Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

ALL TYPES OF THE SOCIALLY INADEQUATE AS A UNIT, BY DIFFERENT

STANDARDS OF MEASUREMENT

Doctor LAUGHLIN. Finally, Mr. Chairman, permit me to submit two other tables, Nos. 13 and 14, which give the comparative results of different measuring rods, applied to all classes of the socially inadequate as a unit, and No. 15, which shows the relative constancy of findings in analyzing the same data concerning the principal classes of the inadequate by different measuring rods.

In Table 13 (p. 1335) several different measuring rods are used in analyzing all instituticnal population as a unit. In method i the standard is the whole population--that is the “Melting Pot” standard. In method 2 the standard is the whcle population minus the negroes. In method 3 the standard is the inmate frequency per 100,000 population for the whole country. In method 4 the standard is the inmate frequency of all types per 100,000 native white, both parents native born. In method 5 the standard is the number of inmates of all types per 100,000 foreign-born white. Thus in this latter method we used not the standard of the whole population but the standard of the foreign-born whites in the United States. I do not need to call your attention to specific differences because the table is available for your inspection and use. I must say merely that by whatever standard taken, the incidence of social inadequacy of all types taken as a unit in State and Federal institutions is practically one and three-quarter times as great in the foreign-born white as in the native white, both parents native born. We can not use the magnifying glass for one part and the reducing glass for the other. We must use the same glass for all parts.

In Table 14 this comparison of quota fulfillments by different systems of analysis, or measuring rods, is set forth. "The three standards taken for special comparison are, first, the incidence of inadequacy of all types in the whole population ; second, the incidence of inadequacy of all types among the native white, both parents native born; and, third, the incidence of inadequacy of all types among the foreign-born white population. Let me call your particular attention to columns 9, 14, and 19. These show the various nativity groups ranked according to their quota fulfillnents, the lowest—that is, the group with the lowest inadequacy-being given

the first rank. We find that no matter by what standard the analysis is made, the rank or order is always the same—the lowest quota for all types of inadequacy as a unit being found in the native white, both parents native born, and the highest in the foreign-born white.

It is thus demonstrated that the facts of the institutional survey may be analyzed in many different ways, but if the measuring rod which we decide upon is used throughout a given analysis, the relative results are not greatly affected. It is impossible to count out by specialized or prejudiced methods data carefully compiled by scientific survey and accurately analyzed.

[ocr errors]

CONSTANT VERSUS SPECIAL STANDARDS

Taking the whole problem of social inadequacy and seeking a single unit or standard of measurement, the incidence in the whole population, including the foreign born and the negroes, is by far the most satisfactory single standard. Thus in the case of those

claiming unfairness to the foreign born in the case of insanity, because the foreign born were represented in the United States principally by adults and not by children, we therefore made an analysis on the standard of adults only, which worked out a little more satisfactorily for the foreign born, but the same standard of measurement gave the second generation in this country a much more unfavorable showing than was given by any other system of analysis.

1

TABLE 13.-Institutional quota fulfillments by all types of the socially inadequate as

a unit-Comparative findings from five different standards or analysis methods Character of institutional population: a. Clinical type: All types of the socially inadequate as a unit. b. Sex and numbers: Males

140, 053 Females.

69, 145 Total.

210, 835 c. Age limits: All persons reported in institutional returns are included.

Source of data 3: Four hundred and forty-ive State and Federal institutions for all types of the socially inadequate.

Where located: Same as listed under Tables 1 to 13, pages 774 to 831, “Analysis of America's Modern Melting Pot,” hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, November 21, 1922.

Date of returns: January 1, 1921-March 31, 1922. Analysis method a: The inmate number frequency of all types of the socially inadequate as a unit in the whole population equals 100 per cent quota fulfillment; method used in the Melting Pot” analysis.

Analysis method b: The inmate number frequency of all types of the socially inadequate as a unit in the whole population minus the negroes in both the census returns and the institutional survey, equals 100 per cent quota fulfillment.

Analysis method c: The inmate number frequency of all types of the socially inadequate as a unit, per 100,000 of the whole population, equals 100 per cent quota fulfillment.

Analysis method d: The inmate number frequency of all types of the socially inadequate as a unit, found per 100,000, native white, both parents native born, equals 100 per cent quota fulfillment.

Analysis method e: The inmate number frequency of all types of the socially inadequate as a unit found per

eign-born white persons, equa 100 per cent quota fulfillment.

[blocks in formation]

10F

1. All groups:
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population..

91, 972, 266 100.00 210, 835 210, 835 100.00 Ł0 100.00
(6) Analysis method b; standard,
whole population minus negroes. 82, 144, 503 100.00 189, 814! 189, 814! 100.00

100.00 1 Plus 15,806 inmates of unknown nativity. 2 The different analyses in this table were secured from first-hand returns supplied by the authorities in charge of the several institutions reporting. These returns were made directly to the expert eugenics agent of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives. The number and location of the institutions reporting data for this table, and those of the same class which did not make returns, are listed on page 823 of the Analysis of America's Modern Melting Pot, hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, Sixty-seventh Congress, third session, Nov. 21, 1922. 3 Population records from the United States census of 1910.

