406 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXII. No. 561. 



THE CHICAGO DEATH-RATE. 



A VIOLENT difference of opinion existed in 

 1900 between the Chicago Health Department 

 and the Census Bureau. The census authori- 

 ties credited Chicago with a population of 

 1,698,753, while Chicago claimed, and esti- 

 mated her death-rate on, a population nearly 

 a quarter million greater. The census bureau 

 said, moreover, that Chicago had made the 

 opposite error in counting her deaths. The 

 census enumerators turned in 1,930 deaths, 

 which were not accounted for in the returns 

 of the City Health Department, Thus it 

 appeared that Chicago had made a plus error 

 of 15 per cent, in estimating her population 

 and a minus error of 6 per cent in counting 

 the deaths. The Census Bureau said that the 

 1900 death-rate of Chicago was 16.2 per 1,000. 

 In the very next year, 1901, Chicago published 

 her. famous low death-rate of 13.88, which, 

 Dr. Whalen says, this year's death-rate will 

 surpass. Of course, the death-rate for 1901 

 was discredited. The statement that 1901 was 

 a remarkably healthy year throughout the 

 world did not remove the doubt which the 

 census results had thrown on Chicago's vital 

 statistics. The department itself later yielded 

 the point of population and accepted the cen- 

 sus figures. The discrepancy in the mortality 

 was allowed to slumber and Chicago offered 

 no satisfactory explanation of the 1,930 death 

 records which the enumerators turned in and 

 which the Census Bureau added to the records 

 furnished the Health Department of Chicago. 

 It is well known that the census enumerators' 

 returns of mortality are about 40 per cent, 

 short. Since these returns are based on in- 

 quiry at every house concerning the deaths 

 during a year preceding, the results can hardly 

 be expected to exceed 60 per cent, of the 

 deaths truly chargeable to the period. A 

 comparison of the enumerators' returns in 

 1900 with the mortality returns furnished by 

 the Health Department of Chicago (16,059 

 and 27,752) shows that the enumerators did 

 not get quite 60 per cent, of the true returns. 

 If, therefore, the 1,930 records appearing in 

 the census schedules, but absent from the city 

 returns, really belonged to Chicago's mortality 

 for 1900, the indications are quite clear that 



the mortality upon which the Health Depart- 

 ment based its death-rate was less than the 

 true mortality by 3,216 deaths, and that Chi- 

 cago was fairly chargeable with a death-rate 

 in 1900 of 18.23 per 1,000, two points more 

 than the census rate and about four points 

 higher than the rate which Chicago published. 

 The suggestion of Dr. Whalen that New 

 York inflates her population figures is not 

 supported by an examination of the census 

 reports, nor did the twelfth census indicate a 

 short count of the New York mortality in 

 1900. The advantage gained by the recent 

 census of New York (46,000 above the popula- 

 tion estimated on the experience of the pre- 

 vious decade) is far too small to justify a 

 suspicion of padding; but Dr. Whalen's sug- 

 gestion that New York ' corrects ' her mortal- 

 ity sheet by excluding all deaths of non-resi- 

 dents and all deaths of infants under two 

 weeks, opens up a question of great importance 

 in American mortality registration. There is 

 no agreement among American registration 

 offices as to the elements of mortality rates. 

 The cities of this country are absolutely 

 unanimous in the exclusion of non-resident 

 decedents, unless Chicago counts them in. 

 Only a few cities, however, publish statements 

 of the non-resident mortality, and not one 

 explains what is meant by a non-resident. It 

 would help the cause of registration tremen- 

 dously if New York would make public answer 

 to Dr. Whalen's definite charges of unfairness, 

 and if Chicago would also define her practise. 

 Let us have from each city answers to the 

 following questions: Are the deaths of non- 

 residents, occurring in the city, included in 

 the total mortality on which the death-rate is 

 figured? Are the deaths of citizens, taking 

 place outside the city, included in the death- 

 rates? What rule determines the question of 

 residence in cases of death within the city? 

 What rule determines the question of resi- 

 dence in cases of death without the city? Is 

 any part of the infant mortality excluded 

 from the death-rates? Are stillbirths in- 

 cluded in the total mortality? What defini- 

 tion of a stillbirth governs your registrar ? 

 ■ — American Medicine. 



