cent; Magyars, 66 per cent; Italians (South), 60 per
cent; Cubans, 58 per cent; Slovaks, 57 per cent; Russians, 52 per cent.

The lowest rate of re-migration was that of the Jews, 5 per cent. The
Irish showed 11 per cent; Scotch and Welsh, 13 per cent; Armenians, 15
per cent; Dutch and Flemish, 18 per cent; Mexican, 19 per cent; English
and French, 21 per cent; Scandinavian, 22 per cent; Syrian, 24 per
cent; Lithuanian, 25 per cent; and Finnish, 29 per cent.]



XIII

THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICA


Under the impact of the "new immigration," most of it dating from the
beginning of the present century, the complexion of the States which,
as repeatedly shown, was almost wholly Nordic and Protestant, began to
change rapidly. As concerned their native-born population, most of the
States followed the rule, often mentioned in these pages, that a State
is populated, in the first instance by its own increase, and secondly
by movements from the States directly adjacent to it.

Maine, according to the 1930 census, with about one-tenth of the
population of New England, is only five-eighths native stock, _i.e._,
native white of native parents. These were mostly people born in Maine,
with a few from surrounding States. Of its foreign stock, three-fourths
were French Canadians.

New Hampshire presents a similar picture, with a slightly higher
percentage of native Americans from nearby States.

Vermont's native population, aside from that portion born in the State
itself, came from New Hampshire or Massachusetts and even more from New
York. As in the two States previously mentioned, most of the foreign
stock is from French Canada, and that which was not from Quebec is
mostly Irish.

The Slavs and Italians have made little inroad in these three States.

Massachusetts in 1930 was more cosmopolitan, with 300,000 residents
from other New England States and nearly 100,000 from New York. The
old white stock, however, now makes up but one-third of the population
of the Bay State. French Canadians, Irish, Italians, Poles, Russians,
and Scandinavians, in the order named, have completely overwhelmed the
native stock--even such a small country as Lithuania is represented in
Massachusetts by more than 50,000 people.

Rhode Island's population, similarly, is now only one-third from the
old stock. Its complexion is similar to that of Massachusetts. French
Canadian Catholics control the government in many communities.

Connecticut, like Rhode Island, has about one-third old American stock.
Here the Italians are the dominant element in number, with Irish,
Slavs, and French Canadians almost equally numerous.

Thus New England, with its more than 8,000,000 population, has been
virtually lost to the native Americans. Their birthrate in that area
has long been far below the level necessary to prevent its dying out,
and migration to the west is not now caused by the region's increase,
as in Colonial times, but by an actual uprooting of families whose
place is taken by others who in race, language, religion, culture, and
institutions are quite out of harmony with American traditions.

A similar picture is observed when one turns to the 26,000,000
inhabitants of the Middle Atlantic States--the most populous, the
wealthiest, and in many ways the most powerful section of the country.

The old stock makes up but one-third of New York's population. For
its composition every State in the Union has been drawn on, with
Pennsylvania and New Jersey furnishing the largest contingents. The
State has well on to half a million Negroes--mostly in Manhattan,
though the ratio of increase of Negroes in some of the other cities of
the State vastly outstripped the ratio of increase of Whites between
1920 and 1930. Thus while the Whites of Buffalo increased 11 per cent
in the decade, the Negroes increased 200 per cent; in Syracuse they
increased twice, in Utica four times, in Rochester seven times, in
Albany eight times, as fast as the whites--due, of course, to the
migration of great numbers of mulattoes from the Southern States
northward.

With its two million Jews, its million and a half Italians, its million
Germans, and its three-quarters of a million each of Poles and Irish,
together with substantial contingents from almost every other country
on the map, the Empire State is scarcely able to meet the requirements
of the Founders of the Republic, who, like Thomas Jefferson, feared
above everything else the formation of an alien, urban proletariat as
creating a condition under which a democratic form of government could
not function successfully.

Three-eighths of New Jersey's population were still of the old native
stock in 1930, though half of these were born in other States,
particularly New York and Pennsylvania. The rest of the population was
a heterogeneous mixture of half a million British (largely Irish), half
a million southern Italians, a quarter of a million Poles, a somewhat
larger number of Germans, and so on down the list.

Pennsylvania makes a somewhat better showing, with more than half of
its population still old native Americans. Of the later arrivals the
largest number, well on to a million, was of British (including Irish)
extraction. Italy and Poland each sent more than half a million,
Germany not much less, Russia and Czechoslovakia each more than 200,000.

In both these divisions, then, the New England and the Middle Atlantic
States, containing as they do more than a third of the entire
population of the United States, the old American stock is now reduced
to a minority. Fortunately, this cannot be said of any of the other
major divisions of the country, though it is true of a few other
individual States--Wisconsin, Minnesota, and North Dakota--where the
foreign-born or their offspring are in a slight majority, but of good
Nordic stock. On the whole, it is the northern and central parts of
the Atlantic Coast that have become the worst un-American parts of
the Union. The South Atlantic States play a much less important part
nowadays than they did a century ago, in furnishing population to the
rest of the country; but they are still American. In the following
discussion their Negro population is ignored, and consideration is
limited to the Whites, unless otherwise stated.

Delaware, with more than three-fifths of its people belonging to the
old stock, has drawn no great additions in late years except from its
neighbors on the west and south, Pennsylvania and Maryland. Its alien
element is a cosmopolitan one in which no single group particularly
preponderates.

Maryland is three-fourths native. Its industrial and commercial life,
centered in Baltimore, has drawn a population from an unusually wide
area, and this tendency has been greatly accentuated because many
of the cosmopolitan group in Washington, D.C., actually reside in
Maryland. Thus in addition to the heavy contingents from Pennsylvania
and Virginia, it has groups of a thousand or more each from half the
States in the Union. The bulk of its foreign population is made up of
Germans, Poles, Russians (including Jews), and Italians, in addition to
the British.

The District of Columbia, as the seat of the Federal Government,
naturally draws its residents from every part of the United States,
the largest element of what may be called its permanent population
being from Virginia and Maryland. There is no large foreign element,
but the Negroes, more than one-fourth of the whole, are nowhere more
aggressive. It is generally understood that the reason Congress has
never been willing to grant the residents of the district the right
to vote, even in local affairs, is that it would be likely to put
the political control in the hands of this Negro block, which would
always find unscrupulous white politicians ready to forget their own
birthright and truckle to it.

Virginia is almost purely of old native stock, Virginian born. Its
seaports and its proximity to the District of Columbia account for some
residents from other States. After dealing in quarter millions and half
millions to describe the foreign-born of the North Atlantic States,
it is with something like incredulity that one notes only 23,000
foreign-born Whites of all sorts in the Old Dominion. The number who
are native-born of foreign or mixed parentage, and therefore classified
as "foreign stock," is twice as large; but many thereof are British.
With Virginia, one reaches the region where the old native American
holds his ground.

North Carolina makes a still more striking picture. In its population
of more than three million, the 1930 census enumerators found scarcely
25,000 foreign-born or of foreign parentage. North Carolina is an
active industrial State, yet it has been able to attain to its modern
development from its own resources. Its neighbors on the North and
South, together, have supplied a hundred thousand citizens; other
regions have contributed a few; but the old white American stock
in this State, as in many others of the South, has been largely
self-sufficing.

South Carolina is not only of the American stock, but has had few
outsiders, even from adjacent States. In addition to natives, a
very few British and Germans, a very few Northerners, and moderate
contingents from the nearby States make up its white population, which
is still but slightly larger than the Negro element in the State.

Georgia fits into the same pattern, though it has attracted a few more
of the "new immigration"--Slavs and Italians; and a few more Yankees,
so that its population, on the whole, is somewhat more cosmopolitan.

Florida, on the other hand, has had an influx both of Northerners,
who have almost changed the political complexion of the State; and of
the foreign stock, largely Nordic, it is true, but with a West Indian
element that is less assimilable. Of its million Whites, a sixth are of
foreign stock, including almost every one of the nationalities found
anywhere in the United States. But despite this somewhat cosmopolitan
nature of its population, the State is overwhelmingly Nordic, like the
other Southern commonwealths.

West Virginia, cut off from the Old Dominion by a technically
questionable move at the beginning of the Civil War, showed by this
very "secession" of its own that its population differed widely from
that of the Tidewater. As pointed out earlier, the latter region was
English and the mountains were Ulster Scotch, with a widely different
outlook on life. The western part of the State had never been a great
slave-holding region, partly because of the sentiment of the people,
partly because there was little for a slave to do there that a free
white could not do much better. To this day only one in sixteen of
the population of West Virginia is colored, and it is still largely
native white, despite the coal mines, which in other regions have come
to depend largely on the labor of Slavs. In the 10 per cent of its
foreign-stock population West Virginia has a scattering of Slavs, as
also of almost every other people, but the largest element is British,
the next German.

Kentucky offers no exception to the rule that the Southern States are
still almost wholly native white. The only important foreign element
is a small German one. It still retains a little of the tendency which
made it, a century or more ago, one of the chief colonizing States, for
it has more of its native sons scattered throughout the Union, than has
almost any other Southern State.

Virginia still sends out a surplus population, and Georgia notably has
done so, though mainly to the States nearest at hand. Kentucky and
Tennessee have sent out pioneers to more distant regions. At present,
for instance, they have as many representatives on the Pacific Coast as
have all the South Atlantic States together.

Tennessee's racial make-up is very similar to that of Kentucky,
although there is still the marked contrast in the "atmosphere" of the
two States, which has existed from the beginning.

Alabama's composition is not very dissimilar to the two just mentioned,
save that the Italian element is a little larger. Its main foreign
stocks, however, are British and German.

What has been said of these States applies almost literally to
Mississippi. The Whites, forming a little less than half of the total
population, are almost all of the old native stock. The emigration of
Whites (and of Negroes, too, for that matter) from the cotton States
during the last fifteen or twenty years has been largely due to the
ravages of the boll weevil, which made cotton less profitable and
prevented many small farmers from making even their expenses.

Georgia has been hit harder than any other State, probably, by this
movement out of the State and thousands of acres of good farming land
are now lying idle there, for lack of hands to work them. The same
holds good to some extent in other States of the region. Many of the
small farmers have moved westward, first perhaps to Texas or Oklahoma,
and then on to the Pacific Coast, the automobile now taking the place
of the covered wagon of their forebears.

Arkansas differs in no important respect from Mississippi, save in
having a much smaller proportion of Negroes. Its old white population
has likewise begun to move, though more often northward, as to Missouri
or Kansas. But Oklahoma and, also, Texas have been the great outlets
for the Arkansas farmers.

The climate and resources of Louisiana have attracted some 50,000
Italians--a small element compared with those in the Northeastern
States, but large for the South. Louisiana has always been more
cosmopolitan than any of the other Southern States, and this is
still the case, yet 85 per cent of its Whites are of the old native
stock. Most of those not born in the State have come from States
directly adjoining. While to a certain extent there has been the usual
interchange, Louisianians going to other nearby States, mainly Texas,
nevertheless Louisiana has been relatively unimportant in settling
other States since the Civil War.

Its population is less homogeneous than most of the Southern States.
The northern part of the State, with a majority of the inhabitants
and with political control, is made up largely of Nordic Protestants
who have come in from Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, or elsewhere,
and who differ little from the inhabitants of those States. The
southern part of Louisiana, on the contrary, is largely Roman Catholic
in religion, and to a large extent French-speaking. In some towns
there are no public schools. The parochial schools teach the children
in French, and the Catholic Church has made particular efforts to
perpetuate the use of that language. The State Convention which
revised the constitution in 1921 made the literacy qualification for
the exercise of the electoral franchise, the ability of a citizen to
write his application for registration "in the English language _or his
mother tongue_."

The State has the highest rate of illiteracy of any in the Union,
whether one considers the total population including Negroes, or
limits the figures to the native Whites. It has been part of the United
States for one hundred and thirty years, but United States officials,
when going into many parts of it, still have to be accompanied by
an interpreter. With only two or three exceptions, every bishop who
has been in charge of Catholic interests in Louisiana since Thomas
Jefferson's day has been foreign-born and foreign-trained.

For such reasons the feeling of separate interests and lack of unity
and national identity have tended to continue; and when the "Cajan"
representatives attend the State legislature at Baton Rouge, they
address the House in eloquent English, but among themselves, discuss
their program in a French patois.

Oklahoma, due to its peculiar history, is one of the cosmopolitan
States. When the territory was thrown open to settlement in the great
land rush of April 22, 1889, speculators from all parts of the United
States were attracted to the scene. But most of the settlers in the
northern part came from Kansas or Missouri and in the southern, from
Texas or Arkansas. In the next year, when the territory was formally
organized, one-third of its population was Indian or Negro. Subsequent
land allotments and colonization tended to perpetuate this dual origin
of the settlers, but after the State became a famous oil field, in the
early years of the present century, the population became so mixed
that this distinction was partly lost. Meanwhile the Indian population
was not only swamped by the Whites, but largely intermarried with
them, partly because Indian women had titles to valuable oil land. At
present Oklahoma is still credited with nearly 30 per cent of all the
Indians in the United States, though it is supposed that not more than
one-fourth of these are full-blood, and many of those who are legally
counted as Indians have but a negligible amount of Indian heredity. The
Creeks and a few others have mixed to some extent with Negroes, but
this has not been general.

Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Kansas are still the principal
sources of Oklahomans, in the order named; but there is not a State
in the Union which is not represented here, many of them with large
contingents. The foreign stock is of equally cosmopolitan background,
but makes up only one-sixteenth of the whole. Considering the
geographical location, it includes a surprisingly large number of
Canadians.

Texas contains nearly half a million people of foreign stock, the
German element being by far the largest. Second in importance among
the foreign stocks is a Czechoslovakian population which has settled
largely in the southeastern part. The Germans are mainly to the west of
them. The State began to attract Italians just before the World War.
The British element is important, while Galveston has long been largely
dominated by Jews.

North Texas enjoyed a boom in 1875 and 1876 when a flood of homeseekers
poured in with their emigrant wagons. Many of these were farmers from
the Middle West who had been impoverished by the great grasshopper
plague.

Western Texas was settled late, and periods of drought, such as that at
the time of the World War, largely depopulated some sections, farmers
packing up what they could carry and abandoning everything else to move
into a region where nature was less reluctant to aid them.

Texas is still the offspring of the lower Mississippi Valley States,
but commercial development and the oil industry have brought in many
Northerners, particularly from the Central States. On the other hand,
the State's contribution to Oklahoma dwarfs all the other streams that
have gone out from it; but it has also contributed liberally to New
Mexico and Arizona and in recent years to California.

Turning back now to the East North Central States, which comprise those
originally carved out of the Northwest Territory of 1787, one again
encounters the full tide of the so-called "new immigration." Here the
old native stock is scarcely more than a numerical majority--fourteen
million out of twenty-five, to be more exact; a striking contrast to
the Southern States, which we have just been considering, where it
still forms nine-tenths or more of the total white population.

Five millions of the later arrivals in the North Central States are
Nordics, but a number almost equally large are Alpines. Half a million
Mediterraneans are present in the Italian immigration, while the area
from which the congress of the Confederation, as one of its last acts,
declared that Negro slaves should be forever excluded, has acquired
nearly a million free Negroes.

Ohio is still two-thirds native, and its great industrial development
has drawn population from all sides, though four out of five of its
citizens still find their names on the birth records of the State
itself. Besides giving population to all its neighbors it has, like the
other States of this region, sent a stream westward, not merely to such
places as Kansas and Colorado, but particularly to the Pacific Coast.

While the German element in Ohio which, half a century ago, made such
cities as Cincinnati centers of Teutonic kultur, is still the most
important numerically, it is outnumbered by the Poles, Czechoslovaks,
Hungarians, Yugoslavs, Lithuanians, and the like, if they are taken
together. The easy access across the Great Lakes has given Ohio, like
her sister States, an important Canadian element.

Indiana, most American of States in its early period, still makes an
excellent showing, with nearly 85 per cent of its population native
white of native parentage. In the interchange of inhabitants it still
continues, as it did in the days of its founding, to draw an important
Southern element from across the Ohio River. The State of Ohio does the
same. The population still tends to move westward, not eastward, from
Indiana, taking with it some of the best of American family lines and
the purest of American traditions.

The half million of foreign stock within the borders of the State are
at least half Nordic. No single group of the Slavs or Mediterraneans
is represented heavily, although there are a few of all those national
elements.

The people of Indiana deserve recognition for the way they have
preserved their heritage. It is no accident that the "Indiana school"
of writers has long sounded the authentic American note in literature,
in striking contrast to the decadent tone of the output in some of the
Atlantic Coast centers where the dominant element is quite un-American.

Illinois, by contrast, is barely more than half native, and the
scandals of its politics in regions where the alien vote is
self-conscious, have long been manifest to every newspaper reader.
With 329,000 Negroes, according to the 1930 census, Illinois ranks in
this respect only after Pennsylvania and New York, among the Northern
States; but corrupt political rings have made of the Negro an important
factor in the government of Chicago, as he has not been in New York or
Philadelphia.

Of its foreign-born stock, Nordics are far below a million, as compared
with a million and a half of Alpines and a quarter of a million of
Mediterraneans. Under the pressure of this competition, the old native
stock has shown a strong tendency to move West and South. Texas and
Arkansas, for example, have drawn more heavily from Illinois than they
have from any other Northern State, and Illinois has also been the
greatest single contributor to the development of the Pacific Coast.

Michigan is now just half native. Its geographical location has
attracted more than half a million Canadians, many of them belonging to
the French Alpine stock there. In the foreign stock as a whole, Alpines
outnumber Nordics not far from two to one. Among the 100,000 Italians
are many Northerners in the copper mines--big fellows so unlike the
Sicilian and Neapolitan to whom the American on the Atlantic Coast is
accustomed, that he does not recognize them as Italians. These northern
Italians, as previously noted, are not Mediterraneans, but mostly
Alpine with remnants of Nordic blood from the days of the Lombards and
Goths.

Wisconsin has almost escaped the Negro invasion of the North, so its
three million inhabitants are at least white; but the native stock
is in a minority, due largely to the great German inrush of the last
century. With this came many Scandinavians.

From 1860 to 1880 the immigrant nationalities ranked in the
order--German, Norwegian, Dane, and Swede. The only difference since
then is that they rank in the order--German, Norwegian, Swede, and
Dane. The great Swedish tide of immigration in the last half of the
nineteenth century did not acquire full force until the Norwegian had
passed its crest.

As late as 1900, three-fourths of the people of Wisconsin were of
foreign parentage, and the Germans made up half of these. Milwaukee,
with its Socialist administration, had long been conspicuously the
center of German influence in the United States. Up to 1843, was a
Yankee village, earnestly trying to supplant Chicago as the center of
the Midwest. By 1856 a third of its population was German. By 1890
one-half of its population was of German parentage and one-fourth
actually of German birth. That census year, however, saw the high tide
of Germanism in Milwaukee. Poles, Russians, Slovaks, and Italians have
modified since then the racial character of the city, which is only
one-third German at the present time. In the characteristic political
color of the State some students profess to see evidence of the fact
that many of the German immigrants were revolutionists fleeing from the
Fatherland.

In Minnesota, the Germans outnumber any single group, although less
numerous than the three Scandinavian groups put together, so the
State is correctly thought of as Scandinavian. Considerably less than
half of its population is of the old American stock, but the State is
overwhelmingly Nordic, the 150,000 Slavs who have invaded it in recent
decades being of little account in its 2,500,000 population. Since
the days of its founding, Minnesota has drawn from Canada a desirable
element, and has given freely in exchange.

Due partly to its relatively late settlement, the State has not been
one of those which have contributed heavily to its neighbors. Its
greatest outflow has been to the Pacific Coast, as its inhabitants
became prosperous enough to move to a milder climate in their old age.

Iowa, of about the same population as Minnesota, is two-thirds native
and equally Nordic. It has contributed heavily to the prairie and
mountain States, and also to the Pacific Coast, but the standing joke
which ascribes to Iowa the parentage of all Southern Californians seems
to be not quite exact--at least California as a whole has received more
of its population during the past generation from Illinois, Missouri,
New York, and Ohio, than from Iowa, which stands only fifth in the list.

Iowa, being pre-dominantly agricultural, has felt particularly the
unfavorable status of agriculture since the World War. During the
decade 1920-30, three out of every five of the villages in the State
actually lost in population, the people having either moved into the
cities or "gone West." Here as elsewhere, the small village seems
unable to meet the needs of the inhabitants. One of the real problems
of statesmanship in the near future is to work out a social and
economic system under which a larger part of the old native stock, and
particularly the most intelligent portion of it, can live under the
favorable biological conditions of the small village.

Missouri has nearly a quarter of a million Negroes, in contrast
with such States as the three last discussed, in which the colored
population is negligible. But of its white population, three-fourths
is native, the rest mostly German. Slavs and Italians have only begun
to get a footing. On the whole, the State is strongly Nordic and sends
out large contingents of Nordics to Illinois on the East, to Kansas
and Oklahoma, and to the mountain and coast States westward. The
importance of the Missouri stock, coming to a large extent from that of
Virginia, has been much greater than is generally recognized, in the
settlement of the whole West.

The great rush into Dakota took place in the decade after 1875. The
Red River country was opened up by the Northern Pacific Railway, and
the model farms which were established were advertised far and wide,
so that the population of 6000 in this district in 1875 increased more
than 2000 per cent in the following ten years.

In 1889 the territory of Dakota was divided on the 45° 55´ parallel,
and North Dakota was admitted as a State with approximately 170,000
population. Its subsequent growth has kept it fairly homogeneous from
a racial point of view, the State being almost wholly Nordic. Apart
from the old native Americans the main elements have been British
from Canada, Germans, and Scandinavians. The Norwegian immigration
which began in the early '90's was particularly noteworthy. Norwegians
now form about one-fourth of the total population of the State. An
interesting small group is that of the Icelanders, representatives of
one of the oldest, most highly cultured, and most stringently selected
of all Nordic peoples.

The Russians in the State, approaching a hundred thousand in number,
are mostly German-speaking. They are farmers whose ancestors were
invited to South Russia several centuries ago, but who retained their
speech and culture to a marked degree.

After the discovery of gold in the Black Hills, the country which is
now South Dakota had a rush in 1876 and for some years following, much
like that of Nevada and Montana during the Civil War and of California
in 1849. This frequently does not result in a well-balanced permanent
population, and the real settlement of South Dakota dates from the
succeeding period when its prairie lands were taken up by wheat growers
from the States of the upper Mississippi Valley. The wheat industry in
Wisconsin gradually died during the decade of 1870-80, and many who
found the ground unprofitable there moved farther west, as did others
with similar motives from western New York and the States of the old
Northwest Territory.

South Dakota has a slightly higher percentage of old Americans than
its sister to the north; otherwise the two differ remarkably little
in size, composition, and resources. In 1920, half of the inhabitants
of North Dakota claimed South Dakota as a birthplace; while half of
the inhabitants of South Dakota claimed North Dakota as theirs. Of all
the forty-eight States, these two are unmistakably the Tweedledum and
Tweedledee.

Nebraska after the Civil War continued to attract mainly the old
American pioneer class, but it also became a haven for several foreign
groups. It is said to contain about one-eighth of all the Bohemians
in the United States. The serious permanent settlement of the State
began in the early '70's. Many discharged soldiers seeking to make a
new start went West with their families. It was only a few years later
that the foreign tide began to reach these prairies and thereafter the
State attracted large fractions of the Bohemian, Scandinavian, and
German immigrations. Like some of the other prairie States it also
received many settlers who were listed as Russian because of their
nationality, but who, in fact, were Germans whose ancestors had gone to
Russia and failed to prosper there. Nebraska, therefore, though less
than three-fourths native, is overwhelmingly Nordic.

Kansas is still four-fifths native and nine-tenths Nordic. It has
received the same foreign contributions as Nebraska, but in much
smaller quantities. At the same time it has continued to receive
settlers from the Mississippi Valley, and even from Eastern States,
such as New York and Pennsylvania.

On the whole, the prairie States have been notably successful in
assimilating their immigrants and maintaining an American tradition.
The newcomers were not segregated in slums but scattered on farms.
It was almost a necessity for them to learn the speech and adopt
the customs of their hosts. While some of the Scandinavians, as in
Minnesota, have tried to have their children learn the language and
preserve the traditions of the "old country," these have at least been
Nordic traditions, and any feeling of aloofness or separateness is
rapidly disappearing.

The mountain States date largely from the Civil War, when another of
the country's waves of migration and settlement broke loose from its
moorings and started westward.

The first great migration of the American stock began immediately after
the Revolution, and resulted in the creation of Kentucky and Tennessee
by the Southerners, the transformation of western New York by the New
Englanders, and a mingling of these two streams as they crossed the
Ohio River to open up the Northwest Territory.

The second great migration reached its crest with the panic of 1819. It
completed the settlement of the Ohio Valley and of the States along the
lower Mississippi and the Gulf.

The third great migration reached its height with the feverish land
speculation promoted by Andrew Jackson's experiments in banking and
broke with the collapse of the prosperity which Martin Van Buren
inherited from his predecessor. It witnessed the settlement of the
Mississippi Valley throughout almost its entire length; together with
the Nordic absorption of Texas.

The fourth wave, slightly more diffuse, washed over the "great plains"
and broke on the crests of the Rocky Mountains during the Civil War,
though a heavy splash had meanwhile reached the Pacific Coast. It
began with the settlement of Kansas, motivated in part by land hunger,
but also by definite political calculations. Meanwhile the conquest
of California, the discovery of gold there, the settlement of Oregon,
and the Mormon appropriation of Utah, brought into existence an active
traffic across the plains, which was the beginning of Nebraska's
existence.

The Rocky Mountain States grew up in the first place out of this
traffic, then by the mining discoveries within their limits, and the
fact that there was a restless population on the Pacific Coast, ready
to surge back eastward, together with a footloose population to the
East ready to move into any part of the West.

This Eastern contingent received its impetus from the panic of 1857,
when many men, bankrupt or dislocated, were prepared to make a new
start. The mining activities in the Far West encouraged adventurers
to try their hand at the gold pan, and the country was full of
prospectors, some of them professional but mostly amateur. Men who had
no jobs at home thought they might as well seek a fortune in this way;
it would not cost them much to live, and they could at least see the
country. A similar renaissance of prospecting and small-scale mining
took place all over the mountains of the West when the depression of
1929 was well under way.

To this element was shortly added another composed of people getting
away from the Civil War. Some of these were actual deserters from
military service; others went West to escape the pressure of public
opinion toward enlistment; others in the border States, ruined by the
conflict or unwilling to cast their lot with either combatant, simply
started in motion as their fathers and grandfathers had done before
them.

The population of the mountain States varied remarkably from month to
month, as the crowd moved from one reputed bonanza to another. The
government at Washington showed itself unusually ready to set up new
governments in that region, because it was on the whole of unquestioned
Union loyalty and, if the South, at the close of the war, should be
brought back into the Union on the old terms, as President Lincoln
evidently planned, a dozen new senators from half as many new Western
States could easily be secured, leaving the South in the minority and
breaking that deadlock of almost half a century which had been the
source of so many compromises and the occasion of so many conflicts.

Colorado, at that time a part of Kansas, was an almost unknown "Indian
territory" when prospectors struck gold in the neighborhood of Denver
in 1858 and 1859. The rush from Kansas and Nebraska, when the legend
"Pike's Peak or Bust," lettered on the sides of emigrant wagons, became
traditional, disclosed how little was known of the country. Pike's
Peak, though not near the gold diggings, was the only place in Colorado
of which most Americans had ever heard.

In 1861 there was enough population to justify territorial government.
Statehood was not attained until 1876. From then on until the
agricultural period, the history of Colorado was the history of its
fluctuating mining camps. But by 1930 the State had reached a permanent
basis and a population of more than a million, of which two-thirds was
native and the other third a heterogeneous lot, partly Nordic but
containing strong Slav, Italian, and Mexican elements. So far as the
native American population was concerned, its geographical origin still
represented a fan spreading out from Pike's Peak until it reached the
Atlantic Ocean. In large or small proportions, emigrants from most of
the older States had converged on the Rockies.

Wyoming, first explored by trappers and fur traders, became important
because it was traversed by the Oregon Trail; but it was merely
a place to pass through, until the arrival of the Union Pacific
Railway and the discovery of gold in the same year (1867) gave it a
life of its own. Nearly 6000 persons spent the following winter in
Cheyenne--a cosmopolitan crowd of adventurers and speculators. After
its organization as a territory in 1859, agriculture had begun, stock
raising became important, there were local gold rushes, and the region
slowly developed until admitted to the Union in 1890.

Wyoming's population, smaller than that of any other State with the
single exception of Nevada, is less than two-thirds native stock, and
this represents a blend from all parts of the United States. Iowa,
Missouri, Illinois, have all contributed more inhabitants than either
of its neighbors, Colorado and Utah. In these mountain States the
general rule that a State is settled by its neighbors, quite breaks
down. Its foreign stock is equally mixed; while much is Nordic the
State has also attracted its quota of Slavs and Italians, and even of
Mexicans.

Idaho, after small Mormon settlements of farmers, owed most of its
early population to its mines. During the Civil War it grew remarkably,
but the fact that it could be reached more easily from the West than
from the East, due to access by the Columbia River, made its settlement
somewhat anomalous in American history, for it was settled largely by
Westerners moving east from Oregon, Washington, and northern California.

In Idaho the development of Mormon colonies has given Utah a strong
influence in the State. Apart from this, its population is made up
nowadays more from the Mississippi Valley than from the mountain and
Pacific Coast States. It is only three-fourths native, but most of the
remainder is Nordic, British and Scandinavians both having sought its
opportunities. A territory in 1863 and a State in 1890, Idaho now has a
population of nearly half a million.

Montana, in the winter of 1862 and 1863 had a total population of 670
inhabitants of whom _The Chronicle_ complacently says: "Fifty-nine
were evidently respectable women." Like Idaho, it attracted an element
of Southern men escaping from the draft into the Confederate Army,
but from then on a large part of its population was from the Northern
States. Its growth of population was closely linked up with the
fortunes of the mining industry.

Territorial status was given Montana at the time of the great gold
discoveries in 1864, and the character of its population fluctuated a
good deal, both as to quantity and quality, between that date and 1889
when it was admitted to Statehood. It has now more than half a million
inhabitants, nearly half of whom are of foreign stock and largely Roman
Catholics. Most of the natives are from the Central States; most of the
foreigners are Irish, Germans, or Canadians, though Montana has also
attracted more than 50,000 Scandinavians.

Utah's population is now about the size of that of Montana, and but
slightly more native in character (three-fifths). These natives are
to a large extent born in the State, the descendants of the Mormon
pioneers. The "Gentiles" are of widely scattered origin. The foreign
stock is mostly English or Scandinavian, the Mormon missionaries having
worked diligently in those kingdoms. Utah, therefore, represents
a Nordic population, and one with a high birthrate, whence it is
evidently destined to continue spreading steadily in the Great Basin.

