202 RELATION OF ORIGINS AND NATIVITY TO CRIME

Canadian born population corrected for both age and sex. When a similar procedure is
followed with the data for the “Other British” and Foreign born the following rates
are found: —

Nativity

Canadian.........covuireiinint ieee erenniaens.
Other British Born......
Foreign born... .

Number who would
be convieted per
100,000 population
(both sexes) under
axisting age and sea
distribution, on the
assumption of a
uniform crime rate
for all nativity
groups

133-3
206-1
229-0

The actual rates in the census year 1921 were as follows: —

Canadian born.......................
Other British born...............
Foreign born................. ..

Nativity }

Actual number
of convictions
per 100,000
population in 1921

156
236
408

raking the Canadian rate as a base in each of the above cases and expressing the rates
for each of the other nativity groups as a proportion of the Canadian rate, we get the
following results: —

Nativity

Canadian born...............ccoceeviunnn.,.
Other British born.........c..ooouuvvein.
Foreign born. ...... FE

Number who woulc
be convicted per
100,000 of each
nativity group
on the basis of a
uniform crime for
all, expressed as
percentages of the
‘ate for the Canadian
 born

Actual rates
in 1921
expressed as
ercentages of
the rate for
the Canadian
born

00 100
155 151
179 205

Ratio
of actual
convictions
to expected
convictions

100
98
152

it is apparent from the above percentages that sex and age distribution are adequate
to account for the entire difference in crime rate between the Canadian and “other
British” born. In the case of the foreign born, the expected number of convictions per
100,000 was 72 p.c. greater than that for the Canadian born population; the actual rate
was some 162 p.c. greater in 1921, leaving an excess of 90 convictions or 52 pc. to be
iccounted for on grounds other than age and sex.
The figure of 90 convictions or 52 pe. probably understates the difference for two
reasons. In the first place, for 2,625 or 13.5 p.c. of the convictions birthplace was not given.
There are reasons to believe that more than a proportionate number of these were of foreign
birth. If so, had the “not givens” been distributed, the rate for the foreign born would
have been relatively higher than appears in the table. Further, the analysis has proceeded
on the assumption that the age distributions of the foreign and Canadian born within the
broad age group 21-39 were similar. Now Table 6, Volume II, of the Census 1921 shows
that this is not the case. Of the Canadian born males between 20 and 29, the largest
number were in the age group 20-24 and the second largest in the group 25-29. Thus
relatively larger proportions of the Canadian born males were in the twenties. With
the foreign born, on the other hand, the largest numbers were between 35 and 39 years
of age and the next largest quinquennial group was 30-34—that is, relatively larger proportions
 were in the 30's. The 20's are the years most favourable to crime, as is shown above
by penitentiary data. Thus the age distribution of the foreign born between 20 and 40
was less favourable to crime than that of the Canadian born in the same broad age group.
In view of these facts it is obvious that the results minimize the difference between
criminality among the foreign born and the Canadian born. That such is the case is
confirmed in the preceding discussion of penitentiary population by age and nativity. The
foreign born males in penitentiaries show more than twice the rate for the Canadian
horn age for age.