46 THE NATURALIZATION OF IMMIGRANT PEOPLES 
For immigrants from all but five of the specified countries, the percentage naturalized 
n cities 25,000 and over is smaller than that naturalized in urban and rural communities 
sombined. The same holds true for the total foreign born. Were separate figures available 
‘or the rural population, greater differences would be expected. Either living in large cities 
is generally less favourable to naturalization or a radical change occurred between 1911 
snd 1021 in the nature of immigration from foreign countries in respect of rural and wrban 
distribution. For example, if immigration in the decade had been continuous on the same 
scale and if during the last five years of the decade all the new arrivals had gone to the 
arge cities, such cities would show a larger percentage unnaturalized merely because they 
had a disproportionate number of the newer immigrants. This, of course, did not happen. 
There is no reason to believe that there was a radical change in the rural and urban 
distribution of immigrants arriving between 1911 and 1914, and from that time to 1921 
immigration greatly declined. The first alternative is obviously the principal explanation— 
viz., that residence in large cities is less favourable to naturalization. Moreover, the fact 
shat the average of the negative deviations in Column 3 is only — 1-41 p.c. as against an 
average of + 7.30 p.c. for the positive deviations is additional evidence that ordinarily that 
section of an immigrant population which lives in large cities naturalizes less rapidly than 
the section residing in rural districts and smaller communities. 
The variation in the differences between Column 1 and Column 2 is worthy of passing 
notice. A 22.06 p.c. larger proportion of all Galicians in Canada had naturalized than 
of the Galicians living in the larger cities, as against a 2.96 p.c. smaller proportion for the 
Jugo-Slavs. The question as to why this spread is sc large is a subject for further 
investigation. 
With the exception of immigrants from France the foreign born who show large positive 
deviations are essentially rural. Positive deviations greater than 9 p.c. oceur in the following 
sases, the Galicians, Norwegians, French, Hungarians, Austrians, Ukrainians, Belgians, 
Swedish and Dutch. The figure for the Galicians is the highest and the countries are 
arranged in descending order. It is recalled that the foreign born Galicians, with only 
24.39 p.c. of their numbers in all urban communities, and the Norwegians, with 21.86 pe. 
urban, were mentioned as being the most rural immigrants in Canada. Further, in none 
of the nine cases, except that of the French, did as high a proportion as 42 p.c. live in 
urban centres, while the percentage urban for the total immigrant bom population in 
Canada was 56.4 pc. Even the percentage urban for those born in France (52.40 p.c.) 
was 4 p.c. lower than the average for all immigrants. The position of the French immigrants 
is peculiar because of the presence of so large a body of their own people among the basic 
stocks of Canada. In the districts to which they go they are foreign in none but the legal 
sense of the term. Their behaviour, therefore, is not important from the point of view of 
assimilation nor is it any criterion for the others. They constitute no problem. The data 
Jor the bona fide foreigners suggest that residence in large cities is relatively more unfavour- 
able to naturalization in the case of those immigrants who show marked rural proclivities. 
The five groups of foreign born showing negative deviations are the Jugo-Slavs, Italians, 
Finns, Poles and Chinese. Two of these cases are not significant because of the smallness 
5f the numbers on which the percentages are based. In 1921 there were only 182 naturalized 
Jugo-Slavs in cities 25000 and over and some 400 Finns, representing only between 
3 and 4 p.c. of all Finns in Canada. The other three classes of immigrants, namely, Italians, 
Chinese and Poles, are among the most urban in Canada, with 75.8 p.c., 71-7 p.c. and 67-3 
pe. respectively in incorporated cities, towns and villages. This suggests the correlative 
hypothesis, that residence in urban communities is relatively less unfavourable (and in these 
extreme cases actually favourable), to naturalization for those who naturally congregate 
shere. Both these suggestions have been confirmed by a more complete analysis of the 
data, but the matter does not appear to be of sufficient consequence to occupy further space 
in this report. 
In conclusion, attention is recalled to the essential point of the discussion in this section. 
[mmigrants settling in large cities show a smaller percentage naturalized than immigrants 
from the same country who have settled in rural districts and in small urban centres. Vrban