The Hokitika Guardian FRIDAY, MARCH 17th, 1922. GENSUS FIGURES.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 March 1922, Page 2

The Hokitika Guardian FRIDAY, MARCH 17th, 1922. GENSUS FIGURES.

Buie Books are not a popular fonn of literature, and those which deal with the results of a census make especially little appeal to the general reader. And yet in the solid pages of statistics which set forth the details of the census of New Zealand taken on April 17th. last year lie many facts of deep interest, well worth the trouble of search, a task facilitated to some extent by the copious introductory notes in which the Government statistician has summarised some of th e features of the succeeding masses of figures, comments the I’ress. With some of the chief particulars of the census our readers are already familiar, as they have been published at intervals during the past eight or nine months. It is not necessary, therefore, to do more than refer briefly to the growth of the population. The very first census of the country is thought to have been taken in the early forties, hut the first cue which took place under an Act of Parliament was that of December 1851. The total census period covers, therefore, 70 years in which time the population lias grown from 20,7017 to 1,218.913 h-p. a regular periodical domparis'on is only, possible for the last- forty years since the first of the five yearly censuses were taken in 1881, when the population was 489,933. Pp till 1901, the greatest numerical increase occurred in the period 1874-78, when, owing to the vigorous immigration policy of those years, the population was increased by 114,898; since 1901 three censuses ) out of four—the. periods of 1901-6, 1906 -11 and. 1916-21— have shown increases of betwepn 115,000 to 119,000, The absence from Now Zealand of so many men during the war was responsible for \\ drop in the rate of growth being indicated by the census of 1016. It is noteworthy'that in the years 1888 to JBOI fhej'a was an OJfefss Of

tures over arrivals. Of the total present population, the North Island holds 00.81 per coat-, the South Island 39.19 per cent. In 1858 the disproportion was almost as great, bur, thence afterwards, right down to the end of the last century, tin- bulk of the population was in the South. Auckland, which in 1881 had 20.29 per cent of the people against Wellington s 12.54, Canterbury's 22.95 and Otago s 21.94, now has 30.32 per cent, the proportion of the others named being Wellington 20.41. C inter bury 16.33 and Otago Hi. 23 per cent. 01 t'-'e total increase of 119,464 since 1916, 75 per cent, has gone to the N»ith Island, Auckland province alone taking 51 per cent. The population at successive census dates of the principal cities and boroughs is given in a table which hardly affords n fair comparison', since it is clear that at various dates certain of the cities secured ac= cessions of population by the amalgamation therewith of adjoining boroughs. It is of interest to note, however, that WhereaS in 18.58 Auckland had 6283 residents as compared with Wellington’s 4516, Christchurch's 1443, and Dunedin’s 15,790, while oy 1878 it had gained only some 1300, whereas Dunedin had secured nearly 10,00(1 more. Dunedin was, indeed the most populous centre from the very early sixties until the first half of the eighties. Auckland gained temporary su-* premacV at the census of 1886. .lint has since had to play second fiddle to Wellington. Of course, when the population of the “urban areas,” a term which has -replaced “metropolitan areas” is reckoned Auckland Holds an unchallenged place her total being 157757 or 13 per cent of the whole Dominion compared with 107,488 in the Wellington urban area. 105,670 in Christchurch, and 72,255 in Dunedin. The ‘-drift to the towns,” which has been so marked il feature of the population of mally countries in recent years, is shown to have beetl occurring in the Dominion over a long period Forty years ago 59.44 pl?r edit Of the people lived outside boroughs; I'lie proportion in favour of the country districts gradually diminished until the census of 1911 showed that it had disappeared altogether, and that 50.11 per cent of the population lived in towns. Last year the borough population was 55.95 of tbo total. Tn view, however, of the fact that the population of many boroughs is rural rather than urban, and that of some counties is more distinctly urban, the Statistician has made another comparison, by which he shows that, regarding as town dwellers those who live in towns of 2500 inhabitants o r more, the rural population is till the greater, the percentages being rural 51.23 per cent, urban 48.77 per cent., compared with 62.,14 p e r cent and 37.66 per cent, respectively forty years ago. in the past twenty years the towns have gaihed practically 10 per cent at the expense of the country.