Nevada sprang almost full grown from the desert, as Venus did from
the waves. It scarcely existed, though on the maps as a transmontane
part of California, until the gold rush of 1849 brought settlements
into existence to take care of the travellers. Then it was attached
administratively to Utah, which was also inconveniently distant. The
discovery of silver in the fabulously rich Comstock Lode (1859) led
to the establishment of Virginia City, and to the inrush of a torrent
of miners, particularly from California, where the gold deposits were
becoming exhausted.

In 1861 Nevada was established as a separate territory, and Lincoln's
administration pushed it through to Statehood in 1864 to get the
advantage of two more friendly senators. With the exhausting of the
silver deposits in a quarter of a century, Nevada had a severe decline,
many of her inhabitants moving away. There was another mining boom in
the first ten or fifteen years of this century, but the State has never
made a steady and substantial growth, and the 1930 census credited it
with no more than 91,058 inhabitants. Not much more than half of these
were of the native stock. The foreigners were a scattered lot, with an
unexpectedly large Italian contingent.

Arizona was cut loose from New Mexico in 1863, and, after the Civil
War, became a typical Western mining community, with a fluctuating
frontier population. A district might be active one year and a few
years later abandoned.

The Mormons made some of the early settlements in the State and still
form a significant part of its population. Like Colorado, Arizona
has more than its share of Mexicans, while some of the other Western
States, Utah and Nevada for instance, have only negligible numbers of
them. The presence of more than 100,000 Mexicans in 1930 gave Arizona,
with less than half a million inhabitants all told, a bad position as
to its proportion of native stock. If one takes account only of the
Whites, 80 per cent are natives of native parentage, the others mostly
British or German, with again a surprisingly large Canadian contingent,
considering how far removed the two regions are. The American
population is of notably cosmopolitan origin, people having gone there
from every State in the Union, in connection with mining, or for
reasons of health. But Texas is by far the largest single contributor,
with California a poor second.

New Mexico stands in the anomalous position of having an almost
unparalleled percentage of its population born not merely in the
United States, but within its own borders; and yet of having an
unparalleled proportion of its population speaking an alien language.
An official interpreter is still required in its State legislature,
so that the local statesmen who boast of their Americanism but
cannot speak English, can make their views known to the Americans.
Since the "Spanish-Americans" are classified by the census as white,
three-fourths of the population are listed as native white of native
parentage. There were also, in 1930, about 60,000 Mexicans born south
of the line, hence aliens. The other residents of foreign stock are
scattering, with no one nationality greatly predominating.

California, which in 1860 had the highest percentage of foreigners,
had not changed this situation strikingly in 1930, despite the great
influx of old American stock from the Central States. Of its 5,677,251
residents, just over a half were native Whites of native parentage. The
general character of the migration to California since the beginning of
this century is too well known to require extended comment. Every part
of the Union has contributed; even Florida is credited with a couple
of thousand converts. On the whole, this influx has been of the purest
Nordic stock, but if a constitutional convention were now to be called,
its make-up would perhaps not differ greatly from that of 1849, which
was attended by delegates born in thirty different States of the Union.

The foreign element in California is equally heterogeneous, though
largely Nordic, so far as it is white at all. Canada has sent a quarter
of a million, nearly all of English ancestry. Italy has contributed
nearly a quarter of a million, who make an important part of the
population in the northern half of the State. Unlike their fellow
nationals in the Atlantic States, these California Italians are mostly
from the northern part of that kingdom. Between North and South
Italians there is not great sympathy--representatives of the two groups
avoid intermarriage. They also avoid migrating to the same territories
and, if the Neapolitan occupies the Atlantic States, the Genoese will
push on to the other side of the continent. These northern Italians
have played a much more prominent rôle around San Francisco than one
would anticipate who knows only the southern Italian in New York or
Boston.

The State has also attracted 150,000 Russians, partly refugees since
the Bolshevik revolution, but mostly agriculturists of an earlier
period; more than half a million British, including Irish, more than
300,000 Germans, more than 200,000 Scandinavians.

It is the non-white element that has attracted attention most
continuously from the outside world. California had nearly half a
million Mexicans, until the exodus which began after the depression of
1929 had made their manual labor less valuable.

It had 45,000 Filipinos, who created serious problems in some regions,
both by competing with native labor, and by paying attention to white
girls, which is resented by the Americans.

The State's population of 37,000 Chinese is declining steadily. The
memorable agitation of the '70's for Chinese exclusion is now only a
historical event, but it was important as helping to lay the foundation
for a wise immigration policy in the United States. Mining, war times,
and the building of the transcontinental railway had kept up inflated
conditions for years. Chinese were pouring in, partly to the mines,
and partly to the railway, which used them in construction work. Some
15,000 of these Oriental laborers, turned out of work by the completion
of the Central Pacific Railway, principally in 1869-70, poured into
San Francisco and made their presence unmistakable. A decade of
dissatisfaction followed, particularly among American workingmen. The
most conspicuous agitator was the Irish drayman, Dennis Kearney. In
1879 the State voted against the further immigration of Chinese by a
majority of 154,638 to 883. There have been few issues in American
history carried by a more nearly unanimous vote. In the same year
the Federal Congress passed an exclusion act which established the
principle that an unassimilable people may be shut out entirely, if
necessary to protect American standards.

Agitation along similar lines sprang up about 1906-7, due to the
rapid increase of Japanese in the State. It was settled, first by a
"gentlemen's agreement" between the United States and Japan, by which
the latter undertook to prevent the emigration of its laboring class to
the Pacific Coast States; second, by a law later adopted in California,
which prevented alien Japanese from owning land; third, by a final
exclusion of all Orientals through national legislation.

The hundred thousand Japanese shown in the 1930 census are no
longer increasing rapidly, in spite of a fairly high birthrate.
The existence of these second-generation Japanese (and the same is
true, in proportion, of the Chinese) has, however, created a serious
problem all its own, since they are not accepted by either race. They
usually do not speak the Japanese language. They are inclined to look
down upon its institutions, and admire those of America. Hence the
real Japanese element both dislikes them, and does not employ them
because of the language barrier. On the other hand, the American does
not accept them as Americans, and they cannot be employed easily
alongside of and in competition with white natives of the United
States. The second-generation Oriental is practically a man without
a country. Because of these special racial problems, California has
had difficulties that some of the other States have not fully or
sympathetically understood.

Oregon's million inhabitants are two-thirds native Whites of the old
stock. Canada, the British Isles, Germany, and Scandinavia, have been
the other large contributors. The American population is largely from
the Central States.

Washington now has more than a million and a half inhabitants, 56 per
cent of whom are of old native stock. Eastern Washington felt a boom in
1862 when it began to accumulate population attracted partly by mines
and partly by farming possibilities, until it reached an equilibrium
with the Puget Sound end of the State which has always been an
important political factor. Many settlers at this time were immigrants
from the "border States" of the Civil War, who became disgusted with
the guerrilla warfare to which they were subjected, and who were
not enthusiastically for either side. During the '80's, the rapid
construction of railway lines brought the population of Washington up
to a respectable figure in a very few years.

The present Whites are mainly from the States of the upper Mississippi
Valley. Canada has furnished 100,000 more of British ancestry, and a
slightly larger number has come direct from the British Isles. Germany
has contributed 100,000, Scandinavia 175,000. As against this, Italy is
represented by less than 25,000, and the Slav countries altogether by
not much more than 60,000. Hence Washington is entitled to claim that
it is one of the most Nordic of the States.



XIV

CHECKING THE ALIEN INVASION


During the earlier part of the immigration period, the tradition of
an "Asylum for the Oppressed" of all nations was the ruling principle
in the national attitude towards aliens, though even then there was
occasional objection to the undesirable character of some of the
immigrants.

Various States adopted their own restrictions. Massachusetts, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, and others tried to control the flow of new arrivals by
head taxes and administrative regulations, while foreign governments
sometimes opposed these measures, as in the case of Wurtemberg in 1855.
The United States having sent back some paupers who had been dumped
on its shores, public resolutions are said to have been passed by the
Wurtembergers, protesting at this lack of hospitality. If the paupers
were returned, they complained bitterly, "we shall have defrayed the
expense of their journey in vain." But the right to deport undesirable
aliens had been set forth by the famous Alien and Sedition Acts of
1798, and the Federal Government has never wavered in its assertion of
this right.

For a generation before the Civil War, the undesirability of
unrestricted immigration was debated, but without definite action.
The first federal restriction was the law of 1875, excluding foreign
convicts and prostitutes. President Roosevelt in 1907 appointed an
Immigration Commission which made a long investigation and a voluminous
report that served as a base for future measures and by 1914 most of
the undesirable classes, except illiterates, were formally excluded.

The opposition to restriction was from the steamship companies, whose
interest was obvious, and from the large employers of cheap labor,
who were likewise not at all disinterested. It also arose among alien
groups in the United States, that wished to get more of their own
people into this country.

The most active forces in its favor were, primarily, organized labor,
which wished no more competition from floating aliens with a wholly
un-American standard of living and, most of all, the native American
groups, eugenists and others who were far-sighted and unwilling to
see the racial character and national unity of America destroyed and
republican ideals endangered and undermined.

The first attempt at a general restriction to improve the quality of
immigration was the adoption by Congress of the literacy test, which
provided that those who could not read and write some language should
be excluded. This was vetoed by President Wilson.

Meanwhile the outbreak of the World War had, for the time, put a
virtual stop to international movements of population, and the nation
had a breathing space to consider its future policies. In 1917
the Burnett Act consolidated the existing provisions for excluding
undesirables, and included the literacy test. President Wilson vetoed
it also, but it was passed over his veto.

At the close of the war, there was widespread apprehension that the
unsettled and impoverished peoples of Europe would begin a new mass
migration westward. Before the war we had been receiving a million
immigrants a year; travellers and consular agents predicted that we
might look forward to receiving two million or more annually. It was
felt that the literacy test, and the provisions against mental and
physical defectives, would not be enough to stop this flood. Congress
met the emergency by the Quota Act of 1921, which provided that the
number of aliens of any nationality admitted in any one year should
be no more than 3 per cent of the number of foreign-born persons of
such nationality residing in the United States in 1910. This law was
intended to preserve the _status quo_. What the nation was in 1910,
that it should be forever.

Such a solution could not satisfy the native Americans, whose people
had made the country great. Fortunately, the demand for a more
scientific approach to regulation found an adequate representative
in the Hon. Albert Johnson, a member of Congress from the State of
Washington, under whose leadership the whole system was revised in the
famous act of 1924.

Administratively, the proceedings were made more workable and more
intelligent by placing on the United States consuls abroad the duty
of approving passports, without which no immigrant could enter. When
the quota was exhausted, the consul was required to refuse his visa on
passports until the next year. There was no longer any possibility of
hardship and apparent injustice.

Restrictively, the quota was reduced from 3 per cent to 2 per cent,
and based not on the 1910 census, but on the 1890 census. The purpose
of this was, frankly, to encourage new arrivals from the countries of
the "old immigration,"--the countries of northern and western Europe
who had contributed most to the American population and whose people
were, therefore, most easily assimilable in the United States; and,
conversely, to discourage immigration from the countries of southern
and eastern Europe, most of whose nationals had come here since 1890.

This law reduced the total possible immigration under quota to 167,750
as against 357,800 permitted by the act it supplanted, and favored the
European Nordic whose people made the United States what it is, as
against the European Alpine and the Mediterranean who were late comers
and intrusive elements. Unfortunately it did not apply to the western
hemisphere, hence offered no obstacle to the Indian peon from Mexico
nor to the Negro from the West Indies, nor were the Filipinos barred.

The most interesting provision of the law of 1924 and, in one sense,
the reason for the existence of this present book, was a provision
that the quotas should be based only temporarily on the 1890 census.
That basis had been justly criticized on the ground that it made the
immigrants of recent times, rather than the old native stock, the
determinants of the future composition of the United States. The
quotas, it was argued, should be based not on the number of aliens here
in 1890, or in any other year; but on the ratio of these aliens to
the whole population. The law therefore embodied the National Origins
provision--one of the decisive events in the racial history of America.

An investigation was ordered to find the proportions of the various
national (not _racial_) groups in the United States at the time of
the 1920 census. The general quota to apply from July 1, 1927 (later
delayed one year), was fixed at a total of 150,000. Each nationality
was to be assigned such proportion of this 150,000 as the number of
its people here in 1920 bore to the total population. Thus, if it
should transpire that 10 per cent of the total population in 1920 was
of Swedish ancestry, Sweden would receive a quota of 10 per cent of
150,000 or 15,000. Or if it were found, for example, that 2 per cent
of the total population in 1920 derived from France, the French quota
would become 3000.

While a committee of experts went to work on the necessary research
for this purpose, an amusing competition began among the alien groups
and hyphenates, to exaggerate as much as possible their claims so that
their relatives and compatriots might benefit by an increase in their
nation's quota. The Irish were perhaps the most industrious in this
occupation, for they could take advantage of the confusion, due to the
fact, pointed out in these pages time and again, that the territory
now composing the Irish Free State had long taken credit for every one
who has passed through Ireland. Actually the "Irish" immigration in
Colonial times was, as already shown, not Irish at all, but for the
most part Scotch, though taking shipping from Ulster; and the Free
State Catholics had few representatives in America at the time of the
Revolution. Such facts were conveniently ignored by the Irish patriots,
who wrote books to demonstrate that the "Irish" not only fought and won
the Revolution, but that they made up the predominant element at the
present time. "It has been estimated by good authorities," affirmed one
such enthusiast, "that at least 25,000,000 of our present population
have more or less Irish blood coursing through their veins. We"
(_i.e._, the population of the United States), he went on, warming up
to his job, "are no more Anglo-Saxon than we are Hindu!"

If the Irish Catholics were inclined to claim something like one-fourth
of the total population, the Germans were prepared to claim anything
up to one-third. The quota based on the 1890 census had, in fact, been
extraordinarily favorable for the Germans, since they were the group
that had been coming into the country in greatest number just before
that date, hence they had the largest number of actual foreign-born
here present in that year. Their allotment on that basis was almost
one-third of the quota for the entire world. The obvious unfairness of
basing future immigration on such conditions, and of ignoring almost
entirely the English and Scotch stock which was the overwhelming
element in the building of America, but which together received only 20
per cent of the quota, was generally recognized.

Scarcely had this injustice been removed and the National Origins
measure gone into effect, however, when business depression began to
throw men out of work, and it was universally felt that no new seekers
for jobs should be brought into the country to displace the workers
already here. Administrative restrictions, therefore, cut down the
incoming flow of aliens to almost nothing. At the same time, many
recent arrivals went back home, thinking they could weather the storm
better among their own people.

A direct benefit from the depression, then, was that it practically
stopped foreign immigration. When the time comes for consideration
of the renewal of present administrative restrictions, the National
Origins Act will be on the statute books as a protection. Meanwhile
Americans can consider what further measures they need to take to
extend the quota provision to the western hemisphere.

The actual contribution of the alien groups to the population of the
United States is based not merely on their net immigration, but also
on their fecundity after they settle here. Many familiar studies show
that, in general, the immigrant women are more fecund than the old
stock. They marry earlier, show a lower percentage of sterility, and
have larger families.

The fact that women are in a minority among most of the recent
immigrant groups has, however, tended to cut down their contribution.
Of the whole foreign-born group, men and women have in late decades
been in the ratio of about five to three. This means that the group, as
a group, will make a smaller contribution than it would, had each man
brought a wife with him. On the other hand, the surplus males usually
marry women of other groups, their descendants being thus assimilated
into the population more quickly, whether for good or for ill.

Again, the increase of the foreign-born groups is cut down by the fact
that for the most part they have a higher rate of infant mortality.
Variations among the races are striking. Thus while the native white
has an infant mortality rate of 94 per 1000 births, that of the
American Negro is 154, that of the Poles about the same, that of the
French Canadians 171, that of the Portuguese 200, as shown in some
extensive studies made by the Federal Children's Bureau.

In the second generation, the fecundity of the alien groups begins
to decline. It is generally said that the immigrant's daughter bears
one less child than did her mother. Hence if immigrants are let in
slowly, they are not likely to swamp the native stock; and as to those
already here, although some of them, particularly the Italians, have
remarkably high birthrates, they will probably lose this advantage
within the next couple of generations.

The question is often raised, whether the population of the United
States would not be just as large today, if immigration had been
permanently excluded in 1790. In other words, if no alien had arrived
since the founding of the United States, would the descendants of the
Colonial population have produced as many citizens as there are now
here? This hypothesis, often known as Walker's Law, assumes that the
fecundity of a group is cut down by the competition of immigrants, and
that the latter do no more than fill the places which would otherwise
have been filled by natural increase.

No one would claim that such a generalization is exact, but as a
general tendency it seems to be near the truth. The United States would
have grown large and strong, had immigration been shut off a century
ago. It will continue to grow large and strong, with immigration shut
off at the present time. That does not mean that the rate of growth
which has been maintained during the last century will continue for
another century. The Nordic civilization is at present near the end of
a cycle of growth, and its rate of multiplication is slowing in every
civilized country. In most of the Nordic nations, the population does
not now replace itself. When the women now of child-bearing age pass
from the scene, they will not leave enough daughters to take their
places.

The influence of the "newer immigration" and its offspring is great
enough to carry forward the United States population expansion a little
longer, but all signs indicate that, assuming _all_ immigration ceased,
the numerical growth of the United States would come to a standstill at
the end of two or three generations, probably at a figure not higher
than 150,000,000 of population, and no more are needed.

All the greater is the need, then, that this stock should be sound in
quality. A memorable step toward this goal was taken by the Federal
Supreme Court in 1923, when it held that only white persons and persons
of African descent are eligible to citizenship.

       *       *       *       *       *

In 1790 Congress enacted the first naturalization statute, the terms of
which confined its benefits to "free white citizens." The restriction
remained in force until extended in 1870 by statute giving the right
of citizenship to persons of African descent. At present, then, only
Whites and Negroes are eligible for naturalization. Interpreting the
statute of 1790, the Supreme Court held that the term "free white" must
be understood in its common meaning as used by the framers, and could
not include a Hindu (Sikh) or, in another case, a Japanese.

Meanwhile the immigration act of 1924 provides that "no alien
ineligible to citizenship shall be admitted to the United States."
The Supreme Court decisions in the cases mentioned mean that this law
excludes all colored and Oriental races--all, in short, save "free
Whites" and Negroes. Another safeguard is thus thrown around the
American stock.

The three millions of Whites of 1790 have increased to 109 millions in
1930. Of this number, one-third are either foreign-born or the children
of such. One wonders how many of the 109 millions are the undiluted
descendants of Colonial stock. While mathematical exactitude cannot be
expected in such calculations, the census experts have figured that
about one-third of the population is of such ancestry.

There are many others who have one parent Colonial and the other going
back perhaps to an immigrant of 1850. Such latter, these experts
claim, is the equivalent of half of a Colonial descendant. Two of
them together they count as equivalent to one Colonial descendant. By
this device the experts calculated that the "numerical equivalent"
of the Colonial stock amounts to nearly one-half of the entire white
population.

The investigations necessary to put the National Origins provision
into effect, and to defend it from partisan criticism, brought out
the salient facts concerning the composition of the population
today--again, of course, subject to such margin of error as is
inevitable. The white population of 1920 was apportioned as follows:

 England, Scotland, Wales, and
   North Ireland                 39,242,733
 Germany                         14,833,588
 Irish Free State                10,378,634
 Poland[11]                        3,626,692
 Italy                            3,566,396
 Russia                           2,108,283
 Sweden                           2,024,434
 France                           1,970,189
 Netherlands                      1,835,959
 Czechoslovakia                   1,623,438
 Norway                           1,431,292
 Austria                            976,248
 Switzerland                        961,406
 Belgium                            790,928
 Denmark                            735,083
 Hungary                            703,409
 Yugoslavia                         440,518
 Finland                            338,036
 Lithuania                          293,100
 Portugal                           272,104
 Greece                             185,836
 Rumania                            185,423
 Spain                              181,658
 Latvia                             144,844
 Turkey                             138,389
 Danzig                              81,522
 All other quota countries          262,216
 Non-quota countries[12]           5,488,757
                                 ----------
                                 94,820,915

The United States is no longer 99 per cent Protestant, as it was in
1790; but it is still 80 per cent Protestant. Its white inhabitants are
no longer 90 per cent Nordic, as after the Revolution; but they are
still 70 per cent Nordic.[13][14] Its future course must be guided in
the light of a consideration of these facts.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 11: It must be remembered that these figures show national
origins, not _racial_. The numbers credited to such countries as
Poland, Russia, and Austria-Hungary therefore include very large
proportions of Jews.]

[Footnote 12: These are the countries of the Western Hemisphere, of
which Canada and Mexico have been the largest contributors.]

[Footnote 13: This would, of course, include all Germany.]

[Footnote 14: The Hoover Committee on Social Trends, in re National
Origins, says that "about 85 per cent of the Whites in the United
States in 1920 were from strains originating in northwestern Europe
where Nordics predominate."]



XV

THE LEGACY OF SLAVERY


The most essential element in nationality is unity. This unity can be
based on race, on language, on religion, on a long tradition held in
common, or on several or all of these.

In the past century the United States has to some extent lost its
unity of religion, of race, and of language. In the same period it has
acquired a number of unassimilable elements brought in as cheap and
docile labor to develop its industries or else allowed to enter through
the false humanitarianism of the so-called Victorian Era. It had been
forgotten that a cheap man makes a cheap job.

In the South manual labor was performed by the Negroes, but in the
North, where there were no slaves, manual labor was chiefly performed
by Americans, and it still is in the districts where there are no
aliens. The moment that cheap alien labor was introduced to build
railroads or dig canals, such labor became distasteful to the native
American, because it was done by lowly foreigners whom they despised.

Among the various outland elements now in the United States which
threaten in different degrees our national unity, the most important is
the Negro. Unlike the other alien elements the blacks were brought into
the country against their will. They brought with them no persisting
language, religion, or other cultural attribute, but accepted these
elements from their masters.

At the time of the first census (1790) the Negroes numbered 757,208,
being 19.3 per cent of the total population. They were naturally mostly
in the Southern States. In 1860 the Negroes numbered 4,441,830 and
constituted 14.1 per cent of the population. They were still in the
South. In 1930 the Negroes numbered 11,891,143 and constituted 9.69
per cent of the population, but there had been a distinct migration
from the agricultural districts of the South to the large cities of the
North.

When, after the Civil War, the Negroes were granted the franchise the
Negro problem was greatly complicated. This ill-advised measure was
forced on the country by a wave of feeling aroused by the wanton murder
of Lincoln. The North feared to entrust the government of the country
to those who had lately been in armed rebellion, so they conferred the
voting power on the Negroes and thereby greatly increased the electoral
vote of the South. If the franchise had been confined to the Whites
only, the influence of the "Solid South" after the Civil War would have
been much less than it now is. The purpose of the measure was to make
the South Republican, its actual effect was to enhance the power of the
South in Congress and in the Electoral College and make that section
definitely Democratic. In the words of the late Chancellor Von Bismarck
this was worse than a crime--it was a blunder.

[Illustration: NEGRO POPULATION

1930

_11,891,143_]

The Southerners understand how to treat the Negro--with firmness and
with kindness--and the Negroes are liked below the Mason and Dixon line
so so long as they keep to their proper relation to the Whites, but in
the North the blocks of Negroes in the large cities, migrating from the
South, have introduced new complications, which are certain to produce
trouble in the future, especially if Communist propaganda makes headway
among them.

In the Negro section of Harlem a further problem is arising from
crosses between Negroes and Jews and Italians. These and other
Mulattoes are showing a tendency toward Communism. During the World War
a Communistic and racial movement was started there and a situation
developed which was controlled with some difficulty, though without
publicity.

The increase in the relative number of Mulattoes to Blacks is growing
greater in the Northern States, as is obvious to any observer in the
Negro districts of the larger cities. There can be seen many yellow and
light-colored individuals, who are Negro in every other respect. Many
of our dark immigrant Whites are themselves darker in color than the
yellow Negroes and this enables some of these light Negroes to "pass"
as Whites. This problem is one which will increase in gravity.

Evidence does not exist to show whether the number of Mulattoes being
produced by primary union of Whites and Negroes is now larger than it
was fifty or one hundred years ago. But evidence does exist to show
that the intelligence and ability of a colored person are in pretty
direct proportion to the amount of white blood he has, and that most
of the positions of leadership, influence, and prominence in the Negro
race are held not by real Negroes but by Mulattoes, many of whom have
very little Negro blood. This is so true that to find a black Negro
in a conspicuous position is a matter of comment. E.B. Reuter has
calculated that a Mulatto child has a better chance than a black child
to achieve prominence in the ratio of thirty-four to one.

Such a situation naturally puts a premium on white blood in the minds
of Negroes, and therefore puts a prize on bastardy, discouraging any
tendency to cultivate pure racial values on the part of the Blacks
themselves. The black man who acquires wealth, at once wishes to show
visible evidences of his affluence by acquiring a light yellow or
"pink" wife, and the black girl is at a heavy discount matrimonially.

Even in adoption the same tendency is found. Child-placing societies
may seek in vain to find a home for the pickaninny with black
skin and curly hair, but the light-colored baby, despite other
disqualifications, is eagerly adopted by darker Negro parents.

The religious world, the political world, and the educational world
alike seem to have conspired to give all the rewards to the Negro with
white blood and to make the bulk of the race feel that white blood is
the greatest possible good for a Negro. Such a condonation of race
mixture is an insidious and far-reaching menace to the racial and
ethical standards of both races.

How much white blood now circulates in the veins of our Negroes cannot
be told. It is generally considered, however, that at least one-third
of all those classed as Negroes in the United States have, in fact,
some white blood and the proportion is probably larger.

The "pass-for-white" does so purely by virtue of his physical
characters which approximate those of his white ancestors. His
intellectual and emotional traits may insidiously go back to his black
ancestry, and may be brought into the White race in this way.

Mentally and emotionally the Negro is the product of thousands of
years of evolution under the most stringent natural selection in the
hot lands of Africa. He is notably lacking in just those qualities
necessary for success in a modern Nordic industrial civilization,
as for instance in self-control and in capacity for co-operation.
Physically he is the product of the same circumstances. His tough skin
gives him an advantage over the White in resisting some diseases. His
lower vital capacity puts him at a disadvantage in others. Thus the
Negro is liable to succumb to tuberculosis or pneumonia, and is less
prone to cancer and skin affections. With the aid of white sanitation
and hygiene, the Negro is holding his own, even gaining ground in the
Northern cities where it was formerly supposed he would die out.

Natural selection, therefore, in view of the present vital statistics
of the two races, can no longer be relied upon to solve the problem by
a gradual elimination of the Negro in America. Comfort has been found
in the fall of the ratio of the Negroes to the total population; but
their absolute increase goes on just the same.

No satisfactory solution of the problem has been suggested. At present,
from a study of past history, there appear to be but three possible
solutions.

First, slow amalgamation with the Whites and an ever-increasing
number of Mulattoes, who little by little will "pass" for Whites.
This amalgamation might easily assume serious proportions in the near
future, with an increase of mixed breeds all over the United States.
But if the sentimental views about Negroes engendered by the Civil
War can be lived down, it may be that the oncoming generation will
resolutely face this Mulatto menace. Otherwise the absorption of 10 per
cent Negroes and Mulattoes, to say nothing of East and South Europeans,
in addition to Mexicans, Filipinos, and Japanese will produce a racial
chaos such as ruined the Roman Empire.

A second solution would be deportation, which was seriously suggested
a hundred years ago. At that time it might have been possible to
re-transport the then slaves to Africa, and such action would have
involved only a fraction of the cost of the Civil War. This was
considered as a possible remedy by some of the wisest statesmen in the
years immediately preceding the Civil War. Today it is not possible,
because Africa, with the exception of Liberia, is under the control
of white states, which certainly would not welcome such an enormous
addition to their own color problem, aside from all other practical
considerations.

[Illustration: NEGRO POPULATION

INCREASE & DECREASE

1920-1930

Figures in each State show the percentage of increase and decrease.]

Present-day advocates of repatriation argue that lack of native
population is the principal factor likely to hold back the development
of some of the healthiest and most fertile parts of interior Africa.
The American Negro, they say, might well carry there the education
he has received in the United States, and do better for himself than
he could expect to do here, especially if, through a rising race
consciousness among the Whites, they show themselves less hospitable to
his claims for equality.

The substantial following, gained by the Negro Garvey, who started a
"Back to Africa" movement a few years ago, is cited as evidence that
the Negroes in this country are not necessarily adverse to leaving it.
But much more evidence will be needed before the repatriation of the
Negro can be considered seriously.

As a third possibility, segregation has been suggested. This would mean
the abandonment by the Whites of whole sections of the country along
the Gulf of Mexico. This has actually happened in some places along the
lower Mississippi River, where the numbers of the Negroes have become
so overwhelming that the few remaining Whites have simply moved out and
abandoned the district to them. It has happened and is happening in the
West Indies. Haiti and Santo Domingo have been entirely turned over to
Negroes and other examples of West Indian Islands almost abandoned to
Negroes can be found.

Whatever be the final outcome, the Negro problem must be taken
vigorously in hand by the Whites, without delay. States which have
no laws preventing the intermarriage of white and black should adopt
them. During the last quarter-century, many such bills, introduced in
Northern legislatures, have been defeated by an organized pro-Negro
lobby. The Christian churches in some parts of the North have also
taken an unwise stand, in trying to break down the social barriers
between Negro and White. This attitude goes back to the days of the
abolitionists, who persuaded themselves that the Negro slave had all
possible virtues and the Southern White man all possible vices. It was
a primary factor in creating the tragedy of "reconstruction" after the
Civil War.

Senator Roscoe Conkling hit this attitude off neatly when some one
asked him what had happened in the Senate that day. He replied: "We
have been discussing Senator Sumner's annual bill entitled 'An act to
amend the act of God whereby there is a difference between white and
black.'"

More necessary than legislation is a more vigorous and alert public
opinion among the Whites, which will put a stop to social mixing of
the two races. Social separation is the key to minimizing the evils
of race mixture at the present time. Public opinion might well stop
exalting the Mulatto and thereby putting its stamp of approval on
miscegenation. Negroes should be encouraged to respect their own
racial integrity. Finally, knowledge of methods of Birth Control now
widespread among the Whites, should be made universally available to
the Blacks.

Compared with the Negro, the American Indian offers no serious problem
to American unity. On the entire continent north of Mexico there are
only about 432,000. The 1930 census gives the Indian population of the
United States as 332,397.

