i
^
gN9.
"^
?A€*^
BUSINESS BRANCH
3^
-TH729': r;36. SftOCT"
,' .^
■i m
SOCIAL STATISTICS
BY
CENSUS TRACTS IN BOSTON
A METHOD OF NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY
BOSTON COUNCIL OF SOCIAL AGENCIES
BUREAU OF RESEARCH AND STUDIES
43 TREMONT STREET, BOSTON
APRIL, 1933
.
SOCIAL STATISTICS BY CENSUS TRACTS IN BOSTON
A METHOD OF NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY
Boston Council of Social Agencies
Bureau of Research and Studies
43 Tremont Street, Boston
April, 1953
Bb
X
FOREWORD
The Boston Covincil of Social Agencies Issues this report,
confident that the material which it contains will be valuable not only
to those engsiged in social work, but to those in other fields of
activity as well. In presenting it, the Council woxild have it clearly
understood that it is offered as an outline of a method of study. It
is in no sense a complete discussion of the statistical material now
available, which can be developed in many different ways according to
the peculiar interests of those who desire to make use of it. This
report serves merely as a guide to this development.
Credit for pioneering work with the census ti^ct project is
due the Boston Health League, particularly Mr. Horace Morison of the
Executive Committee and formerly Executive Secretary, and Miss Anna J.
Haines who, as Executive Secretary, directed the preparation of the
original tract map and street list Miss Margaret H. Tracy, the
present Executive Secretary, has carried forward Miss Haines' work and
collaborated with the Council in the preparation of specific material,
particularly that relating to the health field. Dr. Francis X.
Mahoney, Health Commissioner of Boston, early recognized the value of
the plan with respect to health statistics and arranged for an appro-
priation in his department budget which assured the recording of the
federal census data by tracts.
Our thanks are due to those organizations which have helped
in the preparation of the material and in the supplying of data. We
must mention especially the Emergency Planning and Research Bureau,
which made for us all of the maps and charts and calciilated the area
of inhabited land in the city as shown in Map II, the City Department
of Public Welfare, the State Board of Probation, the City Department
of Health, the Family Welfare Society, the Boston Provident Associa-
tion, and the Jewish Family Welfare Association.
This report has been prepared under the direction of Miss
Mary A. Clapp, Director of the Bureau of Research and Studies, with
the assistsince of Miss Alice Channing, Associate Director, and Miss
Valentina Glebow.
Executive Secretary.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 - Introduction 1
2 - Source Material now Available in Boston 2
United States Census
Health Statistics
Delinquency
Relief
5 - Census Tracts 5
4 - Health and Welfare Areas 4
5 - Population Trends - 1920-1930 5
6 - Density of Population 6
7 - Nationality and Race 7
The Proportion of White Native and Foreign Bom Heads of Families
Distribution of National Groups
Citizenship of Foreign Bom Residents
8 - Economic Status . ,_ 15
Home Ownership
Median Rentals
9 - Housing 15
Boarding and Lodging Houses
10- Health 16
Infant Mortality
Tuberculosis
11- Delinquency 19
12- Relief 22
Department of Public Welfare
Private Agencies
IS- Correlations 28
14- Conclusions 30
i\
Follovrlng
MAPS; page;
I - Population Trends, by Areas 5
II - Use of Land, by Tracts 6
III - Density, by Tracts 6
IV - Foreign Bom Heads of Families, by Tracts 10
V - Median Rentals by Tracts 14
VI - Public Relief by Tracts 24
CHARTS;
I - Native and Foreign Bom Heads of Families in Boston, by Health and
Welfare Areas 8
II - Foreign Bom Heads of Families in Boston by Country of Birth, by
Health and Welfare Areas 10
III - Citizenship of Foreign Bom 21 Years and Over in Boston, by Health
and Welfare Areas 12
rV - Home Ownership in Boston by Health and Welfare Areas - Proportion of
Persons in Dwellings which they Own 15
V - Infant Mortality in Boston 17
VI - Tuberctilosis in Boston - New Cases - Deaths 18
VII - Juvenile Delinquents - Delinquents 17 - 20 Years of Age 21
VIII - Families in Health and Welfare Areas Receiving Relief from the
Boston Department of Public Welfare 25
TABLES; Page;
1 - Density of Population 7
2 - Number and Per cent of Foreign Bom Heads of Families (White) 8
5 - Distribution of Negro Heads of Families in Boston 9
4 - Proportion of Negro to Total Families 9
5 - Four Most Numerous National Groups by Health and Welfare Areas 11
6 - Citizenship of the Foreign Bom 21 Years of Age and Over by Health and
Welfare Areas 12
7 - Home Ownership by Areas 15
8 - Median Monthly Rentals by Areas 14
9 - Proportion of Population Living in Lodging Houses and Hotels by Areas — 15
10- Per cent Distribution of Persons Living in Lodging Houses and Hotels 16
11- Infant Mortality by Health and Welfare Areas 17
12- Tuberculosis - New Cases per 100,000 Population 18
15- Tuberculosis - Death Rates per 100,000 Population 19
14- J uv e nl le Delinquents and Delinquents 17-20 Years of Age, by Health and
Welfare Areas 21
15- Number and Per cent of Families Receiving Relief from the Department of
Public Welfare, by Health and Welfare Areas, November 1, 1952 -
March 1, 1955 24
16- Number and Per cent of Families Receiving Specified Types of Aid from
the Department of Public Welfare, in Health and Welfare Areas -
November 1, 1952 - March 1, 1955 25
17- Distribution of Families Known to Relief Agencies, by Health and
Welfare Areas 27
18- Per cent of Families Known to Public and Private Agencies, by Health
and Welfare Areas 27
19- Rating Scale of Areas for Social and Health Factors 29
INTRODUCTION
The Onited States Census contains a wealth of Information about the
people living In our cities. Other valuable facts lurk in the statistics of
city and state departments. Social agencies have in their records the keys
to many neighborhood and city -wide problems.
Too often problems go vinrecognized because of the difficulty of
excavating the facts, and, more especially, of finding a suitable device for
bringing them together. In addition, statistical material in past Federal
censuses is often not comparable because of the changes in ward lines in the
intervening decades.
Out of attempts to formulate a plan by which decennial census figures
and other statistical material might be made comparable, the device of Census
Tracts has developed. Onder this system, a city is divided into a number of
geographical units. In some cities these units are of uniform acreage; in
others they are made up of areas of which the population was of similar size
at the time of their establishment. However they may be established, the
principle involved is that of a fairly small district with fixed boundaries, which
remains unchanged from one census to the next and irtiich obviates the diffictilty
so often met in frequently changing ward lines. Thus, in any one census, the
nTinber of persons living in a tract, their ages, sexes, nationalities, industry
groups, citizenship or literacy, may be laid against like information of a past
census, and trends and comparisons established.
Similarly health, relief and delinquency trends may be established
from year to year by a distribution by census tract of statistics from city and
state departments. Thus many correlations may be made, especially as social
agencies incorporate in their records the simple mechanism upon which recording
by census tracts is based, and thus make more facts available.
-2-
SOURCE MATERIAL NOW AVAILABLE IN BOSTON
I United States Census
In some cities, federal census material has been available by census
tracts since 1910 or 1920. Although population figures for Boston on this
basis were available in 1920, it was not until 1930 that the following eleven
tables hy census tracts were made available through the efforts of the Boston
Health League and a generous grant of money from the City Health Department:
Table I Population by Color, Nativity, Sex and Age.
Table II Foreign Bom White Population by Country of Birth and Sex.
Table III — Native White Population of Foreign or Mixed Parentage, by Country
of Birth of Parents and by Sex.
Table IV Population 21 years of age and over by Color, Nativity and Sex.
Table V Foreign Born White Population 21 years of age and over by
Citizenship and Sex.
Table VI Population 10 years of age and over by Color, Nativity and
Illiteracy
Table VII — Population 15 years of age and over by Color, Nativity, Sex and
Marital Condition.
Table VIII-Galnful Workers 10 years of age and over by Industry Groups and Sex.
Table JX Families by Color and Nativity of Head and by Size.
Table X Homes by Tenure and Value of Monthly Rental.
Table XI Families, Radios, Dwellings and Quasi-Family Groups.
II Health Statistics
Statistics relating to infant mortality, to tuberculosis, both as to
new cases and to deaths, to diphtheria and scarlet fever*, for 1930 and 1931,
have been gathered through the co-operative efforts of the Boston Health League
and the Boston Coimcil of Social Agencies, from the records of the City Health
Department. In 1952 the Health Department instituted a record system based on
census tracts, so that information in the futiire will automatically come from that
source .
III Delinquency.
In October, 1950, the Massachusetts Board of Probation instituted
♦ Because of the limitations of space and because it was felt that they were not of
equal social significance, figures for diphtheria and scarlet fever are omitted from
the discussion. They are available at the office of the Boston Health League.
-5-
a very complete system of statistical recording. At the present time there are
available for study two sets of figures by Census Tracts,- those for Juvenile
Delinquents (children 7-16 years of age), emd Delinquents 17-20 years of age,
for two years, October, 1930 to October, 1951, and October, 1951 to October, 1952.
IV Relief
Up to the present time, relief figures on the basis of Census Tracts
have not been available. The total case loads and the expenditures of the
Department of Public Welfare and of the various private relief-giving societies
have been a matter of record for years; but it has not been possible to analyse
the figures by comparable districts. Now, however, throiigh the co-operation of
the Department of Public Welfare, and of the Family Welfare Society, the Boston
Provident Association and the Jewish Family Welfare Association, figures by
census tracts are available. Unlike the material for health and delinquency,
these are figures collected not under a permanently continuing system, but for
limited periods.
1. Department of Public Welfare. Families receiving relief between
the first of November, 1932, and the first ol" March, 1933.
2. JChree Private Societies. Families receiving relief and service
in October, 1932.
CENSUS TRACTS
A census tract has already been defined as a fixed geographical unit,
which makes possible the collection and comparison of different sets of statistics
for small areas. The allotment of individual cases into their appropriate
tracts is easily done by means of a street index* in which every street is listed
and assigned to the tract or tracts through which it runs, by the number of the
tract or tracts.
