102 Negro Migration 



The first column indicates the 1900 population of the 

 various groups of counties. The second indicates the nat- 

 ural increase which might have been expected in the popu- 

 lation if there had been no movement and if the excess of 

 births over deaths had caused an increase of 15 per cent dur- 

 ing the decade. Although the Negroes of the country as a 

 whole increased only 11.2 per cent, and the Negroes of Geor- 

 gia 13.2 per cent, it is estimated that the excess of births over 

 deaths in Georgia would have caused that State to increase 

 by 15 per cent, had Georgia not suffered loss by migration. 

 The third column is the actual increase in colored popula- 

 tion between 1900 and 1910, as shown by the census. By 

 subtracting the third from the second column, i. e., subtract- 

 ing the actual increase from the expected increase of 15 per 

 cent, we obtain a fairly good approximation of the extent to 

 which the actual increase by excess of births over deaths is 

 offset by population movement. This is shown in column 4. 

 The Negro population of the State was 1,034,813 in 1900. If 

 it had increased by 15 per cent (155,222) it would have been 

 1,190,035 ; such, however, was not the case. The 1910 census 

 showed only 1,176,987 Negroes, an increase of only 142,174. 

 This leaves the difference between 115,222 and 142,174, or 

 13,048, to be accounted for by migration from the State. 

 As a matter of fact the figures as to birthplace confirm this 

 assumption closely. (See footnote 7.) 



It will be noted from Table 16 that the mountain counties, 

 decreasing rural counties, and stationary counties lost 



of estimating migration is provided by comparing totals with 

 Table 19, Negro Population in the United States. Whereas, 

 this estimate indicates that the State as a whole lost 13,048 

 by migration, Table 19 indicates an increase of 19,004 Georgia- 

 born Negroes outside the State, from this the increase of 1,257 

 born elsewhere but living in the State should be deducted, 

 leaving an excess of 17,747 in the increase of emigrants over the 

 increase of immigrants. The estimate in Column 4, Table 16, is, 

 therefore, conservative because it falls 4,700 below the actual 

 figures in Table 19. 