The distribution of these Indians is remarkably irregular. The West has
the largest number; then comes the South, because of Oklahoma's 92,000,
for the Gulf States have few. North Carolina, on the other hand, stands
seventh in the list of States arranged according to Indian population.
As against 137,000 in the West and 116,000 in the South, the North has
but 78,000. These are widely scattered and often little known to the
general public. New York State still has 7000 Indians, Michigan about
the same number and North Dakota somewhat more; Wisconsin and Minnesota
have 11,000 each, while South Dakota stands fourth on the list of
all the States with its 22,000. In the West the Indian population is
concentrated mainly in Arizona, New Mexico, California, Montana, and
Washington, in the order named.

These Indians now represent 371 tribes, or remnants of tribes. How
large their numbers were at the time of the first white settlement
in North America has been a matter of interesting conjecture. Most
estimates are not much above a million, but the population may
have been considerably greater a few hundred years earlier. Since
white occupation a few tribes have increased in numbers. Most have
diminished, and some have become extinct, more frequently from the
white man's diseases and from whiskey than from the results of fighting.

The densest Indian population at the time of the conquest was on the
Pacific Coast, which did not come into close contact with the Whites
until the last century. This Pacific Coast Indian population was also
of a low scale of intelligence and culture, and remarkably broken up
into distinct groups which could not understand each other. As many
separate languages were spoken by the Indians of this region as by all
the other Indians of the United States together. When the first mission
on the West Coast was founded by the Spaniards, in 1769, the number of
California Indians was computed at 220,000. This has decreased more
than 90 per cent at this date.

The policy of the Catholic missionaries was to corral the Indians
around the missions. The church considered itself the owner of all the
land, and the Indians worked it as tenants. When the Mexican Government
confiscated the property of the church, it took title to all the
land. Hence the Indians, who had always lived on it, found themselves
illegal trespassers, and until about 1913 they were landless, starving
fugitives. At that time the government began to provide land for the
Indians. While their treatment has decimated them nine times, their
isolation prevented intermarriage with the Whites, so the California
Indians are of relatively pure blood.

The revolt of the Pueblo Indians of Arizona and New Mexico against the
Spanish in 1680-92 was the beginning of their decline. The Navajos and
Apaches, on the contrary, have increased in numbers, at the same time
avoiding white mixture.

The Indians of the Atlantic Coast were destroyed partly by disease,
partly by war; and their remnants were pushed westward year after
year by the Whites until they are mostly now west of the Mississippi,
many of them being in Oklahoma. The Iroquois are an exception, and
have perhaps increased in numbers. They got hold of firearms before
their tribal neighbors and were able to destroy many of the latter,
incorporating the remnants in their own tribe. The Sioux of the great
plains are also said to have increased.

In the Gulf States, on the other hand, the Indians were largely
exterminated before their remnants were moved to the Indian Territory.
The Chickasaws told the French explorer, Iberville, in 1702, that
in the preceding twelve years they had killed or captured for slave
traders 2300 Choctaws, at a cost to themselves of 800 men.

In the Northwest and Alaska, whiskey and disease have been leading
factors in the reduction of the number of the natives. With this, in
many regions, went a low fertility, due partly to starvation.

Nearly all of the American Indians lived as hunters. When the Whites
invaded the forests and drove off or killed the game, the Indian
economic system was broken up, and they had little opportunity to meet
the rapidly changing conditions.

There has been, since early times, some intermarriage between Indians
and Whites, but it has not been on a sufficiently large scale to be
serious. The estimate however is sometimes made that one-half of the
census population of Indians has white blood. Naturally, there is no
way of proving or disproving such a conjecture. Only in Oklahoma has
such mixing been looked on with favor, and even there some tribes
held themselves largely aloof from white miscegenation and punished
with death any interbreeding of their members with Negroes. The
discovery of oil on Indian tribal lands made the claim to Indian blood
a lucrative one and oil revenues unfortunately covered a multitude of
sins. Throughout the West in general the term "squaw man" is a bitter
reproach.

Taking the country over, the Whites who have married Indians have not
been of a high class. But the total number of Indians in the United
States is so small that their future is probably that of being absorbed
in the White race through miscegenation, unless it be for a few tribes
cultivating a racial purity of their own and, with favorable economic
conditions, perpetuating themselves for a long time to come.

The Mexican population is found mainly in the Southwestern States,
but has also assumed relatively large proportions in such States as
Colorado, Kansas, Illinois, and Michigan. The character of this
immigration has been described elsewhere in these pages. It has given
the United States an alien element with a high birthrate and very low
standards of living, with which white laborers cannot and will not
compete.

The census of 1930 found nearly a million and a half Mexicans in the
United States. It was generally supposed that the number who had
entered the country illegally was greater than those who came through
the recognized routes. To prevent such a nullification of immigration
regulations, mere registration of aliens is not sufficient, for
that is likely to affect only those who have entered legally. Our
entire population should be registered. The advantages of a universal
system of proving identity are many, and extension of the system of
registering births, on the one hand, and of registering voters, on
the other, would take care of this without setting up much new and
expensive machinery.

The menace of Chinese and Japanese immigration has for the present
been stopped by immigration laws which exclude any one not eligible to
citizenship. A proper application of this rule as established by the
Supreme Court might shut off much of the immigration of Indians from
Mexico.

Since the end of the World War the immigration of Filipino young men
has become a disturbing problem on the Pacific Coast. The number of
arrivals up to 1930 amounts to nearly 50,000. These, like the Greeks
and some other European immigrant groups, bring but few women with
them and therefore form a socially undesirable and racially threatening
element wherever they are located.

Unlike the Puerto Ricans and Hawaiians, the Filipinos are not citizens
of the United States, with rights of entry that cannot be abrogated.
They are citizens of the Philippine Islands, and permitted to enter
the United States only by courtesy. Congress, therefore, has full
right to adopt legislation which will exclude them, and it should make
immediate use of its power to protect white America from this reservoir
of 10,000,000 Malays and Mongoloids now under the American flag and at
present potential immigrants. If this cannot be done effectively, the
United States will have no alternative but to admit that its adoption
of the islands and its attempt to salvage them after Spanish misrule
was a mistake. As a safeguard to its own racial welfare, it may become
necessary to give the Filipino his independence, commend him to the
benevolence of Providence and the League of Nations, and have nothing
more to do with him.

In the same way there should be no thought of further acquisition of
territory in the West Indies or in Central America. It is conceivable
that the Central American countries might in a not too remote future be
able to form a stable confederation and stand on their own feet more
successfully than they have done during the last generation. If such
a federation could include the West Indian Islands, the United States
might well donate its possessions there.

Hindu immigration has so far been nothing more than a threat. The
present immigration restrictions will prevent the immigration of these
people, except for travel and study. Experience in many parts of the
world has shown the folly of allowing white countries to be overrun by
Hindus, and Americans should sympathize with the British possessions
that are trying to maintain white supremacy in their own borders in
this respect.

In Hawaii the United States has another possible source of undesirable
immigration. The dominant element among its third of a million
inhabitants is the Japanese, who have held themselves aloof from
the other residents and shown little tendency to intermarry. Every
Japanese child born in the islands is an American citizen, with the
full right of entry to the mainland. The greater part of the rest
of the population is a mongrel crowd. Chinese and native Hawaiians,
until quite recently, have shown a marked tendency to intermarry.
Every effort should be made to find some constitutional way by which
Hawaii can be prevented from becoming a continuous source of supply of
undesirable citizens of the United States.

While the list of unassimilable elements in the United States is a long
one, it must be borne in mind that most of them are still small. A wise
population policy promptly adopted and maintained henceforth will give
the republic an opportunity to grow along sound and fruitful lines.



XVI

OUR NEIGHBORS ON THE NORTH


Before dealing with the countries to the north of us, it may be well
to call attention to the fact that there are three major divisions of
Canada. First, the Maritime Provinces, which were acquired by Great
Britain at a later date than the other Atlantic Colonies, as they were
originally claimed by the French. In this division Newfoundland should
be considered. These territories lying east of the United States were
settled directly from England or at the time of the Revolution by
Loyalist refugees from New England. There is a large Scotch element in
the population, which was lacking in New England. On the whole, the
area is thoroughly Nordic, except on the shores of the Gulf of Saint
Lawrence and the Bay of Chaleurs, where the Alpine French Habitants
have infiltrated.

The second division of the Dominion is French-speaking, Roman Catholic
Quebec, with a fecund population of low cultural status. The French
distrust of the New England Protestants, with whom they had been at war
for one hundred and fifty years, was the predominant cause of their
failure to join with the revolting American Colonies in 1776. Quebec
was known as Lower Canada.

Like the territories of the United States, the Dominion of Canada of
today represents a part of the Nordic conquest of North America, the
sole exception being the French population of Quebec Province.

The country to the west of the Ottawa River constitutes the third
major division and was, after the Revolution, known as Upper Canada.
Its original population was composed chiefly of American Loyalists who
fled there in numbers after the Revolution. The immigration into Upper
Canada from Britain was later very largely Scotch, Scotch Irish, and
North of England. This is true more or less of all English-speaking
Canada, except possibly British Columbia.

In a measure the Dominion is an offshoot of the United States, and
its development proceeded along lines parallel to those of the States
to the south of the boundary. The character of the population west of
Quebec Province is much the same as that of the United States, lacking,
fortunately for Canada, some of our immigrant elements. The country was
settled without the terrible Indian wars that afflicted our frontier
and without the lawless element so conspicuous in the history of our
Far West.

The French settlement of Quebec was contemporaneous with the first
English settlement in North America at Jamestown. A majority of the
emigrants were from northern France. So far as one can judge at the
present time by the descendants of this population, the pure Nordic
stock must have been rare among them. They are today in general a
stocky, short-necked people, rather of the Alpine build, with eyes
often rather dark. The blond hair and tall stature of the Nordic
are so rare as to attract attention at once. The type suggests the
Pre-Norman population of northwestern France, rather than its Nordic
conquerors. Some of the seigneurs, the explorers, and the adventurers
of the early period apparently were of Nordic stock, but they were
probably always in a great minority and have left few descendants.

Very little satisfactory research has been done as to the origin of the
Habitants. A recent study of a typical group has given some indication
of the general conditions in Quebec. In this group stature was found to
be five feet and five inches, which is about the general average of the
French. The cephalic index was over 83.0, which is about the mean for
Brittany and is higher than that of Normandy. The hair was rather dark
brown and straight, this straightness is slightly suggestive of Indian
admixture. The eye color was more often brown than mixed blue and
brown. Pure blue eyes were present only in 15 per cent. The tall burly
build of the Norman peasant was very rare.

The language spoken in Quebec is an archaic Norman patois of the time
of Louis XIV. This fact has given rise to the general belief that the
Habitants came from Normandy, but the more probable reason is that the
Normans were the earliest immigrants and established their patois,
which was accepted by later arrivals. The Normans appeared to have been
far short of a majority of the total number of immigrants and Brittany
supplied still fewer. The balance was divided among the provinces of
the northern half of France.

The physical type of the Habitants of today suggestive as it is of the
peasants of the interior of Brittany finds confirmative evidence in
their subserviency to the church.

Throughout the French period the population consisted to a marked
extent of soldiers, traders, administrators, priests, and others
who did not bring their families with them. Efforts of the French
Government to encourage family life were not always either well
directed or successful. Colbert hoped for a large French population in
Canada by intermarriage with the Indians. Administrative regulations
penalized bachelors, who, for instance, were refused licenses to enter
the fur trade, which was the main source of wealth in the country at
that time.

Many of these restrictions were directed by the priests, doubtless
not so much for eugenic reasons as with the motive of protecting the
morals of the young men by giving them wives. At an early date the
colony fell under the domination of the Jesuits, and maintained for a
long time a religious tone that in its own way was much more stern and
uncompromising than that of the Puritan settlements in New England.
Much of the wealth and effort that might have gone to strengthen the
colony was sunk in sterile monastic foundations. Even today stone
churches are a conspicuous feature of the landscape in the midst of
poverty-stricken villages.

At one time there was for some years a directed migration of young
women from France, sent out to become the wives of the colonists and
early in the history of the country a policy of bonuses for marriage,
and for large families, which has been repeated at intervals ever
since, was introduced. None the less, the colony grew but slowly and to
the failure to establish it on a sound biological foundation is due the
collapse of French rule.

In 1665 the first census showed a population of 3215. In the next
hundred years this had increased to somewhat more than 70,000, with
an additional 20,000 in what are now the Maritime Provinces. That the
French could maintain the contest for so long against British neighbors
who outnumbered them twenty to one is to their credit, but their lack
of recognition that their settlement could not be permanent unless
based on a real migration of families ultimately cost them the country.

One of the chief causes of the failure of French Canada to expand
beyond the narrow limits of the banks of the Saint Lawrence River,
during its first century of existence, was an obscure skirmish which
occurred on the west side of Lake Champlain in 1609. Champlain was
advancing toward the South in company with Canadian Algonquins, when he
encountered a war party of the Mohawks. In the fighting that followed,
some Mohawks were killed and captured. At that time and in that place
began the bitter enmity of the Iroquois Five Nations and the Canadian
French. It was a feud that was never allowed to rest and yearly war
parties of Mohawks went north along Lake Champlain and the Richelieu
River and devastated the lower portion of Quebec Province. At the
same time war parties of the Senecas descended the Saint Lawrence and
attacked the French from the West. As long as the power of the Iroquois
lasted, which was all through the seventeenth century, they devastated
a large part of New France.

[Illustration: DOMINION OF CANADA & NEWFOUNDLAND]

In the meantime, the Dutch and English were growing up in security to
the South and East. Thus Champlain's skirmish with the Iroquois was
the factor that delayed the expansion of France into the region of the
Great Lakes and down the Mississippi Valley until relatively late in
the eighteenth century.

The French population still centers in Quebec Province, long known as
Lower Canada, but it has spread to other parts of the continent both
south and west of the Quebec boundary. Their expansion in Canada has
been into the neighboring provinces. Emigration to New England began in
the eighteenth century but was not considerable until the nineteenth
century.

While this French-Canadian population has remained so fecund as to
furnish a stock example for every writer, it, too, has felt the trend
of the times. For a long time the government of Quebec offered a grant
of one hundred acres of land to every man who was the father of twelve
living children by one wife. In less than a single year over 3000 heads
of families availed themselves of this privilege and in 1907 there
was published a list of 7000 families having at least twelve living
children.

In spite of this fecundity, the birthrate has been declining for almost
the whole of the historical period. Two hundred and fifty years ago the
average for all women of child-bearing age in Quebec Province was one
child every two and one-half years. By 1850 this ratio had decreased to
one in five years. At present it is one in seven and one-half years.
Under this method of measurement, the rate of natural increase per head
is only one-third of what it was in colonial times. Even the Roman
Catholic "Habitant," therefore, has felt the effect of the general
decline of birthrate throughout the western world in the period since
the beginning of the industrial revolution.

From the beginning of the nineteenth century there was a small but
steady immigration from the British Isles into Upper Canada, though
interrupted by the Napoleonic Wars. After the close of that conflict a
larger movement of population took place, which brought in an extensive
English population. Theretofore most of the arrivals had been Scotch or
Americans, so that a visitor in 1810 commented on the fact that he met
"scarcely any English and few Irish."

In 1815 the government began to assist immigrants by giving free
passage and a grant of one hundred acres of land after arrival with
a promise of free rations for the first six or eight months and a
like amount of land to each male child on his reaching the age of
twenty-one. A wise restriction required a deposit of a little less
than one hundred dollars by the immigrant, to be returned to him after
two years if he had complied with the terms of the contract on his
behalf. These provisions were availed of mainly by Scotchmen going to
Ontario. The scheme, however, had the advantage for our present purpose
of establishing for the first time records of immigration, which
thenceforth can be traced in detail.

In 1819 the emigration from British ports to Canada was in excess of
20,000, and continued for years at about this rate in spite of the
booms which Australia and New Zealand were enjoying at the same time.
There was a substantial movement of emigration toward Canada in the
years 1830-34. In the nine years preceding 1837, more than a quarter of
a million emigrants from the British Isles arrived at Quebec on their
way westward, more than 50,000 of them in a single year.

Primogeniture in England has been a powerful factor in building up the
British Commonwealth. The oldest son of a landed family inherited the
estate and the titles, if any, and stayed at home. The younger sons,
left to shift for themselves, were ready to emigrate. The colonies have
thus received a great many more settlers of first-class ability than
would otherwise have been the case. At the same time, the perpetuation
of family continuity, through the preservation of the ancestral home
intact, has been a strong psychological factor in maintaining a
vigorous family life in the upper classes of Great Britain.

By 1840 the population of Canada was approximately a million and a
half. During the next generation nearly a million more immigrants
arrived from British ports--the great Irish migration changing the
racial character of this movement markedly from about 1845. Prior to
that time the newcomers were pre-dominantly English, with Wiltshire and
Yorkshire largely represented. When the potato famine caused the Irish
to seek refuge elsewhere, they naturally turned their steps to England,
as the most easily and cheaply accessible of havens. Great Britain
could absorb only a limited part of these and began to direct them to
Canada, which, indeed, they preferred to the United States because the
Catholic Church was strong there.

The emigrants were weak and in 1849 one-sixth of those who started
are said to have died on the voyage. The number of Irish who left the
United Kingdom in that year was 215,000, of whom nearly half were bound
for Quebec. Canada became alarmed at being made the dumping ground of
an enfeebled and destitute population so much in excess of its capacity
to absorb, and, by increased taxes and other means, slowed down this
immigration, which then headed toward the United States. Thereafter
many of the Irish who had already gone to Canada moved on down into the
Union, so that in the end Canada received a smaller part of the Irish
Catholic migration than might be thought.

The census of 1871 furnishes a convenient point at which to take
a review of the population. It then totalled 3,485,761 in the four
original provinces (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia).
British and French together, in the ratio of two to one, made up 92 per
cent. The only foreign element which contributed as much as 1 per cent
of the whole was the German, numbering more than 200,000 people, or 5.8
per cent.

The French Habitants have always formed a somewhat indigestible mass,
but half a century of struggle had resulted in a workable system of
government and compromise in the administrative life of the country.
The dominant element was the British, and save for the great mass of
French there was no large foreign block to menace the country's unity.

In sharp contrast to the settlement of the West of the United States,
the occupation of the prairie and mountain provinces of Canada has
been marked by law and order. In our West, especially in the mining
districts, law was largely disregarded and its place taken by private
justice, administered by individuals.

In Canada the Mounted Police have played a most efficient rôle in
controlling both the settlers and the Indians. At the time of the
Klondike rush in 1898, when hordes of gold seekers scrambled over the
passes to the head waters of the Yukon, a handful of Mounted Police
maintained a discipline for which the Americans themselves were very
grateful. In the same way the administration of the mining laws of the
Klondike, which is in Canadian territory, was admired and envied by the
Americans there.

The Canadian treatment of the Indians in the western provinces was
also marked by an absence of the bloody wars which characterized our
westward advance. The only uprising against the Whites was the Riel
Rebellion in Manitoba, in 1869, which was by the half-breeds rather
than by the Indians and which had special underlying causes. All this
has been accomplished without the Whites in any way fraternizing with
the Indians.

During the French period, the Canadian Indians always sided with the
French against the English, because under the influence of the Catholic
priests, the French Indian half-breed was regarded as a Frenchman and,
as a result, influenced his mother's people in favor of the ruling race.

There were plenty of offspring of white frontiersmen and Indian squaws
all along our frontier, but these half breeds were everywhere kicked
out and despised as Indians. This attitude toward the lower race has
always characterized our American frontier and while very unpopular
with the natives, has served to keep the White race unmixed, in sharp
contrast to the French and Spanish colonies.

Canada still has more than 100,000 Indians, four times as many in
proportion to the whole population, as in the United States.

       *       *       *       *       *

Newfoundland, for geographical reasons, even though it has politically
no relation to Canada, is the most convenient starting point in
reviewing in more detail the subdivisions of the country.

Larger than Ireland, the island claims to be the "senior colony" of
the British Commonwealth. John Cabot, a Genoese, sailing from Bristol,
discovered it in 1497, according to the traditional account, and
took possession of it in the name of Henry VII. Within a few years
fishermen, not merely English but French, Spanish, Portuguese, and
Basque, were landing there to dry and cure the enormous quantities of
cod caught on the Great Banks, which still form the principal wealth of
the colony. In fact, some writers believe that the island may have been
discovered long before the time of Columbus, by fishermen. At any rate,
the effective occupation, though scarcely the continuous settlement of
Newfoundland, long antedated the colonization of Virginia and many of
the original English residents came from Devonshire.

The aboriginal inhabitants, the Beothics, disappeared half a century
ago. They were probably Eskimos, or closely related to them, and are
sometimes spoken of as "Red" Indians, in contrast to the "Black"
Indians, the Micmacs, who have recently immigrated in small numbers
from New Brunswick.

Newfoundland has nearly a quarter of a million inhabitants, but its
backward stage of development still makes it little known to the
outside world.

On the mainland a long strip of the Atlantic Coast and a large triangle
of land behind it are attached to Newfoundland administratively, under
the name of Labrador. Because of its scanty population it may well be
disregarded in the present discussion.

       *       *       *       *       *

Nova Scotia during Colonial days was almost a New England colony. It
was known to the French as "Acadie" and was ceded to England in 1713.

Interposed between New England and French Canada, Acadia suffered
heavily from the warfare that went on between the two regions.
The existence of a large French population was always a source of
irritation, and of danger, to the English. Finally in 1758 the French
were cleared out, about 6000 of them being distributed throughout the
English colonies, and the remainder escaping to Canada. Those who came
to the thirteen colonies suffered hardships, but on the whole were more
humanely treated than were those who fled to their co-religionists in
Quebec Province. The place of the exiled Acadians[15] was largely taken
by New England emigrants.

The American population of Nova Scotia was further greatly augmented
at the time of the Revolution by an influx of Loyalists. These came
in such numbers as to disturb the colony seriously, but formed an
invaluable addition of the best sort of British stock. This general
trend has continued so that, even in 1921, of the foreign-born
population of Nova Scotia, that which originated in the United States
was twice as large as all the rest of the foreign-born population put
together.

The Scotch immigration which has exercised such an important influence
on the eastern counties of Nova Scotia began about 1760 with the
arrival of Scots and Ulster Scots. In 1772 a contingent of Highlanders
direct from Scotland took up land alongside an American group from
Philadelphia. From then on until about 1820, a steady stream of
Highlanders came into the region; Gaelic is still spoken in parts
of the colony. Nova Scotia with the other Maritime Provinces still
represents the most purely British of all the Canadian provinces, and
as shown, an important part of its population came to it through the
United States.

       *       *       *       *       *

New Brunswick was established on August 16, 1784, out of a part of
ancient Acadia. It also received an important number of Loyalists
at the time of the Revolution--indeed it might be said to owe its
existence to the arrival of some 10,000 expatriates from the United
States. But the bulk of the population is Scottish with a strong
Highland contingent. There are few foreign-born other than a small
element from the United States.

       *       *       *       *       *

Prince Edward Island is similar as to its population and is the most
purely "native" of all, only one in each one hundred in this province
being foreign-born. The Roman Catholics there include a considerable
number of Scotch Highlanders and number nearly a half of the population.

       *       *       *       *       *

Quebec is still the stronghold of the French-Canadians, more than
half of whom are unable to speak the English language. The French
stock still numbers one-fourth of the entire population of the entire
Dominion of Canada. On the northern frontier of Quebec there was some
mixture with the Indians, but the half-breeds are probably not numerous
enough to form a substantial part of the old population. In addition to
their great movement to New England the French-Canadians have spread
into Ontario, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island to some extent.

The French-Canadian stock is the most highly inbred of any of the
large groups of the New World. It is based on original immigrants who
numbered a good many less than 10,000. In the course of three centuries
this nucleus has multiplied to 3,000,000, with virtually no additions
of fresh arrivals from abroad. They have lived a New World life longer
than have most of the Whites of the Western Hemisphere, and must be
put in a class by themselves. They are not French, in spite of their
language--an archaic speech at which the true Frenchman laughs. In
every way they differ from the present-day French, more indeed than
New Englanders of Colonial descent now differ from the present-day
Englishman. From the cradle to the grave they are surrounded by the
influence of the Roman Catholic Church to an extent almost as unknown
to the present-day French as it is to the present-day Americans. Of
late years not only those who have come to New England, but some of
those living in Quebec Province have shown a disposition to break away
from the church because of its heavy and inexorable taxation.

The French-Canadians, in Quebec and the neighboring provinces, were, to
an extent, disloyal to the British Empire in the Great War. Under the
influence of their priests they resisted the draft in several instances
and there was bloodshed in Quebec on this account. As has been said
elsewhere, these Frenchmen would not fight for the British Empire,
which had guaranteed them extraordinary privileges as to their language
and religion, nor would they fight for France, which they claimed as
motherland, but which they now regarded as atheistic. Neither would
they fight for Belgium, which is pretty nearly as clerical as they are.
In short, their conduct during the World War was contemptible and in
sharp contrast to the militant and effective patriotism of the more
westerly provinces of Canada.

       *       *       *       *       *

Ontario, called Upper Canada in distinction to French-speaking Lower
Canada, received its first important population from the United
States when Loyalist refugees, including many Highland Scots, mainly
from northern and western New York, settled there and became known
as the United Empire Loyalists. Among these immigrants, were the
disbanded frontier regiments which had been organized by Sir John
Johnson, including abundant Macdonalds from Glengarry and Inverness,
together with Camerons, Chisholms, Fergusons, MacIntyres, Russells, and
Hamiltons, who opened up the region constituting the present counties
of Glengarry, Stormont, and Dundas.

In 1785, almost the entire parish of Knoydart, Glengarry, emigrated
direct from Scotland and settled in a body in Upper Canada. In 1793 a
contingent from Glenelg settled at Kirkhill. In 1799 came many Camerons
from Lochiel, and in 1803 another delegation of Macdonalds arrived,
with more people from Glenelg and Kintail. Thus Ontario, which in 1791
was set off from (French) Lower Canada and given its own government
under the name of Upper Canada, became almost as much entitled to
consider itself a "Nova Scotia," as did the Maritime Province of that
name.

At the end of the American Revolution, Upper Canada was supposed not
to contain as many as 10,000 inhabitants. By 1811 it had 83,000 and
by 1817 it was estimated to have 134,000. While many Irish came at a
somewhat later period, most of these eventually went on to the United
States.

The interference with British immigration caused by the Napoleonic
wars led to Upper Canada's offering special attraction to settlers
from the United States. The lack of sympathy of these with the British
Government during the War of 1812 was an embarrassment to Canada, just
as the loyalty of the United Empire group, which prevented Canada from
being conquered by the United States, was in turn a serious annoyance
to the American Government.

The later settlement of Ontario was largely from Scotland and the
northern English counties, and was pre-dominantly Presbyterian. There
were enough Ulster Scots to make it an active center of the American
Protective Association of forty years ago and it is definitely, at the
present time, a Nordic territory.

During the present century it has received thousands of Austrians,
Poles, and Italians, who introduced racial elements not easily
assimilated.

       *       *       *       *       *

Manitoba began to be settled shortly after the War of 1812, when Lord
Selkirk established his Red River Colony. The Scotch Highlanders,
Swiss, and others whom he planted there did not prosper, and many of
them eventually drifted down into the United States, taking an active
part in the formation of Minnesota. Around this nucleus, however,
there gradually grew an incongruous and isolated settlement made up
of three elements that had almost nothing in common; the Scotch, the
French-Canadians, and the half-breeds. In 1849 the Red River Settlement
was credited with 5391 people. With the establishment of steam
navigation on the Red River, and the official creation of Winnipeg,
both of which occurred in 1862, development began on a larger scale.

A provisional government was given to the territory in 1869, and from
time to time land was generously allotted to the early white settlers,
to the half-breeds, and to the Hudson's Bay Company. Thereafter the
province grew slowly, from the natural increase of its founders and
from a Nordic migration from Ontario and from the neighboring parts of
the United States, until the mixed European immigration of the last
half-century changed somewhat the character of the population. These
latter now account for one-third of the whole.

The proportion of these non-Nordic Europeans, from southern or central
Europe, is three times as great as the European immigration from either
northern or western Europe. If this immigration continues in like
proportions, Manitoba, like the other prairie provinces, is in danger
of being lost to the Nordics.

       *       *       *       *       *

Saskatchewan has a larger American-born population than Manitoba, one
resident in every eight having first seen the light of day under the
American flag. But it has a still larger recent European immigration
amounting to nearly 40 per cent of the total population of the
province. A bare half of the people of Saskatchewan are of British
origin.

       *       *       *       *       *

Alberta has both a somewhat smaller European element and the largest
American-born contingent of any of the provinces, amounting to one in
six. Many English of a fine type have settled there.

       *       *       *       *       *

In all the Prairie Provinces the French-Canadian represents scarcely
more than one in twenty of the population.

       *       *       *       *       *

British Columbia has prided itself with justice on its British origin,
and is exceeded in this respect only by the Maritime Provinces. Of its
European immigrants (one in eleven of the whole), approximately equal
numbers are Nordics from northern or western Europe, and Alpines or
Mediterraneans from southeastern and central Europe. During the World
War its young men showed great attachment to the mother country, and
the loss from death was correspondingly great. Because of its great
distance from the ports of entry, it was long avoided by immigrants.
Not until about 1907 did it begin to get its fair share. Since then, it
has held its own, about half of its new arrivals however coming from
the United States.

The province also has its Asiatic problem, which has been the source
of hard feeling on several occasions. One of the great hindrances to
its more rapid development was shortage of labor, and it was natural
that the Orient, which could reach British Columbia more easily and
cheaply than could either Europe or even the Atlantic provinces of
Canada itself, should be called upon to meet the need. Chinese soon
began to enter, until stopped by a head tax of $500. Japanese came in
considerable numbers, not merely in the fisheries but for day labor in
railway construction. Some 6000 Hindus likewise found their way there.
Orientals now amount to one in every seven of the total population.
There is a real Asiatic question here and the Whites are beginning to
look to the United States for protection.

       *       *       *       *       *

Canada's immense arctic area, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories,
may be neglected in this discussion because of the lack of population.
Those who see in the mosquito-infested tundra of "The Land of Little
Sticks," with its months of winter darkness, a future populous area of
agricultural and livestock industry are destined to wait long for the
realization of their dream.

       *       *       *       *       *

So far as the British element in Canada is concerned, it has been
pointed out above in several places that the country is to a certain
extent an offspring of the United States. This contribution has
continued up to the present time. During the 1880's there was another
great period of migration from the Union to the Dominion. At that time
nearly twice as many entered Canada from this country as from Great
Britain, and six times as many as from the continent of Europe.

Not all of these Americans were of the old native stock. It has been
calculated that at least half of this contingent was of British
extraction, the other half being made up of various European
nationalities who, after becoming acclimated to the New World in the
United States, passed on to Canadian soil. Thus the contribution from
the United States during that period did not represent a purely Nordic
accession.