♦"Alphabet Street Index and Basic Demographic Data for the City of Boston by
Census Tracts."
-4-
Under the present scheme, there are in Boston 128* separate census
tracts. These tracts vary greatly both in size and in population. The smallest
is one of 7.8 acres - census tract G-4 in the South End; the largest is one
of 2956.6 acres - census tract W-6 in West Roxiury. Population figures show
equal diversities - from G-5 in the South End, with its 441 inhabitants, to
Y-5 in Brighton, which has a population of 18,889. However, the point
already made, that the establishment of a basis of comparison is the all
important factor, makes these differences of size and population relatively
unimportant. There is always the possibility of sub-dividing large tracts and
combining small ones provided only that original outlines be not distiirbed.
HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
In addition to individtial tracts, it has been felt necessary to define
a number of larger geographical units, composed of groups of tracts, as a further
basis for study. In the first place, the city falls into a niunber of commonly
accepted neighborhoods or districts. In the .secwid place, the larger figiires
made possible by combining those for several tracts, are of greater statistical
validity, and obviate the wider fluctuations created by the use of smaller
nvimbers. Then, too, many social agencies in Boston operate on a district plan
under which they have a central headquarters, and sub-offices in various
neighborhoods. Typical of this sort of agency, are the Family Welfare Society
and the Community Health Association. In many instances, however, their
district lines fail to coincide. Accordingly, what one agency means by "Roxbury"
is not at all what another may mean by it. In order that definitely defined
districts might be established, a group of member agencies of the Council of
Social Agencies last year held several conferences, as a result of which the
*One tract - B-6, is omitted from these calculations- It is that which in-
cludes all the harbor islands, and has no bearing on neighborhood problems.
-5-
clty was divided into fovirteen Health and Welfare areas. The City Health
Department has already officially adopted this plan. In deciding upon these
areas, which must follow tract outlines as well, the factors of historical
district boundaries, population, and transportation facilities were considered.
It is obvious that many agencies, in the actual pursuance of their district
work, may not find it jxjssible to conform to the boundaries of these Health and
Welfare Areas, especially since tract outlines do not always coincide with
generally accepted district boundaries. For example, the South End is
generally conceded to run to Massachusetts Avenue; whereas the nearest tract
outlines follow a tortuous trail along Northampton Street, Harrison Avenue,
East Lenox and Fellows Streets . For the present, emphasis is laid upon the
importance of statistical recording of data significant to social planning,
by these Health and Welfare Areas, rather than upon the need for uniform
operating districts.
POPULATION TRENDS - 1920-1950
The population of Boston increased 4.1 per cent between 1920 and
1950. Seven areas - those clustered in the center of the city - decreased
in population in the ten years in varying degrees, from the Back Bay area which
changed very little, to the West End in which the population in 1950 was almost
30 per cent less than it was in 1920. The seven outlying areas showed in-
creases, ranging from Roxbury, in wtiich the population remained practically
stationary, to West Roxbury which increased over 50 per cent. (Map I.)
Individual census tracts fluctuated far more than did the areas. For example,
census tract F-5 in the North End Area showed the largest increase in the
decade - 147.8 per cent - in spite of the fact that the Health and Welfare area
in which it is located decreased 12 per cent. The highest percentage of
decrease was 75 per cent in G-5, a tract in the South End Area.
-6-
DEMSITT OF POPULATION
Density of population for a given area is calculated by dividing the
number of people inhabiting it by the size of the area. Unless the number of
acres actually lived in is known, however, results may be misleading. In many
instances, most of the land is not available for living purposes (see Map II. )»
with the result that a tract which, because of its small population and large
acreage, may appear to be rather sparsely populated, is in reality very
densely populated, once the acreage devoted to purposes other than living is
eliminated. Tract G-1, in the South End, is a case in point. Its popula-
tion was 2204, its acreage 300.5. Its uncorrected density was 7.5 persons
per acre. Study of Map II - the Use of Land in Boston - however, reveals
that the Common occupies one comer of it, the South Station emd its yards
auiother, while the great down-town business district extends throughout its
center. As a matter of fact, only 4.7 acres of the total 300.5 are at the
present time inhabited. Accordingly its corrected density became 490.8
persons per acre, thus making it the eleventh tract in order of density.
The density of population by census tracts is shown in Map III, and by
Health and Welfare Areas in Table 1.
The corrected densities of individual tracts were often far greater
than those of the Health and Welfare areas. For example, in the North End,
F-5 had a density of 1420 persons per acre, and F-2 a density of 1008.7
c
Co
I! n
s >■
°S'»' —
S
D5
O
f
P O '^ 35 z
ii
n
J
n:
(;^
P s
03
^
ZT
?
* >
5 n
S >
go
O xi
5 -^
^ ^ m m
o LJ Liiij t»!
-7-
TABLE 1. DENSITY OF POPULATION.
Number of Acres
Number of Persons
Health and
Available
per
Welfare Area
Population
for Habitation
Inhabited Acre
Boston 778.976
North End 27,818
West Old 28,028
South End 60,506
Charlestown 51,665
South Boston 59,728
East Boston 59,242
Back Bay 58,887
Roxbury 105,790
Dorchester North 120,055
Brighton 56,562
Dorchester South 74,445
Jamaica Plain 44,542
West Roxbury 47,414
Hyde Park 24,498
6.944.9
54.8
84.0
187.9
125.8
279.7
294.9
255.4
730.0
1,105.2
712.4
955.0
648.5
1,016.5
559.0
112.2
799.4
533.7
522.1
255.8
213.5
200.9
167.2
144.9
108.6
79.1
78.0
68.7
46.6
45.4
NATIONALITY AND RACE
Three aspects of nationality are herewith analysed,- the proportion
of foreign and native bom heads of families, the distribution of national and
racial groups throughout the city, and the degree to which foreign bom
residents have assumed citizenship. As a basis for this analysis, because of
its greater social significance, the table (Federal Census Table 9) * which
gives the birthplace and race of the head of the family, rather than that
(Federal Census Table 2) which gives the same facts for individuals, is
used .**
* "Census Tract Data, 1950 Census", on file at the office of the Council of
Social Agencies.
»* " the percentage of the families classified as foreign-born white is
likely to be much larger than the percentage of the population classi-
fied as foreign bom white". Population Bulletin, Families. U S.
Census, 1950. p. 6
-8-
The Proportion of White Native and Foreign Born Heads of Families.
In seven of the foiirteen Health and Welfare Areas, even in 1930,
in spite of the immigration restrictions since the world war, more than half the
heads of families were foreign bom (See Cheirt I, and Table 2.) This, of
course, is an outstanding point of interest in respect to the ethnic factors
in the population of the city.
TABLE 2. NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FOREIGN BORN HEADS OF FAMILIES (WHITE)
Health and Total Number
Welfare Area of Families
Boston 179.189
Back Bay 11,561
Brighton 15,814
Charlestown 6,691
Dorchester North 27,941
Dorchester South 16,847
East Boston 12,581
Hyde Park 5,540
Jamaica Plain 11,008
North End 4,649
RoxbTiry 25,492
South Boston 15,255
South End 10,562
West End 6,194
West Roxbury 11,074
Foreign Bom Families
Number
Per cent
89.162
49.8
5,009
26.0
5,655
55.8
5,004
44.9
14,787
52.9
9,350
55.5
8,659
68.7
2,610
47.1
4,753
45.0
4,065
87.4
12,255
48.0
7,565
55.6
5,576
50.8
5,870
62.5
4,468
40.5
Chart I also shows concentration of Negro Population in the South
End and in the Roxbury areas, for residing in these two districts are to be
found almost nine-tenths (87.1 per cent) of all the Negroes in Boston.
Since negroes present particular problems, especially in matters pertaining
to health, attention should be given to those districts in which they
congregate.
♦For definition of "Family", see Population Bvilletin, Families. U. S.
Census, 1950. p. 5.
NATIVE AND FOREIGN-BORN HEADS of FAMILIES
IN BOSTON
BY HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
FKOM UNITED STATES CEN3U3 i930
I' » IP »0 SO
BOSTON
BACK BAY
BRIGHTON
CHARLESTOWN
DORCHESTER NO.
DORCHESTER SO.
BAST BOSTON
HYDE PARK
JAMAICA PLAIN
NORTH END
ROXBURY
50UTH BOSTON
50UTH END
WE5T END
WEST ROXBURY
SO 60 70 eo
90 |oo%
PERCENT ^CALE ""|mm|mm|mm| 1, rr, nu, | m n , m 1 1 1 1 1 1 i , 1 1 iril u i , , m ri'^nxpni
annBini]!
AyyyyyA
DID ^
NATIVE BORN NATIVE BORN FOREIGN BORN NEGROES OTHER RACES
NATIVE PARENTS FOREIGN PARENT5
(WMITt) (WHITEJ (WUITt)
PREPARED FOR
BOSTON COUNCIL OF SOCIAL AGENCIES
BY THE EMERGENCY PLANMING d RESEARCH BUREAU INC BOSTON.MASi - 1933
CHAKT N" X
-9-
TABLE S. DISTRIBOTION OF NEGRO HEADS OF FAMILIES IN BOSTON.
Health and Per cent
Welfare Area Number Distribution
Boston 5,539 ' 100.0
Roxbury 5,504 65.6
South End 1,546 25.2
All Others 489 9.2
The relationship of the negro population to total population
appears in the following table:
TABLE 4. PROPORTION OF NEGRO TO TOTAL FAMILIES.
Health and Total Number Negro Families
Welfare Area of Families Number Per cent
Boston 179.189 5.559 5.0
Roxbury 25,492 5,504 15.7
South End 10,562 1,546 12.7
All Others 145,155 489 .5
Negro population was especially concentrated in four census tracts
in the Roxbury area,- R-1 with 8.1 per cent, R-2 with 51.4 per cent, R-5 with
55.5 per cent emd D-5 with 22.9 per cent; and in three in the South End area,-
L-2 with 57.9 per cent, L-5 with 59.1 per cent and J-2 with 42.2 per cent.
