RELATION OF SEGREGATION TO INTERMARRIAGE 133 
In Chapter IV it was pointed out that the bulk of the Scandinavians and Ukrainians are 
found in the western provinces, consequently a survey of their distribution in Manitoba, 
Saskatchewan and Alberta is adequate for our purpose. 
Of all those of foreign origin in the Prairie Provinces, the Icelanders and Ukrainians 
show the greatest tendency to rural segregation. In Manitoba, 55 pe. of the Icelanders 
are in one out of the 15 electoral districts existing in 1921; in Saskatchewan, 65 pe. in 
one out of 16; in Alberta, though their numbers are comparatively small, a total of 55 p.c. 
are in two out of 12 electoral districts. The Ukrainians are much more numerous than the 
Icelanders in each of the three provinces and there are more cases of segregation. In 
Manitoba, 80 p.c. of this group is found in five electoral districts, in Saskatchewan 41 p.c- 
in one and 83 p.c. in five, and in Alberta 55 p.c. in one and 79 p. fn two out of the 
dozen districts in that province. When the analysis is carried to the smaller districts withimr 
the electoral areas, the tendency to segregate is even more marked. For example, 87 p.c. of 
the Ukrainians in Census Division I of Manitoba are located in one subdistrict of which 
they constitute 77 p.c. of the population. In Census Divisions 5, 12 and 13 totals of 79 p.c., 
85 p.c. and 89 p.c. respectively are found in three of the subdistricts in each division. 
Similar cases occur in Saskatchewan and Alberta. 
A comparison of the Icelanders and the other Scandinavians throws further light on the 
subject. In Manitoba and Saskatchewan, the Icelanders show as high proportions as 55 p.c. 
and 65 p.c. of their number in one electoral district; 23 p.c. is the highest figure shown for 
any of the other three Scandinavian peoples and that is for the Norwegians, for whom actual 
intermarriage exceeded expectation by the smallest percentage. The behaviour of the 
different stocks in the Scandinavian group furnishes additiona! confirmation of the thesis 
that segregation is an important influence in preventing intermarriage. 
The case of the Dutch provides a further illustration. There were about as many 
Dutch in the three Prairie Provinces as in Ontario. In Ontario they were widely scattered, 
but in Manitoba 64 p.c. were found in one and 76 pc. in two electoral districts, and in 
Saskatchewan 38 p.c. in one. In Alberta they are more evenly divided. The figure for the 
Dutch is only moderately below the expected amount of intermarriage, which seems to 
be consistent with their segregating in two provinces and failing to do so in the others. 
The Mennonites called themselves Dutch in 1921, and it is in the districts where Mennonites 
are settled that segregation appears. 
That segregation is an important influence may be illustrated in another way by the 
data for those of Dutch origin. The tendency to segregate becomes less marked in passing 
trom Manitoba west. If segregation is an important influence one would expeet a smaller 
percentage of intermarriage for the Dutch in the province of Manitoba than in Saskatchewan 
and in Saskatchewan than Alberta. The Annual report on Vital Statistics for 1925 shows 
the origin of parents of children born in that year. In Manitoba, 19 p.c. of the Dutch 
fathers had married into other stocks: 32 pc. in Saskatchewan and 57 pe. in Alberta. 
Segregation is not the sole explanation of these differences, but is probably a significant one. 
Passing to the Czechosdlovaks, it is not surprising that they exceeded expectation in 
respect to the amount of intermarriage, while other people from South, Eastern and 
Central Europe fell short. Czechs are quite different from the Russians, Austrians, Poles 
and Ukrainians, and appear to be much more easily assimilated. 
The influence of city as opposed to country residence on intermarriage Is difficult to 
demonstrate, as the rural and urban distribution of the various “origin” groups in 
Canada is not conveniently available. Other things being equal, however, people who 
congregate in cities would be expected to intermarry more than those who prefer rural 
life and follow rural occupations. On this basis, one would expect intermarriage for the 
Italians to far exceed expectation, because they show much larger percentages in larger 
cities. The failure to do so may be attributed, at least in part to the marked tendency 
to segregate in large cities or quarters—a tendency which also characterizes the Hebrew 
and other stocks. 
A similar examination of the data for other stocks furnishes conclusive evidence that 
segregation is much less marked than in the case of those stocks which are backward in