The 1890's represented a period of British immigration. But, with
the turn of the century, Canada began to share in the great influx
of miscellaneous peoples who were already deluging the shores of the
United States. During the first twelve years of the twentieth century,
Canada received 2,000,000 people, of whom 800,000 were British. About
700,000 others came from the United States, but more than a third of
these are calculated to have been Continental arrivals who merely
passed through the United States for convenience. In 1901 there were in
Canada some 650,000 of "foreign stock"--that is, of neither British nor
French origin. In 1921 there were more than twice as many. Since the
beginning of the century Canada has acquired more than 100,000 Jews.

After the World War the Empire Settlement Act began to make itself
felt, reducing markedly the proportion of immigrants from the United
States into Canada while from 1900 onward Ireland began to figure
heavily in the immigration statistics.

In 1930 there were, on the other hand, over 1,200,000 Canadian-born,
both of British and French stock, in the United States and during the
preceding eight years 300,000 had returned to Canada.

Not only have the western provinces, then, been thrown violently into
a disequilibrium by the population changes of the last generation, but
the stability of the whole Dominion has been menaced. Canada, like the
United States, has taken on a great liability in the admission of the
hundreds of thousands of non-Nordics, who will be hard to assimilate,
even if it be assumed that they would become valuable when assimilated,
which is by no means always the case. One of Canada's advantages, on
the other hand, is the negligible proportion of Negroes, and it might
well erect barriers even now against them, as it has already done
against the Asiatics.

With its immense territory and more than 10,000,000 inhabitants, Canada
is still to be credited to the Nordics, though, if the population
trends that began with this century should continue, the balance would
change rapidly. While the United States has contributed by far the
largest number of foreign-born, Russia has contributed the second
largest number of immigrants, Saskatchewan receiving more of these than
any other province. Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba have received about
equal numbers, in each case one-third less than went to Saskatchewan.
Those of Austrian birth, who are third in the list, are concentrated in
the two provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in about equal numbers,
each of these provinces having almost twice as many Austrian-born as
Alberta or Ontario. The Chinese stand fourth in numbers among the
foreign-born of the Dominion, but most of them are concentrated in
British Columbia. Ontario has almost as many Italians as all the rest
of Canada put together, and it has also the largest number of Poles.

Because of the great body of French-Canadians, the Roman Catholic
Church is proportionately twice as strong as in the United States.

The 1921 census showed the population to be made up as follows:

                 PER CENT
 British origin    55.40
 French            27.91
 Other European    14.16
 Indian             1.26
 Asiatic             .75

This computation distributes the immigrants from the United States
according to their racial stock; thus the main part would be classified
with those of British origin, a smaller part as "other European," and
so on.

From the foregoing it is evident that Canada is now less than 60 per
cent Nordic--probably less Nordic than the United States.

Canada has been the great obstacle to extending the American
immigration quotas to the countries of the Western Hemisphere. The
majority of its inhabitants are our own kinsmen, many of whom have
already contributed elements of great value to our population. Others
would be most welcome if they chose to come.

Our nation has been unwilling to put the slightest restriction on
Canadian immigration, by applying a quota; and it was thought it would
be invidious and discriminatory to apply a quota to the countries south
of us, and not to the one to the north. That difficulty will have to be
met firmly in the near future. One proposed solution has been to admit
from Canada only those whose mother tongue is English.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 15: Acadie in the Micmac language means "place." Henry
Wadsworth Longfellow's pathetic poem, "Evangeline," embodies the
anti-English sentiments of the early nineteenth century in New England
and is founded largely on an error of spelling, which made "Arcadia"
out of the Indian word. The expulsion of the French in 1758 was by
Bostonians under Colonel John Winslow, and was justified by the refusal
of the French to accept loyally the rule of the English.]



XVII

OUR NEIGHBORS ON THE SOUTH


Unlike Canada on our north, the countries south of the Rio Grande have
been relatively little influenced by Nordic culture, to say nothing
of anything resembling a Nordic conquest. The outlying territories of
Mexico which were annexed to the United States were nearly empty lands
and present Mexican influences in the Southwest are matters of more
recent date.

Latin America is one of the major divisions of the World, and from the
present point of view should no more be discussed as a unit than could
Europe or Asia. Its original population represents one of the great
racial divisions of mankind. Its twenty different nations now speak
several different languages, and embrace representatives of all the
important races of both hemispheres.

The general area gets such unity as it possesses from the Latin and
Roman Catholic aspect of its culture as contrasted with the Protestant,
Anglo-Saxon culture of America north of the Mexican border. This Latin
civilization was originally Spanish (in Brazil Portuguese), but since
the era of the revolutions which threw off the Spanish yoke, the
Spanish influence has become more and more negligible, and locally has
been somewhat supplanted by the French, and, to a small extent, by the
Italian influence.

Latin America was never colonized at all in the sense that North
America was colonized. English settlers with their families came to the
New World to found homes, but the early history of Latin America was
that of a series of plundering and proselyting expeditions, and such of
the adventurers as tarried were usually men without families who had
no desire to stay a day longer than was necessary to acquire a fortune
and return to Europe. Add to these the military forces who came under
compulsion, and the missionaries, administrators, and concessionaires
of all kinds and one has the bulk of the early European immigration.

Under these circumstances the number of women who came with their
husbands was naturally small, and most of the Europeans took Indian
wives, frequently several of them, thus laying the basis for the
half-breed population of the present day. In Paraguay, for instance,
some of the colonial rulers are said to have had fifty or a hundred
native concubines. If every descendant of these matings carries the
Spanish name but has married mainly with Indian stock in the ten or
fifteen generations since, it is easy to understand that present-day
families may bear the names of hidalgos, of whose genetic traits they
have virtually none.

The number of European immigrants was never large. During the sixteenth
century, a period of active exploitation, the entire movement from
Spain to America is thought to have represented only about 1000 or 1500
persons a year. With a high death rate, and the disposition on their
part to return as soon as possible, there was no opportunity for the
Spaniard to establish the basis of a civilization built upon his own
race.

By 1553 foundling half-breeds numbered thousands in Spanish America
and the viceroy Mendoza was obliged to establish an orphan school for
them. Even at the end of the eighteenth century, when Humboldt visited
Mexico City, he remarked that of the European-born Spaniards there, not
one-tenth were women. The proportion of women must certainly have been
still smaller in the provincial towns and on the frontiers.

So far as the present population goes back to the early days of Spanish
dominion, it may be said to be Spanish by name and Indian by blood. The
families, which in many Spanish American countries have social prestige
because of descent from the conquerors and rulers of the Colonial
Period, must therefore attach all importance to the family name, and
little or none to the many other lines of descent which have entered
into the composition of their present generation.

Honorable exception should be made in almost every one of the Spanish
American republics of a small group of Whites that has consistently
maintained its racial integrity and upheld intelligent ideals of racial
progress, under most difficult conditions. In many of the countries,
too, there are groups of far-seeing intellectuals who are working
for the adoption of wise immigration policies, presenting sound and
constructive measures of eugenic reform, and striving to awaken their
fellow countrymen to the fact that a nation's capital is, in the last
analysis, biological, and that permanent and satisfactory progress is
possible only to a people with a healthy family life.

In many of the Latin American countries the Whites, or those who pass
as such (for they have, in most cases, a large proportion of Indian
blood) form an oligarchy or ruling caste occupying the higher positions
in the political and ecclesiastical worlds. They also constitute the
land-owning and professional classes, while commerce and industry are
largely in the hands of foreigners or their descendants. In many cases
these foreign immigrants marry into the best native families, and thus
their children become a part of the ruling caste.

       *       *       *       *       *

Mexico. The restriction of European immigration into the United
States under the National Origins Quota cutting off what had been the
principal source of unskilled labor had an unexpected and undesirable
effect in encouraging immigration from nearby countries of the Western
Hemisphere, which were not under the quota, and particularly from
Mexico. Industries accustomed to depend upon cheap, ignorant, and
docile workers from Mediterranean or Alpine countries turned to the
illiterate Indians on the South as a ready substitute. The stream of
arrivals across the border, more illegal than legal, soon brought into
the United States more than a million Mexicans. Only the unexpected
depression beginning in 1929 stemmed this tide and apparently prevented
Mexico from reconquering peacefully, by an immigrant invasion, the
territory it had lost by the decision of war in 1848.

Since the sixteen million residents of Mexico are the nearest large
body of people in a position to supply immigrants to the United States
and ready to do so, a study of their composition is of the highest
importance at the present time. Mexico at the time of the Spanish
Conquest had seen the rise and fall of several relatively high native
civilizations, and that of the Aztecs, which was destroyed by the
Spaniards, had many noteworthy features. The combination of brutality
and piety which dominated the conquerors led to the extermination as
far as possible of every salient feature of the native culture. The
country was, thereafter, exploited ruthlessly by the Spaniards, but the
Spanish civilization, such as it was, did not succeed in establishing
itself in this foreign soil. The history of the last four centuries
has been a history of the gradual absorption of the foreigners by the
Indian element. This is true alike of race and culture.

[Illustration: MEXICO CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST INDIES]

The large native population found here by the Spaniards was quickly
reduced in numbers. A Spanish priest enumerates ten plagues which had
decimated the people during his time, that is, during the first
quarter of a century after the conquest. First the smallpox, brought
by a Negro in one of Narvaez' ships. It is said to have destroyed more
than half of the people in many of the provinces. The others were: the
slaughter in the capture of Mexico City, the famine resulting from
the widespread warfare; the abuses of overseers of the towns given in
vassalage; the heavy tributes; the tremendous abuses in connection
with the mines; the reconstruction of Mexico City by forced labor;
the traffic in branded slaves; the abuses of transportation, with
Indians as human beasts of burden; and the factional warfare among
the Spaniards themselves, in which the Indians bore the brunt of the
fighting. To these should be added particularly the other infectious
diseases that the Spaniards introduced, such as tuberculosis and
syphilis, as to which the aboriginal inhabitants had not the slightest
immunity or resistance, through previous racial experience.

Under such conditions the native population of the hemisphere was
probably reduced by 50 or 75 per cent in a few generations, and in
the West Indies it was exterminated. Since then it has been steadily
regaining ground on the mainland, though not in the islands, in many of
which the Negro has replaced it.

The number of Spaniards who came at any time to Mexico is placed at
300,000 at the outside. Many of these certainly did not remain in the
country and few of them brought their families. Under the conditions
that existed in Mexico and the other conquered territories, it was
universally recognized that the situation was not suitable for a white
woman. While the Spanish Government encouraged men to take their wives
out from Spain, few of them cared to do so, and probably most of the
men who came to the colonies were unmarried. Spain put insuperable
difficulties in the way of unmarried women who wanted to emigrate,
so that Spanish women throughout the history of Mexico were few. The
resulting population is therefore made up of the offspring of the
Indians and of a few Spanish men mated to Indian women. Most of the
Mexican population is still pure or nearly pure Indian. There is a
considerable hybrid element which does most of the talking, and a
negligible element that can be considered white in the strict sense of
the term.

Mexican statistics commonly designate about 10 per cent of the
population as white. But most of these have much Indian blood, and
recent students doubt whether 3 per cent are properly to be described
as white. Much of this genuine white element is in Mexico City, though
the various states have their local and reputable white aristocracies,
of which that in Yucatan is conspicuous for the maintenance of high
standards of racial integrity.

The Mexican revolution which began in 1810 dislodged the overseas
Spanish and substituted exploitation by the local hybrid group. Since
then the general trend has been toward the rise to control of the
Indians. The last period of revolution, which began in 1910 and may
be said to be still in progress, has been marked by attempts to take
away from the hybrid oligarchy the immense land properties which it had
obtained and to distribute them to the Indians. While this has met with
many difficulties, and has been realized only to a small extent, it has
been at least the avowed objective of most of the revolutionists in the
past two or three decades.

During recent years there has been a glorification of the Mexican
Indian and his culture by North American writers. No doubt the Mexican
Indian is well suited to his environment, and his traditional habits
are well suited to him. This does not mean, however, that either has
any important contribution to make to the United States which would be
realized by a northward mass migration of agricultural and industrial
serfs. On the contrary, the Mexican immigration to the United States,
which is made up overwhelmingly of the poorer Indian element, has
brought nothing but disadvantages. It has created, particularly in the
Southwestern States, an exploited peasant class unconformable with
the principles of American civilization. This population, neither
physically nor mentally up to the prevailing standards, is producing a
large contribution to the future American race, since every one of its
numerous children born in the States becomes an American citizen by
birth.

Tests made in the schools of southern California, in which the language
handicap was discounted as far as possible, indicate that the average
Mexican child was about as far below the average Negro child in
abstract intellect as the average Negro child was below the average
white child.

Physically, the race is conspicuous by its low resistance to
tuberculosis, which has exterminated so large a part of the native
population of the Western Hemisphere during the last four centuries.
The New World had not been subject to tuberculosis and therefore
offered a fertile field for the germs of this disease. The population
of the Old World had been ravaged by it for many centuries, and in each
generation the low resistants had been killed off so that a more immune
stock had been gradually produced by natural selection.

Such studies as have been made in the Southwestern States indicate
that the average Mexican family is at least half again as large as
the average white family. Thus there is every reason to expect that,
without a sharp limitation of such immigration, the Southwest will
become more and more Mexicanized.

By 1928 Los Angeles County had more than a quarter of a million
Mexicans, and the City of Los Angeles had the largest Mexican
population of any city in the world, with the exception of Mexico
City. Whole industries and whole agricultural areas had come to
think themselves largely dependent on Mexican labor, while millions
of American citizens were out of employment in every State of the
Union. The dependence of agriculture in the Southwestern States on
cheap Mexican labor, largely of a migratory nature, is particularly
disastrous from a racial point of view, since the maintenance of
American civilization depends largely on the maintenance of a healthy
and prosperous farm population.

[Illustration: DISTRIBUTION OF MEXICANS

  _The figures represent distribution of Mexicans by states per 100000
  of population in 1930_

Distribution of Mexicans by States. Except in the border States
Mexicans are chiefly concentrated in large urban centers.]

Nearly all of the Mexicans who came to the United States were seeking
to better themselves economically and to avoid the murder and plunder
that had been going on in their country for a score of years under
the guise of revolution. Most of them intended to return home as soon
as conditions became more satisfactory, but as conditions from year
to year failed to improve, the Mexican population tended to become a
permanent one. At the same time few of the Mexicans became American
citizens, and in every community where they settled in racial groups
there were unsatisfactory standards of education and sanitation.

Most of the Mexicans come with their families, thereby differing
markedly from some of the other foreign groups, as the Bulgarians,
Greeks, Spanish, and Filipinos, which consist mainly of unmarried men.
These latter either return home after making money, or else intermarry
with the other immigrant groups. The Mexican community, on the other
hand, perpetuates itself and increases without much intermarriage with
the other population.

Since the depression beginning in 1929 there has been a repatriation of
a portion of the Mexican immigration of unknown size but undoubtedly
considerable. Lack of work has led many to go home where they can live
more economically and be among friends, and at the same time American
authorities began to offer free transportation back to Mexico for
those dependent on public charity, and willing to leave. Thus trainload
after trainload returned, and at the same time a tightening of the
immigration restrictions and procedures on the border cut down the flow
of immigrants to almost nothing.

While the census of 1930 counted nearly a million and a half Mexicans
in the United States, it is probable that the number has since then
diminished, and it is of highest importance that it should not be
allowed to increase. The Mexican Indian has no racial qualities to
contribute to the United States population that are now needed, and
if he has any cultural contribution to make it will not be made by
the immigration of hundreds of thousands of illiterate and destitute
laborers.

       *       *       *       *       *

Guatemala. More than half of the population of Guatemala is still pure
Indian, and the half breed class which plays such an important part in
Mexico and other countries is relatively less conspicuous there. The
inconsiderable white population is made up in part of the descendants
of old Spanish families and in part from more recent immigrants,
especially Germans.

The proportion of Teutonic names among the rulers of Guatemala during
the last generation has been growing steadily. With two million
population Guatemala is the most powerful of the Central American
countries, but the Indians tend to be little more than a subject race
exploited by others, and the general progress of the country is
therefore in some ways slow.

       *       *       *       *       *

Honduras suffers partly from its tropical situation but still more
from the mixture of races, and the large amount of Negro blood in
the population of the lowlands. By contrast with Guatemala the
Indian element is here unimportant, and the people are Negroes and
half-breeds, or a little of each. With its 600,000 population largely
of mongrel origin, the Republic has been a backward member of the
Central American group throughout most of its history. British Honduras
is an unimportant area with much the same characteristics. The
so-called Caribs along the coast are now scarcely distinguishable from
pure Negroes.

       *       *       *       *       *

Salvador. Smaller than the State of New Jersey, Salvador has an
importance out of proportion to its size because of the dense
population and large amount of cultivable land together with a smaller
amount of Negro mixture than in the adjoining Republics. With a
population estimated at a million and a half (such a thing as a real
census is almost unknown in Latin American countries), its people are
largely of mixed blood with the Indian predominating, but the number of
pure-blooded Indians is not large compared with Guatemala.

       *       *       *       *       *

Nicaragua, a synonym for turbulence in the minds of Americans, has also
a population of highly mixed character. The Indians did not remain a
distinct group as in Guatemala, nor were they largely exterminated as
in Costa Rica. They were absorbed into a half-breed population of more
than 600,000 which has also in the lowlands a large Negro admixture.

The upper classes of more or less remote European ancestry have
maintained a semi-feudal political dominance that has been disastrous
to the welfare of the country, and it is doubtful whether the Yankee
influence, which during the last generation has been stronger in
Nicaragua than in any of the other Latin American states except Panama,
has been particularly useful.

       *       *       *       *       *

Costa Rica has always prided itself on being the whitest of the Central
American Republics, and its history of relative peace and prosperity
reflects this fact. Apart from a fringe of Indians and Negroes in
the lowlands, the population of nearly 500,000 is concentrated in a
beautiful and healthful inland region. The Indians of the country
having been driven out or destroyed at an early day, the settlers of
Costa Rica were unable to live as parasites exploiting serfs as did the
upper classes in some of the other Central American countries, but were
forced to settle on the land and work out their own salvation. While
they were therefore considered in colonial days to be in a pitiable
situation, the result was highly advantageous in the long run, for it
has given the country a more nearly genuine population of citizens
prepared to contribute to the progress and welfare of the country.

A large part of the Spanish blood in Costa Rica is supposed to be
Galician, and therefore to have a considerable Nordic infusion. The
Gallegos, as natives of this part of the Iberian Peninsula are called,
are one of the most law-abiding and hard-working of the numerous
peoples that comprise the Spanish Republic, and their descendants in
Costa Rica reflect credit on their origin. In most of the other Latin
American countries the Spanish element is supposed to be largely from
Andalusia and therefore quite different in make-up, with a noteworthy
Moorish element.

       *       *       *       *       *

Panama with its hybrid population of half a million, largely Negro in
composition, is unimportant in the picture of Latin America. North
American influence has transformed it economically, but cannot change
mongrels into a sound and vigorous stock.

       *       *       *       *       *

Colombia has large numbers of Negroes in the hot lowlands, but the
bulk of the six million population is Indian with a slight infusion
of European blood. The upper class of Colombia represents the results
of geographical isolation, the region until recently having been
inaccessible; and by virtue of a sort of intellectual inbreeding it has
long been the most conservative and least touched by foreign influence
of all the Latin American "aristocracies." The upper-class Colombian
prides himself with reason on the purity of his Spanish blood, and
still lives to a large degree in the memories of the ancient colonial
period. In Bogotá there is an intense anti-Negro social sentiment. The
isolation of the half-breeds in Colombia has come nearer to producing a
new racial group than is to be found elsewhere in Latin America.

       *       *       *       *       *

Venezuela, in spite of its nearly three million inhabitants, is an
unimportant country, largely hybrid with extensive Negro infiltrations.
As in many other Latin American countries, the number of Whites is
officially put down as about 10 per cent, but as in most such instances
it is doubtful whether one resident in fifty can properly be called a
white man, except by courtesy.

       *       *       *       *       *

Guiana. The three Guianas, British, French, and Dutch, represent one of
the least attractive parts of South America in almost every way.

British Guiana has 300,000 inhabitants of whom one-third are Negroes,
another third Orientals, mostly Hindu, and the remainder is largely
made up of crosses between these two elements, of a few thousand native
Indians, and of a handful of Whites.

Dutch Guiana has a population well under a hundred thousand, largely
Orientals imported to furnish coolie labor and including Hindus,
Javanese, and Chinese. There are many Negroes and a couple of thousand
Whites.

[Illustration: SOUTH AMERICA]

French Guiana differs from the Dutch settlement mainly in being
smaller, its population being not much more than 30,000, including
many convicts or ex-convicts, for this has long been a French penal
settlement.

       *       *       *       *       *

Brazil with a territory larger than the continental United States
differs from its neighbors in many striking ways, apart from the fact
that it was settled by Portuguese, not Spanish, and that its language
and culture are therefore Portuguese rather than Spanish.

The Indian population was killed off or driven westward by the early
settlers just as in the United States, so that it is now confined
largely to the untracked and almost unpopulated forests of the
Amazonian Basin, where perhaps a couple of a million aborigines may
still exist.

To provide labor the Portuguese imported slaves from Africa, and
then fused with them to produce the present-day pre-dominantly Negro
population. The Portuguese here thus repeated the experience of the
mother country. During the great years of Portuguese exploration and
colonization in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries,
it has been estimated that a million Portuguese, mainly young men,
went to the tropics, and for the most part never came back. Negroes
were imported to take their places and to do the work of the country.
Intermarriage of these Negroes with the old population left Portugal
with a larger amount of Negro blood than any other European country,
and greatly impaired its ability to contribute to the progress of
civilization. Thus Portugal, which, when dominated by the Nordics, had
set an extraordinary example of progress in many ways, now contributes
relatively little to such progress and only the rebirth of a reasonable
pride of race, and the application of a sound eugenics program will
enable it to regain a position of leadership.

History has repeated itself in Brazil. The salvation of Brazil has been
the arrival during the past century of European immigrants. Thousands
of Germans poured into the Highlands of the Southern States where large
regions have an almost Teutonic civilization at the present time. If a
false interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine had not helped to interfere
with this process, the results for South America might have been most
beneficial.

But the main currents of immigration have been from Latin countries of
the Old World. During the past century Brazil has received more than
four million foreigners, of whom a million and a half were Italians,
a million and a quarter Portuguese, and half a million Spanish. Thus
more than three-fourths of the immigration has been from the Latin
countries, and only about a quarter of a million from Germany and
Austria. Since the World War this overwhelming migration from the Latin
countries has slowed down. The German migration has, on the contrary,
increased.

Brazil thus consists of two distinct areas: a relatively small,
fertile, and healthful highland region in the south, where the main
activities of the country are carried on largely under the influence
of Mediterranean and Alpine immigrants; and a huge tropical area given
over mainly to the Negro and Mulatto element and the Indians.

With a population of somewhere around 30,000,000 Brazil is not only the
largest of the South American republics, but nearly as large as all the
rest of them put together.

The future of Brazil depends largely on the nature of its immigration
policy during the next generation or two and on the acceptance of a
workable program of eugenics. Fortunately, no South American country
has taken up such a policy with more interest than has this great
republic. It still possesses an aristocracy which has maintained its
racial purity, but this is probably too small a nucleus alone to
regenerate the whole body politic.

       *       *       *       *       *

Uruguay. Crossing the boundary from Brazil to Uruguay, one sees a new
picture. Uruguay is almost entirely white. Indeed, this whole region
of La Plata is one of the future dominant areas of the New World. It
contains less Negro blood than does, relatively, the United States. Not
only have Negroes been largely kept out, but the remnants of Indian
tribes have become inconspicuous, as on the plains of the Mississippi
Valley, where the Indians, mere nomads with a negligible culture, were
driven back by the march of civilization. The striking parallel between
the settlement of this region and that of the Western States of North
America is often pointed out. Each was a sheep and cattle country, and
then farmers took up land and developed it into a region of prosperity
and great potentialities.

Uruguay has a cosmopolitan population almost wholly of European
origin. Since the World War it has attracted not only a large part of
the Spanish emigration but also large numbers of Italians, French,
Germans, and others. The earlier immigration was largely of North
Italians, mainly of Alpine blood with slight Nordic infusion. The total
population of the country is now well over a million and a half.

A wise selection of immigration from now on will still further increase
the influence of this small republic, and set a good example for all of
South America.

       *       *       *       *       *

Argentina represents one of the striking examples of a nation built up
rapidly by foreign immigration. Nearly 85 per cent of its people are
foreign-born or the descendants of recent immigration, with Italians
forming by far the largest group. Moreover, the Argentine Republic
has attracted the vigorous population of North Italy, which racially
is mainly Alpine but still has a Nordic element, and forms a striking
contrast to the population of South Italian and Sicilian immigrants
that have filled up the slums of North American cities. The North
Italians are more akin to the Swiss and the South Germans than they are
to the South Italians.

Non-whites do not amount to 5 per cent of the population. The total
population of something like 10,000,000 makes the Argentine Republic
second only to Brazil in size in South America, and in every respect,
except size, it easily takes first rank.

The racial composition of this extraordinary nation with its
ultra-modern civilization, and its get-rich-quick atmosphere, deserves
more extended treatment than can be given here. The English, though not
the most numerous, have taken the first place in its financial world.
French immigrants, though fewer in number, have become a very important
factor in the progress of its civilization. A hundred thousand Germans
have settled in the country and form the backbone of many regions.

Since the war Argentina has been one of the principal destinations of
citizens of the former Central Empires who were going overseas. The
spirit of the civilization has attracted many Jews. More than 160,000
immigrants during the last two generations are credited to Russia,
and almost an equal number to Turkey. These last, however, were Turks
only by force and were actually Christian Syrians from the Lebanon who
became so completely identified with the retail trade of the country
that the colloquial name for a small grocery store is "Turco."

All of these elements together do not begin to measure in importance
with the Spanish and Italian elements. But in recent years new currents
have set in which, if continued, will profoundly modify the character
of the country by introducing a large number of Slavs, particularly
Poles, Yugoslavs, Czechoslovaks, and Lithuanians, together with the
Slavic element among the Germans. Before the World War the immigration
to Argentina was about seven-eighths from the Latin countries, but
since then these have furnished only about two-thirds.

Argentina therefore represents a white population largely Alpine and
Mediterranean with a considerable Nordic element. It is doubtful
whether it stands to gain by allowing Alpines to increase, particularly
if this brings in different types of culture and traditions. Argentina
might well profit by the mistakes of the United States and immediately
orient its immigration policy along sound logical and constructive
lines.

       *       *       *       *       *

Chile, unlike the Indo-Spanish countries just south of the United
States, is also a white man's country. The pure Indians are a vanishing
minority. The Spanish and dominant element is largely made up of
Basques, but there has been a substantial addition of British, whose
influence is important in commerce and industry, and of Germans, who
have dominated the army and education, and have been an important
factor in agriculture. Chile, with four million population, is
therefore the least Latin of any of the countries south of the United
States. The progressiveness and prosperity of the region have long
attracted the attention of every traveller.

       *       *       *       *       *

Bolivia is another of the pre-dominantly Indian countries which have
made little contribution to the world. The number of Whites here is
negligible. Immigration has never been important and the Bolivian has
developed a provincial arrogance and hostility to foreigners which is
as prejudicial to his own interests as it is unwarranted. Scarcely
one-fifth of the people even speak Spanish in their daily life, and
two-thirds are primitive Indians, the others being hybrids of varying
degrees.

       *       *       *       *       *

Paraguay is an Indian republic which has not only avoided the Negro
influence common elsewhere but has almost escaped the infusion of
white blood. There are scarcely any pure Whites. The Guarani Indians
of this region were not highly civilized like the Mayas and Incas, and
therefore took on a Spanish culture instead of retaining one of their
own. It would have been extremely interesting to see what an Indian
republic could amount to in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Unfortunately the course of experiment was obstructed by one of the
most sanguinary wars in history (1864-69) in which Paraguay carried on
a contest with Brazil and Argentina until the greater part of its male
population was destroyed. At the beginning of the war, the population
of Paraguay was officially said to be 1,337,437. Even if this were
extraordinarily inaccurate and exaggerated, the figures afterward were
no less so, for the calculation after the close of hostilities credited
the country with a loss of more than a million. More exactly, the
population was returned as 221,709, of which 86,079 were children,
106,254 women, and only 28,746 men. Nothing like this situation has
ever before been recorded in a large population. Whole regiments had
been made up of boys under sixteen. In more than half a century since
then, the country has not begun to recover. Even now its population is
less than a million. Immigrants from Europe have always avoided it.
Paraguay is in a class by itself.

       *       *       *       *       *

Peru's four or five million inhabitants are mostly pure Indians, while
the remainder are nearly all hybrids. Chinese and Japanese as well as
Negroes have contributed to the mongrelization of the mass, and not
one in ten even claims to be white, which here, as elsewhere in Latin
America, by no means guarantees anything more than a homoeopathic dose
of European blood.

The aboriginal civilization is often described as remarkably high but
seems to have been the work of peoples who antedated the Spanish by a
long period; and the Conquerors themselves apparently considered the
Peruvian Indians to be less intelligent than those they had encountered
in Mexico. The number of Indians decreased during the early Spanish
regime until some districts were almost depopulated and the loss
of leaders especially was irreparable. Whether or not the present
inhabitants are the descendants of the Incas, they have not been able
to develop a strong and progressive state.

       *       *       *       *       *

Ecuador is an isolated and unimportant region inhabited largely by
backward Indian tribes. Probably not less than two-thirds of the
2,000,000 population are pure Indian. The handful of Whites and the few
hundred thousand hybrids rule the country. The Negro element, never
large, is gradually being absorbed and is leaving its stamp on the
whole population.

       *       *       *       *       *

The West Indies are more important to the United States immigration
policy than would be expected from their size, because of their close
proximity to American ports of entry.

       *       *       *       *       *

Cuba has always received its immigrants pre-dominantly from Spain,
and the imported Negro element, numbering about 800,000 of its three
millions of population, is not increasing in importance. The island is
considered less white than Puerto Rico, but more than a quarter of a
million of the inhabitants are Spanish-born, these comprising nearly
three-quarters of all the foreigners.

As in many other Latin-American countries, the Chinese have taken a
strong hold, beginning nearly a century ago, and are intermarrying with
the Whites.

Cuba does not represent a desirable or needed source of immigration to
the United States, and should be put under a proper quota.

       *       *       *       *       *

Puerto Rico has a population of nearly a million and a half. The fact
that this dense population cannot make a living under the present
and backward conditions on the island, and that it is continually
exercising its right of entry to the United States, is one of the most
serious features of the present immigration policy.

The Negro and Mulatto element makes up a majority of the population but
is relatively losing ground--partly from high death rates and partly by
absorption in the mass. The Indian stock is extinct. Immigration from
abroad has been negligible for a long time.

As the island is a territory, the inhabitants are citizens of the
United States and cannot be prevented from coming freely into the
mainland. The number of Puerto Ricans in New York City was at one time
estimated as high as 100,000. If economic conditions are attractive
there is nothing to prevent half a million of them from migrating to
the continent and adding their traits to the much-overloaded "melting
pot."