Chart I also shows a concentration of 'Other Races" - xmdoubtedly the
Chinese - in the South End eirea. In two tracts in this area - G-1 sind
G-2 - "Other Races" were 40.2 per cent eind 15.6 per cent respectively of the
total population.
-10-
Map IV illustrates the distribution of foreign born heads of families
by census tracts. The proportion in certain tracts was very high. For
example, in F-1, in the North End area, 92.2 per cent of all heads of families
were foreign bom.
Distribution of National Groups.
Chart II (based on Table 5) portrays the national complexion of each
area by ranking in each the four most numerous national groups. Native born
persons, whether of native born or foreign bom parents, are not included in
the following calculations.
Persons bom in the Irish Free State comprised the largest group
of the foreign bom in Boston. They were widely distributed throughout the
whole city, and constituted one of the four most numerous national groups in
twelve of the fourteen areas.
On the other hand, those bom in Italy, while nearly as large a
group, appeared in fewer areas - nine of the fourteen - and showed great
concentration in the North End and in East Boston.
The third numerically important group - persons bom in Canada -
like the Irish, were scattered throxjghout the whole city, and were one of the
four ranking groups in twelve of the fourteen areas.
Those bom in Russia - the fourth Isirgest group - like those from
Italy, were found on this basis in six of the fourteen areas, but were
especially concentrated in the West End and in Dorchester South. The Federal
Census at no place makes any accounting of the Jewish group, because no
classification is made by religious faith. This Russian group is of impor-
tamce because it is undoxjbtedly largely composed of those of the Jewish
faith.
I
H
5 a
s s
i Xt ^
06 M M
5 5
3 3
S $
^ a
5 a
3 3
3
3
3
a
3
3
3
CO
CO
to
3
•H
PQ
£
£
£
5
+>
£
«j
^
A
•S
3
^
(.
s
•ri
u
•H
3
9 9
m
3
^
3
3
3
^
S S
5
3
3
3
k
fi
£
£
<A
0
A
A
•o
T)
fi
^
^
■g
^
o
■y
n
■•i
u
M
s
O
ID
OQ
3
5
t-t
3
U
M
S
o
1
9
O
o
o
o
o
o
O
o
O
o
o
o
o
o
O
^
8
8
8
s
s
8
o
o
S
8
s
g
8
g
g
"^
r-A
fi
•H
H
■^
^
U)
S3
IQ
o»
to
»o
\n
to
to
„
03
s
«
lO
S
s
t^
«
N
(O
IQ
00
«
m
■a
■^
Ol
oo
CM
^
-^r
w
t-
lO
•*
CO
iH
5
3
3 5
3
a .3 £>
5
a
3
FOR.EIGN BORN ULAD5 or FAMILIES m B05T0N
BY COUNTRY or 5IRTH
DT HEALTH (5 WELFARE AREA5
DAT* - FRO" UMTCO STATE5 CEMSUS t930
b 3 to Zo 30 40 SO 60 JO SO qo lop?^
PEIRCEMTAGE 5CALE I ' ^ ^ M ' ' ' ' I ' ' ^ M ' ' ' ' 1 ' ' ^ N ' ' ■ ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 1 1 ' ' U ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' -m-l " ' 1 '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 * "
bO^TON
bACK BAY
BRIGHTON
CUAR.LE5TOWN
DORCHESTER MO-
DORCHESTER SO-
EAST BOSTON
HYDE PAR.K
JAMAICA PLAIW
NORTH END
EOX&UBY
50UTH BO5T0M
50UTH EMD
WE^T EhJD
WE5T KOXBURy
SSH
^sz^m^^^m
i^^i^i^J^^ftWlWlWj^^iM
r^^i^^j^csss
".'VV'.''.'. ■.;.■.'.;'.■ vvv_v^_
::::::::::'2^^^^
:^J^::::!^
5^^^^^.^^^^N:::::::::::
MJ^^^^i^^J^^^
^
^W^^
^^^^^^
0
^
IRISH FREEHATE ITALY
I
LITHUAUIA
POLAND
GREAT braiTAiN S-MOIMUMD CAWADA
rw — »» — w- w-
EUS51A
<//^///,
:,//,//,/.
GRtECt GERMANY 5YR.IA
ALL OTHERS
PREPAEiD FOR.
BOSTON COUNCIL OF SOCIAL AGENCIES
BY EMERGENCY PLANWHG JSP RESEARCH BURIAU - IKIC-1<133 CHART Wo H
1>
-12-
There are certain national groups, not sufficiently numerous to appear
in Table 5, which nevertheless were concentrated in one or two tracts. The
Syrian population offers a good example of this fact. There were in Boston 969
heads of families bom in Syria, of iriiom 544 or 55.5 per cent of the total number,
lived in tracts G-1 and G-2 in the South End. In Q-1 the group comprised 85.6
per cent, and in G-2, 55.9 per cent of the total foreign bom heads of families
in the tract. In six contiguous tracts of this same area there were 658 heads
of families bom in Syria - 65.8 per cent of all in Boston.
Citizenship of Foreign Bom Residents
The degree to irtiich the foreign born have assumed United States
Citizenship by tracts is shown in Chart III. Table 6 ranks the areas according
to the percentage of foreign bom citizens in each who have become naturalized,
who have taken out their first papers, or irtio are aliens.
TABLE 6 . CITIZENSHIP OF THE FOREIGN BORN 21 YEARS OF AGE AND OVER BY HEALTH
AND WELFARE AREAS.
Total Foreign
Born with Known
Health and
Welfare Area
Boston
Jamaica Plain
West Roxbury
Charles town
Brighton
Dorchester North
Dorchester South
Roxbury
Hyde Park
Back Bay
South Boston
South End
East Boston
West End
North End
Citizenship
Naturalized
First Papers
Aliens
Nunber
Percent
Number Percent
Number Percent
Number Percent
207.510
100.0
115.142
54.5
22.084
10.6
72,284
54.8
10,526
100.0
6,917
66.9
1,058
10.1
2,571
25.0
10,765
100.0
7,027
65.2
966
9.0
2,772
25.8
6,867
100.0
4,524
65.0
765
11.2
1,778
25.8
12,225
100.0
7,561
61.8
1,178
9.6
5,485
28.5
51,687
100.0
19,496
61.5
5,129
9.9
9,062
28.6
21,422
100.0
15,055
60.9
1,977
9.2
6,410
29.9
27,517
100.0
16,598
60.0
2,757
10.0
8,182
50.0
5,720
100.0
5,107
54.5
588
10.5
2,025
55.4
9,606
100.0
4,719
49.2
1,271
15.2
5,616
57.6
16,108
100.0
7,896
49.0
2,056
12.8
6,156
58.2
18,487
100.0
8,454
45.2
2,282
12.4
7,751
42.4
18,110
100.0
7,551
41.6
1,915
10.5
8,666
47.9
9,527
100.0
5,794
59.8
1,255
15.2
4,480
47.0
9,545
100.0
2,885
50.9
951
10.0
5,529
59.1
ClTIZ[N5HIPof rOI^LIGN 50RN'21 Y[AR5andOVEI^
IN BOSTON
5Y HEALTh AND WtLfA^L AR[A5
DATA - fROM UNlTtO 3TATt5 CtN3U3 1930
PERCENTAQt SCALt f 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 j°l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1'|° 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l^p 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1*^^ | , 1 1 1 1 1 i^ 1 1 1 1 m 1 1*-" 1 1 1 | m i i^n 1 1 1 1 1 1 i^^l^ 1 1 1 1 1 m^mii 1 1 1"
D05T0N
SACK. DAY
5RIGHTON
CMARLE5T0WN
DOHCHLSTtR NS-
D0R.CHt5TER 52
EA5T BOSTON
HYDE PAI^K
JAMAICA PLAIN
NORTH END
R0X5URY
50UTH 505T0N
50UTH LND
WEST END
WE5T ROXBURY
NATURALIZED
FIRST PAPERS
ALItN5
PREPARED rOR.
505TON COUNCIL OF SOCIAL AGENCIES
er THt. LMCRSCNCV PLAMNIMO i^ IttSCARCH buniAU iNC BoapM MA^S - ISOS
CHAET N«Iir
-15-
ECONOMIC STATUS
The Federal Census, in the information which it contains about home
ownership, the values of these homes, and the amounts of rent paid, offers
valuable clues to the economic levels of different neighborhoods. Median
values or median rentals for a given tract may be considered as rough but
significant gauges of the general economic status of families in the district.
While the figures used in this report are based on facts collected in 1930
and while conditions concerning rents and values have undoubtedly changed in
the interim, the differences in the economic levels of the tracts is still
significant.
Home Ownership
Home ownership is one means by which the economic level of a
neighborhood is tested, for it is commonly supposed that a district in which a
great many people own their homes is of a different calibre from one in which the
great proportion of people pay rent. The percentage of homes owned in the health
eu:eas ranged from 52.7 per cent in West Roxbury to 4 per cent in the West End.
TABLE 7. HOME OWNERSHIP BY AREAS.
Health and
Total Homes with
Known Tenures
Homes Owned
Homes Rented
Welfare Area
Number Percent
Number Percent
Number Percent
Boston 176.168 100.0
West Roxbviry 10,913 100.0
Hyde Park 5,496 100.0
Dorchester South — 16,677 100.0
Jamaica Plain 10,811 lOO.O
East Boston 12,411 100.0
Dorchester North — 27,571 lOO.O
South Boston 13,097 100.0
Charlestown 6,548 100.0
Brighton 15,594 100.0
Roxbury ■— 25,068 100.0
South End 10,124 100.0
West End 6,001 100.0
Back Bay 11,501 100,0
North End 4.576 100.0
46.014 26.1
5,754
2,578
5,829
3,700
3,571
7,711
3,527
1,724
3,336
4,452
1,636
739
1,131
326
52.7
46.9
35.0
34.2
28.8
28.0
26.9
26.3
21.3
17.8
16.1
12.3
10.1
7.1
130.174 73.9
5,159
2,918
10,848
7,111
8,840
19,860
9,570
4,824
12,258
20,616
8,488
5,262
10.170
4.250
47.3
53.1
65.0
65.8
71 2
72.0
73.1
73.7
78.7
82.2
83.9
87.7
89.9
92.9
HOML OWNERSHIP IN BOSTON
5Y HEALTH ($ WELfARL AREAS
PEOPOETION or PEESONS IN
DWLLLING-5 WHICH THEY OWN
DATA - FROM UNITED STATej CENSUS 1930
PERCENT 5CALE. I ' ' ' ' I n n M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ffl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 m m 1 1 1 1 m^i" i n 1 1 1 1 S^ rjrrTg
505TON
WEST EOX&UB.V
SOUTH LND
WEST END
5ACI^ &AY
NOieTH END
HOMLS OWNLD
PUCPABtD '■oe.
b05T0N COUNCIL Of SOCIAL AGLNCILS
&Y THE EMERGENCY PLANNING 4 EESEAeCM &UB.LAU INC. 505TON MA5e)-l933
CMAR.T NO 21
-14-
Median Rentals
In this discussion the item of rent rather than that of assessed valua-
tion,* is used to determine economic status, as it probably gives a truer pictvire
of the actual living conditions in the area. In the North End, for example,
real estate is valuable, and assessed values are high. Rents, however, are low
because people crowd into tenements. Since 73.9 per cent of the people in
Boston pay rent, the median rent is a sound basis for calculation.
