37 2 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
in the state of Texas alone ; (2) because as Mr. Hewes has pointed out the disproportionate number of colored prisoners would affect the results disproportionately. Had the southern states been included, the showing would have been less favorable for the native-born population, as is indicated by the ratios shown for the entire United States.
It is, proposed, therefore, to compare the total number of male prisoners in the northern states with the total number of males of voting age in those states. To be perfectly exact the comparison should have been between the male inhabitants of voting age and the male prisoners of voting age ; but this was impossible for the reason that the census does not show the facts as to the nationality of the prisoners of voting age. A careful examination proved, however, that the results would be relatively the same in considering the whole number of prisoners or the prisoners of voting age, for the reason that the distribution of prisoners as to nationality is almost exactly the same for the total number as for those of voting age.
The table on page 373 exhibits the ratios above mentioned for the United States, the northern states, the northern divisions and each of the northern states.
It will be seen from the table on page 373 that the men of for- eign birth furnish fewer prisoners proportionately than those of native birth in each division of the northern states, as follows (see columns 2 and 3 of the table):
NUMBER OF MALE PRISONERS IN EACH MILLION MALES OF
VOTING AGE.
Foreign Born Native Born
Northern States - 3240 4445
North Central Division - 1915 355o
North Atlantic Division - - 4615 5205
Western Division - 4360 6410
By reference to the table it will be seen that the showing is in favor of the foreign born in every northern state and territory except Maine, New Hampshire, Arizona, and New Mexico. While the showing is more favorable to the native born in the
