Statistical Notes
Postponement of the Census from April 24th to June 19th.
—The significance of the date selected for the Census in this country lies in the fact that, in the absence of any express enquiry as to each person's normal place of residence, the figures of local populations must be based upon the residences at which the individuals are enumerated. It follows that, if the distribution thus obtained is to be taken as substantially equivalent to a classification by place of normal residence, it must be the aim of the Census authorities to choose a date at which the movement of the population, not only to and from the country as a whole, but between the several areas within the country, may be expected to be at a minimum. In. the selection of a suitable date it is possible as a rule to avoid large scale movements affecting wide areas; but no one date applying to the country as a whole can be expected to meet with an absence of movement in every locality. Small tidal migrations are almost continuously occurring, of which examples maybe seen in the seasonal movements in some industries, particularly in connection with agricultural operations such as harvesting, hop picking, pea and fruit picking, etc. Again, the universities and large public schools, which often bulk largely in the life of the districts in which they are situated, regularly expand and contract their populations with their alternating periods of term and vacation. Such movements are usually limited in range, but their number, variety and frequency render it exceedingly improbable that the result of a general enumeration at any given point of time could ever be closely representative in the case of every area of the normal resident population. The first Census was taken in March, 1801; and though for the next four, viz., 1811-1841, dates near the end of May were selected, the subsequent Censuses 1851-1911, have invariably been taken at the end of March or the beginning of April. For the present Census the night of the 24th April was originally chosen; and while the 19th June, the date on which the postponed enumeration actually took place, succeeded in avoiding the recognised industrial holiday season, there is no doubt that the periodical summer movement of population had by that time begun and that part of the increase recorded in Table III. for towns usually affected by this migration would not have been recorded at the earlier date. It has been urged on many occasions that for some of the statutory and other purposes upon which the censal population has a bearing, a Census taken in March or April does not adequately reflect the mean population of a town which is inhabited for several months in each year by an influx of visitors out of all proportion to its winter strength. Thus, an inflation which may render the returns more representative of the average than of the more permanently resident population, while undesirable for some reasons (e.g., mortality comparisons, since deaths are allocated to area of residence), is not necessarily to be regretted in connection with other purposes. Conversely, if it is customary for the residents of an inland or industrial district to spend a portion of the year, however small, away from home, it is equally reasonable that the fact should find statistical expression in the Census figure. The matter depends, of course, almost wholly upon the nature of the purpose to which the Census figure is applied. Further reference is made to the subject on page xv in connection with the actual returns. Population of England and Wales.
—The total population enumerated in England and Wales on the 19th June, 1921, numbered, according to the preliminary returns, 37,885,242 persons; 18,082,220 being males and 19,803,022 females. In Table I, on page I, these figures are shown in continuation of the series of corresponding figures of previous censuses, and are presented pictorially in the graphs on page viii. It will be seen that the present total is the largest ever recorded in this country, and exceeds the number returned at the previous enumeration of 2nd April, 1911, by 1,814,750, corresponding to an intercensal rate of increase of 5.03 per cent., or a decennial1
rate of increase of 4.93 per cent. The increase itself is numerically only about one-half of the increase in the preceding intercensal period; it is less than any corresponding figure since 1811 while proportionately it is far lower than any hitherto recorded. POPULATION OF ENGLAND AND WALES AT EACH CENSUS SINCE 1801. AMOUNT OF INCREASE OF POPULATION OF ENGLAND AND RATE OF INCREASE OF POPULATION OF ENGLAND AND The intercensal movement may be analysed into its more important elements as follows:— Table A shows these variations in comparison with those of preceding intercensal periods. *
Including the deaths of non-civilians in England and Wales which occurred outside the United Kingdom. In Table B the variations are shown for individual years from 1911-1921, in order that the important changes in the amount and direction of the several movements which have taken place since 1911 may be more precisely located. †
Non-civilian deaths are included in this column for the years 1901-1913. *
The total of the deaths shown in these two columns is taken from the figures supplied by the War Departments and includes the "Missing, Presumed Dead". The number assignable to the population of England and Wales is not known, and the allocation is based on the numbers recruited in the several portions of the United Kingdom which give about 86 per cent to England and Wales. It is seen from these tables that, so far as concerns what is known as the natural increase viz. the balance of births over deaths, the numbers recorded from 1911-1914 are comparable with the figures of earlier years, but that thereafter the continuity ceases and the changes become so great as to render any forecast of such movements, based upon results of previous years, entirely random. The fall in the birth-rate during the years 1915-1918 was much heavier than anything previously experienced; the numbers being from 20 to 25 per cent, below what might have been expected in normal circumstances. Though the direction of the movement changed upon the cessation of the principal hostilities in 1918, and very large increases have been and are being recorded, the actual amount of the increases within the intercensal period is not nearly sufficient to compensate for the deficiencies of the preceding years. The deaths, on the other hand, including the deaths of non-civilians registered in this