TABLE 8. MEDIAN MONTHLI RENTALS BY AREAS.
Health and Median
Welfare Area Monthly Rental
Boston IS6.70
Charlestown 21.70
North End 24.10
South Boston 24.16
East Boston 25.51
South End 27.59
West End 28.95
Roxbury 55,55
Hyde Park 55.87
Dorchester North 59.79
Jamaica Plain 40.94
Dorchester South 42.25
West Roxbury 45.98
Brighton 52.92
Back Bay 54.60
Median monthly rentals for each tract are shown in Map V. In almost
half of the tracts, the median rentals were less than $50 per month, and in almost
three-quarters, less than $40 per month. With the exception of three tracts where
rentals were high (K-3 and K-5 in the Back Bay and K-2 in the West End) and of ten
irtiere they were less than $20 per month (C-1 and D-1 in Charlestown, S-2 in
Roxbury, M-1, M_2. M-5, M-4 and 0-4 in South Boston, and G-4 and Q-1 in the South
End) , in almost nine-tenths of the tracts the median rents ranged from $20 to
$50 per month.
♦Complete tabulations of assessed valuations are on file at the Council office.
-15-
If excessively low rents indicate bad housing with its attendant
effects upon living and health conditions in general, then those particular
districts where they exist become of immediate interest.
HOUSING
Boarding and Lodging Houses
The presence of large numbers of lodging houses and hotels Influences
the character of a neighborhood. Whereas less than 5 per cent of the total
population of Boston was so lodged > there were certain areas in i^ic?i this
proportion was very much higher. Almost 20 per cent of every one living in the
South End, for example, resided in one or the other of these two kinds of domi-
ciles. In one tract - 1-5 - of the area, 51.4 per cent of the inhabitants
lived in lodging houses.
TABLE 9. PROPORTION OF POPULATION LIVING IN LODGING HOUSES AND HOTELS BT AREAS.
Health and
Welfare Area
Popiilation
Per cent of Population
Living in Lodging Houses and Hotels
In Lodging
In Both Houses In Hotels
Boston
South End
Back Bay
West End
North End
All Others —
778.976
60,506
58,887
28,028
27,818
625.757
2.5
18.5
9.2
7.4
5.9
.5
1.8
14.2
4.8
5.8
2.7
.5
_^
4.1
4.4
1.6
5.2
Seventy-five and three tenths per cent of that portion of the popu-
lation of Boston living in hotels and lodgings was concentrated in two of the
Health and Welfare Areas,- the South End and the Back Bay. These two with
the West End and North End areas, contained over 95 per cent of the city's
hotel and lodging house dwellers. Table 10 gives the distribution in these
areas, and shows that 56.8 per cent of the persons living in lodging houses and
hotels in Boston live in the South End.
-16-
TABLE 10. PER CEOT DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONS LIVING IN LODGING HOUSES AND HOTELS.
Persona Living In Lodging Houses and Hotels
Total In Lodging Houses In Hotels
Health and Per cent Per cent Per cent
Welfare Area Niimber Distribution Nxinfcer Distribution Number Distribution
Boston 19.552 100.0 13.995 100.0 5.559 100.0
South End 11,112 56.8 8,6.50 61.8 2,462 44.2
Back Bay 3,620 18.5 1,890 13.5 1,730 31.1
West End 2,090 10.7 1,634 11.6 456 8.2
North End 1,637 8.4 743 5.4 894 16.1
All Others 1,093 5.6 1,076 7.7 17 .4
HEALTH
Mention has already been made of the fact that health statistics covering
Infant Mortality, Tuberculosis, Diphtheria and Scarlet Fever, based upon the
records of the City Health Department, and prepared by the Boston Health League,
are available by Health and Welfare Areas and by Census Tracts for the years 1930
and 1931.
As these statistics are studied, two facts must be borne in mind:
1. In many instances, especially in the case of figures which deal with
births and infant deaths, the numbers for individual tracts are often
small. Accordingly fluctuations in rates are disproportionately great.
2. These figures cover the span of two years, a period too short for
the building up of statistical evidence of great social significance.
It Is only when small numbers follow a consistent trend over a long period of
time that they become of real significance. High morbidity rates in any given area
therefore should be considered as danger signals indicating the need of careful case
study of conditions affecting the area rather than as absolute factual evidence.
-17-
Infant Mortality
The infant mortality rate for Boston in 1931 was 59.4 per 1,000
live births,- the lowest rate on record. In the previous year - 1930 - it
was 66 .6 In this two-year period, rates in eleven of the fourteen areas
decreased in varying degrees. The rates in three areas,- Back Bay, Charlestown
and Hyde Park,- increased in 1931. In both years, the Hyde Park area had a
rate below the general rate for the city. The rate in the Back Bay equalled
that of the city in 1930, and was greater in 1931. Charlestown' s rate in both
years was decidedly above that of the city, and increased markedly in 1931.
In contrast, the West End, a district which compares in many other respects
with Charlestown, had the best record for infant mortality of all the areas,
having the next to the lowest rate in 1930 and the lowest in 1931. (Chart V.)
TABLE 11. EJFMT MORTALITY BY HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS.
iths
?ar
L951
Boston 13.892 12.975 926 772 66.6 59.4
Back Bay 329 337 22 27 66.8 80.1
Brighton 1,045 944 59 48 56.4 50.8
Charlestown 543 454 45 52 82.8 114.5
Dorchester North 2,206 2,049 15S 107 69.3 52.2
Dorchester South 1,274 1,267 69 61 54.1 48.1
East Boston 1,310 1,228 105 86 78.6 70.0
Hyde Park 454 436 17 24 37.4 55.0
Jamaica Plain — 837 732 59 52 46.5 43.7
North End 495 461 40 57 .80.8 80.2
Roxbury 2,160 1,975 140 118 64.8 59.7
South Boston 1,176 1,086 105 76 89.2 69.9
South End 857 797 76 58 88.6 72.7
West End 408 440 19 13 46.5 29.5
West Roxbury 798 769 39 33 48.8 42.9
♦The Boston Health League co-operating with the Harvard Oniversity School of Public
Health, the City Health Department, and the Bureau of Research and Studies of the
Boston Council of Social Agencies, is sponsoring a study which involves a medical
and social investigation of infant deaths occiirring in these two areas, in the
first six months of 1935.
Health and
Number of Births
1930 1951
Number of
Infant Deaths
Under 1 Year
Rate per 1000 Births
Welfare Area
1930 1931
1950 1931
z
o
o
>
lU
d
lU
o
o
o
>
"> a
z
<
d
z a
■u ^ 1
<
Oil-
a
3>;
Sg
o
X
to
H fe
to ^
On
^mm^m^
NODTti- END
50UTrt £ND
EAST BOSTON
|50UTMD05T0N
DOXBUDY
DODILSTEBNOBTft
CCtlTON
D0BCttt5Tm50UTtt
MAICA PUIN
WEST DOXBUBY
W£5T END
BOSTON
^^
'I'i'i'i
'I'Ml'l'
I'I'I'I
HYDt RACK
BACK E3AY
CI1ADLE5T0WN
CHACT N0 3Z:
-18-
Tuberculosls
Two sets of rates concerning tuberculosis are available,- that for new
cases and that for deaths. (Chart VI.)
The rate for cases of Tuberculosis decreased In 1951, falling to 148.0
from 170.0 in 1950. Rates in twelve of the fourteen areas showed a similar trend.
The rates in two areas only,- the North End and East Boston,- increased in 1951.
TABLE 12. TUBERCULOSIS - NEW CASES PER 100,000 POPULATION.
Health and Total
Welfare Area Population
Boston 778.976
Back Bay 58,887
Brighton 56,562
Charlestown 51,665
Dorchester North 120,055
Dorchester South 74.445
East Boston 59,242
Hyde Park 24,498
Jamaica Plain 44,542
North End 27,818
Roxbury 105,790
South Boston 59,728
Soutii End 60,506
West End 28,028
West Roxbury 47,414
Although the rate for new cases for the city was smaller in 1951 than it
iras in 1950, the rate for deaths from tuberculosis increased from 57.0 per 100,000
population in 1950, to 65.0 in 1951. Four areas - Dorchester North, Hyde Park,
and South and West Ends - showed improved rates for the two-year period. Of these
four, three had rates for 1951 lower than that for the city as a whole; but the
rate for the South End was more than twice as large as the rate for the city.
The South End area, as Tables 12 and 15 reveal, has excessively high
Number of
New Gases
Rate per
100,000
1950
1951
1950
1931
1,524
1,155
170.0
148.0
68
45
174.8
110.5
65
52
115.3
92.2
62
59
195.8
186.5
168
151
159.9
109.1
75
75
100.7
100.7
81
94
136.7
158.7
51
28
126.5
114.3
57
42
127.9
94.2
40
48
143.7
172.5
192
176
181.4
166.3
120
93
201.0
156.0
240
214
596.7
353.6
55
41
189.0
146.0
72
59
151.8
124.4
o
o
o
6
o
§ " I
9 j: 5
z
Z 2
a o
i— '
to
ILJ
r
o
IL-
d
z
22
o i:
< Ss
lO "^ g
o — g
u 3 2
Zap
858
z o
O q
1- ^
•q
^^^^:^;^.»;^^;^;»_;^
SOUTtt tND
tmiiLtSTOWN
^
^^^^
^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
^W^^
^^^^^^
!