It is now clear that the United States made a great mistake, after the
war with Spain, in taking over territories that were already populated
by aliens. Previously the territory that was acquired was largely
empty and suitable for settlement by the old stock. What has been done
is not easy to undo, but it may at least serve as an emphatic lesson
against any further acquisitions of inhabited territory in the future.
Meanwhile there is an embryonic movement for independence in Puerto
Rico, which may have to, indeed should, be encouraged in order to give
the United States protection from its own folly.

       *       *       *       *       *

The Virgin Islands, which the United States bought from Denmark in
1917, have, like other West Indian islands, a population almost
exclusively Negro or Mulatto.

       *       *       *       *       *

The British West Indies are overwhelmingly black, though many of them,
such as New Providence, Barbados, Bermuda, and the Bahamas, have
substantial English aristocracies that guard jealously their racial
heritage. These British islands, particularly Jamaica and Barbados (the
latter one of the most densely populated spots in the whole world) have
been fertile sources of black emigration to other islands and to the
mainland.

       *       *       *       *       *

Haiti is a purely Negro Republic, and offers a good illustration of
what the Negro accomplishes if left to himself, even though given all
the advantages of easy access to European civilization. The republic of
Santo Domingo occupies the other part of the same island; its hybrid
population has more Spanish and less Negro blood but it is not by any
means civilized.

In general the islands of the West Indies now contain nearly 8,000,000
people, the descendants of Negro slaves with a very small but
undiscoverable admixture of Indian blood and a somewhat larger but
still unimportant admixture of European stock. They present a standing
menace to the United States immigration policy, and afford one of the
principal arguments for extending stringent restrictions to the Western
Hemisphere. The whole Caribbean is in the process of becoming a Negro
territory. Such a result may be inevitable, but adjacent nations which
desire to remain white must protect themselves while there is time.

In broad outline, the picture of Latin-America is the picture of a
diversified region occupied by some 80,000,000 people, mainly Indians,
but with varying proportions of White and Negro blood, the former
usually small in amount, the latter often large. The few countries that
may properly be called white are not emigrant-exporting countries,
and their inhabitants are for the most part non-Nordic, therefore not
particularly well adapted to incorporation in the United States.

In conclusion, it may be remarked at this point that each successive
revolution in Latin America has tended toward hastening the elimination
of European blood and influence. It is usually the half-breeds who
revolt and they, in turn, are subject to the increasing self-assertion
of the pure native.



XVIII

THE NORDIC OUTLOOK


In the preceding chapters we have seen the unity of the nation greatly
impaired in race and religion and threatened in language, but the
country is still 70 per cent Nordic and 80 per cent Protestant, and
no one foreign language seriously threatens our English speech. There
are nearly 50 per cent of Old-Native American Whites in the country at
large, although they have been swamped by aliens in New England and in
the industrialized States of the Northeast.

The great majority of the senators of the United States are still
of old American stock and so are the members of the House of
Representatives. The leaders of the nation in science, education,
industry, and in the Army and Navy are still overwhelmingly Nordic,
so that with these elements in our favor we are still in a position
to check the increase of the other elements and contend against their
deleterious effects upon our institutions.

Much of the immigration during the last century has been identical
with the old British stock in all respects. The English and the Scotch
who have come over here, as well as the Scandinavians and most of
the Germans, and perhaps some other elements, are to be regarded as
reinforcements of the older stock. On the other hand, most of the
people from southern and eastern Europe must be regarded as distinct
menaces to our national unity.

The remedy is first and foremost _the absolute_ suspension of all
immigration from all countries; and the signs of the times indicate
that such suspension is inevitable. Such a total suspension of
immigration would remove all grounds for charges of discrimination
against Asiatics, which now embarrass our foreign relations. At the
very least, the same quota limitations should be imposed on the
countries to the south of us as are enforced against Europe.

In view of the fact that during the great depression which began in
1929 we had millions of unemployed of our own people here, we should be
deaf to sentimental pleas for the admission of relatives of any kind.
If families are separated, it has not been through the fault of the
American people, and the immigrant can return whence he came, if he
wishes to join his family. As a matter of fact, it is only one or two
groups which are so vigorously clamoring for the admission of relatives.

Not only should European immigration be entirely stopped but still
more, all immigration of every sort from countries to the south of us
should be barred. In the islands and on the coasts of the Caribbean,
and in Mexico and in Central America, to say nothing of the countries
farther south, we have a vast reservoir of Negroes, and of Indians in
the interior, who sooner or later will be drawn toward the United
States by the high wages of common labor. The strictest legislation
at this time is necessary to prevent this impending invasion before
it assumes the dimensions of a flood, such as has already happened
in the case of the Mexican Indians. If immigration be not absolutely
prohibited, at very least, no one should be allowed to enter the United
States, unless a visitor or traveller, except white men of superior
intellectual capacity distinctly capable of becoming valuable American
citizens.

The law of 1790 providing that no one could become a citizen of the
United States except free Whites was the law until the aftermath of the
Civil War added the word "black" or "of African descent" to those who
could be naturalized. This last provision should be repealed and the
blacks with the South American and Central American Indians put on the
same footing as the Orientals.

All Filipino immigration should be stopped before it becomes a serious
menace. If possible, half-breeds from Hawaii should not be allowed
entry and absolute restriction should be placed on the entrance of
Negroes and Mulattoes from Puerto Rico. There are now swarms of them
in the Harlem District of New York. This last is simple justice to the
American Negroes.

The increasing use of machines calls for less and less common labor,
and even in normal times there will be a surplus of man power for the
factories and the farms. Why should outsiders be allowed to come in and
take the jobs and lower the living standards of American labor? This
is one of the greatest questions before the American people and the
depression following 1929 has brought this truth home.

We have now in this country over five million aliens who are not
citizens, more than a million of whom are said to be illegally here.
These last should be deported as fast as they can be located and funds
made available. There can be no better means of relieving unemployment
present or future than by such wholesale deportation. We should begin
with those aliens who have violated our laws or who have become public
charges and all such, now in our penitentiaries and asylums, should be
deported forthwith. When that has been done and done fully, it should
be followed by the deportation of unemployed aliens.

Registration is necessary for the carrying out of any proper system
of deportation. Why any one should object to registration as a proper
means of identification is a mystery, unless there is a sinister motive
behind the desire to conceal identity.

A storm of protest will arise from the vociferous and influential
foreign blocs and from the radicals and half-breeds claiming to be
Americans, who will all rush to the defense of their kind. It is
strange to find how sensitive we are to any foreign criticism of things
American, but how prone we are to listen respectfully to local aliens,
who are urging their own interests at the expense of the national
welfare.

In order to curb the influence of these aliens and to prevent their
pernicious control by politicians, it would also be wise to suspend
all naturalization for a generation at least. Our citizenship in the
past has been made of little value by the absurd way that it has been
thrust upon foreigners. Nothing can be more ill-advised politically
than the Americanization programs of some worthy people. An American
is not made by conferring upon him the franchise, but by the alien's
voluntary and genuine acceptance of our language, laws, institutions,
and cultural traditions.

Even though the foregoing program were put into effect, which would,
possibly, be a "Counsel of Perfection," we would still have with us
an immense mass of Negroes and nearly as many southern and eastern
Europeans, intellectually below the standard of the average American.
The proper extension to and use by these undesirable classes of
a knowledge of birth control may be in the future of substantial
benefit, and the practice of sterilization of the criminal and the
intellectually unfit, now legally established in twenty-seven States,
can be resorted to with good result.

The fundamental question for this nation, as well as for the world at
large, is for the community itself to regulate births by depriving
the unfit of the opportunity of leaving behind posterity of their
own debased type. Our civilization has mercifully put an end to the
cruel, wasteful, and indiscriminate destruction of the unfit by
Nature, wherefore it is our duty, as exponents of that civilization,
to substitute scientific control, that civilization itself may be
maintained. Down to date the American stock has only just begun to
intermarry with the immigrant stock. When this process has gone
further--and it will go further--it will be more difficult to control
the destinies of the nation. It is therefore the duty of all Americans,
and such of the immigrant stock as are in sympathy with them, to face
the problem boldly and to take all eugenic means to encourage the
multiplication of desirable types and abate drastically the increase of
the unfit and miscegenation by widely diverse races.

So much for our internal problems. The problems outside of our country
are a different matter. In the last century the world has grown
smaller, and, perhaps, in the long run America must take her part in
international affairs.


The White Man's Burden

As Americans we are faced with the necessity of assuming our share of
a burden which has been carried by Great Britain for the last three
centuries--that is "the White Man's Burden,"--the duty of policing the
world and maintaining the prestige of the white man throughout the
Seven Seas. Due to the change in the industrial situation all over the
world and to the spread of the fatal sentimentalism of the Anglo-Saxon,
the lower races in Europe and elsewhere are beginning to assert
themselves. Everywhere from one end of the world to the other is heard
the cry of self-determination.

Americans already have much the same problem in the Philippines.

The attitude of the Imperial Government in London toward the native
races in its various Dominions has been in the past and still is not
unlike that of the Federal Government in Washington toward the Negroes
in our Southern States.

Americans must sympathize with the firm resolve of the handful of white
men in South Africa (less than a million and a half) to control and
regulate the Negro population there--numbering some seven millions and
in the midst of which they live. The same problem arises in Australia
and New Zealand where the Whites are determined that their civilization
shall not be swamped by Orientals.

We must also sympathize with the Whites in Kenya Colony in their
opposition to a filling of their country with cheap Hindu labor. As
Americans we can understand the Negro and recognize his cheerful
qualities, but we can have little sympathy with the Hindu whom we
have expressly barred from our Pacific Coast. These Hindus, with
the Chinese, have ruined the native races of many of the Polynesian
Islands. They have been for ages in contact with the highest
civilizations, but have failed to benefit by such contact, either
physically, intellectually, or morally.

Similar dangers exist on the Pacific Coast of Canada. The struggle for
the maintenance of the supremacy of the white man over the native, or
for that matter over the non-European, until now has been maintained
by Great Britain alone. Her ruling class has given the world the
greatest example since the days of Rome, of a just, fearless, and
unselfish government, but apparently the native does not desire such a
government.

The old imperial instinct that enabled Great Britain to retain control
of the white man's world appears to be coming to an end. The weary
Titan seems willing to turn over the burden of government to the
Dominions as fast as the latter demand it. This is evidenced also by
the proposal to give up the naval base at Singapore. If this base
is ever actually abandoned, it means England's withdrawal from the
supremacy of the Pacific. In such event, whether we Americans like it
or not--whether we intend it or not--the burden of the control of the
Pacific will pass in great measure to America. The future lies in the
Pacific rather than in the Atlantic, and with the completion of the
Panama Canal, America is brought face to face with Oriental problems.

Australia and New Zealand, still more British Columbia, look for
co-operation and leadership to the United States as well as to Great
Britain, and we must be prepared to accept this responsibility.

We have our own troubles in respect to the Philippines. The swarming of
the Filipinos into the Pacific States brings with it a repetition of
the Chinese problem of sixty years ago. California is determined that
the white man there shall not be replaced by the Chinese, the Japanese,
the Mexican, or the Filipino. The Eastern States should face this
problem understandingly, and recognize the simple fact that the white
men on the Pacific Coast of the United States and Canada are determined
to maintain a white ownership of the country, even though the East has
been willing to see New England swamped by French-Canadians and Polaks,
and the industrial centers of the North filled to overflowing with
southern and eastern Europeans.

When we talk about the maintenance of the white man's ideals and
culture and about the supremacy of the white man, we are talking
about two distinct things. One is the determination of the white
man to keep for himself his own countries, the United States, Great
Britain, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and many of
the smaller islands. With this determination Americans sympathize and
sooner or later we may be called on to help protect the White race
and the English language in these countries. It seems to be a part of
our destiny. The other phase of white supremacy is the white man's
effort to benefit the backward races and raise them to civilization by
instilling his language, his religion, and his culture into Asiatics
and Africans. This is the tendency of foreign missions, and it leads
sooner or later to a challenge by the natives of the control of the
Whites.

To rule justly, as the English have in India and Burma, is for the best
interest of the native. For example, the United States should either
firmly govern the Philippines, which, in the last analysis, is for the
interest and enrichment of the Filipinos, or else abandon them to
their own devices. If Japan ever gets hold of these islands, she will
keep them without regard to the wishes or interests of the native, as
that Empire is not greatly troubled with sentimentalists and native
sympathizers such as flourish in the United States.

The Japanese, the Chinese, the Hindus, and the Moslems have cultures,
customs, religions, arts, literatures, and institutions of their own,
which for them may be, and in many cases probably are, as good as
our own. The writer does not see any gain in destroying these native
elements of culture or replacing them indiscriminately with the
institutions of the white man to which those races are, for the most
part, unfitted. Democracy is an excellent example. It simply will not
work among Asiatics. In fact, its success is yet fully to be proven in
the Western World.

But the other side of the problem--whether we, the White race, shall
surrender our own culture, our own lands and our own traditions,
good or bad, to another race--presents a very different question.
Fortunately, in this case, Reason and Sentiment march hand in hand.

The prestige and strength of Europe and Great Britain have been greatly
impaired since the World War and Western civilization sooner or later
may be forced to hand on the Torch to America.

We see the Nordics again confronted across the Pacific by their
immemorial rivals, the Mongols. This will be the final arena of the
struggle between these two major divisions of man for world dominance
and the Nordic race in America may find itself bearing the main brunt.

In the meantime, the Nordic race, that has built up, protected, and
preserved Western civilization, needs to realize the necessity of its
own solidarity and close co-operation. Upon this mutual understanding
rest the peace of the world and the preservation of its civilization.

Let us take thought as to how we can best prepare for our share of the
task before us--that is, bear our share of the White Man's Burden.



BIBLIOGRAPHY


  Abbott, John S.C., _Peter Stuyvesant_. New York, Dodd, Mead & Co.,
  1898.

  Adams, Alexander A., _The Plateau Peoples of South America_. (An
  Essay in Ethnic Psychology.) New York, Geo. Routledge & Sons, Ltd.,
  1915.

  Adams, James Truslow, _The Founding of New England_. Boston, Atlantic
  Monthly Press, 1921.

  ----, _The March of Democracy_. New York, Charles Scribner's Sons,
  1932-33.

  ----, _New England in the Republic, 1776-1850_. Boston, Little Brown,
  1926.

  ----, _Provincial Society, 1690-1763_. New York, Macmillan Co., 1927.
  Vol. III of series entitled _A History of American Life_.

  ----, _Revolutionary New England, 1691-1776_. Boston, Atlantic
  Monthly Press, 1923.

  Alsina, Juan A., _European Immigration to the Argentine_, 1898.

  American Council of Learned Societies, _Report of the committee
  on linguistic and national stocks in the population of the United
  States_. Washington, D.C., 1932. (Reprint from annual report of the
  American Historical Association for 1931, pp. 107-441.)

  Arber, Edw. (ed.), _Story of the Pilgrim Fathers_. Boston, Houghton
  Mifflin Co., 1897.

  Arbois de Jubainville, M.H. d': 1. "Les Celts en Espagne," _Revue
  Celtique_, Vols. XIV and XV.

  ----, 2. "Les Celts et les langues celtiques," _Revue archéologique_,
  série 2, t. XLIII, pp. 87-96, 141-155.

  ----, 3. "Les Gaulois dans l'Italie du Nord," _Rev. Celt._, Vol. XI.

  Avebury, Lord (Sir John Lubbock), _Prehistoric Times_, 7th ed. New
  York, Henry Holt & Co.; London, Williams and Norgate, 1864-1913.

  Avery, Elroy McKendree, _A History of the United States and Its
  People_. Cleveland, Burroughs Bros., 1905.


  Babcock, Kendrick Charles, _The Scandinavian Element in the U.S._
  Urbana, University of Illinois, 1914.

  Baily, John, Esq., _Central America_. London, Trelawney Saunders,
  1850.

  Bancroft, Hubert Howe, _History of Arizona and New Mexico,
  1530-1888_, Vol. XVII. San Francisco, The History Co., 1889.

  ----, _History of California_, 4 vols. San Francisco, A.L. Bancroft &
  Co., 1884, 1885, 1886.

  ----, _History of Oregon_, 2 vols. San Francisco, The History Co.,
  1886.

  ----, _History of Washington, Idaho, and Montana_. San Francisco, The
  History Co., 1890.

  Barker, Eugene C. (ed.), _Readings in Texas History_. Dallas,
  Southwest Press, 1929.

  Barker, Howard F., "The Founders of New England." American Historical
  Review 38 (4): 702-713. July, 1933.

  Bassanovitch, I., _Materials on the Anthropology of the Bulgars: The
  Lomsk District_, pp. 3-186, 1891.

  Beard, Charles and Mary, _Rise of American Civilization_. New York,
  Macmillan, 1927.

  Beddoe, John: 1. _The Anthropological History of Europe_, 1893.

  ----, 2. "The Kelts of Ireland," _Journal of Anthropology_,
  1870-1871, pp. 117-131.

  ----, 3. "On the Stature and Bulk of Man in the British Isles,"
  _Memoirs of the Anthropological Society_, Vol. III, pp. 384-573.
  London, 1867-1869.

  ----, 4. _The Races of Britain_. Bristol and London, 1885.

  Bertrand, Alexandre (with S. Reinach), _Les Celts dans les vallées du
  Pô et du Danube_. Paris, E. Leroux, 1894.

  Binder, Julius, _Die Plebs_. Leipzig, G. Bohme, Deichert, 1909.

  _Biographical and Historical Memoirs of Northeast Arkansas._ Chicago,
  Goodspeed, 1889.

  Blackmar, Frank W. (ed.), _Kansas_. Chicago, Standard Pub., 1912.

  Blegen, Theodore C., _Norwegian Migration to America_. Northfield,
  Minnesota, Norwegian American Historical Assn., 1931.

  Boam, Henry J., _British Columbia_. London, Sells Ltd., 1912.

  Boni, G. Roma, _Notizie degli Sclavi_; série 5, pp. 123 seq. and 375
  seq., 1903.

  Bork, Ferdinand, _Die Mitanni Sprache_. Berlin, W. Peiser, 1909.

  Boule, M., "Essai de paléontologie stratigraphique de l'homme,"
  _Revue d'anthropologie_, série 3, t. III, pp. 129-144, 272-297,
  385-411, 647-680, 1888.

  Bourinot, Sir John G., _Canada under British Rule, 1760-1900_.
  Cambridge, Massachusetts, University Press, 1900.

  Bracq, Jean Charlemagne, _The Evolution of French Canada_. New York,
  The Macmillan Company, 1924.

  Breasted, James H.: 1. _Ancient Times, A History of the World_.
  Boston, Ginn & Co., 1916.

  ----, 2. "The Origins of Civilization," _Scientific Monthly_, vols.
  IX, nos. 4, 5, 6, and X, nos. 1, 2, 3.

  ----, 3. _A Survey of the Ancient World_. Boston, Ginn & Co., 1919.

  ----, 4. _History of Egypt_, and other writings.

  Bresette, Linna E., _Mexicans in the United States: Report of a Brief
  Survey_. Washington, D.C., Natl. Catholic Welfare Conf., 1929.

  Breuil, L'Abbé H., "Les peintures rupestres d'Espagne," (avec Serrano
  Gomez et Cabre Aguilo), _L'Anthropologie_, t. XXIII, 1912.

  Brewer, Daniel Chauncey, _The Conquest of New England by the
  Immigrant_. New York, Putnam's Sons, 1926.

  Brown, John Henry, _History of Texas_, 2 vols. St. Louis, L.E.
  Daniell.

  Browne, William Hand, _Maryland, The History of a Palatinate_.
  Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1890.

  Bruce, Philip Alexander, LL.B., LL.D., _History of Virginia,
  1607-1763_, vol. I. Chicago and New York, American Historical
  Society, 1924.

  ----, _Institutional History of Virginia_. New York, G.P. Putnam's
  Sons, 1910.

  Bruhnes, Jean, "Race et nation," _Le Correspondant_. Paris,
  September, 1917.

  Bryce, George, _The Remarkable History of the Hudson Bay Company_.
  New York, Scribner, 1900.

  Bryce, James, _The Holy Roman Empire_. Macmillan, 1904.

  Buck, Solon, _Illinois in 1818_. Springfield, Illinois Centennial
  Commission, 1917.

  Bureau of the Census: Reports on Population.

  Burke, U.R., _A History of Spain_, 2d ed. London, Longmans, Green &
  Co., 1900.

  Burrage, Henry S., D.D., _The Beginnings of Colonial Maine_,
  Portland, Me., Marks Printing House, 1914.

  Bury, J.B., _A History of Greece_. Macmillan, 1917.


  Cable, George W., _The Creoles of Louisiana_. New York, Charles
  Scribner's Sons, 1889.

  Cahun, Léon, _Histoire de l'Asie_. Paris, Armand Colin et Cie., 1896.

  Caldwell, Bishop R., _A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South
  Indian Family of Languages_, 2d ed. London, K. Paul, Trench, Trübner
  & Co., 1913.

  Campbell, Charles, _Introduction to the History of the Colony and
  Ancient Dominion of Virginia_. Richmond, B.B. Minor, 1847.

  Candolle, Alphonse de, _Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis
  deux siècles_, 2me éd. Genève, H. Georg, 1806-1893.

  Carpenter, Niles, _Immigrants and Their Children_. Census Monographs
  VII. Washington, D.C., Bureau of the Census, 1927.

  Cartailhac, Émile, _La France préhistorique d'après les sépultures et
  les monuments_, 2me éd. Paris, 1903.

  Castle, William E., _Genetics and Eugenics_. Cambridge, Harvard
  University Press, 1930. 4th ed.

  Cattell, J. McKeen, "A Statistical Study of American Men of Science,"
  _Science_, N.S., vol. XXIV, nos. 621-623, and vol. XXXII, nos. 827
  and 828.

  Chambers, Henry E., _Mississippi Valley Beginnings_. New York, G.P.
  Putnam's Sons, 1922.

  Chantre, Ernest, "Recherches anthropologiques dans l'Asie
  occidentale," _Extrait des Archives du musée d'histoire naturelle de
  Lyon_. Lyon, 1895.

  Claiborne, J.F.H., _Mississippi as a Province, Territory, and State_,
  vol. I. Jackson, Mississippi, Power & Barksdale, 1880.

  Clay, Albert T., _The Empire of the Amorites_. Yale University Press,
  1919.

  Cleland, Robert Glass, Ph.D., _A History of California_ (The American
  Period). New York, The Macmillan Co., 1930.

  Clemenceau, Georges, _South America Today_. New York and London, G.
  Putnam & Sons, 1911.

  Coan, Charles F., Ph.D., _A History of New Mexico_, vol. I. Chicago
  and New York, The American Historical Society, Inc., 1925.

  Cobb, Sanford H., _The Story of the Palatines_. New York and London,
  G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1897.

  Cole, Arthur Charles, _The Era of the Civil War_. Springfield,
  Illinois Centennial Commission, 1919.

  Cole, Cyrenus, _A History of the People of Iowa_. Cedar Rapids, Torch
  Press, 1921.

  Collignon, R.: 1. "L'anthropologie au conseil de révision, etc.,"
  _Bulletin de la Société d'anthropologie_, pp. 736-805, 1890. Also
  _Bull. Soc. d'anth._, 1883.

  ----, 2. "Anthropologie de la France: Dordogne, Charente, Creuse,
  Corrèze, Haute-Vienne," _Mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie_,
  série 3, I, fasc. 3, pp. 3-79.

  ----, 3. "L'indice céphalique des populations françaises," _L'Anth._,
  série I, pp. 200-224, 1890.

  Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of
  Representatives. Hearings, especially 67th Cong., 3d session; 68th
  Cong., 1st session; 69th Cong., 1st session; 70th Cong., 1st session
  and 2d session; 72d Cong., 1st session. (A valuable series of
  reports, containing testimony of H.H. Laughlin and other experts.)
  Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1923-1932.

  Conklin, Edwin G., _Heredity and Environment_. Princeton University
  Press, 1929. 6th ed.

  Cooke, John Esten, _Virginia, A History of the People_. Boston,
  Houghton Mifflin Co., 1887.

  Cotterill, R.S., _History of Pioneer Kentucky_. Cincinnati, Johnson &
  Hardin, 1917.

  Cowan, Helen I., _British Emigration to British North America,
  1783-1837_. University of Toronto Library, 1928.

  Coy, Owen Cochran, _The Great Trek_. Chicago, Powell Pub. Co.

  Crawford, O.G.S., "Distribution of Early Bronze Age Settlements in
  Britain," _Geographical Journal_, XL, pp. 184 seq., 1912.


  Darwin, Charles, _The Descent of Man_, 2d ed. London, John Murray,
  1901.

  Davenport, Charles B.: 1. _The Feebly Inhibited, Nomadism ...
  Inheritance of Temperament_. Washington, D.C., Carnegie Institution,
  1915.

  ----, 2. _Heredity in Relation to Eugenics_. New York, Henry Holt &
  Co., 1911.

  Davidson, Alex., and Stuvé, Bernard, _A Complete History of Illinois_
  from 1673 to 1873. Springfield, Illinois Journal Co., 1874.

  Davis, John, _Travels in Louisiana and the Floridas in the Year
  1802_. New York, I. Riley Co., 1806.

  Davis, Walter B., _History of Missouri_. St. Louis, Hall & Co., 1876.

  Dawkins, W. Boyd, _Early Man in Britain_. London, Macmillan, 1880.

  Deniker, J., "Les races de l'Europe, Note préliminaire,"
  _L'anthropologie_, vol. IX, pp. 113-133. Paris, 1898.

  Dill, Samuel, _Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western
  Empire_, 2d ed. Macmillan, 1906.


  Eginhard, _Life of Charlemagne_, Glaister translation. London, George
  Bell & Sons, 1877.

  Esarey, Logan, _A History of Indiana_, vol. II. Indianapolis, Bowen,
  1918.

  ----, _A History of Indiana from Its Exploration to 1850_.
  Indianapolis, W.K. Stewart, 1915.


  Fairbanks, _History of Florida, 1512-1842_. Philadelphia, J. B.
  Lippincott & Co., 1871.

  Fanning, John William, Negro Migration. Bull. Univ. Georgia, June,
  1930.

  Farish, Thomas Edwin: 1. _History of Arizona_, vol. III. San
  Francisco, The Filmer Bros. Electrotype Co., 1916.

  ----, 2. _History of Arizona_, vol VI. San Francisco, The Filmer
  Bros. Electrotype Co., 1918.

  Faust, Albert Bernhardt, _The German Element in the United States_, 2
  vols. Boston and New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909.

  Feist, Sigismund, _Address to the International Congress at Gratz_.
  1909.

  Ferrero, Guglielmo, _The Greatness and Decline of Rome_. New York,
  Putnam, 1909.

  Ferris, Jacob, _The States and Territories of the Great West_. New
  York, Miller, Orton & Mulligan, 1856.

  Fish, Carl Russell, _The Rise of the Common Man, 1830-1850_. New
  York, Macmillan, 1927.

  Fisher, George Park, _The Colonial Era_. New York, Charles Scribner's
  Sons, 1892.

  Fisher, H.A.L., _The Political History of England_, vol. IV. Edited
  by William Hunt and Reginald Poole. London, Longmans, Green & Co.,
  1906.

  Fisher, Sydney George: 1. _The Making of Pennsylvania_. Philadelphia,
  J.B. Lippincott Co., 1896.

  ----, 2. _The Quaker Colonies_. New Haven, Yale University Press,
  1921.

  Fiske, John, _The Dutch and Quaker Colonies in America_, vols. I and
  II. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1899.

  Fleure, H.J. (with James, T.C.), "Anthropological Types in Wales,"
  _Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and
  Ireland_, vol. XLVI, pp. 35-154.

  ----, (with L. Winstanley), "Anthropology and Our Older Histories,"
  _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XLVIII, pp. 155 _seq._

  Flint, Timothy, _History and Geography of the Mississippi Valley_, 2
  vols. Cincinnati, E.H. Flint, 1832.

  Flower and Lydekker, _Mammals, Living and Extinct_. London, Adam and
  Charles Black, 1891.

  Foerster, Robert F., _The Racial Problems Involved in Immigration
  from Latin America and the West Indies to the United States_.
  Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept. of Labor, 1925.

  Folwell, William Watts, _Minnesota_. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co.,
  1908.

  Ford, Henry Jones, _The Scotch-Irish in America_. Princeton
  University Press, 1915.

  Fortier, Alcée, _A History of Louisiana_, 4 vols. New York, Manzi,
  Joyant & Co., 1904.

  Fosdick, Lucian J., _The French Blood in America_. New York, The
  Baker & Taylor Co., 1911.

  Frank, Tenney, "Race Mixture in the Roman Empire," _American
  Historical Review_, vol. XII, no. 4, July, 1916.

  Freeman, E.A.: 1. _A Historical Geography of Europe_. Edited by J.B.
  Bury, 3d ed. London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1912.

  ----, 2. _Race and Language_. Historical Essays, series 3, pp.
  173-230. New York and London, Macmillan, 1879.

  Fritsch, Gustave, _Das Haupthaare und seiner Bildungsstätte bei den
  Rassen des Menschen_. Berlin, 1912.

  Fuller, George W., _A History of the Pacific Northwest_, 3 vols. New
  York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1931.


  Galton, Sir Francis, _Hereditary Genius_. London and New York,
  Macmillan & Co., 1892.

  Gameau, F.X., _History of Canada_, vols. I and II. Montreal, John
  Lovell, 1862.

  Gayarre, Charles, _Louisiana, Its History as a French Colony_, vol.
  II. New York, Wiley, 1852.

  Geer, Baron Gerard de, "A Geochronology of the Last 12,000 Years,"
  _Compte-Rendu de la session 1910, du Congrès Géol. Intern._, vol. XI,
  fasc. 1, pp. 241-257.

  Gibbon, Edward, _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_.

  Gindley, Anton, _History of the Thirty Years' War_. New York, G.
  Putnam's Sons, 1884.

  Gjerset, Knut, _The History of the Norwegian People_. New York,
  Macmillan, 1915.

  Goodwin, John A., _The Pilgrim Republic_. Boston and New York,
  Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909.

  Gosnell, R.E., _The Year Book of British Columbia_. Victoria, B.C.,
  Librarian Legislature Assembly, 1897.

  Gosney, E.S., and Popenoe, Paul, _Sterilization for Human
  Betterment_. New York, Macmillan, 1929.

  Grant, Madison, "The Origin and Relationships of North American
  Mammals," _Eighth Annual Report of the New York Zoological Society_.
  New York, 1904.

  ----, _The Passing of the Great Race_. 4th ed. New York, Charles
  Scribner's Sons, 1921.

  Green, John R., _A History of the English People_. New York, Harper,
  1878.