country, showed no such decline up to and including the year 1918. Such diminution in the number of civilian deaths as was due to the reduction of the civilian population has been more than, counteracted by the deaths of non-civilians registered in this country. Since 1918, however, a notable reduction has been recorded which, with the increase of births already referred to, combined to produce in 1920 a natural increase considerably greater than that of any previous year. A separate column is shown of the deaths of non-civilians of England and Wales which occurred abroad at the various theatres of war. Though these form a direct loss to the community by death they are included in Table A in the balance of passenger movement, since, strictly speaking, they 'ceased to be part of the population for Census purposes on leaving the country. The figures in the last column of Table A show that the balance of the movement of population other than that accounted for by the difference between births and deaths varies greatly from one period to another. The want of continuity in this series precludes the possibility of any reliable prediction of future movement; and if deduction is made of the deaths of non-civilians abroad, technically included within the figure of 1,193,750 representing the balance of movement for 1911-1921, the remainder, viz. 633,750, though large, is not out of character with its antecedents, and is in no way indicative of the large abnormal movements of which it forms the net result. The gross civilian passenger movement between the United Kingdom and other Countries rapidly declined from 1914, until in 1917 and 1918 it was less than 15 per cent, of that registered in the first three years of the decennium, the effect on the balance of movement entailing not only a reduction of the normal outward flow but. the reversal of the net motion from an outward to an inward direction during the years 1914 and 1915. A curious feature which is not shown by the table is that the first net inward movement recorded was for the three months April to June, 1914. Apart from the increases and decreases due to births and deaths and civilian migration referred to in. the previous paragraphs there is the unknown amount of interchange between the several countries within the United Kingdom itself, while there have also been, since 1914, enormous movements of non-civilians between this country and the various theatres of war. The number of arrivals and departures to and from this country of members of the British Forces, of the Forces of the Dominions, Colonies and Allied Powers, of enemy prisoners and war refugees amounted to many millions; and though, after allowing for the deaths which occurred abroad and the known excess of non-civilians outside England and Wales in 1921 as compared with 1911, the exits and entries may be expected to have tended to neutralise one another, it is probable, having regard to the magnitude of the movement and the circumstances under which it occurred that this factor has contributed to the net intercensal balance of movement. An estimate of the total population of England and Wales as at the date of the census made in accordance with the method adopted for the purpose by the Registrar-General in his Annual Reports, would have yielded a figure about 33,000 in excess of the enumerated population, representing an overestimate of rather less than I per 1,000. During the years 1915-1918, however the difficulty of obtaining definite information regarding the non-civilian movement precluded any reasonable estimation of the total population within the Country at a given moment; and for these years the Registrar-General preferred to limit his consideration to the civilian population with the aid of returns as to recruiting and discharges. Population and Variations in Geographical Divisions of the Country
.—Table C shows approximately how the variations in the population, which, for the whole of England and Wales in the period 1911-1921, amounted to a net increase of 5.0 per cent., were distributed in geographical divisions of the country. The smallest of these groups show the greatest relative divergence, Wales standing highest with an average increase of 9.0 per cent., while the Eastern Counties only advanced by 3.0 per cent. It is remarkable how closely the order of increase in these geographical divisions follows the corresponding order for the previous decennium, each of the current rates bearing a relation to the 1901-1911 figures very similar to the relation between the corresponding rates for England and Wales as a whole. Table V on page 57 further distributes these variations into counties, the county for this purpose being the Administrative County, or a group of Administrative Counties, together with the associated County Boroughs in each case. In 47 of these county areas the population has increased since 1911, and in six of them the increase exceeded 10 per cent., viz. Flintshire (14.8), Monmouthshire (13.9), Glamorganshire (11.8), Warwickshire (11.4), Middlesex (11.2) and Surrey (10.0). The counties surrounding the Metropolis other than those already mentioned stand high on the list, Kent being credited with an increase of 9.2 per cent, and Essex with 8.7 per cent. The County of London itself, which is dealt with subsequently in greater detail, shows a small decrease. In eight county areas, the largest of them (other than London) being Cornwall and Shropshire, a decline was registered amounting in no case to more than 3.4 per cent, with the exception of Rutlandshire where a loss of 1,978 persons represents a decrease of nearly 10 per cent. Table D classifies the variations in the 55 county areas in relation to the mean variations for the whole country. The striking feature of this table is the restriction in the range of variations which have occurred between 1911 and 1921 as compared with those of the period 1901-1911. In the earlier decennium, only 23 out of the 55 county areas showed increases or decreases within 5 per cent, of the mean for the whole country.; while in five areas the populations increased by 25 per cent, or more, the highest being Middlesex and Monmouthshire with increases of 42 per cent, and 33 per cent, respectively. At the same time 10 counties showed a variation of more than 10 per cent, below the mean. During the past 10 years the movement in 41 of the 55 county areas has been within 5 per cent, of the mean while all are within 10 per cent, with the exception of the very small County of Rutland already referred to. Urban and Rural Districts.