DOXbUCY
50UTtt BOSTON
WE^T END
/L5T DOXDUDY
ttYDt PABK
&ACRDAY
DOIOOIBNOCm
DoiiaiC3rER5oum
JAMAICA PLAIN
BEOTTON
E)05TOH
\>\>\>\>\,\
^^^^^^^
I
.^^^^^t^t^
CAST BOSTON
NODTtt END
I
CHAET No3r
-19-
tiiberculosls rates. Both for new cases and for deaths, these rates were the
highest of any area in the city.
TABLE 13. TUBERCULOSIS - DEATH RATES PER 100,000 POPULATION.
1951
Niimber of Deaths
Health and from Tuberculosis
Welfare Area 1950
Boston 448
Back Bay 10
Brighton 16
Charlestown 23
Dorchester North 55
Dorchester South 18
East Boston 25
Hyde Park 10
Jamaica Plain 26
North End 16
Roxbury 70
South Boston 52
South End 94
West End 17
West Roxbury 18
Death Rate
per 100.000
1930
1931
505
19
25
25
49
57
56
7
26
19
77
58
88
15
28
57.0
25.7
28.3
72.6
45.8
24.1
58.8
48.8
58.5
57.5
66.1
87.0
155.4
60.6
57.9
65.0
48.8
40.8
72.6
40.8
49.7
60.7
26.5
58.5
68.5
72.7
97.1
145.4
55.5
59.0
DELINQUENCY
Statistics for delinquency for two age groups - children from 7-16
years of age, and minors from 17-20 years of age - have been gathered and made
available by the Massachusetts Board of Probation, for the two years from
October, 1950, to October, 1952. These young delinquents have been dis-
tributed, not according to the court in which they were dealt with but according
to their residence. If a child is charged with several offenses at the same
time, he is counted only once in these statistics. If, however, he appears
in court more than once in the same year, he is tallied for each ap^^earance.
Strictly speaking the term "delinquency" applies only to offenders below the
age of 17. For convenience it is used in this discussion as applied also to
those offenders in the ages of minority.
-20-
The total number of delinquents may not, therefore, mean an equal number of
ii^dividual children. It is unlikely, however, that there are many instances in
which the same child is counted more than once in the same year. (Chsur't VII.)
The fact that the age groups of the Federal Census and those of the
Massachusetts Board of Probation did not coincide, presented a difficulty in
calculating delinquency rates. However, since delinquency rates are of greater
significance if based on the population of the same age, rather than upon the
total population, estimates were made of the number of children 7-16 years of
age, and those 17 - 20 years of age residing in each tract.*
From Table 14 two conclusions may be drawn. In the first place, the
rates were much higher for the older than for the juvenile group. For Boston as
a whole, the ratio was four to one. Often it was greater; seldom was it less.
In the second place, six areas - Charlestown, South Boston, the South, North and
West Ends and East Boston - were consistently high in each group for both years.
_
Method of Estimating Child Population:
In making the following estimates it was assumed that the number of individu-
als in a census age group was equally distributed throughout the years. For
example, there were 66,229 children in the census age group of 5 - 9 years. On
this basis, each one of the five years represented was estimated to consist of
13,246 children. The number of children from 7-9 years of age - those ages
included in the delinquency age group - was estimated to be three-fifths of the
total, or 39,758.
For Children 7-16 Years of Age:
Total Census Population Estimated Population
Age group -5-17 Years 7-16 Ye^rs
Federal Census 169.821 150,464
5-0 years 66,229 59,758 (5/5 of total Census group
10-14 " 64,998 64,998 (Total of " "
15-17 n 58.594 25,728 (2/3 of total " "
Ii9-K Minors 17-20 Years of Age;
Total Census Population Estimated Population
Age group 15-24 Years 17-20 Years
Federal Census 156.722 54.586
15-17 years 38,594 12,864 (l/5 of total Census group
18-19 " 27,571 27,571 (Total of " "
20-24 " 70.757 14.151 (1/5 of total " "
-21-
I
CO
5
o
(1)
O
1
w
•P
d
D
fn -P
0) a.
-p o
<a
O
H O
■P I 0)
o r~ w
Eh fH <
'O C <«H
<U O O
P -H
^ P to
B oJ ^
•H iH td
P 3 (U
to P,{M
W O
Pui
•P
a
3,
a
>
•-5
o
o
q fl
H o
»H P JH W
0) 0)
(D cd
0) P<rH
-P O I
o
.3
to
1^
CD
O C-
E-!
a
X) o
P P
CO CO
p "
w
W
Ph
cd
'O 0)
9^
P ^H
rH (C
cd tM
Q) rH
W (D
to
CD
OO
c^l
ool
00
to
00
CO
•I
rH
in
CD
to
O
d
o
o
m
C>-rHOOKJK(Ot^CVrHWOOI>-tDCO
rHCDeOWlOOOrHrHC-t^TjitDr^cO
C--«DI0t^t~t~-t«-<0050>KjrHWcD
mwOt^tDtQlO^OOJlCiHOfH
a3tOtOi-|l«tDTl<cDt-OlOrHWO
tocogootvcnt^c^ooJwHKjtD
OJC^K5C7>pHO>^-^-QOWOOWK3C>J
lOtOiHtOWtDWt>-rHW03Cn«3rH
rHC\iK3«0^»OHrHCv2C>-Ui»OWCJ
»OrH'>*02W10lOW^t~lOt>-t^O
iHCviWC«-'^^rHC\iO>2»OWJ»OWC\i
oqOlClC^WeOrHH^OOt-OOrHcD
•* •*
•* •*
WtOWOOUJ^HCviWC-x^lOWKi
tDtDO>ooa(ooHHa>c^u>oiC--a)
• •••••••••••••
OtOOTKJOOtOOJHCDOWKitDOO
tviiHWH tfi iHtOC\2C\i»OTj<
toiOcviwc^iO'jtirjt^pH^ltowoo
00l«CvJ'*O)'<4<-<#Tj<WtO0if-IO00
iHiHtQrH KirHiHOJrHCViWtO
»Oloto«DCTJoo"^a>ooa^'*^o^-{r)
•<*OC^OOrHlO'<*t--C\2C^aOWO«D
O^fD'^OCOt-itOtOtOHCO'^lO
■^OtDOllOtDt- OtOOiC^lOlOCD
iHpHCVi,-|Tj* rHrHWKiHiH
tOO'^C-OWOOOCOtDLOlOOC"-
iDOCXJiOOtDWCvicDlOrHOOtQC^
C\i
W rH i-l i-H ,-1
(S o
pa
o
I A
I P
I ^
I o
25
•H CO
- fn X
OQ CQ O
X!
P
o
CO
d
^^ o
0) P
P 03
m o
O p
fn CO
o Cd
I I I
I I I
I I
I ■ d
I •H
I Cd
rH
I
0) 4
33 •->
d X!
XI P
X 3
o o
o _ _ _
a cc; cTj CO
o
Pi
p
CO
0)
o
0
v>
a
<
>
Q
I-
0
0
n
<
Q
5
0
r
LU
>
-7
^
K2
O
Ci-i
o
^ 2 o
o
z
o
I
2
p. [—
O 01
a o
2 PQ
CO
UJ ^
3 O
aJ
C^ o
z ;i: £
Q
> 8 c^ o
~ :==; o
s
09 O
< w
X o
'^ o
>^
lo <
I^ T- "^
< Q, a
O
u
o
1 "
<^
a
X
1-
^
^
SOUTH BOSTON
CHACLE.5T0WN
50UTH END
&OXBUD.Y
DODCHESTEHSO.
BACK BAY
BRIGHTON
WEST tOXBUPT
BOSTON
^^m^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I I I I I
< o
s
o
o
o
10
JAMAICA PUIN
HYDE PARK
D0RCHE5TEB.no.
EAST BOSTON
NOCTH END
WE5T END
CHABT N« 2n
-22-
RELIEF
The statistics upon which the following relief figrires are based
were obtained from the Department of Public Welfare and the Family Welfare
Society, the Boston Provident Association, and the Jewish Family Welfare
Association. The original plan called for a study of all cases active
on a given day, in each of the four agencies. Differences in record keeping
and office organization made this impossible, and modifications had to be
made. The figures were finally obtained upon the following basis:
1. Three Private Agencies Families receiving relief or service
during the month of October, 1952.
2. Department of Public Welfare Families receiving relief from the
first of Novenber, 1932, to the first of March, 1953. In obtaining the
information the mailing list of the Department was used. This list is
divided into four sections: Old Age Assistance, Mothers' Aid, Dependent
Aid (chronic cases) and Dependent Aid (unemployment cases). As the
already hard-pressed addressograph operators had to run off the almost
twenty -^line thousand addresses at odd moments, it took four months to
complete the lists. Figures for Old Age Assistance and Mothers' Aid
came through quickly because they were less numerous. They represented,
therefore, the number of families receiving these two types of aid at
some time in November. Flgtires for the two classes of Dependent Aid
were received in seven lots during December, January and February, the
chronic cases being the first to come through. As the case load for
these four months showed a steady Increase, rising from 26,817 on the
first of November, to 32,197 on the first of March, these figures do
not give as accurate a picture of the work of the Department as would a
complete count taken in all divisions on the same day. These were,
however, impossible to obtain.
-25-
Department of Public Welfare
A family is defined by the United States Census of 1950 as " a group
of persons who live together as one household . Single persons living
alone are counted as families, however, as are a few small groups of unrelated per-
sons sharing the same living accommodations as 'partners' . Households rejjorting
more than 10 lodgers are classified as boarding or lodging houses rather than as
families."
Figures from the Department of Public Welfare are based upon its case
load. Under their system a case may be either a family consisting of a group
of persons, or a single person living alone.