  Greene, Evarts B., and Virginia D. Harrington, _American population
  before the federal census of 1790_. New York, Columbia University
  Press, 1932.

  Gregory, W.K.: 1. "The Dawn Man of Piltdown, England," _American
  Museum Journal_, vol. XIV. New York, May, 1914.

  ----, 2. "Facts and Theories of Evolution, with Special Reference to
  the Origin of Man," _Dental Cosmos_, pp. 3-19, March, 1920.

  ----, 3. "Studies on the Evolution of the Primates," _Bull. Amer.
  Mus. Nat. Hist._, vol. XXXV, article xix. New York, 1916.

  Griffis, William Elliot: 1. _The Story of New Netherland_. Boston and
  New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909.

  ----, 2. _The Story of the Walloons_. Boston and New York, Houghton
  Mifflin Co., 1923.

  Gue, Benjamin F., _History of Iowa_. New York, Century History Co.,
  1903.

  Guillaume, H., F.R.G.S., _The Amazon Provinces of Peru_. London,
  Wyman & Sons, 1888.


  Haddon, A.C.: 1. _The Races of Man and Their Distribution_. London,
  Milner & Co.

  ----, 2. _The Study of Man_. New York, Putnam; and London, Bliss
  Sands, 1898.

  ----, 3. _The Wanderings of Peoples_. Cambridge University Press,
  1912.

  Haeckel, Ernst, _The Riddle of the Universe_. Harper, 1901.

  Hale, Will, and Merritt, Dixon, _A History of Tennessee and
  Tennesseans_, vols. I and III. Chicago, Lewis Pub. Co., 1913.

  Hall, H.R., _The Ancient History of the Near East_, 3d ed. London,
  Methuen & Co., 1916.

  Hall, Prescott F.: 1. _Immigration_, 2d ed. New York, Henry Holt &
  Co., 1908.

  ----, 2. "Immigration Restriction and World Eugenics," _Journal of
  Heredity_, vol. X, no. 3, pp. 125-127. Washington, D.C., March, 1919.

  Hamilton, Peter Joseph, _The Colonization of the South_, vol. III
  of _The History of North America_, edited by Guy Carleton Lee.
  Philadelphia, George Barrie & Sons, 1904.

  Hanna, Charles A., _The Scotch-Irish_, or _The Scot in North Britain,
  Ireland, and America_, 2 vols. New York, G. Putnam's Sons, 1902.

  Harper, Roland M., _The Population of Mexico: an Analysis_.
  Pan-American Magazine 44 (4): 269-278. Apl., 1931.

  Harrison, J.P., "On the Survival of Racial Features in the Population
  of the British Isles," _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XII, pp.
  243-258.

  Hart, Albert B. (ed.), _Commonwealth History of Massachusetts_. New
  York, States History Co., 1927-28.

  Hawley, James H., _History of Idaho_, vol. I. Chicago, The S.J.
  Clarke Pub. Co., 1920.

  Henderson, Archibald, _Conquest of the Old Southwest_. New York, The
  Century Co., 1920.

  Herodotus, _History of the World_.

  Hewatt, _An Historical Account of the Rise and Progress of the
  Colonies of South Carolina and Georgia_, 2 vols. London, Alexander
  Donaldson, 1779.

  Hirt, Herman, _Die Indo-Germanen, ihre Verbreitung, ihre Urheimat und
  ihre Kultur_. Strassburg, Trübner, 1905.

  _History of Tennessee._ Nashville, Goodspeed Publishing Company, 1886.

  _History of Welsh in Minnesota._ Hughes, Edwards & Roberts, 1895.

  Hittell, Theodore H., _History of California_, vol. III. San
  Francisco, N.J. Stone & Co., 1897.

  Hodgkin, Thos., _Italy and Her Invaders_.

  Holmes, S.J., and S.L. Parker, "The Stabilized Natural Increase of
  the Negro." _Journal of the Amer. Statistical Asso._, June 1, 1930.

  Holmes, S.J., "The Biological Trend of the Negro." _Univ. of Calif.
  Chronicle_, Jan., 1930.

  Holmes, T. Rice, _Ancient Britain, and the Conquests of Julius
  Cæsar_. Oxford University Press, 1907.

  Homer, _The Iliad_; _the Odyssey_.

  Houck, Louis, _A History of Missouri_, vols. I, II, and III. Chicago,
  R.R. Donnelley & Sons, 1908.

  Hulbert, Archer Butler: 1. _The Ohio River_. New York, G.P. Putnam's
  Sons, 1906.

  ----, 2. _Soil, Its Influence on the History of the United States_.
  New Haven, Yale University Press, 1930.

  Human Betterment Foundation, _Collected Papers on Eugenic
  Sterilization_. Pasadena, Calif., 1930.

  Huntington, Ellsworth: 1. _Civilization and Climate_. Yale University
  Press and Oxford University Press, 1915.

  ----, 2. _The Pulse of Asia_. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1907.

  Hooton, E.A.R., _Up from the Ape_. Macmillan, 1931.


  Jacobs, J., "On the Racial Characteristics of Modern Jews," _Jour.
  Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XV, pp. 23-62, 1885-1886.

  James, Bartlett Burleigh, _The Colonization of New England_, vol. V.
  Philadelphia, G. Barrie & Sons, 1904.

  James, T.C. (with Fleure, H.J.), "Anthropological Types in Wales,"
  _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XLVI, pp. 35-154, 1916.

  Janson, Florence Edith, _Background of Swedish Immigration_.
  University of Chicago Press, 1931.

  Jenks, Albert Ernest, _Indian-White Amalgamation_. Minneapolis,
  _Bulletin of Univ. Minnesota_, 1916.

  Johnson, Charles S., _The Negro in American Civilization_. New York,
  Henry Holt & Co., 1930.

  Johnson, Harrison, _History of Nebraska_. Omaha, 1880.

  Johnson, Stanley C., _A History of Emigration_ (from the _United
  Kingdom to North America_). London, George Routledge & Sons Limited,
  1913.

  Johnston, Sir Harry H.: 1. _The Negro in the New World_. London,
  Methuen & Co., 1910.

  ----, 2. "On North African Animals, A Survey of the Ethnography of
  Africa," _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XLIII, pp. 375-422.

  ----, 3. Various writings.

  ----, 4. _Views and Reviews._ London, Williams and Norgate, 1912.

  Jones, Frederick Robertson, _The Colonization of the Middle
  States and Maryland_; vol. IV of _The History of North America_.
  Philadelphia, George Barrie & Sons, 1904.

  Jones, Howard Mumford, _America and French Culture_. Chapel Hill,
  N.C., University N. Carolina Press, 1927.

  Jones, Sir J. Morris, "Pre-Aryan Syntax in Insular Celtic," Appendix
  B of Rhys and Jones, _The Welsh People_. London, Macmillan, 1900.

  Jordanes, _History of the Goths_, Mierow translation. Princeton
  University Press, 1915.

  Josephus, Flavius, _De Bello Judaico_, or _The Jewish War of Flavius
  Josephus_, translated by Robert Traill. London, Houlston & Stoneman,
  1851.


  Keane, A.H.: 1. _Ethnology._ Cambridge University Press, 1896.

  ----, 2. _Man, Past and Present._ Also new edition by Ouiggin &
  Haddon. Cambridge University Press, 1900.

  Keary, C.F., _The Vikings in Western Christendom_. London, T. Fisher
  Unwin, 1891.

  Keith, Arthur: 1. _Ancient Types of Man._ Harper, 1911.

  ----, 2. _The Antiquity of Man._ London, Williams and Norgate, 1915.

  Kephart, Horace, _Our Southern Highlanders_. New York, Outing
  Publishing Co., 1913.

  King, Grace, _New Orleans: The Place and the People_. New York,
  Macmillan Co., 1920.

  Kingsford, William, _The History of Canada_, vol. I, 1608-1682; vol.
  II, 1679-1725. Rowsell & Hutchison, 1887.

  Kuhns, Oscar, _The German and Swiss Settlements of Colonial
  Pennsylvania_: Study of the So-Called Pennsylvania Dutch. New York,
  Henry Holt & Co., 1901.


  Levering, Julia H., _Historic Indiana_. New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons,
  1909.

  Lockley, Fred, _History of the Columbia River Valley_ (From The
  Dalles to the Sea). Chicago, The S.J. Clarke Pub. Co., 1928.

  Lodge, Henry Cabot, _Short History of the English Colonies in
  America_. New York, Harper & Bros., 1881.

  Louhi, E.A., _The Delaware Finns_. New York, Humanity Press, 1925.

  Lyman, Horace S., _History of Oregon_, 4 vols. New York, The North
  Pacific Pub. Society, 1903.


  MacDougall, D., _Scots and Scots' Descendants in America_, vol. I.
  New York, Caledonian Publishing Co., 1917.

  Martin, François-Xavier, _The History of Louisiana_. New York, James
  A. Gresham, publisher, 1882.

  Mathews, Lois Kimball, _The Expansion of New England_ (The Spread of
  New England Settlement and Institutions to the Mississippi River,
  1620-1865). Boston and New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., The Riverside
  Press, Cambridge, 1909.

  Matthew, W.D.: 1. "Climate and Evolution." Published by the _New York
  Academy of Sciences_, vol. XXIV, pp. 171-318. New York, 1915.

  McMaster, John Bach, _History of the People of the U.S._

  Merriam, John C., "The Beginnings of Human History Read from the
  Geological Record: The Emergence of Man," _Scientific Monthly_, vols.
  IX and X, 1919-20.

  Metchnikoff, Elie, _Nature of Man_. Putnam, 1903.

  Mexicans in California. Report of Gov. C.C. Young's Fact-Finding
  Committee. Sacramento, State Printer, 1930.

  Meyers, Albert Cook, _Narratives of Early Pennsylvania, West New
  Jersey, and Delaware_. New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912.

  Miller, Gerrit S., "The Jaw of the Piltdown Man," _Smithsonian
  Miscellaneous Collections_, vol. LXV, no. 12. Washington, D.C., Nov.,
  1915.

  Minns, E.H., _Scythians and Greeks_. Cambridge University Press, 1913.

  Mommsen, Theodor, _A History of the Roman Provinces_, translated by
  William P. Dickson. Scribner, 1887.

  Montelius, Oscar: 1. "Die Chronologie der altesten Bronzezeit,"
  _Arch. f. Anth._, Bd. 25, pp. 443 seq. 1900.

  ----, 2. _The Civilization of Sweden in Heathen Times_, translated by
  F.H. Woods. London, Macmillan, 1888.

  ----, 3. _La Civilisation primitive en Italie._ Stockholm, 1895.

  ----, 4. _L' Anthropologie_, série XVII, 1906.

  Mortillet, G. de, _Formation de la nation française_. Paris, 1897.

  Much, Mathæus, _Die Heimat der Indo-Germanen im Lichte der
  urgeschichtlichen Forschung_. Berlin, 1902.

  Müller, Friedrich: 1. _Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft._ Wien, 1884.

  ----, 2. _Reise der österreichischen Fregatte Novara um die Erde
  in den Jahren 1857-9, unter den Befehlen des Commodore B. von
  Wiellerstorf._ Wien, Ubair-Linguistischer Theil, 1867.

  Müller, Sophus: 1. _L'Europe préhistorique_, tr. du Danois, ... par
  Emmanuel Philipot. Paris, J. Lamarre, 1907.

  ----, 2. _Nordische Alterthumskunde._ Strassburg, 1897.

  Munro, Dana Carleton, _A Source Book of Roman History_. Boston, New
  York and Chicago, D.C. Heath & Co., 1904.

  Munro, John, _The Story of the British Race_. New York, D. Appleton &
  Co., 1907.

  Munro, R.: 1. _The Lake-Dwellings of Europe._ London, Cassell & Co.,
  1890.

  ----, 2. _Palæolithic Man and the Terramara Settlements._ Macmillan,
  1912.

  ----, 3. Discussion in _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._ for 1890.

  Myres, J.L., "A History of the Pelasgian Theory," _Jour. of Hellenic
  Studies_, vol. XXVII, pp. 170-226, 1907.


  Nansen, Fridtjof, _In Northern Mists_. New York, Frederick A. Stokes,
  1911.

  Nason, Elias, _A Gazetteer of the State of Massachusetts_. B. B.
  Russell, 1874.

  Nordenskiöld, Erland, "Finland: The Land and the People,"
  _Geographical Review_, vol. VII, no. 6, pp. 361-375, June 1919.


  Oman, Sir Charles: 1. _The Dark Ages._ London, Rivington's Press,
  1905.

  ----, 2. _England before the Norman Conquest._ London, Methuen & Co.;
  or New York, Putnam, 1913.

  Origin, Birthplace, Nationality, and Language of the Canadian People.
  Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Ottawa, 1929.

  Osborn, Henry Fairfield: 1. _Men of the Old Stone Age_, 2d edition.
  New York, Scribner, 1918.

  ----, 2. _The Origin of Life._ New York, Scribner, 1917.

  Owen, Thomas M., _History of Alabama_, vol. II. Chicago, Clarke
  Publishing Co., 1921.


  Palfrey, John Gorham, _A Compendious History of New England_, vol.
  IV. Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1893.

  Palgrave, Sir Francis, _The Rise and Progress of the English
  Commonwealth_. London, 1832.

  Parkman, Francis, _The Old Régime in Canada_. Boston, Little, Brown &
  Co., 1905.

  Parrish, Randall, _Historic Illinois_. Chicago, A.C. McClurg, 1905.

  Parsons, F.G., "Anthropological Observations on German Prisoners of
  War," _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XLIX, 1919.

  Paxson, Frederic L., _History of the American Frontier_. Boston,
  Houghton Mifflin & Co., 1924.

  Payne, Edward John, _A History of the New World Called America_.
  Oxford Press, vol. I, 1892; vol. II, 1899.

  Peake, H.J.E., _Memorials of Old Leicestershire_. 1911.

  Pearl, Raymond, "The Sterilization of Degenerates," _Eugenics
  Review_, April, 1919.

  Peck, J.M., _A New Guide for Emigrants to the West_. Boston, Gould,
  Kendall & Lincoln, 1836.

  Penck, Albrecht, "Das Alter des Menschengeschlechts," _Zeitschr. f.
  Eth._, Jahrg. 40, Heft 3, pp. 390-407. 1908.

  Penka, K., _Die Herkunft der Arier_. Wien, 1886.

  Petrie, W.M.F., "Migrations," _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XXXVI,
  pp. 189-233. 1906.

  Pickett, Albert James, _History of Alabama_, vol. II. Charleston,
  Walker & James, 1851.

  Pliny, _Natural History_.

  Plutarch's _Lives_, Langhorne translation. London, Frederick Warne &
  Co.

  Pollard, A.F., _A Political History of England_, vol. IV. London,
  Longmans, Green & Co., 1915.

  Polybius, _History_.

  Popenoe, Paul, "One Phase of Man's Modern Evolution," _19th
  International Congress of Americanists_, pp. 617 seq. Washington,
  D.C., 1915.

  Popenoe, Paul, and Johnson, Roswell H., _Applied Eugenics_. 2d ed.
  New York, Macmillan, 1933.

  _Popular History of New England_, 2 vols. Boston, Crocker & Co., 1881.

  Priestly, Herbert Ingram, _The Coming of the White Man, 1492-1848_; A
  History of American Life, vol. I. New York, The Macmillan Co., 1929.

  Procopius, _A History of the Wars_, translated by H.B. Dewing, Loeb
  Classical Library. New York, Putnam; and London, Wm. Heinemann, 1919.

  Pumpelly, Raphael, _Explorations in Turkestan_. Washington, D.C.,
  Carnegie Inst., 1905 and 1908.


  Ramsey, J.G. M., _The Annals of Tennessee_. Kingsport, Tenn.,
  Kingsport Press, 1853.

  Ranke, Johannes, _Der Mensch_. Leipsig, 1866-7.

  Ratzel, Friedrich, _The History of Mankind_. Macmillan, 1908.

  Reade, Arthur, _Finland and the Finns_. New York, 1915.

  Reid, Sir G. Archdall: 1. _The Laws of Heredity_. London, Methuen &
  Co., 1910.

  ----, 2. _The Principles of Heredity_. London, Chapman & Hall, 1905.

  Reinach, Salomon, "Inscription attique relative à l'invasion des
  Galates en Grèce," _Rev. Celtique_, série 11, pp. 80-85.

  Reisner, George A., _The Early Dynastic Cemeteries of Naga ed-Dêr_.
  University of California publications, 1908; Leipsig, J.C. Hinrichs,
  1905.

  Retzius, G.: 1. _Anthropologia Suecica, Beiträge zur Anthropologie
  der Schweden_. Stockholm, 1902.

  ----, 2. _Crania Suecica Antiqua_. Stockholm, 1900.

  ----, 3. "The So-Called North European Race of Mankind," _Jour. Roy.
  Anth. Inst._, vol. XXXIX, pp. 277-314. 1909.

  Rice, Holmes T.: 1. _Ancient Britain and the Conquests of Julius
  Cæsar_. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1907.

  ----, 2. _Cæsar's Conquest of Gaul_. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1911.

  Ridgeway, Sir William: 1. _The Early Age of Greece_. Cambridge, 1901.



  ----, 2. _The Origin and Influence of the Thoroughbred Horse_.
  Cambridge University Press, 1905.

  ----, 3. "Who Were the Romans?" _Proceedings of the British Academy_,
  1907-1908.

  Riegel, Robert E., _America Moves West_. New York, Henry Holt & Co.,
  1930.

  Ripley, William Z., _The Races of Europe_. New York, D. Appleton &
  Co., 1899.

  Robinson, Edward, _University of Minnesota Studies in Social
  Sciences_, no. 3.

  Robinson, Will H., _Story of Arizona_. Phoenix, The Berryhill Co.,
  1926.

  Roosevelt, Theodore, _Winning of the West_, vol. IV. New York, G.P.
  Putnam's Sons, 1896.

  Rossiter, William S., _Increase of Population in the United States,
  1910-1920_. Washington, D.C., Bureau of the Census, 1922.

  Rowland, Dunbar, _Mississippi, the Heart of the South_, vol. II.
  Chicago, S.J. Clarke, 1925.

  ----, _Mississippi, the Heart of the South_, vol. I. Chicago, S.J.
  Clarke, 1925.


  Savigny, Friedrich Karl, _Geschichte des römischen Rechtes im
  Mittelalter_.

  Sayce, Archibald Henry, _The Ancient Empires of the East_. Scribner,
  1898.

  Scharf, J. Thomas, _History of Delaware_ (1609-1888), vol. I.
  Philadelphia, L.J. Richards & Co., 1888.

  Schrader, Oscar, _Die Indo-Germanen_. Leipsig, 1911.

  Sclater, W.L. and P.L., _The Geography of Mammals_. London, Kegan
  Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1899.

  _Secret History, or The Horrors of Santo Domingo, in a series of
  Letters Written by a Lady at Cape François to Colonel Burr (late
  Vice-President of the United States) Principally during the Command
  of General Rochambeau._ Philadelphia, Bradford & Inskeep, R. Carr,
  printer, 1808.

  Sergi, G.: 1. _Africa: Antropologia della Stirpe Cannitica (Specie
  Eurafricana)_. Torino, 1897.

  ----, 2. _Arii e Italici_. Torino, 1898.

  ----, 3. _Italia: le Origini_. Torino, Fratelli Bocca, Editori, 1919.

  ----, 4. _The Mediterranean Race._ New York, Scribner; and London,
  Walter Scott, 1901.

  Shaler, N.S., _Kentucky_. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co. 1893.

  Skeat, W.W., _The Wars of Alexander_, translated chiefly from
  _Historia Alexandra Magni de preliis_. London, N. Trübner & Co., 1886.

  Smith, G. Elliot: 1. _The Ancient Egyptians_. Harper, 1911.

  ----, 2. "Ancient Mariners," _Journal of the Manchester Geographical
  Society_, vol. XXXIII, parts 1-4, pp. 1-22, 1917. Manchester and
  London, April, 1918.

  Soane, E.B., _To Mesopotamia and Kurdistan in Disguise_. Boston,
  Small, Maynard & Co.

  Southern Historical Publication Society, _The South in the Building
  of the Nation--a History of the Southern States_. Richmond, Virginia,
  1909.

  Spangler, J.M., _Civilization in Chile_. San Francisco, H.G. Parsons,
  1885.

  Speranza, Gino, _Race or Nation?_

  Stanard, Mary Newton, _The Story of Virginia's First Century_.
  Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co., 1928.

  Stark, James H., _The Loyalists of Massachusetts_. W.B. Clark Co.,
  1910.

  Stella, Antonio M.D., _Some Aspects of Italian Immigration to the
  United States_. New York and London, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1924.

  Stoddard, Lothrop, _The French Revolution in San Domingo_. Boston,
  Houghton Mifflin Co., 1914.

  Sykes, Mark, "The Kurds," _Jour. Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XXVIII, pp.
  45 _seq._, 1908.


  Tacitus, _Germania_, translated by M. Hutton, Loeb Classical Library.
  New York, Macmillan; and London, Wm. Heinemann, 1914.

  Taylor, Isaac Canon: 1. _The Origin of the Aryans_. London, Walter
  Scott, 1890.

  ----, 2. _Words and Places_, edited by A. Smythe Palmer. New York,
  E.P. Dutton & Co.; and London, Routledge & Son.

  Taylor, Paul S., _Mexican Labor in the United States: Migration
  Statistics_. Univ. of Calif. Pubs. in Econ. 6 (3): 237-255. Berkeley,
  1929.

  Thomas, William Roscoe, _Life Among the Hills and Mountains of
  Kentucky_. Kentucky, Standard Printing Co.

  Thomson, J. Arthur, _Heredity_. New York, Putnam; and London, John
  Murray, 1926. 5th ed.

  Topinard, P.: 1. "Carte de la couleur des yeux et des cheveux en
  France," _Rev. d'anth._, série 3, IV, pp. 513-530.

  ----, 2. _Éléments d'anthropologie générale_. Paris, Delahaye et
  Lecrosnier, 1885.

  Trevelyan, Sir George, _George III and Charles Fox_. London,
  Longmans, Green & Co., 1914.


  Utley, Henry M., _Michigan as a Province, Territory and State_. The
  Publishing Society of Michigan, 1906.


  Van der Zee, _The British in Iowa_. Iowa City, State Hist. Society,
  1922.

  Van Tramp, John C., _Prairie and Rocky Mountain Adventures_.
  Columbus, Segner & Condit, 1867.

  Villari, Pasquale, _The Barbarian Invasions of Italy_, translated by
  Linda Villari, 2 vols. Scribner, 1902.

  Von Luschan, F.: 1. "The Early Inhabitants of Western Asia," _Jour.
  Roy. Anth. Inst._, vol. XLI, pp. 221-244.

  ---- (with E. Petersen). _Reisen in Lykien, Milyas und Kibyratis._
  Wien, 1889.


  Wallis, B.C.: 1. "The Rumanians in Hungary," _Geographical Review_,
  Aug., 1918.

  ----, 2. "The Slavs of Northern Hungary," _Geo. Rev._, Sept., 1918.

  ----,3. "The Slavs of Southern Hungary," _Geo. Rev._, Oct., 1918.

  ----, 4. "Central Hungary: Magyars and Germans," _Geo. Rev._, Nov.,
  1918.

  Weeden, William B., _Early Rhode Island_. New York, The Grafton
  Press, 1910.

  Wertenbaker, Thomas: 1. _Patrician and Plebeian in Virginia_.
  Virginia, The Michie Co., 1910.

  ----, 2. _The First Americans_ (1607-1690). New York, The Macmillan
  Co., 1927.

  Whitney, Orson F., _History of Utah_, vol. I. Utah, Geo. Q. Cannon &
  Sons Co., 1892.

  Willcox, Walter F., _International Migrations_, vols. I and II. New
  York, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1929 and 1931.

  Wilser, L., _Die Germanen_. Eisenach u. Leipsig, 1904.

  Wilstach, Paul, _Tidewater Virginia_. Indianapolis, The Bobbs-Merrill
  Co., 1929.

  Winsor, Justin: 1. _The Mississippi Basin. The Struggle in America
  between England and France_. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1895.

  ----, 2. (ed.) _Narrative and Critical History of America_. Boston,
  Houghton Mifflin Co., 1894.

  _Wisconsin in Three Centuries_, 4 vols. New York, Century History
  Co., 1906.

  Wissler, Clark, _The American Indian_. New York, Douglas C.
  McMurtrie, 1917.

  Woodruff, C.E.: 1. _The Effect of Tropical Light on White Men_. New
  York and London, Rebman Co., 1905.

  ----, 2. _The Expansion of Races_. New York, Rebman Co., 1909.

  Woods, Frederick Adams: 1. _Heredity in Royalty_. New York, Henry
  Holt & Co., 1906.

  ----, 2. _The Influence of Monarchs_. Macmillan, 1913.

  ----, 3. "Significant Evidence for Mental Heredity," _Jour. of
  Hered._, vol. VIII, no. 13, pp. 106-112. Washington, D.C., 1917.

  Work, Monroe N., _Negro Year Book_, 1931-32 (Negro Census by States),
  vol. VIII. Tuskegee Institute, Ala. Ala. Negro Year Book Pub. Co.

  Wortham, Louis J., LL.D., _A History of Texas_ (From Wilderness to
  Commonwealth). Fort Worth, Wortham-Molyneaux Co., 1924.


  Yoakum, H., Esq., _History of Texas_ (Its First Settlement in 1685 to
  Its Annexation to the U.S. in 1846). New York, Redfield, 1856.


  Zaborowski, M.S.: 1. "Les peuples aryens d'Asie et d'Europe" (part of
  the _Encyclopédie scientifique_), Octave Doin, Éditeur. Paris, 1908.

  ----, 2. "Relations primitives des Germains et des Finnois," _Bull.
  Soc. d'anth._, pp. 174-79. Paris, 1897.

  ----, 3. _Les races de l'Italie_. Paris, 1897.

  Zeuss, J.K., _Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstamme_. München, 1837.



INDEX


  Aberdeen, 136.

  Abolitionists, 210.

  Acadia, 308, 309.

  "Acadie" (Nova Scotia), 308.

  Achæans, invasions into Greece, 26;
    Nordics in West as, 39;
    Osco-Umbrians, kin to, 39.

  Africa, Negro slaves in, 9;
    Christianity in, 14;
    (Ethiopia) early races in, 19, 20.

  Alabama, settlement in, 183, 184;
    heart of Cotton Kingdom, 184;
    Scotch and English blood in, 184;
    1930 census native population, 242.

  Alans, the, 44, 45, 46.

  Alaska, 90.

  Albanians, 36.

  Albany (N.Y.), 102, 110, 168;
    Ulster Scots in, 108;
    increase in Negroes in, 237.

  Albemarle, 138.

  Alberta, 314, 318.

  Alemanni, the, 42, 51, 52.

  Alemannish dialect, 79, 166.

  Alexander the Great, 23.

  Alien Act of 1798, 268.

  Aliens, public sentiment in America, 1;
    attitude toward, 268;
    restrictions of, 269;
    opposition to restrictions of, 269;
    literacy test for, 269;
    Quota Act of 1921, 270, 271;
    National Origins Act, 272, 274, 278.

  Alleghanies, Ulster Scots west of, 123;
    "poor whites" in, 135.

  Allentown (Pa.), 121.

  Alpine race, characteristics of, 29, 30;
    origin of, 29;
    similarity to Mongols, 29;
    extent of domain, 31;
    Turanians, 31, 32;
    Armenians, 32;
    increase in Central Europe, 33;
    in United States, 153.

  Alpine Slavs, 15.

  Alsace, 50, 116.

  Amazonian Basin, 335.

  America, Catholics in, 4;
    Jews in, 4, 224-227;
    South Germans in, 8;
    relative diminution of Anglo-Saxon blood in, 10;
    whites and blacks in, 12, 13;
    origin of American Indians in, 19;
    Norman element in, 55;
    Ulster Scots in, 60;
    sentiment for France in, 71;
    naval war with France in 1798, 71;
    motive of early settlers in, 65;
    migration from Leinster to, 76;
    "Scotch Irish" of, 92;
    emigration from Ireland to, 93;
    Huguenot migration to, 96;
    North German Nordics in, 143;
    opportunities for British race in, 156;
    migration toward Pacific Coast, 158;
    emigration of Scottish farmers to, 159;
    emigration of Southern England farmers to, 159;
    emigration of Irish to, 159;
    emigration of Germans to, 161, 162;
    South Irish Catholics in, 218;
    freedom of speech and press in, 219;
    waste in, 221;
    ratio of criminals in, 224;
    alien invasion in, 223-234;
    migration following the Revolution, 256;
    migration with panic of 1819, 256;
    migration at time of land speculation by Andrew Jackson, 256;
    minority of women among recent immigration groups in, 275;
    solutions of Negro elimination in, 285 ff.
    _See also under_ United States.

  American colonies, Nordics in, 77.

  American Indians, Mongols and Alpines ancestors of, 30;
    Mongolian blood in, 37.

  American Protective Association, 313.

  American Revolution, the influence of Massachusetts during, 99;
    loss of population during, 100;
    increase in migration following, 101;
    New York State after, 108;
    migration after, 109;
    troops from New York and Massachusetts, 111;
    Calvinistic, 121.

  Amerinds, 26, 27.

  Amish, 79.

  Andalusia, 188, 333.

  Andover, 94.

  Angles, the, 59.

  Anglicans, Quakers become, 121.

  Angora, 41.

  Annapolis, 127.

  Apache Indians, 291.

  Apennines, the, 41, 51.

  Appalachian valleys, 74, 78;
    lawlessness in, 67.

  Apulia, 39.

  Arabia, 22, 27;
    the Mediterraneans of, 24.

  Arabs, in Spain, 46, 49;
    race mixture among, 49;
    period of expansion, 49;
    ruined by Negro women, 49

  Aral Sea, 34.

  Argentina, 338;
    racial composition of, 339, 340.

  Argonauts, the, 216.

  Argyllshire, 159.

  Arians, 46.

  Arius, 46.

  Arizona, 152, 213, 214;
    Mexicans in, 162, 262;
    separated from New Mexico, 262;
    Mormons in, 262;
    Texans in, 263;
    Indians in, 289.

  Arkansas, 243;
    settlement in, 189, 190;
    growth of, 190;
    British stock in, 190.

  Arkansas River, 189.

  Armenians, 32.

  Armorican language, 58.

  Aryan language, Centum group, 24-25;
    Satem group, 24-25.

  Ashkanazim Jews, 225.

  Asia, Christianity in, 14;
    Mongoloid tribes of northeastern, 19;
    expansion of civilization in southeastern, 23.

  Asia Minor, Nordic Gauls in, 41;
    Turks in, 50.

  Asiatics, 356.

  Assyria, 22.

  Assyrians, cruelty of, 156.

  "Asylum for the Oppressed," 268.

  Atlas Mountains, 45.

  Attila, 44, 51.

  Aurora (N.Y.), 110.