—Reference to Table III, on page 5 shows that, of the 1,798 Urban and Rural Districts into which the country is divided, the population of the 1,126 Urban Districts (including County and Municipal Boroughs and counting the Administrative County of London as one District) amounted in all at the date of the Census to 30,034,385 persons, while the population of the Rural Districts (numbering 672) was 7,850,857, the proportions living under urban and rural conditions being thereby 79.3 per cent, and 20.7 per cent, respectively. In Table E these figures are shown in relation to the similar statistics of earlier Censuses. *
The figures for 1891 relate to the Districts as constituted at the date when the General Report on that Census was published towards the end of 1893. The table shows the steadily increasing predominance of the urban as compared with the rural element, the advance of the former during the past thirty years having been from 72 per cent, to 79 per cent, of the whole. The 1921 Urban District population is greater by 6.6 per cent, than that of 1911, 5.2 per cent, being actual increase within the districts as now constituted and the balance being accounted for by the fact that during the decennium, rural areas or portions of rural areas have become Urban Districts or have been absorbed by existing Urban Districts by the extension of boundaries. It will be observed that there has been a reduction in the number of Urban Districts, the new creations having been fewer than the number of those which have been amalgamated or absorbed. The present Rural District population is slightly less numerically than the similar 1911 population. The increase within the existing rural areas, however, is not seriously below the mean for the whole Country and indicates that the actual diminution is due merely to the normal growth of urban centres and not to any serious migration from country to town, such as that which took place during the latter half of the last century and which is reflected in the intercensal changes shown in the above table for the decennia between 1881 and 1901. Table F. classifies the Urban Districts according to their variations in a similar manner to that shown for Counties in Table D. *
The 28 Metropolitan Boroughs and the City of London are treated as separate Districts for the purpose of this table. As might have been expected, the sub-division of the urban population into a large number of separate units results in a very considerable widening of the range of increase and decrease variations. Comparison with the figures of the previous period serves, however, to confirm the indication given by Table D, that notwithstanding the displacements which might have been expected a"s a result of the War, the movements as a whole have been more restricted than might have been the case in a normal decennium. In Table G. the Urban Districts are further classified according to the numbers of their populations in 1921. *
Administrative County of London here reckoned as one district. London Administrative County and the "Outer Ring."