There is one point only at which a family, as defined by the census,
and a case as defined by the Department of Public Welfare fail as suitable units
of comparison. A lodging house keeper with less than ten lodgers is coiaited
in the census as a head of a family. The lodgers are excluded from the count.
Each of the lodgers who may be receiving aid, however, is counted as a case by
the Department of Public Welfare. As a result, in the districts in which there
are large numbers of lodging houses, relief rates are unduly high. Since,
however, these districts are few and are definitely recognized as such (Tables 9,
10.) due allowance for this discrepancy can easily be made. Since then, the
unit known as a "family" in the census, and as a "case" by the Department of
Public Welfare, are the same with the above exception, they will be defined as
"families" throughout this discussion.
Since the number of individuals aided by the Department of Public
Welfare, while estimated, is not definitely known, no valid calculations can be
made of the percentage of individuals in Boston and its areas who are receiving
relief. The following tables (Tables 15 and 18.^ give the percentage of
families receiving relief based on the number of families as enumerated by the
FAMILIES IN HLALTH AND WELFARE AEEA5 BECEIVING
RELIEF EROM THE &05TON DEPARTMENT OE PUBLIC WELE\RE
BOSTON
50UTH END
NOETH tND
E.A5T b05TON
WE5T END
CHAI^LE5TOWN
vSOUTH 505TON
ROX5UR.Y
HYDE. PACK.
PtCCENT XALL
TOTAL NUM5EE FAMILIE:)
OF FAMILIES AIDED
US CENSUS 0ATA-I9SO NOV I9 3t - HAR 19 33
17 9,189 ZS,938
JAMAICA PLAIM
5R.1GHTON
WE^T ROX5UR.Y
DACK bAY
10,5G2
4,649
!Z,581
G.194
G.691
13,235
25,492
5,540
DO]^CHE5TEI^ IM02TH 27,941
1 1, 006
DORCHE5TEE 50UTH 1(£.,<347
15,614
11, 074
11.561
4.865
1,586
3.210
1.459
1,498
2,8S3
5,075
791
3,257
1,085
1.264
.312
524
529
^WORK RLLIEP
DEPENDENT AID
PREPARED FOR.
^OLD AGL A55I5TANCE
■ MOTHERS' AID
THE BO-5TON COUNCIL Or 50C!AL AGtNClt5
5Y THL EMEIiGENCY PLANNING ^ RE5tAR.CH bUREAU INC.
&05T0N. MA55. 1933.
CHART NO "ma
-24-
1930 census. TOiile the proportion, 46.3 per cent, of families receiving aid
in the South End is vmdoubtedly an overstatement as compared with the percent-
ages shown by the other eureas, its relief load is the heaviest of all.
TABLE 15. NUMBER AND PERCENT OF FAMILIES RECEIVING RELIEF FROM THE DEPART-
MENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, BT HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS. NOVEMBER
1, 1932 - MARCH 1, 1953.
Health and Total Number Families Receiving Relief
Welfare Area of Families
Boston 179.189
South End 10,562
North End 4,649
East Boston 12,581
West End 6,194
Charlestown 6,691
South Boston 13,235
Roxbury 25,492
Hyde Park 5,540
Dorchester North 27,941
Jamaica Plain 11,008
Dorchester South 16,847
Brighton 15,814
West Roxbury 11,074
Back Bay 11,561
The proportion of families receiving aid is indicated by census
tracts . (Map VI . ) Figures very much higher than those shown by Health and
Welfare areas are to be found. Tracts in the South End, which showed the
highest percentage of all, are omitted from this discussion, because of the
fact already pointed out that they are probably not comparable to other
districts. Tracts in other areas with especially heavy relief loads were
F-1 (47.1 per cent), F-3 (69.6 per cent) and F-6 (58.9 per cent), in the
North End; A-6 (38.6 per cent) and B-3 (40.8 per cent), in East Boston; and
H-4 (38.2 per cent), in the West End.
Number
Per cent
28.938
16.1
4,885
46.5
1,588
34.2
3,210
25.5
1,459
23.6
1,498
22.4
2,863
21,6
5,073
19.9
791
14.3
3,257
11.7
1,085
9.9
1,264
7.5
912
5.8
524
4.7
529
4.6
-25-
Uentlon has already been made of the classification of types of aid
given, by the Department of Public Welfare. The areas varied widely in the
proportions of families receiving the different types of aid. (Table 16.)
Straight unemployment cases ranged all the way from 55 per cent of all cases in
the Back Bay to 62 per cent in South Boston, and 68 per cent in East Boston.
The chronic cases showed a mdich narrower range of variation. Old Age Assist-
ance fluctuated from 2.5 per cent in the Horth End and 5 per cent in East
Boston, to 27.6 per cent in the Back Bay. Mothers' Aid, almost negligible in
the South End, rose to 6 per cent of all cases in Dorchester South.
TABLE 16. NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES RECEIVING SPECIFIED TYPES OF AID
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, IN HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS.
NOVEMBER 1, 1952 - MARCH 1, 1955.
Families Receiving Aid:
Health and
Unemployment
Dependent
Old Ag
e
Mothers'
Welfare Area
Total
Aid
Aid
Assistance
Per
Aid
Per
Per
Per
Per
Number
cent
Number
cent
Number
cent
Number
cent
Niimber
cent
Boston
28,958
100
15.870
54.8
8.655
29.9
5.524
11.5
1.091
5.8
Back Bay —
529
100
176
55.2
205
58.4
146
27.6
4
.8
Brighton
912
100
588
42.5
511
54.2
168
18.4
45
4.9
Charlestown
1,498
100
807
55.9
420
28.0
194
15.0
77
5.1
Dorchester North
5,257
100
1,763
54.1
854
26.2
455
14.0
185
5.7
Dorchester South
1,264
100
651
49.9
505
24.0
255
20.2
75
5.9
East Boston
5,210
100
2,168
67.6
749
25.5
165
5.1
128
4.0
Hyde Park
791
100
485
61.5
192
24.5
85
10.5
51
5.9
West Roxbury
524
100
260
49.6
157
26.2
98
18.7
29
5.5
Jamaica Plain —
1,085
100
642
59.2
254
21.6
160
14.7
49
4.5
North End
1,588
100
950
59.8
520
52.8
40
2.5
78
4.9
Roxbury
5,073
100
2,614
51.5
1,689
55.5
600
11.8
170
5.4
South Boston
2,865
100
1,756
61.4
757
25.7
244
8.5
126
4.4
South End
4,885
100
2,470
50.6
1,768
56.2
615
12.5
54
.7
West End
1,459
100
760
52.1
556
56.7
105
7.1
60
4.1
-?.6-
Prlvate Agencies
The case loads of the three private agencies,- the Family Welfare
Society, the Boston Provident Association and the Jewish Family Welfare
Association,- totalled 2,789 families. Many of the persons included in
these families were xjndoubtedly counted in the statistics of the Department
of Public Welfare, because of the practice of the private agencies of giving
supplementary relief eind case work service to families aided by the public
department. Because of the fact that names of the Department of Public
Welfare families were not given, no checking of individuals could be done.
Accordingly no attempt should be made to total the two sets of figures.
There are, however, comparisons which can be made:
1. The distribution of families by Health and Welfare Areas.
2. The proportion of cases receiving relief by Health and Welfeire Areas.
Study of the distribution of families by areas revealed a similarity
between those known to public and private agencies, in all save those of East
Boston, Dorchester North and Dorchester South. Eleven and one-tenth per cent of
all families known to the Department of P*ublic Welfare lived in East Boston; while
the corresponding figure was but 4.4 per cent for the private agencies. In the
other two areas the private agencies were carrying relatively heavier loads, the
difference being 17.6 per cent as against 11.5 per cent for Dorchester North and
9.1 per cent as against 4.4 per cent for Dorchester South. (Table 17, p. 27.)
Of all the families living in Boston, 16.1 per cent, or about one-
sixth, were on the lists of the Department of Public Welfare; while 1.6 per
cent were receiving relief or service from the three private agencies. The
South Bad, already indicated as the district in which the greatest proportion
of families were receiving relief from the Department of Public Welfare,
occupied a similar position in relation to other areas as regards relief and
service given by the private agencies. (Table 18, p. 27.)
-27-
TABLE 17. DISTRIBUTION OF FAMILIES KNOTO TO RELIEF AGENCIES BY HEALTH AND
WELFARE AREAS.
Departmept of Public Welfare
Health and
Welfare Area
Number
of
Families
Per cent
Distribution
of Families
Three Private Agencies
Health and
Welfare Area
Number
of
Families
Per cent
Distribution
of Families
Boston
28,938
Roxbury 5,075
South End 4,885
Dorchester North — 5,257
East Boston 5,210
South Boston 2,865
North End 1,588
Charlestown 1,498
West End 1,459
Dorchester South — 1,264
Jamaica Plain 1,085
Brighton 912
Hyde Park 791
Back Bay 529
West Roxbury 524
100.0 Boston 2,789 100.0
17.5 Roxbury 508 18.2
16.9 Dorchester North - 491 17.6
11.5 South End 569 13.2
11.1 Dorchester South - 254 9.1
9,9 South Boston 208 7.4
5.5 West End 207 7.4
5.2 East Boston 125 4.4
5.0 Hyde Park 115 4.1
4.4 Charlestown 115 4.1
5.7 Back Bay 105 5.8
5.2 West Roxbury 84 5.1
2.7 Jamaica Plain 81 2.9
1.8 Brighton 76 2.7
1.8 North End 55 2.0
TABLE 18. PERCENT OF FAMILIES KNOWN TO PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGENCIES BY HEALTH
AND WELFARE AREAS.