The per cent allotment is found by dividing the population of the particular nativity group by the whole population used in the group or groups taken as the standard, and multiplying the result by 100. 3 The number expected is found

by multiplying the per cent allotment by the total number found in institutions in the particular group, and dividing the product by 100.

6 These numbers are found by the actual survey, and of course do not vary with the different methods of analysis.

7 This per cent distribution is found by dividing the number of the particular group found in institutions by the number in institutions found in the group or groups representing the standard, and multiplying the result by 100.

8 This quota fulfillment by numbers is found by subtracting the number expected from the number found. The quota fulfillment by per cent is found by dividing the number found by the number expected, and multiplying the quotient by 100.

TABLE 13.-Institutional quota fulfillments by all types of the socially inadequate as

a unit-Comparative findings from five different standards or analysis methods Continued

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

100.00

[ocr errors]

1. All groups--Continued.
(c) Analysis method c; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

91, 972, 266 229. 2 210, 835 210, 835 (d) Analysis method d; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
native white, both parents
native born.

91, 972, 266 193. 3 210, 835 210, 835 (e) Analysis method e; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
foreign-born white.

91, 972, 266 334, 1 210, 835 210, 835
2. Native white, both parents native born:
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population..

100.00

45. 37-17, 780

84, 33

50. 40 -18,689

83. 66

45. 37--17, 780

84, 33

45. 37 --17, 780

100.00

45. 37--17, 780

57. 86

15, 996

7. 58 +2, 284

116.65

8. 43 +2, 174

115.73

49, 488, 575 53. 81 113, 446 95, 666 (6) Analysis method b; standard,

whole population minus negroes - 49, 488, 575 60.25 114, 355 95, 666 (c) Analysis method c; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

49, 488, 575 229.2 | 113, 446 95, 666 (d) Analysis method d; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
native white, both parents
native born.

49, 488, 575 193. 3 95, 666 95, 666 (e) Analysis method e; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
foreign-born white

49, 488, 575

334. 1 165, 340 95, 666 3. Native white, one parent native born, one foreign born: (a) Analysis method a; standard, whole population.

5, 981, 526

6. 50

13, 713 () Analysis method b; standard,

whole population minus negroes. 5,981, 526 7. 28 13, 822 15, 996 (c) Analysis method c; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

5,981, 526
229.2

15, 996 (d) Analysis method d; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
native white, both parents
native born.

5, 981, 526 193.3 11, 563 15, 996 (e) Analysis method e; standard,

inmates, all types, per 100,000
foreign-born white.

5, 981, 526 334. 1

19, 984 4. Native white, both parents foreign born: (a) Analysis method a; standard, whole population..

12, 916, 311 14.04 29, 610 32, 392 (b) Analysis method b; standard,

wholo population minus negroes. 12, 916, 311 15.72 29, 847 32, 392 (c) Analysis method c; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

12, 916, 311 229. 2 29, 610 32, 392 (d) Analysis method d; standard, in

mates all types, per 100,000 na-
tive white, both parents native
born...

12, 916, 311

193. 3 24, 968 32, 392 (e) Analysis method e; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000 for-
eign-born white

12, 916, 311 334. 1 43, 153 32, 392
5. Total native-born white (2, 3, and 4):
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population.

68, 386, 412 74.36 156, 766 144,054 (6) Analysis method b; standard,

whole population minus negroes. 68, 386, 412 83. 25 158, 022 144, 054 (c) Analysis method c; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

68,386, 412 229.2 | 156, 766 144, 054 (d) Analysis method d; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000
native white, both parents na-
tive born..

168, 386, 412 193.3 132, 1971 144, 054

13, 713

7.58 +2, 284

116.65

7. 58 +4, 433

138. 34

15, 996

7. 58 -3,988

80.04

15.36 +2, 782

109. 40

17.06 +2, 545

108. 53

15. 36 +2, 782

109. 40

15.36 +7, 424

129, 73

15. 36-10, 761

25. 03

68. 32-12, 712

91.89

75. 89 -13, 968

91, 16

68. 32 -12, 712

91. 89

68. 32 +11, 571 104,97 mates, all types, per 100,000 foreign-born white

TABLE 13.-Institutional quota fulfillments by all types of the socially inadequate as

a unitComparative findings from five different standards or analysis methodsContinued

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

62, 329

[blocks in formation]

5. Total native-born wbite--Continued.
(e) Analysis method e; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000 for-
eign-born white..

68, 386, 412 334, 1 228, 477] 144, 054
6. Foreign-born white:
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population.