  Austin, Moses, 209.

  Australia, 20, 303, 353, 354;
    Negroids in, 28;
    racial tangle in, 28.

  Australoids, the, 20, 21, 28;
    compared to Alpines, 30.

  Austria, 116.

  Austrian Empire, languages in old, 5.

  Aztecs, the, 324.


  Babylonia, 22.

  Bactria, 23.

  Bahamas, the, 345.

  Baltic Sea, 35, 56.

  Baltimore (Md.), growth of, 129;
    cosmopolitan population in, 239.

  Baltimore, Lord, 125, 126, 128.

  Barbadoes, 85, 86, 345.

  Basques, 340.

  Bath (N.Y.), 110.

  Baton Rouge (La.), 187, 245.

  Bavaria, Alpines in, 36.

  Bay of Chaleurs, 296.

  Beaker Makers, 57.

  Belcher, Thomas, 105.

  Belfast, 95.

  Belgæ, the, 41, 42, 43, 58.

  Belgium, languages in, 5;
    the Flemings of, 52.

  Beothics, the, 307.

  Berbers, the, 24;
    in Atlas Mountains (North Africa), 39.

  Berkeley, Governor (Virginia), 126, 132, 135.

  Berkshire, 84.

  Bermuda, 85, 345.

  Bethlehem (Pa.), Moravians in, 117.

  Bigot, 46.

  Binghamton (N.Y.), 109.

  Black Hawk Purchase, 198.

  Black Hawk War, 198.

  Black Hills, gold in, 254.

  Blacks, the, 12, 20;
    advance in America, 13

  Blue Ridge, the, 137, 138.

  Bogotá, 334.

  Bohemia, Czechish in, 5;
    rise of nationalism in, 14;
    Mongolian characters in, 37.

  Bolivia, population of, 341.

  "Bonnie Prince Charlie," 140.

  Boone, Daniel, 123, 145.

  Boone, Daniel Morgan, 200.

  "Boone's Lick," 191.

  Boston (Mass.), 71, 82, 101, 105;
    Huguenots in, 97.

  Braddock, General, 137.

  Bradford (postmaster), 83.

  Brandenburg, 181.

  Branford (N.J.), 113.

  Brattleboro (Vt.), 89.

  Brazil, Portuguese in, 335;
    European immigrants in, 336;
    size of, 337.

  Bristol, 307.

  Britain, Celts in, 41;
    invaded by Saxons, 59;
    invaded by Angles and Jutes, 59;
    Norman conquest in 1066, 60, 61.

  British Columbia, 297, 354;
    Asiatic problem in, 315, 316.

  British Commonwealth, 303.

  British Empire, abolition of slavery in, 11.

  British Honduras, 331.

  British Islands, mixture of Nordics and Mediterraneans in, 33.

  British Isles, racial composition of, 57.

  British West Indies, 345.

  Brittany, Armorican language in, 58.

  Bronze Age, 57;
    Alpines in, 31.

  Brooklyn (N.Y.), 105.

  Brythons, the, 41, 42, 43, 58.

  Buckingham, 84.

  Buffalo (N.Y.), 177;
    increase in Negroes in, 237.

  Burgundians, the, 42, 46, 50.

  Burlington (Iowa), 197.

  Burlington (N.J.), 112.

  Burma, Sanscrit in, 25;
    English rule in, 355.

  Burnett Act, 270.

  Bushmen, the, 20.

  Byrd, Colonel, 136.

  Byzantine Empire, 54.


  Cabot, John, 307.

  Cæsar, Julius, 221;
    campaigns in Gaul, 41.

  Caithness, 55.

  "Cajans," 6.

  Calabria, 39.

  Calhoun, John C., 168.

  California, 152, 173;
    Mexicans in, 162;
    Indians and Spaniards in, 214;
    annexed to United States, 215;
    Spanish blood in, 215;
    increase in Americans in, 215, 216;
    gold in, 215, 263;
    Chinese in, 216;
    contrasted with other United States frontiers, 217;
    foreigners in, 263-267;
    migration to, 263, 264;
    Nordic element in, 264;
    decline of Chinese in, 265;
    vote against Chinese immigration, 265;
    racial problems in, 265, 266;
    Indians in, 289.

  California gold rush, 199.

  Camoens, 48.

  Campbelltown, 139.

  Canada, French language in, 5;
    migration of Loyalists to, 100, 110;
    annexed to the Union, 111;
    divisions of, 296, 297;
    Maritime Provinces, 296, 300;
    Quebec, 297-301;
    Upper Canada, 297, 302;
    inducements to immigrants, 302;
    population in 1840, 304;
    Irish Catholics in, 304;
    population in 1871, 305;
    British and French in, 305;
    Mounted Police in, 305;
    Indians in, 306;
    migration from United States to, 316-319;
    British immigration in, 317;
    "foreign stock" in, 317, 318;
    Jews in, 317;
    few Negroes in, 318;
    Nordic element in, 318;
    strength of Roman Catholic Church in, 318;
    1921 census, 319.

  Canandaigua (N.Y.), 109, 110.

  Canary Islands, 188.

  Cape Cod Bay, 82.

  Cape Fear River, 139.

  Cape May, 112.

  Caribbean Sea, 12, 155, 348.

  Caribs, 331.

  Carlisle (Pa.), 122.

  Carpathians, the, 31.

  Carroll, Jesuit John, 151.

  Carter, Colonel John, 137.

  Caspian Sea, 34.

  Caucasus, the, 44;
    beauty of women in, 50.

  Cayuga, 110.

  Celtiberians, 40.

  Celtic Nordics, 36;
    conquest of Spain by, 40;
    in British Isles, 40.

  Celtic-speaking tribes, 42.

  Celtic tribes, in Gaul and Britain, 40, 41;
    "Q" and "P," 57, 58.

  Central America, 294, 330 ff., 348.

  Central Asia, 17, 44.

  Central Pacific Railway, 265.

  Cervantes, 48.

  Chaldea, 22.

  Chalons, 44;
    Battle of, 52.

  Champlain, 300, 301.

  Charlemagne, 31;
    the Franks under, 54;
    conquest of Saxons, 54.

  Charles I, 126, 135.

  Charleston (S.C.), 41, 42;
    Ulster Scots enter colonies through, 77, 78.

  Charlestown (Mass.), 82.

  Chesapeake Bay, 73.

  Chester, 114.

  Cheyenne (Wyo.), 259.

  Chicago (Ill.), 196, 229.

  Chickasaw Indians, 291.

  Chile, white races in, 340.

  China, rise of nationalism in, 14;
    Mongols of, 19.

  Chinese, the, 353;
    in California, 265.

  Choctaws, 291.

  Christian Syrians, 339.

  Christianity, Unitarian form of, 46;
    orthodox, 46.

  Christy, Howard Chandler, 3.

  Cid Campeador, 48.

  Cimbri, 42.

  Cincinnati (Ohio), 161, 164, 248.

  Circassians, the, 50.

  Cisalpine Gaul, 41, 51.

  City of Brotherly Love (Philadelphia), 114.

  Civil War, 2, 3, 12, 138, 158, 169-176, 193, 199, 200, 207, 212, 214,
  220, 223, 229, 241, 254, 262, 267, 349;
    Irish in, 161;
    influence of "Solid South" after, 282.

  Civilization, development of, 22 ff.

  Clark, General George Rogers, 163, 167, 168, 171.

  Clay, Henry, 87, 211.

  Cleveland (Ohio), 165.

  Coast cities, inhabitants richer than frontiersmen, 75.

  Colbert, 299.

  Coligny, 141, 192.

  Coligny, Admiral, 96.

  Collinson, Peter, 117.

  Colombia, population of, 333.

  Colonial times, racial population in, 2;
    religion in, 4;
    intermarriage during, 8.

  Colonies, original racial complexion of, 75;
    Ulster Scots in, 78.

  Color, 26, 27.

  Colorado, 173, 203;
    Daniel Boone's grandson in, 123;
    Southeastern, 213;
    gold in, 258;
    Nordics in, 259;
    Mexican population in, 292.

  Columbia River, 260.

  Columbus, Christopher, 48, 56, 208.

  Commonwealth, Puritans under the, 66.

  Comstock Lode, 261.

  Confederate Army, 260.

  Congregationalists, hostile to Presbyterians, 94.

  Conkling, Senator Roscoe (quoted), 288.

  Connecticut, 94, 108;
    early settlement of, 72, 86, 87;
    growth of, 101;
    Western Reserve of, 164, 165;
    foreign-born in, 218;
    1930 census native population, 236.

  Connecticut River, 90;
    migration to, 72.

  Connecticut River Valley, 82;
    "forts" of Dutch in, 104.

  Constitution of the United States, 155.

  Constitution of 1835, 177.

  Continental Congress, religion of, 69.

  Continentals, the, 139.

  Convention of 1787, 7, 155.

  Cornwall, 58.

  Corsica, Vandals in, 45.

  Costa Rica, population of, 332, 333;
    Nordic infusion in, 333.

  Creek Indians, 183.

  Creeks, the, 246.

  Crefeld, 116.

  Creoles, French spoken by, 6.

  Crete, 22.

  Crimea, the, 44.

  Cromwell, Oliver, 93, 125;
    and Irish Rebellion, 133.

  Crown Point, 108.

  Crusades, the, 53.

  Cuba, 211;
    population of, 343.

  Cumberland Gap, 145, 146

  Cumberland Presbyterian Church, 122.

  Cymric, 58.


  Dacia, 44.

  Dacian Plains, 39.

  Dakota, 197;
    rush into, 253.

  Dante, 48.

  Danube, the, 44.

  Da Vinci, Leonardo, 48.

  Davis, John (quoted), 187, 188.

  Dayton (Ohio), 164.

  Declaration of Independence, 101;
    religion of signers, 69.

  Dedham, 81.

  de Lapouge, Count, 33, 49.

  Delaware, 73, 125;
    1930 census native population, 239.

  Delaware River, 111;
    English settlers along, 73;
    French Huguenots along, 73;
    surrounding land colonized by Quakers, 112.

  Democracy, 356.

  Denmark, 22, 59, 345.

  de Saussure, 141.

  Detroit (Mich.), 176, 229.

  Devonshire, 307.

  Dippers, 115.

  District of Columbia, residents of, 239;
    Negroes in, 239, 240.

  Dorchester (Mass.), 82, 87, 144.

  Dorchester Society, 144.

  Drummond, James, the Earl of Perth, 113.

  Dubuque, John, 197.

  Duke of Liegnitz, 53.

  Duke of York, 125.

  Dundas (Ontario), 312.

  Dunkards, 79.

  Dutch East India Company, 102.

  Dutch settlement, 102 ff.


  East Anglia, Puritan emigration from, 84.

  East Jersey, 112;
    stronghold of Scotch Presbyterians in, 113.

  Ecuador, Indian tribes in, 343.

  Edict of Nantes, 127, 139;
    revocation of, 96.

  Egypt, 22, 25;
    rise of nationalism in, 14;
    Libyans in, 39.

  Elbe, the, 31, 54.

  Electoral College, 282.

  Elizabeth (N.J.), 77.

  Elizabethtown (N.J.), 113.

  Elizabethtown Association, the, 113.

  Emigration Society Land Company, 212.

  Emmet, Robert, 159.

  Emmet, Thomas A., 159.

  Empire Settlement Act, 317.

  England, Norman element in, 55;
    Norsemen in, 59;
    Puritan emigration from, 82;
    Palatines in, 107;
    population at time of Revolution, 154.

  English Quakers, 77.

  English Whigs, 70.

  Episcopalians, strength of, 69.

  Ericson, Leif, 56.

  Erie Canal, 105, 106, 110, 168, 172, 177.

  Erse language, 57.

  Eskimos, 307.

  Ethiopia (Africa), 27;
    early races in, 19, 20;
    true Negroes in, 28.

  Euphrates, Valley of the, 22.

  Eurasia, 18, 19;
    development of civilization in southwestern, 22;
    racial groupings in, 27;
    Negroids in, 27;
    Negritos in, 28.

  Europe, intermingling of peoples in, 21;
    racial mixtures in, 36;
    saved from Mongols, 53;
    Nordics in, at time of discovery of America, 61;
    monopoly of land ownership in, 65.

  _Evangeline_ (Longfellow), 186.


  Fairfield (Conn.), 87.

  Fall Line, the, 73.

  Falmouth, 101.

  Fayetteville, 139.

  Federal Children's Bureau, 275.

  Federal Government, 163.

  Federal Supreme Court, 277.

  Filipinos, 224, 294.

  Finland, Ural-Altaic language in, 24.

  Finlanders, 111.

  Firbolgs, the, 62.

  Flemings, in New York, 76.

  Florida, 152;
    Spanish in, 117;
    South Carolinians in, 142;
    settlement in, 192-194;
    ceded by Spain to England, 193;
    second Nordic invasion of, 193;
    slow development of, 193;
    small population in, 193, 194;
    Negroes in, 193;
    1930 census native population, 241.

  Forbes, General, 138.

  Foreign missions, 355.

  Fort Orange (N.Y.), 102.

  Fort Schuyler (N.Y.), 110.

  Fort Snelling, 196.

  Fort Stanwix (N.Y.), 110.

  Founders of the Republic, 237.

  France, races in, 4, 5;
    unity of national feeling in, 4;
    Alpines in, 15;
    decrease of Nordics in, 33, 49;
    Alpines in, 42;
    as a Nordic land, 42;
    eldest son of the church, 46, 47;
    (southern) Gothic names in, 48;
    variety of names in, 49.

  Franklin, Benjamin 84, 124;
    (quoted), 118-120.

  Franks, the, 42, 46;
    in Gaul and western Germany, 52;
    had support of Roman Church, 52;
    in Belgium, 52;
    in northern France, 53;
    conquer Franconia, 54;
    seize northern Italy, under Charlemagne, 54.

  Frederick County (Md.), 129.

  Free State Catholics, 273.

  Freehold (N.J.), 77, 112.

  French, the Nordics and Alpines among the, 36;
    in Quebec province, 301;
    emigration from Quebec to New England, 301.

  French Canadians, 355;
    influence of Roman Catholic Church on, 311.

  French Huguenots, in New England, 73;
    in New York, 76;
    in South Carolina, 80;
    in North Carolina, 139.

  Friesland, 116.

  Frontier, the, character of, 68;
    history of, 156, 157;
    effect of Indians on, 157.


  Gadsden Purchase, 210.

  Gaelic, spoken in Scotland, 58;
    spoken in Nova Scotia, 309.

  Galatia, 41, 45;
    Gothic blood in, 47.

  Galatians, 41, 42.

  Galena, 196.

  Galicia, Mongolian characters in, 37.

  Gallegos, the, 333.

  Garvey, the Negro, 287.

  Gaul, 221;
    Celts in, 41;
    remnant of Visigoths in, 46.

  Gauls, the, 42.

  Gelderland, 103.

  Gendron, 141.

  Geneva (N.Y.), 110.

  Genoa, 48, 231.

  "Genoese," 231, 264.

  Genseric, 45.

  "Gentiles," the, 261.

  Georgia, racial complexion in, 80;
    Palatines in, 116, 117;
    settlement of, 143, 144;
    benefited after Revolution, 145;
    1930 census native population in, 241;
    idle farming in, 243.

  Georgians, the, 50, 145.

  Gepidæ, the, 44.

  German Jews, 226.

  Germans, among Roman Catholics in the colonies, 70;
    forced to the West, 73;
    in Pennsylvania, 73;
    in the colonies, 79.

  Germantown (Pa.), founded by Mennonites, 115.

  Germany, quota of immigrants from, 2;
    races in, 4;
    Nordics in eastern, 14;
    Revolution of 1848, 161, 181;
    immigrants in America, 161, 162;
    peak of emigration in, 228, 229.

  Gettysburg (Pa.), 122.

  Ghetto population, 227.

  Glenelg, 312.

  Glengarry (Ontario), 108, 312.

  Gloucestershire, 84.

  Gobi desert, 23.

  Goidelic, the, conquer the Neolithic Mediterraneans in Ireland, 62.

  Goidels, 40, 57.

  Gold, discovered in California, 215;
    caused increase in California population, 216.

  Gothia Septimania, 46.

  Goths, the, 43, 250;
    in South Russia, 44.

  "Great American Desert," 155.

  Great Britain, emigration from New England to, 86;
    "White Man's Burden" in, 352, 354.

  Great Lakes, the, 163.

  Great Salt Lake, 204.

  Great Wall of China, 34.

  Greece, 22;
    invasions of Achæans into, 26;
    Nordic conquest of, 39.

  Green Mountain Boys, 90.

  Greenwich (Conn.), 104, 105.

  Guadalquivir, the, 46.

  Guarani Indians, 341.

  Guatemala, population of, 330, 332.

  Guiana (British), 334;
    (Dutch), 334;
    (French), 334, 335.

  Guilford (N.J.), 113.

  Gulf of California, 210, 211.

  Gulf of Mexico, 12, 287.

  Gulf of Saint Lawrence, 296.

  Gulf States, extermination of Indians in, 291.


  Habitants, the, origin of, 298;
    physical type of, 299;
    effect of decline in birthrate on, 302.

  Haiti, 287;
    loss of white control in, 11, 12;
    barbarism in, 12;
    Negro Republic, 345.

  Hamitic language, 24.

  Hamburg, 116.

  Hampshire, 84, 159.

  Hamptons, the, 105.

  Hansen, Professor, 152.

  Hartford (Conn.), 87.

  Hawaii, 349;
    Japanese element in, 295;
    possible source of undesirable immigration, 295.

  Hawaiians, 294.

  Henry, Patrick, 136.

  Henry VII, 307.

  Highlands, the, mixture of races in, 61.

  Hindus, the, 27, 353;
    Aryan speech among, 27.

  Hittites, 32, 39.

  Holland, 103, 116;
    Palatines in, 107.

  Holland (Mich.), 178.

  Holstein, 59.

  Holston settlement, the, 148.

  _Homo sapiens_, 20.

  Honduras, population of, 331.

  Hottentots, the, 20.

  Hudson, Henry, 102.

  Hudson (N.Y.), 109.

  Hudson River, New Englanders and Germans along, 73;
    Dutch settlements along, 102.

  Hudson River valley, 110;
    Dutch in, 102, 103, 105;
    growth of towns in, 109.

  Hudson's Bay Colony, 314.

  Huger, 141.

  Huguenot French, during the Revolution, 7.

  Huguenots, migration to America, 96, 97.

  Humboldt, 322.

  Hungary, 50;
    Ural-Altaic language in, 24.

  Huns, 31, 44.

  Hunter, Governor (N.Y.), 106.

  Hussites, 79.


  Iberian Peninsula, 333.

  Iberians, 40, 61.

  Iberville (French explorer), 291.

  Idaho, first settlement in, 205;
    part of Washington territory, 205;
    growth during Civil War, 260;
    Nordic strength in, 260.

  Illinois, 149, 164, 175;
    settlement of, 170-176;
    boom in, 171;
    Erie Canal access to, 172;
    lead mines in, 172;
    dominated by Ulster Scots, 173;
    population at beginning of Civil War, 173;
    represented in Westward migration, 173;
    Germans in, 175;
    Irish in, 175, 176;
    English in, 176;
    Mormons in, 176;
    Scandinavians in, 176;
    Mexican population in, 293;
    native population in, 249;
    Negroes in, 249.

  Illinois Central Railway, 174, 176.

  Immigration Commission (1907), 269.

  Incas, 341.

  India, rise of nationalism in, 14;
    Sanscrit in, 25;
    Aryans in, 25;
    passing of Nordics in, 26;
    Pre-Dravidians of, 27;
    English rule in, 355.

  Indian War of 1855-1856, 207.

  Indiana, 164;
    Southerners in, 167;
    Ulster Scots and Quakers in, 167;
    "Underground Railroad" in, 167;
    settlement of, 167-170;
    Nordic influence in, 169, 170;
    population in, 169, 170;
    influence of Germans in, 181;
    native population in, 248, 249.

  Indianapolis (Ind.), 169, 170.

  Indians, American, 22, 66;
    origin of, 19;
    culture of, 19;
    cruelty of, 156;
    effect on the frontier, 157;
    1930 population in United States, 289;
    distribution in United States, 289;
    on Pacific Coast, 290;
    on Atlantic Coast, 291;
    lived as hunters, 291, 292;
    intermarriage with Whites, 292.

  Indus, Valley of the, 25.

  Inquisition, the, 227.

  Inverness, 108, 312.

  Inverness-shire, 159.

  Invincible Armada, 208.

  Iowa, 175, 195, 197;
    delay in settlement, 198;
    Southerners in, 198;
    foreign immigrants in, 198;
    entered Union as a State, 200;
    Nordic and Anglo-Saxon, 200;
    native population in, 252;
    agricultural, 252.

  Iranian, division of Aryan languages, 25;
    distribution in Asia, 26.

  Ireland, quota of immigrants from, 2;
    Erse in, 5, 6, 57, 58;
    potato famine in, 7;
    rise of nationalism in, 14;
    attacked by Norse and Danes, 55;
    Norsemen in, 59;
    Neolithic Mediterraneans in, 62;
    the Goidelics in, 62;
    Norse and Danes in, 62;
    English language in, 63;
    religion in, 63;
    the Reformation in, 63;
    Protestants in, 92, 93;
    emigration to North America from, 159, 160.

  Irish Free State, 273.

  Irish Rebellion in 1652, 133.

  Iroquois Five Nations, 300, 301.

  Iroquois Indians, 73, 291.

  Isle of Man, 58.

  Italians, immigration in United States, 231;
    high birthrate of, 276.

  Italy, races in, 4;
    invasions of Osco-Umbrians in, 26, 39;
    Ostrogoths in, 44;
    northern, 116;
    emigration from, 231.


  Jackson, Andrew, 70, 256.

  Jamaica, 345;
    results of abolition of slavery in, 11.

  James I, 63, 92, 93.

  James II, 127.

  James River, 130.

  Jamestown (Va.), settlement of, 130, 297;
    Negroes in, 131.

  Japan, Christianity in, 14;
    "gentlemen's agreement" with United States, 266.

  Japanese, in California, 266.

  Jefferson, Thomas, 70, 208, 237, 245.

  Jews, 46.

  Johnson, Honorable Albert, 1 n.; 270.

  Johnson, Sir John, 108, 312.

  Johnson, Sir William, 108.

  Johnston, Gabriel, 140.

  Johnston, Sir Harry H., 6.

  Jordanes, 43.

  Judaism, 225.

  Jutes, the, 59.

  Jutland, 59.


  Kansas, 173;
    slavery in, 12;
    Daniel Boone's son in, 123;
    Kansas-Nebraska settlement, 200;
    battleground for slavery and free-soil elements, 201;
    few New England settlers in, 202;
    increase in emigration from Free States, 202;
    of British complexion, 202, 203;
    native population in, 255;
    settlement of, 256;
    Mexican population in, 292.

  Kassites, 39.

  Kearney, Dennis, 265.

  Kent, 84, 159.

  Kentaro, Baron Keneko, 9.

  Kentucky, 72, 157;
    Boone in, 123;
    settlement of, 145, 146;
    growth of, 146;
    English atmosphere in, 147;
    admitted as a State, 147;
    Alpines in, 153;
    1930 census native population, 242.

  Kenya Colony, 353.

  Khozars (Alpine), 225.

  King Philip's War, 88.

  Kingston (Ontario), 110.

  Kintail, 312.

  Kirkhill, 312.

  Klondike gold rush, 130, 305.

  "Know Nothings," 218;
    principle of, 219.

  Knoydart, 312.

  Korea, 31.

  Krim, Götisch, 44.

  Kurds, the, 50.


  Labadists, the, 116.

  Labrador, 308.

  Lafayette, 12, 71.

  Lake Champlain, 90, 109, 300.

  Lake Erie, 110;
    first steamboat on, 177.

  Lake George, 108.

  Lake Ontario, 110.

  Lancaster (Pa.), 79, 121, 124.

  Land Act (1818), 189.

  Languages, in West Indies, 23, 24;
    Hamitic, 24;
    spoken by Alpines, 24;
    Aryan, 24 ff.;
    Erse, 57.
    _See also under_ various languages.

  Lanier, 141.

  La Plata, 337.

  Latin America, 320, 321, 333, 334, 342, 346;
    Amerinds in, 26;
    Indians in, 321, 322;
    Whites in, 322, 323.

  Laud, Archbishop, 85.

  Laurens, 141.

  Law, John, 187.

  League of Nations, 294.

  Lebanon (Pa.), 121.

  Lebanon, the, 339.

  Lee, Richard, 135.

  Lehigh Valley, Germans in, 120-121.

  Leicester, 84.

  Leinster, 7, 63.

  Leinster Protestants, 93.

  LeSerrurier, 141.

  Liberty Loans, 3.

  Libyans, in Egypt, 39.

  Liegnitz, Battle of, 53.

  Lincolnshire, 83.

  Literacy test, for aliens, vetoed by President Wilson, 269;
    passed over veto, 270.

  Lithuania, 236.

  Lithuanian language, 25.

  Liverpool, 204.

  Lochiel, 312.

  Lombards, 46, 50, 250;
    in Italy, 51;
    overthrown by Franks, 51.

  London, Puritan emigration from, 84;
    Imperial government in, 353.

  Londonderry, 94.

  Lone Star Republic, 211.

  Long Island, 103, 105, 110.

  Lord Baltimore, 80.

  Los Angeles (Calif.), Mexicans in, 328.

  Los Angeles County, Mexicans in, 328.

  Louis XIV, 79, 106.

  Louisiana, 152;
    French language in, 6;
    settlement in, 186-189;
    French in, 186;
    Acadian refugees in, 186;
    Nova Scotians in, 186, 187;
    cosmopolitan population in, 243, 244;
    religious groups in, 244;
    illiteracy test, 244, 245.

  Louisiana Purchase of 1803, 149, 152, 185, 187, 188, 189, 191, 195, 208.

  Lower California, 210.

  Loyalists, 65, 68, 108, 146, 158;
    Episcopalians as, 69;
    expulsion in the North, 69;
    in Boston, 71;
    leave colonies for Canada, England, and English West Indies, 71;
    flee from colonies, 100;
    migration from New York State after the Revolution, 110;
    in New York State during the Revolution, 110;
    Scotch Highlanders as, 139;
    United Empire, 311.

  Lynn (Mass.), 82.


  Magna Græcia, 232.

  Maine, 101;
    scattered settlements on coast of, 87;
    1930 census native population, 235.

  Malay Peninsula, Negroids in, 28.

  Malays, the, 30, 294;
    in the Philippines, 31;
    in Japan, 31.

  Man, ancestry of, 17.

  Manhattan, Negroes in, 237.

  Manhattan Island, 102, 111.

  Manitoba, 195;
    Riel Rebellion in, 306;
    settlement of, 313, 314;
    Russians in, 318.

  Mann, Elizabeth, 137.

  Manx, 58.

  Marcellus (N.Y.), 110.

  Marietta (Ohio), established by New England Company, 164.

  Maritime Provinces, 309, 315;
    Nordic element in, 296;
    population in, 300.

  Maryland, 73, 127, 146;
    settlement of, 80;
    religious groups in, 127, 128;
    Negroes in, 128;
    Acadians in, 128;
    population at time of Revolution, 129;
    thoroughly Anglo-Saxon at time of first census, 129;
    Alpines in, 153;
    1930 census native population, 239;
    attitude toward aliens, 268.

  Mason and Dixon line, 172.

  Massachusetts, first inhabitants of, 81;
    expansion in, 84;
    naming of cities in, 84, 85;
    population pushed westward, 88;
    as parent of all New England, 89;
    settlement west of Connecticut River in, 89, 90;
    influence during Revolution, 99;
    loss of population in, 100;
    growth in interior of, 101;
    Revolutionary troops from, 111;
    cosmopolitan population in 1930, 236;
    attitude toward aliens, 268.

  Massachusetts Bay, early permanent settlements around, 72;
    Governor Winthrop's fleet in, 82.

  Massachusetts Bay Colony, antecedents of, 82;
    social status of English founders of, 83, 84.

  Mather, Cotton, 94.

  Maverick, Rev. John, 85.

  Mayas, 341.

  Maynard, Lord, 85.

  Medford (Mass.), 82.

  Mediterraneans, the, 24, 57, 59;
    characteristics of, 29;
    range of, 29;
    in southern Italy, 39;
    Celtic-speaking, 40;
    on British Isles, 57.

  Melanesia, Negroids in, 28;
    racial tangle in, 28.

  Mendoza, 322.

  Mennonites, 79;
    in Germantown, 115.

  Mesopotamia, 22, 25, 39.

  Mexican Indians, 327, 349.

  Mexican revolution, in 1810, 326;
    in 1910, 326, 327.

  Mexican War, 165, 208, 213;
    California annexed to United States as result of, 215.

  Mexicans, in California, 216;
    in Southwestern States, 292;
    lack of intelligence, 327, 328;
    in United States, 327-330.

  Mexico, 323, 348;
    Nordics in, 209;
    Spaniards in, 324, 325;
    Indian blood in, 326.

  Mexico City, 325, 328;
    Humboldt in, 322.

  Michaelangelo, 48.

  Michigan, 164;
    French atmosphere in, 177;
    State Constitution, 177;
    population in 1836, 177;
    Dutchmen in, 178;
    native population in, 250;
    Canadians in, 250;
    Indians in, 289;
    Mexican population in, 293.

  Micmacs, the, 307.

  Middle Atlantic States, powerful section of America, 237.

  Middlefield (Mass.), varied population in, 109.

  Milan, 51.

  Milford (N.J.), 113.

  Milledgeville (Ala.), 183.

  Milwaukee (Wis.), 161, 250, 251;
    Germans in, 251.

  Minnesota, 313;
    settlement in, 195;
    treaties with Indians, 195;
    first official census in, 195;
    Scandinavians in, 196, 251;
    Germans in, 196;
    Anglo-Saxon in character, 197;
    Indians in, 289;
    native population in, 238.

  Miocene, 17.

  Mississippi, heart of Cotton Kingdom, 184;
    settlement in, 184-189;
    Negroes in, 185;
    1930 census native population, 243.

  Mississippi Bubble, 187.

  Mississippi River, 73;
    territories west of, 195-207.

  Mississippi Valley, 149;
    Norway and Sweden immigration to, 229;
    settlement of, 256.

  Missouri, 87, 172, 175;
    Boone in, 123;
    settlement in, 190-192, 201;
    Kentuckians in, 191;
    Nordic American stock in, 201;
    native population in, 252;
    Negroes in, 252.

  Mitanni, 39.

  Mobile (Ala.), 183.

  Mohammedan Arabs, 45.

  Mohammedanism, and the Negro, 49.

  Mohawk River, 107, 108;
    Loyalists and Scotch along the, 76.

  Mohawk Valley, 109, 110.

  Mohawks, the, 299.

  Mohenjo-Daro, 25.

  Mongolia, 23.