Department of Public Welfare
Three Private Agencies
Boston
16.1
Boston
1.6
South End 46.3
North End 54.2
East Boston 25.5
West End 23.6
Charlestown 22.4
South Boston 21.6
Roxbury 19.9
Hyde Park 14.5
Dorchester North — 11.7
Jamaica Plain 9.9
Dorchester South — 7.5
Brighton 5.8
West Roxbury 4.7
Back Bay 4.6
South End 3.5
West End 5.5
Hyde Park 2.1
Roxbury 2.0
Dorchester North — 1.8
Charlestown 1.7
South Boston 1.6
Dorchester South — 1.5
North End 1.2
East Boston 1.0
Back Bay .9
West Roxbury .8
Jamaica Plain .7
Brighton .5
-28-
CORRELATIONS
Discussion up to this point has centered upon the analysis by tables,
maps and charts, of the various sets of statistics available for the study of
neighborhoods. As already stated, this material in no way represents final
evaluation, but outlines a method for study of material which lends itself to
wide interpretation. Conditions which appear to be of significance about any
one area or tract have been pointed out throughout. Because of the complexi-
ties of modem city life, however, one fact about a city or a neighborhood
should not be considered except in its relationship to other facts.
Therefore, the attempt is now made to bring together all of the
social and health factors which have been already considered separately, in
order to discover, if possible, whether any correlations exist between them.
In Table 19, the standing shown by the fourteen Health and Welfare
areas iii each of the many subjects already discussed, is considered, and
ratings from (l) to (14) are given, (l) signifying for the most part unsatis-
factory conditions. So far as the foreign bom are concerned (1) stands for
the highest proportion of foreign bom, and of aliens; while (14) signifies
the lowest proportion of foreign born and of aliens. For the rest;
(1) stands for the lowest median rents, the smallest percentage of
owned homes, the densest population, the highest rates for deaths,
disease and delinquency, and the largest percentage of persons aided.
(14) on the other hand, signifies the highest median rents, the largest
percentage of owned homes, the least dense population, the lowest
rates for deaths, disease 6uid delinquency, and the smallest propor-
tion of persons aided.
In so rough a correlation, the only point of significance is the
presence or absence of high or low numbers for any one area. The shades of
I
0>
CV)
I
g
i
a
o
■P
%4
•H
rH
CO
to
OO
s
to
1-t
Ol
^
l>-
rH
CM
CM
rH
a
■5:
s
o
1 ^
H
lO
O)
d
»Q
00
s
CM
t^
to
rH
^
to
rH
H
CM
o»
OD
e-
s
1-4
to
lO
rH
■*
lO
to
rH
o
M
1
s
1
H
S
lO
00
s
<D
;4
o>
^
c»
CM
lO
rH
H
S
O
1
to OO
H
O
s
U5
<n
rH
^
CM
:i
CM
t^
to
lO
H
S
»-s
CM
rH
rH
n
rH
rH
3
Ol
U)
00
-"J"
to
to
rH
^
13 «
w
^
t-
O
rH
n
01
CM
CO
(D .
to
to
rH
OT ^
rH
rH
H
H
t*
rH
0
j::
■p
^
Q
s »
■*
)H
w
o
IQ
CM
Ol
in
t-
m
CM
^
r-i
a
Ol rH
r-l
t-i
S
t-i
rH
»0 rH
CJ
^
lO
o
to
^
CO
lO
lO
CM
rH
Ol
t-
O) .H
rH
rH
^
iH
i-H
m
J3
4J
0
A lO
<w
lO
OJ
■^
O
00
tD
t^
■^
CM
r-t
lO
^
a> rH
H
rH
r-i
rH
5
iH
3
rH
tc
a
n o
'i'
CM
:i
CM
in
(71
«o
lO
^
CO
rH
c^
OO
•H n
<n rH
r^
H.
t-t
n o
H
O o
H «
3 O
O
i;S
A to
lO
W
o>
■<J<
o
CM
rH
00
to
CM
rH
^
e*
J3 es
O)
*-l
H
rH
rH
rH
5
rH
S «
o
i-t
O)
^
to
(D
CM
CM
t-
<D
'i*
-*
lO
*.J5
r-
s
rH
rH
rH
si
'" A
4
S t-
o>
■o
«)
O
u>
^
CM
^
00
rH
CM
«
rH
a
o
t-i
i-i
rH
rH
rH
^i
g
•H O
•H t^
o
^
O)
>~t
to
•^
CM
H
OO
to
to
CM
to
n cu
■P
r^
f-i
H
rH
rH
g<M
^
a 0
tg
*> ■*
»
rH
<»
H
■^f
00
O
CM
C--
«
to
to
CM
a fH
r^
*~*
rH
rH
<s
..l
o
e o
•rl lO
to
b-
CT>
CM
o
KJ
a
H
U5
OD
tT
W
^
= 1
•§
rH
r-i
H
H
a
CM
o
Ol
CM
t-
•"f
rH
CO
lO
*#
(O
to
s ^
t-i
^
rH
rH
^
:a
^
g 3
to
rH
S
(O
lO
CM
cn
S
H
(D
^
^-
to
CM
rH
v
(<
CQ
o
o
«
o
1^
p
■P
4A
^E
s
5
$
CO
Q
CO
3 to
«
•
v>
Is
O
<D
o
9
£
£
£
t^ «
^
e
OJ
0)
«
(d
(0
13 <D
O TI
xi
*H
■H
^
>>
J3
t>>
•rf
A
iH
Xt
tD U
d
(S
n
a
03
HT
m
»-f
n
(0
CD
ts
1
§
(4
5
M
3
M
■H
3
03
o
(0
CJ
a
o
m
•H
0)
4^
1 '
+
)
+
+
1
+
+
1
+
1
1
1
+
t
O
(L,
e
5
U
o
K
U
5
CO
8
5
a)
H
^
o
V
a>
■P
M
Ol
■o
(D
T)
«
(0
>>
d
■p
+3
■p
tD
U
.3
xi
O
.a
1
T»
4)
0
n
5
5
O
£
a)
1
X3
S
<S
M
bo
i
O
o
•P
(P
1
•->
+3
+J
4J
+>
U
^
b
u
CO
•o
b
3
n
a
u
s
o
a
&
^
o
5
<g
s
£
SE
CO) to
En «
O a -rl
O at
rH -H a
•H O O
«d O rH
(m Fh ^
<d d a o
to o
(« -H t.
-P O
o d (^ ^
o* a o
•H a. m
0 Tl O (D
a o L| 4->
d a £ ^
GPP
(0 03 P I
-p 0} <D n
(D x: tkO a> I
01 bp tr t
rl "H -H
r^ Fh ti
&o o o
a, o, a,
coop
:3 IX £ d*
q -p +> +>
•rJ ID to B)
O <D O
'SE
> < O
J O ^
> 0) d
1 -H 60 a
* H -H d
I -H 01 3
Sh tH
O rH
1 (X4 C^ •■^
d -p o
o a -H >*
•H ® p o
p n h ^
a o
Ud o> o
3 o o
0 -O £ d
a. o £
a -p
P OP
01 p O (0
O in rH o
a O rH jC
gg g^
O »J CO U3
p p -p
tH b tl
5. D< GU
o o o
£ a. £
p p p
QO uU C0
-50-
difference which exist in the various rankings cannot be indicated by such a
scheme .
Study of this table reveals a preponderance of low numbers in the South
End. It had consistently the worst record of all the areas for tuberculosis and
for relief; and its infant death rate was high. Charlestown was another area
which presented an almost equally dreary picture. South Boston and the North
End were next in order.
On the other heind, the Back Bay, in spite of its somewhat heterogene-
ous makeup, including as it does not only the district commonly known as the Back
Bay, but a rather poor apartment house district around the Fenway as well, and
the suburbsin areas were on a distinctly higher economic level than many of the
others, and had rather consistently good records - Brighton perhaps the most
uniformly so.
Out of dreary mediocrity or of good or bad extremes, however, appeared
certain inconsistencies so intriguing as to make further study a necessity.
Why, for example, did West Roxbur^-, with a record otherwise so good, make so
poor a showing as regards its rates for new cases of tuberculosis? Why had the
West End, whose ranking for every other item was poor, the proudest record for
infant mortality? Why was the Back Bay so spotty as regards delinquency, and
certain health figures?
CONCLUSIONS
Only more intensive study of the fig\ire3 now available by census
tracts, and of the danger signals which they raise, can bring a more exact
knowledge £uad a deeper understanding of the problems with which the construct-
ive forces in Boston must grapple, if they are to achieve results commensurate
with their potentialities.
-51-
The Covmcil of Social Agencies is accordingly bringing to its
member agencies this outline of a new method of study in the confident
expectation that they will use the rich material to which it is a key, as
a measuring stick for the neighborhoods in which they are working, and as
a stepping stone to the collection of still more facts helpful in meeting
the problems with which social work is concerned.
SOCIAL STATISTICS
BY
CENSUS TRACTS IN BOSTON
VOLUME II
BOSTON COUNCIL OF SOCIAL AGENCIES
BUREAU OF RESEARCH AND STUDIES
43 TREMONT STREET, BOSTON
JULY," 1935
SOCIAL STATISTICS
BY
CENSUS TRACTS IN BOSTON
VOLUME II
Boston Council of Social Agencies
Bureau of Research and Studies
45 Tremont Street, Boston
July, 1935
t3t3
FOREWORD
This is the second report dealing with the interpretation
of social statistics on the basis of census tracts which the Boston
Council of Social Agencies has published.
The occasion for producing this second report is found in
the recent Massachusetts Census of Unemployment, undertaken in 1934
as a C, W, A, project for women, which provides population statis-
tics more recent than those of the Federal Census of 1950.
We wish to express our thanks to those organizations which
have supplied the data used in the report. We are especially in-
debted to Roswell F, Phelps, Director of the Division of Statistics
of the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Industries, under whose
sponsorship the census 'oroject was carried out; and to the members
of the census staff with whom we have had cordial cooperation from
the beginning to the end of the project. We are likewise again in-
debted to the Massachusetts Board of Probation, the Boston Health
Department, and the Family Tv'elfare Society of Boston, all of whom
furnished valuable statistical data; and to the Emergency Planning
and Research Bureau for the preparation of maps and charts.
This report, like the first, was prepared under the direc-
tion of Mary A. Clapp, Director of the Bureau of Research and Studies.