13, 345, 545 14. 51 30, 592 44,587 (6) Analysis method b; standard,

whole population minus negroes. 13, 345, 545 16. 25 30, 837 44, 587
(c) Analysis method c; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population..

13, 345, 545 229. 2 30, 592 44, 587
(d) Analysis method d; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000 na-
tive white, both parents native
born..

13, 345, 545

193. 3

25, 798 44, 587
(e) Analysis method e; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000 for-
eign-born white...

13, 345, 545 334. 1

44, 587

44, 587
7. Total foreign white stock (3, 4, and 6):
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population..

32, 243, 382 35. 06 73, 915 92, 975
(b) Analysis method b; standard,
whole population minus negroes. 32, 243, 382 39. 25 74, 506

92, 975 (c) Analysis method c; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population.

32, 243, 382 229. 2 73, 915 92, 975
(d) Analysis method d; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000 na-
tive white, both parents native
born..

32, 243, 382 193.3

92, 975 (e) Analysis method e; standard, in.

mates, all types, per 100,000 for-
eign-born white...

32, 243, 382

334. 1 107, 724 92, 975 Negro (all parentage): (a) Analysis method a; standard, whole population..

9, 827, 763 10. 69 22, 530 21, 021
(c) Analysis method c; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population..

9, 827, 763

229.2 22, 530 21, 021
(d) Analysis method d; standard, in-

mates, all types, per 100,000 na-
tive white, both parents native
born....

9,827, 763 193. 3 18, 998 21, 021 (e) Analysis method e; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000 for-
eign-born white...

9,827, 763 334. 1 32, 834 21, 021 9 Indian, Chinese, Japanese, and all other

(all parentage):
(a) Analysis method a; standard,
whole population..

412, 546 0.45 947

1, 173
(b) Analysis method b; standard
whole population minus negroes.

412, 546 .50 953

1, 173 (c) Analysis method c; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000
whole population..

412, 546
229.2 947

1, 173 (d) Analysis method d; standard, in

mates, all types, per 100,000 na-
tive white, both parents native
born..

412, 546 193.3 797 (e) Analysis method e; standard, in

[blocks in formation]

1, 173

55

+376

412, 546 334. 1 1, 378 1, 173

147. 18

. 55

- 205

85. 12

Table 15.---Showing relative constancy of findings in analyzing the same dati

different methods, and standards or "unit measuring rods"

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

I. The feeble-minded.... (a) Analysis method a: Standard, “The

Melting Pot" (whole population).
(6) Analysis method bi standard, whole

population minus negroes.
(c) Analysis method c: Standard, whole

population under 25 years of age.
(d) Analysis method d: Standard, whole

population under 15 years of age. II. The insane...

(a) Analysis method a: Standard, “The

Melting Pot" (whole population).
() Analysis method b: Standard, whole

population over 20 years of age.
(c) Analysis method c: Standard, wbole

population over 40 years of age.
III. The adult criminal- (a) Analysis method a: Standard, “The
istic.

Melting Pot" (whole population).
(b) Analysis method b: Standard, whole

population over 20 years of age.
(c) Analysis method c: Standard, whole

population over 20 years of age minus

negroes.
IV. All types of the socially (a) Analysis method a: Standard, “The
inadequate.

Melting Pot" (whole population).
(6) Analysis method b: Standard, whole i

population minus negroes.
(c) Analysis method c: Standard, inmates,

all types, per 100,000 whole population.
(d) Analysis method d: Standard, inmates,

all types, per 100,000 native white, both
parents native born.
(e) Analysis method e: Standard, inmates,

all types, per 100,000 foreign-born white.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Similarly, if the age group is insisted on for the insane, we apply the plan to the institutions for the feeble-minded, and we find the aliens, instead of making a better showing, made one almost twice as bad. Thus in special pleading, if the suggested scheme of reanalysis is carried through the whole collection of data secured, in the long run, no advantage is to be had for a special group. In these and future studies the standard measuring rod will continue to be that used throughout the “Melting Pot” studies, namely, the incidence of institutional inmates for the particular type of social inadequacy in the whole population of the United States equals 100 per cent quota fulfillment; and special analyses for side lights. The original " Melting Pot” survey is thorough and biologically sound. It contained no "statistical slip.” It presented a true mathematical picture of social and nativity groups in our state and federal custodial institutions.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee is glad to have this new explanation and additional set of tables. I believe we are getting facts, and I know that we are under great obligations to Doctor Laughlin. I am sorry we have had to interrupt him so often.

I see a gentleman sitting at the other end of the table. Would you like to be heard ?

A VOICE. I am Henry S. Jacoby, for 32 years at Cornell University, professor of bridge engineering, emeritus, and I am now living in Pennsylvania. I am here merely as an onlooker and have no statement to make.

[ocr errors]
« ÎnapoiContinuă »