  Mongoloid race, physical characteristics of, 37;
    as distinguished from Alpine race, 37.

  Mongoloid tribes, 19.

  Mongoloids, the, 28, 64, 294.

  Mongols, the, 21, 53;
    similarity to Alpines, 29;
    traits in, 30;
    ancestors of American Indians, 30;
    Asiatic, 31;
    confront the Nordics, 356.

  Monongahela country, 165.

  Monroe, James, 136.

  Montana, 254;
    few settlers in, 205;
    mining industry and growth of, 260;
    admitted to statehood, 261;
    foreign stock in, 261;
    Indians in, 289.

  Montcalm, overthrown at Quebec, 99.

  Montgomery (Ala.), 183.

  Moors, 49.

  Moravia, 79;
    Mongolian characters in, 37.

  Moravian Brothers, in North Carolina, 80.

  Moravians, in Georgia, 117, 144.

  Mormon Church, 204.

  Mormon Utah settlement, converts from England, 204.

  Mormonism, 67.

  Mormons, 176;
    in Nebraska, 203;
    in Utah, 203.

  Morocco, 231.

  Moscovia, 54.

  Mulattoes, 131, 283;
    in Virgin Islands, 11;
    migration northward, 237;
    intelligence of, 284.

  Myjerka, 103.

  "Myth of the Melting Pot," 1.


  Naples (N.Y.), 110, 231.

  Napoleonic Wars, 302, 312.

  Nashville (Tenn.), 147.

  Natchez (Ala.), 183.

  Natchez (La.), 188.

  National Origins Act, 272, 274, 278.

  National Origins provision, 2.

  National Origins Quota, 323.

  Navajo Indians, 291.

  Naval war in 1798, 71.

  Neapolitan, the, 264.

  Nebraska, 173;
    settlement in, 203;
    Mormons in, 203;
    transients in, 203;
    permanent settlers in, 203, 204;
    attracted pioneers after Civil War, 254;
    Bohemians in, 254;
    Nordic influence in, 255.

  Negrillos (or Pigmies), 20.

  Negritos, 31;
    in Eurasia, 28.

  Negro slavery, 134, 144.

  Negroes, the, 21;
    in Virgin Islands, 11;
    and Mohammedanism, 49;
    among Roman Catholics in the colonies, 70;
    increase in New York State, 237;
    manual labor in South by, 281;
    in United States according to census, 282;
    in the North, 282;
    treatment by Southerners, 282, 283;
    in the North, 283;
    tendency toward Communism, 283;
    advantages of "white blood," 284;
    in Central American countries, 330 ff.

  Negroids, in Eurasia, 27;
    in Melanesia, 28;
    in Tasmania, 28.

  Neolithic Mediterraneans, in Ireland, 62;
    conquered by the Goidelic, 62.

  Nevada, 254;
    discovery of silver in, 205, 261;
    growth of, 261;
    admitted as a State, 262;
    decrease in population, 262.

  Nevis, 85.

  New Amsterdam (Manhattan Island), 102.

  New Bern, 139.

  New Brunswick, Scottish population in, 309;
    French-Canadians in, 310.

  New Brunswick (N.J.), 113.

  New Castle County (Del.), 116;
    Scotch settlements in, 122.

  New England, Pilgrim and Puritan migration to, 65;
    early religions in, 67;
    Episcopalians as Loyalists in, 69;
    at war with France and Canadian Indians, 71;
    early settlements in, 72;
    natural increase in population of Whites in, 86;
    emigration to Great Britain and West Indies from, 86;
    Nordic character in, 90, 91;
    Indian population of, 97, 98;
    smallpox in, 98;
    golden age of, 99;
    vigor of Nordics in, 155;
    French-Canadians in, 218;
    increase of Anglo-Saxon stock in, 219, 220;
    decline in white stock birth rate in, 220.

  New England Company, 164.

  New England Emigrant Aid Company, 201.

  New Hampshire, 72, 94;
    settlements in, 88, 89;
    growth of, 101;
    1930 census native population, 235.

  New Iberia, 188.

  New Jersey, 72;
    settlement of, 77;
    small Dutch element in, 77;
    English in, 77, 111-114;
    East Jersey, 112;
    West Jersey, 112;
    population at time of Revolution, 114;
    Alpines in, 153;
    foreign-born in, 218;
    1930 census native population, 238.

  New London (Conn.), 87.

  New Mexico, 152;
    Spanish language in, 6;
    native and Mexican Indians in, 213;
    population in, 213, 214;
    Mexicans in, 263;
    Indians in, 289.

  New Netherland, Dutch settlement of, 102.

  New Orleans (La.), 168, 171, 186.

  New Providence, 345.

  New Rochelle (N.Y.), 76, 106.

  New York City, 112;
    inferiority of, at time of Revolution, 105;
    beginning of commercial greatness of, 105, 106;
    arrival of French Huguenots in, 106;
    Puerto Ricans in, 344.

  New York State, 72, 229;
    small Dutch population in, 73;
    French Huguenots in, 73, 76;
    foreigners in, 75;
    Flemings in, 76;
    as unimportant colony, 105, 108;
    New England colonization of, 105;
    Palatines in, 107;
    invasion of New Englanders after the Revolution, 108;
    Ulster Scots in, 108;
    Loyalist migration from New York State after the Revolution, 110;
    large quantity of Revolutionary troops from, 111;
    Alpines in, 153;
    foreign-born in, 218;
    increase in Negroes in, 237;
    race mixture in, 237;
    Indians in, 289.

  _New York Tribune_ (quoted), 216.

  New Zealand, 303, 353, 354.

  Newark (N.J.), 72, 113.

  Newark Bay, 113.

  Newfoundland, 296, 307, 308.

  Newport (R.I.), 88.

  Newton, 87.

  Nicaragua, population of, 331, 332.

  Niebelungenlied, the, 51.

  Nile, valley of the, 22.

  Nordic Frisians, 76.

  Nordic race, peculiar characteristics of, 34, 35;
    red-haired branch of, 35, 36;
    importance in United States, 153;
    necessity of close co-operation by, 357.

  Nordics, 21;
    jealousy of, 15;
    originators of Aryan group of languages, 24, 26;
    in India, 25;
    and the caste system, 26;
    passing of, in India and Persia, 26;
    expansion of Alpines at expense of, 31;
    development of, 33;
    mixture with Mediterraneans in British Islands, 33;
    question as to homeland of, 33, 34;
    as aggressors, 34;
    in Scandinavia, 35;
    around Baltic and North Seas, 35;
    Celtic, 36;
    Teutonic, 36, 42, 46, 50;
    in West as Achæans, 39;
    in Mesopotamia, 39;
    in Italy, 51;
    in France, 52;
    and the Crusades, 53;
    Goidels, 57, 62;
    in American colonies, 77;
    weakened as a race, 150;
    in Mexican territory, 209;
    favored in Quota Act of 1921, 271;
    confronted by the Mongols, 356, 357.

  Norfolk, 56;
    the Angles in, 61.

  Norman conquest in 1066, 60.

  Normandy, religion in, 60.

  Normans, the, 52.

  Norse, 59;
    in Scotland, 55.

  Norsemen, 59, 60.

  North, the Revolution in the, 69.

  North Africa, the Berbers of, 24.

  North Carolina, 134, 146;
    extended to Mississippi River, 74;
    Scots in, 74;
    Moravian Brothers in, 80;
    English and Ulster Scots in, 80;
    Boone in, 123;
    settlement of, 138;
    varied races in, 138-140;
    1930 census native population, 240;
    Indians in, 289.

  North Dakota, native population, 238;
    admitted as a State, 253;
    Nordic element in, 253;
    Indians in, 289.

  North German Nordics, in America, 143.

  North Sea, 35.

  Northampton (England), 84.

  Northamptonshire, 83.

  Northern Abolitionists, 12.

  Northern Pacific Railway, 253.

  Northmen, the, in Scotland, 55;
    as Danes, 55;
    conquer Normandy, 55.

  Northwest Territory (old), 163-182;
    French in, 162;
    Mexicans in, 162;
    Ohio, 164-167;
    Indiana, 167-170;
    Illinois, 170-176;
    Michigan, 176-178;
    Wisconsin, 178-182.

  Norwalk (Conn.), 87.

  Nova Scotia, the French in, 308;
    Loyalists in, 308;
    Gaelic spoken in, 309.


  Offnet race, 32.

  Oglethorpe, Governor, 116, 143, 145.

  Ohio, 150;
    migration to, 109;
    settled by New England Company, 164;
    Pennsylvania emigration to, 165;
    Nordics and Pennsylvania Dutch in, 166;
    German and Irish immigrants in, 166;
    settlers of northern Indiana in, 168;
    native population in, 248;
    Canadians in, 248.

  Ohio Legislature, 165.

  Ohio River, 145, 146, 164, 167, 168.

  Oklahoma, pride of Indian blood in, 98;
    cosmopolitan population in, 245, 246;
    Indians in, 246, 289-292;
    Canadians in, 246.

  Old Charles Town, 141.

  Old Pretender, the, 139.

  Oneida Community, 67.

  Ontario, 303;
    Roman Catholic Scotch Highlanders in, 108;
    "United Empire Loyalists" in, 111;
    French-Canadians in, 310;
    Loyalist refugees in, 311;
    increase in population, 312;
    Nordic element in, 313;
    Poles and Italians in, 318;
    Russians in, 318.

  Orange County, Ulster Scots in, 107.

  Oregon, settlement in, 206, 207, 256;
    native population in, 267.

  Oregon Trail, 259.

  Orient, revolt against European control in the, 15;
    missionaries in, 15.

  Osco-Umbrians, 39;
    invasions into Italy, 26.

  Ostrogoths, 44, 51.

  Ottawa, French language in, 5.

  Ottawa River, 297.


  Pacific Coast, 155;
    migration westward to, 158, 217, 218;
    restless population on, 257;
    Indian population on, 290;
    immigration of Filipinos on, 293, 294.

  Pacific States, America's future in, 354;
    Philippines in, 354.

  Palatinate, the, 116, 228.

  Palatine Germans, along the Hudson River and Mohawk valleys, 76.

  Palatines, the, 8, 106;
    in Holland and England, 107;
    in New York State, 107, 117;
    in Pennsylvania, 107;
    in Georgia, 116, 117.

  Paleolithic Period, 32.

  Palmer, 94.

  Palmyra (N.Y.), 110.

  Panama, population of, 333;
    North American influence in, 333.

  Panama Canal, 354.

  Papua, racial tangle in, 28.

  Paraguay, 321;
    population of, 341, 342;
    war with Brazil and Argentina, 341.

  Paris, 186.

  Peace of Paris, the, 99.

  Pelham, 94.

  Penn, William, 114, 115, 121, 123, 125.

  Pennsylvania, 146;
    French Huguenots in, 73;
    settlement of, 77;
    Germans in, 79;
    Palatines in, 107;
    religious denominations in, 115;
    invasion of Palatinates in, 117, 122, 124;
    English alarmed over Palatine invasion, 120;
    Ulster Scots in, 121-122;
    increase in population, 123;
    races in, at end of Colonial period, 124;
    Delaware part of, 125;
    foreign-born in, 218;
    1930 census native population in, 238;
    attitude toward aliens, 268.

  Pennsylvania Dutch, 123, 124, 137.

  _Pennsylvanische Deutsche_, 115.

  Perpetual Emigrating Fund, 204.

  Persia, passing of Nordics in, 26;
    Negro admixture in, 27.

  Persians, Islamized, 49.

  Perth Amboy (N.J.), 77, 113.

  Perthshire, 159.

  Peru, Indian race in, 342.

  Peruvian Indians, 342.

  Philadelphia, 105, 112, 114, 155, 309;
    English Quakers and Welsh around, 77;
    Ulster Scots enter colonies through, 77;
    strength of Church of England in, 121;
    as metropolis of United States, 123.

  Philippines, the, 294;
    rise of nationalism in, 14;
    American problem in, 353;
    in Pacific States, 354;
    United States should govern, 355, 356.

  Phrygia, Nordic conquest of, 39.

  Picts, 58, 61.

  Piedmont, 173.

  Piedmont (Italy), 143.

  Pigmies (or Negrillos), 20.

  Pike's Peak, 258, 259.

  Pilgrim Fathers, 82.

  Piscataqua (New Brunswick, N.J.), 113.

  Pittsburgh, Ulster Scots in, 123.

  Pleistocene glaciation, 34.

  Plymouth, 98.

  Plymouth colony, settlers of, 81;
    antecedents in, 82.

  Plymouth Rock, 82.

  Po valley, as Cisalpine Gaul, 41.

  Polaks, 355.

  Poland, rise of nationalism in, 14;
    migration of German Jews into, 225.

  Polish Jews, 224-226.

  Polk, James K., 210.

  Polygamy, as racial curse, 49, 50.

  Polynesia, Malay blood in, 30.

  Polynesian Islands, 353.

  Pomerania, 181.

  Port of New York, Dutch population outside, 77.

  Portland (Maine), 101.

  Portsmouth (R.I.), 88.

  Portugal, 47, 48, 335, 336.

  Portuguese, in Brazil, 335.

  Prairie Provinces, 314.

  Prince Edward Island, native population of, 309;
    French-Canadians in, 310.

  Princeton University, 113.

  Protectorate, the, 133.

  Protestant Episcopal Church, the, 69.

  Protestant House of Orange, 127.

  Providence (R.I.), 88;
    Huguenots in, 97.

  Prussia, 116, 170.

  Pueblo Indians, revolt against Spanish, 291.

  Puerto Ricans, 294.

  Puerto Rico, 343, 349;
    results of abolition of slavery in, 11;
    population of, 343, 344.

  Puget Sound, 267.

  Puritan emigration, from England, 82.

  Puritans, New England, 66;
    as refugees in Virginia, 135.

  Putnam, General Rufus, 164.


  "Q" Celts, 62.

  Quakers, 93, 125;
    along Delaware River, 112;
    become Anglicans, 121;
    in Albemarle, 138.

  Quebec, 229, 304;
    French language in, 5;
    "Habitat" French of, 8;
    intermarriage of French and Indians, 9;
    overthrow of Montcalm at, 99;
    stronghold of French Canadians, 310;
    Russians in, 318.

  Quebec Province (Lower Canada), 301;
    French settlement of, 297;
    physical characteristics of settlers, 297, 298;
    language in, 298;
    domination of Jesuits in, 299;
    centre of French population, 301.

  Quota Act of 1921, 270, 271;
    favored the European Nordic, 271.


  Race, in United States during Colonial times, 2 ff.;
    at present time, 6;
    definition of, 21 ff., 36;
    distinction between language and, 24;
    Mediterranean, 28, 29;
    Alpine, 28, 29;
    Nordic, 29;
    Alpine Slavs, 31;
    Mongols, 36;
    in Ireland, 62, 63.
    _See also under_ various races.

  Railroads, 175.

  Ravenal, 141.

  Reading (Pa.), 121, 123.

  Red River, steam navigation on, 313.

  Red River Colony, 195, 313.

  Red River country, 253.

  Reformation, the, 42;
    lack of hold on Ireland, 63.

  "Refuge for the Oppressed," 227.

  "Regulators," rebellion in North Carolina, 70.

  Reuter, E.B., 284.

  Revolution, the American, hatred in New England of mother country
  during, 68;
    political and social, 70;
    loss of Nordic blood in America during, 71;
    and expulsion of Iroquois Indians, 76;
    Germans unloyal during, 79;
    Protestants in United States after, 152;
    Nordic invasion of Florida during, 193;
    migration following, 256.

  Revolution (French), 179.

  Revolution of 1689, 128.

  Rhode Island, settlements in, 88;
    source of colonization, 89;
    1930 census native population, 236.

  Richelieu River, 301.

  Richmond (N.Y.), 110.

  Richmond (Va.), 136.

  Riel Rebellion, 306.

  Rio Grande, the, 154, 320.

  Robinson (clergyman), 83.

  Rochester, increase in Negroes in, 237.

  Rock Island and Pacific Railway, 196.

  Rocky Mountain States, 257;
    varying population in, 258.

  Roderick, 46.

  Roman Catholic church, growth in America, 162;
    hostility of Know Nothing Party to, 219;
    strength in Canada, 318.

  Roman Catholics, population in the colonies, 69, 70;
    Negroes and Germans among, 70;
    many colonies legislated against, 70.

  Rome, 22;
    sacked by Gauls, 41.

  Roosevelt, Theodore, 4, 269.

  Roxbury (Mass.), 82.

  Royalists, in Virginia, 135.

  Russia, Varangians in, 56.


  Sahara Desert, 26.

  Saint Croix, 85.

  Saint Kitts, 85, 86.

  Saint Lawrence River, 300, 301.

  Saint Louis (Mo.), 161, 171, 196;
    as French outpost, 190;
    marked German tinge in, 191, 192.

  Saint Mary's (Md.), 126, 128.

  Saladin, 50.

  Salem, 112.

  Salvador, population of, 331.

  Salzburg, 144.

  San Antonio (Texas), 212.

  San Francisco (Calif.), 216;
    Oriental laborers in, 265.

  Sanscrit, in Burma, 25;
    in India, 25.

  Santo Domingo, 287, 345;
    loss of white control in, 11, 12;
    barbarism in, 12.

  Saracens, at Tours, 53.

  Saskatchewan, 314;
    Russians in, 318.

  Savannah (Ga.), 144.

  Saxons, 41, 51;
    invaded Britain, 59.

  Scandinavia, 42;
    first Nordics in, 35;
    Nordic immigration from, 227, 229.

  Schenectady, 103.

  Schuylkill valley, Germans in, 121.

  Schwankenfelders, 79.

  Scituate, 82.

  Scotch Highlanders, importation of Roman Catholics, 108.

  "Scotch Irish," 63.

  Scotch Rebellion of 1670, 133.

  Scotland, 58;
    Nordic population in, 59;
    invaded by Danes, 59.

  Scrooby, 82.

  Sedgmoor, Battle of, 134.

  Sedition Act of 1798, 268.

  Selkirk, Lord, 313.

  Seneca Falls (N.Y.), 110.

  Seneca Lake, 110.

  Sephardim, 227.

  Seven Seas, the, 352.

  Seven Years' War, 193.

  Sevier, 141.

  Shakers, 67.

  Shawneetown, 172.

  Shays's Rebellion, 70, 90.

  Sheffield, 90.

  Shenandoah Valley, 74, 137, 146;
    Scotch Germans in, 122.

  Sicily, 231, 232.

  Sidonius, Appollonius, 51.

  Sierra range, the, 155.

  Silesia, 53.

  Singapore, 354.

  Sioux Indians, 291.

  Skrellings, 98.

  Slavery, 12;
    results of abolition on British Empire, 11;
    in South Africa, 11;
    in Jamaica, 11;
    in Puerto Rico, 11;
    and the Civil War, 12, 13;
    in South Carolina, 142.

  Slavs, Alpine, 31.

  Smith, Captain John, 90.

  Société des Amis des Noirs, 12.

  Sogdians, 23.

  "Solid South," 282.

  Somaliland, 29.

  Somerset, 159.

  South, the, religion in, 69;
    decline of leadership in, 175.

  South Africa, 353;
    results of abolition of slavery in, 11.

  South Carolina, 168;
    racial complexion in, 80;
    settlement of, 141;
    large-scale agriculture in, 141;
    Ulster Scots in, 142;
    slavery question in, 142;
    Nordics and loyalists in, 142;
    Dorchester Society in, 144;
    Negroes outnumbered whites, 185;
    1930 census native population, 240, 241.

  South Dakota, rush in 1876 in, 254;
    Indians in, 289.

  South Irish Catholics, 7.

  South Italy, Negroid element in, 9.

  South of Portugal, Negro slave element in, 9.

  South Russia, Aryan language in, 24;
    the Goths in, 44.

  "South Sea," the, 162

  Southern frontiersman, religion of, 67.

  Southwest, 183-194;
    Alabama, 183, 184;
    Mississippi, 184-189;
    Louisiana, 185-189;
    Arkansas, 189-190;
    Missouri, 190-192;
    Florida, 192-194.

  Soviet Russia, Alpines in, 15.

  Spain, conquered by Celtic Nordics, 40;
    Visigoths in, 45;
    ceded Florida to England, 193.

  Spaniards, in Mexico, 324, 325.

  Spanish Conquest, 324.

  Spanish Main, the, 98.

  Spencer, Herbert (quoted), 9, 10.

  Stamford (Conn.), 87.

  Statehood, 258, 261, 262.

  Steamboat, first on Lake Erie, 177.

  "Stony Mountains," 155.

  Stormont (Ontario), 312.

  Straits of Gibraltar, 45.

  Stratford (Conn.), 87.

  Suevi, the, 42, 45, 51.

  Suffolk, the Angles in, 61.

  Sumner, Senator, 288.

  Surrey, 159.

  Susquehanna River, 110.

  Swabia, 228.

  Sweden, 44, 45.

  Swedes, 111.

  Switzerland, 50;
    national unity in, 5;
    various languages in, 5.

  Symmes, Judge T.C., 164.

  Syracuse, increase in Negroes in, 237.

  Syria, 231.


  Tasmania, 20;
    Negroids in, 28.

  Taunton (Mass.), 82.

  Tennessee, 72, 146, 157;
    Scotch and Germans in, 122;
    settlement of, 147-149;
    Alpines in, 153;
    racial make-up of, 242.

  Teutonic, branch of the Nordic race, 42;
    as a term, 43.

  Teutonic Nordics, 36, 42, 43.

  Teutons, 42;
    collapse of Roman Empire under, 43;
    physical characteristics of, 43.

  Texas, 152, 174;
    Mexicans in, 162, 208;
    American settlement in, 209;
    importance as slave-holding territory, 209;
    growth of population at time of Mexican War, 212;
    Negroes in, 212;
    German emigration (Alpines) in, 212;
    foreign elements in, 246;
    Nordic absorption of, 256.

  _The Chronicle_, 260.

  "The Land of Little Sticks," 316.

  "The Provisional State of Deseret," 204.

  "The Refuge of the Oppressed," 1.

  Theodoric, 44.

  Thirteen Colonies, the, 163.

  Thirty Years War, 127.

  Thomson, David, 88.

  "Three Notch Road," 184.

  Tioga River, 110.

  Tokarian language, 25.

  Toulouse, 48.

  Tours, the Saracens at, 53.

  Transcontinental Railway, 203.

  Treaty of Paris, 163.

  Trenton (N.J.), 115.

  Troubadours, 48.

  Tucson (Ariz.), 214.

  Turanians, 31.

  "Turco," 339.

  Turkestan, Ural-Altaic language in, 24.

  Turks, race mixture among, 50;
    in Asia Minor, 50.


  Ukraine, the, 54.

  Ulster, 95;
    Presbyterians in, 63.

  Ulster Presbyterians, 93.

  Ulster Scots, 7, 92, 93, 96;
    in America, 60;
    hatred of England, 67;
    forced to the West, 73;
    in North Carolina, Kentucky and Tennessee, 74;
    in California, 78;
    in Ireland, 78;
    in Orange County, 107;
    established church in Albany, 108;
    west of Alleghanies, 123;
    in Pittsburgh, 123;
    in Maryland, 129;
    in South Carolina, 142;
    in Georgia, 144;
    animosity during Revolution, 150.

  Union, the, requirement for admission to, in 1818, 173.

  Union Pacific Railway, 259.

  Unitarian form of Christianity, 46.

  "United Empire Loyalists," 111, 311, 313.

  United Irishmen, 159.

  United States, mixture of racial groups in, 2;
    effect of sentimentalism on Nordic survival in, 12;
    slavery in, 12;
    first census, 49;
    distribution of free land in, 65;
    little Dutch blood in present population of, 104;
    population at time of first census, 149, 152, 153;
    Protestant majority in, 151, 154;
    Catholic hierarchy in, 151, 152;
    Nordic race in, 153;
    Alpine race in, 153;
    census of 1860, 158, 162;
    German settlement in, 180, 181;
    Nordics in, 220, 226, 234;
    national unity in, 222;
    Nordic immigration from Scandinavia, 227-230;
    Alpines in, 227, 228;
    European immigration to, 228;
    early Germans in, 228;
    Norwegians in farming land of, 230;
    immigration of English and Irish in, 230;
    immigration of Italians, 231;
    percentage of alien emigration and immigration in, 233;
    "gentlemen's agreement" with Japan, 266;
    white population in 1920, 278;
    percentage of Protestants in, 279;
    percentage of Nordics in, 279, 280;
    loss of unity in, 281;
    Negroes in, 282;
    increase of electoral vote in the South, 282;
    1930 Indian population, 289;
    distribution of Indians in, 289;
    Mexicans in, according to 1930 census, 293;
    Hindu immigration prevented in, 295;
    Irish Catholic migration from Canada to, 304;
    Mexicans in, 324;
    disadvantages of Mexican immigration to, 327, 329;
    percentage of Nordics and Protestants in, 347;
    immigration during last century, 347, 348;
    restriction of immigration, 348 ff.;
    aliens in, 350;
    international affair, 352;
    "White Man's Burden" in, 352, 357;
    trouble with Philippines, 354;
    should govern Philippines, 355.

  Upland (Chester), 114.

  Upper Canada, 297;
    immigration from British Isles to, 302, 303;
    increase in population, 312.

  Ur, 25.

  Ural mountains, 54.

  Uruguay, white races in, 337;
    cosmopolitan population in, 338.

  Utah, Mormons in, 176, 204, 205, 256;
    Nordic population in, 204, 205;
    native population in, 261;
    foreign stock in, 261.

  Utica, increase in Negroes in, 237.


  Vaal River, 11.

  Valens, 44.

  Valley of the Syr-Daria, 22.

  Van Buren, Martin, 256.

  Vandals, 45, 46.

  Varangians, 56, 59.

  Varini, the, 52.

  Venezuela, population of, 334.

  Vermont, dispute over ownership of, 72;
    settlement of, 89;
    as a frontier, 90;
    migration from Massachusetts to, 90;
    as an independent state, 90;
    growth of, 101;
    1930 census native population, 235.

  Victorian Era, 281.

  Vigot (or Bigot), 46.

  Vincennes (Ind.), 149, 168.

  Virgin Islands, 192;
    Negroes and Mulattoes in, 11, 345.

  Virginia, 116, 117, 146, 220;
    early settlements, 72;
    Mother of States in Colonial times, 73;
    tidewater population, 73, 74;
    extended to Mississippi River, 73;
    English settlement, 80;
    natural increase in population of whites, 86;
    Pocahontas tradition in, 99;
    as exploitation of adventurers, 130;
    mixed classes of immigrants in, 132 ff.;
    Cavaliers in, 133;
    refuge of Puritans during Stuart period, 135;
    Royalists in, 135;
    Kentucky veterans in, 164;
    1930 census native population, 240;
    surplus population, 242.

  Virginia City (Nevada), 261.

  Visigoths, 46, 52;
    in Gaul, 44;
    in Spain, 45, 49.

  Vistula, the, 44, 54.

  Von Bismarck, chancellor, 282.


  Waldenses, 143.

  Wales, 58, 59;
    Norsemen in, 59;
    Iberians in, 61.

  Walker's Law, 276.

  Walla Walla Valley, 207.

  Walloons, 102.

  War of 1812, 166, 171, 177, 208, 312, 313;
    causes of, 163.

  Warwick (R.I.), 88.

  Washington, 289;
    an independent territory, 207;
    native population, 267;
    population increased by railways, 267;
    Nordic element in, 267.

  Washington (D.C.), 239.

  Washington Bicentennial in 1932, 6.

  Washington, George, 125, 148.

  Watauga settlement, the, 148.

  Watertown (Mass.), 81, 82, 87.

  Welsh, in England, 41.

  Wends, 31, 54.

  Wessex, Puritan emigration from, 84.

  West Central Asia, 64;
    origin of civilization in, 22, 23.

  West India Company, 103.

  West Indies, 208, 294, 325, 343;
    languages in, 23, 24;
    Nordic settlement, 85, 86;
    Negroes in, 86;
    Loyalists flee to, 100;
    South Carolinians in, 142;
    fate of colonists in, 154, 155.

  West Jersey, 112, 113.

  West Scotland, high stature in, 62.

  West Virginia, 138;
    1930 census native population, 241, 242.

  Wethersfield (Conn.), 87.

  Whiskey Rebellion, 70, 125.

  "White Man's Burden," 352, 354, 357.

  Whites, the, 12, 20;
    slaves injurious to, 13.

  Whitesborough, 109.

  Whitman, Marcus, 206.

  Wilderness Road, 145.

  William III, 63.

  Williams, Roger, 88.

  Wilmington (Del.), 115, 139.

  Wilson, Woodrow, 14, 269, 270.

  Wiltshire, 84.

  Windsor (Conn.), 87.

  Winnipeg, 313.

  Winthrop, Governor, arrival of fleet in Massachusetts Bay, 82.

  Wisconsin, 164, 175, 195;
    lead mines in, 172, 178;
    settlement of, 178-182;
    growth, 178, 179;
    foreign element in, 179;
    climate, soil, and forest lands, 179, 180;
    Germans in, 179-181;
    non-Nordic population, 182;
    native population, 238;
    foreign element in, 250, 251;
    waning of wheat industry, 254;
    Indians in, 289.

  Woodbridge (N.J.), 113.

  Worcester, 94.

  World, the, racially, 26 ff.

  World War, 15, 116, 185, 212, 231, 246, 247, 252, 269, 283, 315, 336,
  338, 340, 356;
    immigration law as result of, 1, 2;
    foreigners in draft list, 3;
    immigration from Scandinavia since, 229.

  Wright, J.K., (quoted), 40 n.

  Wurtemberg, 268.

  Wusuns, 34.

  Wyoming, admitted to Union, 259;
    native population, 259;
    foreign stock in, 259.

  Wyoming Valley of Pennsylvania, 101.


  Yadkin valley, 123.

  Yarmouth, 82.

  Yiddish (language), 225.

  York (Pa.), 79, 122.

  Yorkshire, 82.

  Young, Brigham, 204, 205.

  Young Pretender, the, 139.


  Zuyder Zee, 103.





*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "The Conquest of a Continent - or, The Expansion of Races in America" ***

Doctrine Publishing Corporation provides digitized public domain materials.
Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians.
This effort is time consuming and expensive, so in order to keep providing
this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties,
including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Doctrine Publishing
Corporation's ISYS search for use by individuals, and we request that you
use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort
to Doctrine Publishing's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a
large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of
public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Keep it legal -  Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for
ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because
we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States,
that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries.
Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we
can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is
allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Doctrine Publishing
ISYS search  means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world.
Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About ISYS® Search Software
Established in 1988, ISYS Search Software is a global supplier of enterprise
search solutions for business and government.  The company's award-winning
software suite offers a broad range of search, navigation and discovery
solutions for desktop search, intranet search, SharePoint search and embedded
search applications.  ISYS has been deployed by thousands of organizations
operating in a variety of industries, including government, legal, law
enforcement, financial services, healthcare and recruitment.



Home