—In the Administrative County of London and the immediately surrounding areas conveniently designated the "Outer Ring" (which together comprise what is usually known as Greater London, and coincide with the total area covered by the City of London and Metropolitan Police Districts) 7,476,168 persons were enumerated, representing about one quarter of the population of all urban areas and about one fifth of the total population of England and Wales. The intercensal increase in the combined area is seen from the above table to have been at the rate of 3.1 per cent, which is less than one-third of the corresponding figure for the preceding decennium and is only about 60 per cent, of the rate of increase in the whole Country. In the Administrative County alone a decrease was recorded, representing a numerical loss of 38,436 persons, or between two and three times the corresponding loss which occurred in 1901-1911. Having regard to the total numbers this decrease is inconsiderable and signifies little else than that, in the process of the decentralization of the resident population which must usually accompany the development of an important commercial or industrial centre and which has been gradually taking place during several decades in the London area, the County boundary for the past 20 years has been just inside the line within which the normal increase and the outward movement, due to decentralization, approximately neutralize one another. The latter movement is illustrated in greater detail in Table VI on page 58, in which the Metropolitan Boroughs and the City of London are shown in detail. It is of interest to examine briefly the densities of the various Boroughs as measured in terms of resident population per acre. With the exception of the City itself, with its resident population of only 20 per acre, the density is greatest in the central Boroughs, being at a maximum of 159 per acre in Shoreditch and. 154 in Bethnal Green. This extreme diminishes with a progression outwards until in the areas farthest from the centre, particularly in the South East and South West directions, the densities become less than 30 per acre, the lowest being Woolwich, Lewisham and Greenwich with densities of 17, 25 and 26 respectively. In the "Outer Ring" the increase of 9.6 per cent, (representing an addition of 263,246 persons) stands out in marked contrast to the heavy increases recorded in respect of earlier periods. The distribution of the population into the constituent Urban and Rural Districts is given in Table VI on page 58, from which it may be seen that the individual variations, though very uneven, are, with few exceptions, much smaller both in amount and range than those of the period 1961-1911. Large Towns.
—Of the 1,126 Urban Districts, 101 (including the Administrative County of London as one District) had respectively an enumerated population exceeding 50,000. There were 97 such towns in 1911 of which four have ceased to exist as separate administrative districts (viz. Handsworth, Aston Manor, King's Norton and Northfield and Devonport), while eight have been added (viz., Cambridge, Carlisle, Exeter, Chesterfield, Luton, Hendon, Doncaster and Wood Green). In Table VII. on page 60 these towns are brought together and arranged in the order of their 1921 populations; the 1901 and 1911 populations are also shown in respect of the areas as now constituted. It will be seen that altogether they account for 18,692,501 persons, nearly one-half of the total population of the country thus being found in large and relatively dense aggregates. As a measure of caution it should be remarked that while the successive Census returns do provide general evidence of the growth or otherwise of various types of areas, the actual figures of individual districts, particularly of the large towns, can only be viewed in relation to the boundaries. which delimit them. The bulk of the development in such a case will often occur in suburbs which may be outside the administrative boundary and would not in that event be associated in a Census classification with the main area from which it derived its existence. Boundaries are extended from time to time to take in the new accretions; but the changes can only take place at infrequent intervals and would normally lag behind the growth of the population until the latter had reached a comparatively advanced stage. The 20 large towns in which the recorded increase was more than 10 per cent, are specified below; and in the adjoining column are given the 12 large towns in which an actual decrease was shown. It is interesting to note that Southend on Sea, the second in the above table, showed the highest increase in the corresponding group of towns for the period 1901-1911, while Ealing, Coventry and Wallasey were 3rd, 5th and 6th respectively in that period. The presence, among the 12 cases of decrease, of six Lancashire towns is remarkable, particularly having regard to the fact that Lancashire as a whole increased a at rate very little different from, the average of England and Wales. It is difficult not to associate these decreases with the large increases shown for Blackpool and neighbouring holiday resorts. Holiday Resorts.
—Some reference has already been made to the effect of postponing the Census to a point of time within the period affected by the summer holiday movement. Though this movement, accelerated perhaps by the unusually fine and warm weather experienced in the month of June, 1921, must have represented only a fraction of the .maximum which is attained in August, it was undoubtedly sufficient to swell the figures for the more popular watering places in a .marked degree. Instances similar to that of Blackpool are available from Table III. It is to be noted, however, that generally speaking these districts had been growing rapidly between 1901 and 1911, and that this development may well have continued into the following period. Such rough examination as has been possible in the short time available seems to indicate that the movement may have affected perhaps from one-half to three-quarters per cent, of the total population. The corresponding deflation will, subject to a slight reservation in the case of urban areas in close proximity to the coast, tend to be spread evenly over the country and should have little effect on the true populations of its component divisions. Intercensal Estimates of Populations.
—It has already been shown that an estimate of the total 1921 population obtained by adjusting the 1911 figures in respect of the known movements or balances of movement which have been recorded during the decennium would have exceeded the censal population of this year by about 1 per 1,000. Though., for the reason already stated, some of the intercensal estimates published in the Annual Reports of this Department since 1915 have been confined to the civil population, they have been derived from the successive annual movements; and the close correspondence of the estimated and enumerated population of 1921 appears to justify some degree of confidence in the intermediate links in the chain of estimates between 1911 and 1921. The data available at the time the several estimates were made was, however, to some extent provisional, and the published figures may therefore fall to" be adjusted in the light of the more complete information now at hand. In regard to the local distribution of the total population, however, no such check upon intercensal estimates is possible. No record of the internal movement of the population is obtainable, but it was known that after 1913 such movement was quite abnormal and sufficiently extensive to render estimates based upon a preconceived formula largely valueless. In these circumstances recourse was had to such local statistics of population as were available, the most reliable of which were the records obtained under the food rationing schemes; and these were adjusted so as to aggregate to the estimate of the total population of the country obtained in the usual way as described in the foregoing paragraph. Estimates made in such circumstances were bound to be crude and little would be gained by attempting any detailed comparisons between them and the enumerated local populations of 1921. Parliamentary Areas.
—In Table IV. on page 44 are shown the male and female populations within each of the Parliamentary Counties, Boroughs and, Divisions. For purposes of comparison the corresponding electorates as registered on the Spring Register of 1921 and the 1911 populations have also been inserted. The latter figures are shown in respect' of the areas as at present constituted, the original 1911 areas having been entirely changed by the redistribution of seats which took place under the Representation of the People Act, 1918. Sexes.
—One of the direct legacies of the War demonstrated by the Census returns of 1921 is the increased preponderance of females over males, the excess amounting to 1,720,802 as compared with 1,179,276 in 1911. In both cases, of course, the male population excludes the members of the Army, Navy and Air Force and of the Mercantile Marine who were out of the country on "the census night. The preponderance corresponds to a ratio of 1,095 females to 1,000 males; and in Table I. on page 1, where the similar ratios for each of the Censuses of England and Wales are shown, it will' be seen that this proportion of females is the highest ever recorded and stands out in strong contrast to any of the earlier records. The sex distribution differs greatly in the sub-divisions of the country as is shown by the following table. This has, however, always been the case and the relative positions of the several sub-divisions do not appear to have been greatly affected by the change in the aggregate proportions. Proportion of Females to 1,000 Males
PART II.—STATISTICAL NOTES.
WALES IN EACH INTERCENSAL PERIOD SINCE 1801.
WALES IN EACH INTERCENSAL PERIOD SINCE 1801.
Increase—
Births registered in England and Wales
(+)
8,275,400
Decrease—
Deaths registered in England and Wales:
Civilian
(-)
5,198,900
Non-civilian
(-)
68,000
Loss due to excess of outward over inward migration, of which 560,000 is estimated as representing the deaths of non-civilians belonging to England and Wales which occurred outside the United Kingdom (estimated)
1,193,750
Net intercensal increase
(+)
1,814,750
TABLE A.
Intercensal Period.
Intercensal
increase of
Population.Births
registered in
England and
Wales.Deaths
registered in
England and
Wales.Excess of
Births over
Deaths.Loss representing
balance of
outward over
inward passenger
movement.1871-1881
3,262,173
8,604,710
5,178,230
3,426,480
164,307
1881-1891
3,028,086
8,893,920
5,264,445
3,629,475
601,389
1891-1901
3,525,318
9,157,181
5,563,525
3,593,656
68,338
1901-1911
3,542,649
9,290,633
5,245,765
4,044,868
502,219
1911-1921
1,814,750
8,275,400
5,266,900
3,008,500
*
1,193,750
TABLE B.
Calendar Year.
Births in
England and
WalesDeaths in
England and
WalesExcess of
Births over
Deaths
in England
and Wales.Deaths of non-
civilians belonging
to England and
Wales which
occurred at the
various theatres
of war.
*Balance of Civilian
Passenger movement
between the U.K.
and other Countries
as returned by the
Board of Trade.
+ = Inward.
- = Outward.Civilian.
†Non-
Civilian.
*Yearly
Average{
1901-05
938,654
534,313
—
404,341
—
-107,309
1906-10
920,988
515,442
—
405,546
—
-163,053
1911
881,138
527,810
—
353,328
—
-241,151
1912
872,737
486,939
—
385,798
—
-241,734
1913
881,890
504,975
—
376,915
—
-203,611
1914
879,096
514,886
1,856
362,354
}
560,000{
+108,688
1915
814,614
553,476
8,777
252,361
+36,147
1916
785,520
497,145
11,072
277,303
-1,832
1917
668,346
486,965
11,957
169,424
-13,298
1918
662,661
587,828
24,033
50,800
-14,850
1919
692,438
495,478
8,725
188,235
-152,642
1920
957,782
464,680
1,450
491,652
-166,686
TABLE C.
DIVISION
Population.
Increase per cent. in intercensal
period.1901.
1911.
1921.
1901-1911.
1911-1921.
Wales
1,714,800
2,025,202
2,206,712
18.1
9.0
Central Counties
(Cheshire, Derbyshire, Notts, Staffs, Shropshire, Leicestershire, Northants, Warwickshire, Worcester, Hereford, Monmouth, Gloucester, Oxford, Bucks, Beds.)
7,272,216
8,089,342
8,566,885
11.2
5.9
Northern Counties
(Northumberland, Durham, Cumberland, Westmorland, Lancs And Yorkshire)
10,092,504
11,132,682
11,674,515
10.3
4.9
London & surrounding Counties
(London, Middlesex, Essex, Herts, Surrey, Kent)
8,285,964
9,201,484
9,610,234
11.0
4.4
Southern Counties
(Berks, Wilts, Sussex, Hants, Dorset, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall)
3,553,838
3,890,649
4,044,038
9.5
3.9
Eastern Counties
(Lincs, Rutland, Hunts, Cambs, Norfolk, Suffolk)
1,608,521
1,731,133
1,782,858
7.6
3.0
TABLE D.
1901-1911.
1911-1921.
Mean Rate of Variation for England and Wales.
110.9 per cent.
105.0 per cent.
No. of
Counties.Increase (+) or
decrease (-) of
Population.No. of
Counties.Increase (+) or
decrease (-) of
Population.County Areas which
showed percentage
variations:—{
over 20 above the mean
2
+ 431,632
15 to 20 above the mean
2
+ 452,896
10 to 15 above the mean
1
+ 266,883
5 to 10 above the mean
5
+ 391,903
6
+ 554,705
0 to 5 above the mean
10
+ 693,599
17
+ 836,635
0 to 5 below the mean
13
+ 1,153,143
24
+ 478,635
5 to 10 below the mean
13
+ 175,577
7
- 53,247
Over 10 below the mean
9
- 22,984
1
- 1,978
55
+ 3,565,633
55
+ 1,869,975
Total
-22,984
-55,225
TABLE E.
—
1891.*
1901.
1911.
1921.
Number of Districts
{
Urban
1,011
1,122
1,137
1,126
Rural
575
664
657
672
Population
{
Urban
20,895,504
25,058,355
28,162,936
30,034,385
Rural
8,107,021
7,469,488
7,907,556
7,850,857
Percentage of Total Population
{
Urban
72.0
77.0
78.1
79.3
Rural
28.0
23.0
21.9
20.7
Increase in population in the
areas as constituted at the
date of each Census over the
population of the same areas
at the previous Census.{
Urban
15.4
15.2
11.1
5.2
Rural
3.0
2.9
10.2
4.3
TABLE F.
1901-11.
1911-21.
Mean Variation for England and Wales.
110.9%
105.0%
No. of Districts.
No. of Districts.
Urban Districts having percentage variations
{
Over 60 above the mean
41
21
Over 50 but under 60 above the mean
16
10
Over 40 but under 50 above the mean
16
20
Over 30 but under 40 above the mean
38
17
Over 20 but under 30 above the mean
66
26
Over 10 but under 20 above the mean
101
90
Over 0 but under 10 above the mean
211
342
Over 0 but under 10 below the mean
414
521
Over 10 but under 20 below the mean
237
99
Over 20 BUT BELOW 30 below the mean
23
4
Over 30 below the mean
2
4
Totals
*
1,165
*
1,154
TABLE G.
Population Of Urban Districts.
Number
of
Districts.Aggregate
Population,
1921.Aggregate
Population of
the same areas,
1911.Mean Percentage
of Increase (+),
or Decrease (-)
of Population
1911-1921Over 1,000,000
1*
4,483,249
4,521,685
-0.9
500,000
and under
1,000,000
3
2,453,107
2,307,940
+6.3
250,000
and under
500,000
8
2,737,615
2,653,435
+3.2
150,000
and under
250,000
13
2,541,853
2,414,043
+5.3
100,000
and under
150,000
21
2,621,605
2,473,608
+6.0
75,000
and under
100,000
20
1,738,571
1,611,151
+7.9
50,000
and under
75,000
35
2,116,501
1,959,661
+8.0
40,000
and under
50,000
31
1,375,626,
1,279,351
+7.5
30,000
and under
40,000
50
1,736,777
1,606,151
+8.1
20,000
and under
30,000
76
1,854,762
1,736,371
+6.8
15,000
and under
20,000
95
1,649,369
1,515,622
+8.8
10,000
and under
15,000
141
1,769,889
1,645,432
+7.6
5,000
and under
10,000
262
1,863,019
1,756,551
+6.1
4,000
and under
5,000
90
403,654
387,268
+4.2
3,000
and under
4,000
92
320,867
310,710
+3.3
2,000
and under
3,000
91
231,201
226,668
+2.0
Under 2,000
97
136,720
134,810
+1.4
TOTAL
1,126
30,034,385
28,540,457
+5.2
TABLE H.
1861.
1871.
1881.
1891.
1901.
1911.
1921.
Population of—
Administrative County of London
(including the City of London)2,808,494
3,261,396
3,830,297
4,227,954
4,536,267
4,521,685
4,483,249
Outer Ring
414,226
624,245
936,364
1,405,852
2,045,135
2,729,673
2,992,919
Greater London
3,222,720
3,885,641
4,766,661
5,633,806
6,581,402
7,251,358
7,476,168
Increase (+) or decrease (-) per
cent. in preceding intercensal
period—
Administrative County of London
(including the City of London)—
+16.1
+17.4
+10.4
+7.3
-0.3
-0.9
Outer Ring
—
50.7
50.0
50.1
45.5
33.5
9.6
Greater London
—
20.6
22.7
18.2
16.8
10.2
3.1
Corresponding increase (+) or
decrease (-) in:—
England and Wales
—
13.2
14.4
11.7
12.2
10.9
5.0
All Urban Districts
—
28.1
25.6
18.5
19.9
11.1
5.2
Increases greater than 10%.
Decreases.
Blackpool
64.0
Blackburn
4.8
Southend on Sea
50.0
Bury
4.4
Hendon
44.3
Burnley
3.4
Coventry
20.6
Halifax
2.4
Eastbourne
18.1
Oldham
1.7
Barrow in Furness
16.4
Norwich
1.3
Bournemouth
15.9
Bolton
1.2
Wallasey
15.6
Merthydr Tydfil
1.0
Darlington
14.9
Bradford
0.9
Luton
14.2
London
0.9
Croydon
12.6
Bath
0.8
Wimbledon
11.8
Rochdale
0.7
Southampton
11.6
Doncaster
11.6
Birkenhead
11.3
Ealing
10.7
Chesterfield
10.7
Newport (Monmouthshire)
10.4
Grimsby
10.3
Southport
10.1
TABLE J.
1911.
1921.
1911.
1921.
England and Wales
1,068
1,095
All Urban Districts
1,087
1,114
All Rural Districts
998
1,025
Counties with highest proportion
of females:—
Counties with lowest propor-
tion of females:—
Sussex
1,217
1,273
Northumberland
1,010
1,027
Surrey
1,166
1,187
Rutland
973
1,024
Cardigan
1,224
1,185
Derby
993
1,024
Carnarvon
1,106
1,181
Carmarthen
1,004
1,020
Somerset
1,153
1,174
Wiltshire
1,004
1,016
Westmorland
1,112
1,173
Montgomery
1,026
1,015
Cornwall
1,164
1,173
Durham
984
998
Middlesex
1,144
1,165
Brecknock
952
974
Gloucester
1,142
1,146
Glamorgan
925
964
Merioneth
1,090
1,144
Monmouth
908
939
The predominance of females is apparently smallest in rural areas and in the counties associated with the mining industry, the combination of these two features in Wales making the proportions for that country 1,010 females to 1,000 males as compared with 1,101 to 1,000 in England.
1 Note :—The intercensal period 1911-1921 being approximately 10 years 2½ months, the decennial movement and rate of movement has been regarded as about 2 per cent, less than the corresponding intercensal movement. This difference has been allowed for in all references to decennial figures.