'/c'-^^— <
Executive Secretary,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1 - Census Tracts and Health and Welfare Areas 1
2 - Massachusetts Census of UnemploTinent 2
3 - Population Trends. ....• 5
4 - Density of Poptilation 5
5 - Unemployment. • • 6
Unemployment Among General Population
Unemployment Among Young People
Unemployment Among the Colored
6 - Delinquency 14
7 - Health 18
Infant Mortality
Tuberculosis
8 - Relief and Family Service 23
9 - Conclusions. .• 25
10 - Appendix - Boundaries of He=^lth and Welfare Areas 27
MAPS
I -
II -
III -
IV -
V -
VI -
Following
Page;
Population Trends by Health and Welfare Areas 4
Use of Land in Boston 5
Density of Population by Census Tracts 5
Unemployment by Census Tracts * • 9
Juvenile Delinquency by Census Tracts 17
Infant Mortality by Census Tracts. 21
CHARTS
I - Unemployment by Health and Welfare Areas,,.,,,.,,,., 9
II - Unemployment Among Young Persons 13
III - Juvenile Delinquency by Health and Welfare Areas.. 17
IV - Infant Mortality by Health and Welfare Areas - Four-Year Aver-
age... 20
V - Tuberculosis by Health and Welfare Areas - New Cases and
Deaths 25
TABLES
Page;
1 - Population Trends in Boston by Health and Welfare Areas,
1920-1950-1954 5
2 - Density of Population in 1950 and 1934 by Health and Welfare
Areas. •.••,••,..,•,,••......,,,,,•••,...,•,.....•....*..• 6
5 - Employable Persons in Population, January 2, 1954,. 7
4 - Employment Status of Employable Persons, January 2, 1954 9
5 - Unemployment by Health and Welfare Areas, April, 1930 and
^ January, 1951 10
6 - Rank of Health and Welfare Areas in Unemployment, 1950, 1951,
and 1954 11
7 - Employable Workers and Those not Seeking Employment, Among
Young Persons 14-20 Years of Age, Boston 12
8 - Employment Status of Young Persons 14-20 Years of Age, Boston 15
9 - Unemployment Among Racial Groups in Boston, January 2, 1954... 14
10 - Unemployment Among White and Colored Persons in Nine Census
Tracts in Boston, January 2, 1934., ....,,........• 15
11 - Juvenile Delinquency by Health and Welfare Areas, 1931-1934... 17
12 - Rank of Health and Welfare Areas in Juvenile Delinquency...... 18
15 - Infant Mortality by Health and Welfare Areas 20
14 - Rank of Health and Welfare Areas in Infant Mortality, 1930-
1955 21
15 - Tuberculosis in Boston by Health and Welfare Areas - Average
for Four Years, 1930-1954 25
16 - Ratio of Major Service Cases of Family Welfare Society to
Population, ..,•• , , ••••, 24
CENSUS TRACTS AND HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
In 1955 the Boston Co^lncil of Social Agencies issued a report, "Social
Statistics by Census Tracts in Boston", which outlined at some length the method
of and reasons for collecting statistics by census tracts, stressed the advisabil-
ity of defining districts or neighborhoods, and cited statistics from the United
States Census, the Boston Health Department, the Public Welfare Department, the
Massachusetts Probation Commission, and three private family service agencies.
Since that time, there has been an increasing use of census tract mate-
rial - an indication of a growing demand on the part of social and health agencies
for comparable and reliable statistics.
(1)
At the risk of repeating what has already been outlined at length, it
should be stated that a census tract is a geographical unit with fixed boundaries,
laid out by the United States Census Bureau for enumeration purposes. Thus it
differs from the ward, a political division, the boundaries of which are changed
from time to time. For this reason, in any two periods, figures for tracts can
be safely compared, while those for wards may be utterly incomparable. Since the
census tract is a fairly small unit - Boston is divided into 128 - it has seemed
advisable to group them into a number of larger districts. Quite arbitrarily,
then, but with an honest endeavor to make boundaries conform in so far as possible
to those of well-acceoted neighborhoods, fourteen so-called "Health and Welfare
Areas" have been established, (See Appendix.)
Several social agencies in Boston oDerate on a district plan. Few of
(1) - "Social Statistics by Census Tracts in Boston", 1955, p,5.
their botmdaries, even though their districts go by the selfsame names,- Roxbury,
the West End, Hyde Park, Dorchester,- exactly coincide. It would obviously be
impossible, then, to compare the figures for "Roxbury" as given by one agency
with those as given by another.
Undoubtedly, the botmdaries of these various operating districts are
entirely satisfactory to the various agencies. Possibly they think that the
boundaries of some census tracts or health and welfare areas are quaint and il-
logical, and they, see no reason why they shou?-d change their districts to con-
form. However, what may seem fantastic to one may be perfectly logical to an-
other, for, in the final analysis, boundaries are nebulous things,- largely
matters of opinion and association. By and large, the botindaries of the health
and welfare areas conform to the common conception of the districts whose names
they bear.
However, districts for operation and districts for statistical record-
ing may well be two quite separate things. Although it may be that the obstacles
in the path of uniform operating districts are too many and too high to surmount,
there is little excuse for not having uniformity in district recording, when the
device for carrying it on is so simple.
MASSACHUSETTS CENSUS OF U:JEMPL0YMIi2IT
Early in 1934, a census, sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of
Labor and Industries, and carried on as a woman's project tinder the program of
the Civil Works Administration, was made to determine the amount of unemployment
in the state. At the very outset, the Boston Council of Social Agencies became
interested in that part of the project which concerned the City of Boston, In
-5-
(1)
spite of the fact that it was not an official census, it is a well-checked enum-
eration of the population of Boston at a point almost midway between the Federal
Census of 1930 and that of 1940, for, in preparing it, constant reference was made
to the Federal Census of 1930, and discrepancies were careftilly checked, in a few
instances whole census tracts being re-eniimerated. In addition, it offers a new
base for the computation of rates of various kinds. Since it includes a tabula-
tion of children and young people in each age group from 7 to 20 years of age, it
affords more satisfactory bases for delinquency rates than does the Federal Census,
the age groupings of which do not coincide with the Massachusetts delinquency age
groupings, thereby making it necessary to estimate the total number of children of
(2)
appropriate age in the population. The preliminary report of this census has al-
ready been published by the Massachusetts DeDartment of Labor and Industries, and
(5)
the final report is about to be issued.
(l) - Report of the Census of Unemployment (Preliminary Report), Massachusetts De-
partment of Labor and Industries, 1934:
"In order that the census might be exhaustive, it was necessary to make a
thorough house-to-house canvass in each city and town. Incidentally, the
population of the cities and towns was ascertained, but the census should
not be considered as an official census of the population of the State or
of the individual cities and towns, (p. 2)
"Althoi;i£h this census was not an official census of the population, it is
believed that the population returns are substantially correct, becnuse a
thorough house-to-house canvass in each city and town was made, in order to
secure information relative to all persons who r°re unemployed." (p. 15)
(2)- "Social Statistics by Census Tracts in Boston", 19S5, p. 20.
(3)- If there are apparent discrepancies between the figures cited in this report
and those published in the preliminarj' report of the census, it is due to
the fact that the former includes staff members and inmates of institutions
in order that they may be comparable to those of the Federal Census which in-
cludes the inmates of institutions. The population of health and welfare
areas, as given in the Preliminary Report, (p. 218), excludes the staff and in-
mates of Boston Home for Incurables, Boston Psychopathic Hospital, Boston
St'ite Hospital, Charlestown State Prison, Mattapan Sanatorixim, Suffolk County
Jail, end the institutions in the harbor islands. With all adjustments made, the
two sets of figures check.
-4-
POPULATION TRENDS
By this census the population of Boston (as of January 2, 19?4), ex-
clusive of census tract B-6, which is composed of the population of the harbor
(1)
islands, was foiand to be 774,470. According to the Federal Census of 1950,
the comparable figure was 776,978, In the four-year period, then, there has
(2)
been a slight decrease in the population of the city - 4508 or ,6 per cent.
In the preceding decade, 1920-1950, wide changes of population took
place in sense health and welfare areas, the general rule being decreases in the
congested central areas and increases in the less densely settled outer areas.
For the most part, the same trends have continued, though in less degree, in the
four-year period, (Table 1 and Map I,) Back Bay, Charlestown, the North End,
South Boston, and the South End showed decreases in both periods; Dorchester
North, Dorchester South, Hyde Park, and West Roxbury consistently increased,
Roxbury and East Boston showed little change. Although Brighton, Jamaica Plain,
and the ?/est End fluctuated considerably, examination of the figures shows that
in general greater movements in population took place in the ten-year 'oeriod from
1920 to 19?0, than in the shorter four-year period between 1930 and 1954, The
CL) - See Footnote 5, p,5.
(2)- Substantiation of this decrease in population is found in the figures of ele-
mentary school attendance for the same period. Elementary school attendance
bears a fairly constant ratio to total population from year to year, and is,
accordingly, a check on it. In Boston, in the five-year neriod, it, too, has
decreased slightly.
Elementary School Enrollment (Grades I- VIII)
in Boston Public and Parochial Schools 1929-1954
Autumn Autumn Autumn
1954 1955 1929
Total 110.195 112.021 115.446
Public Schools 82,656 84,145 87,287
Parochial Schools 27,559 27,878 28,169
sS
r F o o n n
CO 2 O
^ n n
(jD ^ (/) ,^ 00
-<
n c
2 (/>
o
CO
H
O
z
movement away from the heart of the city to its outer fringes, noted after the
1950 tabulations, is still in progress.
T/vBLl:; 1. POPULATION TRtJIDS IN BOSTON ET HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
1920-1950-1954
Figures for 1920 and 1950 from United States Census;
for 1954 from Massachusetts Census of Unemployment
Increase or
Decrease
in Popiyl^atioa
Health and
Total Population
Niimber
Per
cent
Welfare Area
1920-
1950-
1920-
1950-
1920
1950
1934
1950
1954
1950
1934
Boston
748,060
778.976
774.470
+30.916
-4.508
+ 4.1
- 0.6
Back Bay
59,971
58,887
56,191
- 1,084
-2,696
- 2.7
- 6.9
Brighton
42,104
56,562
54,965
+14,258
-1,597
+55.9
- 2.5
CharlestoTim
54,272
51,665
50,252
- 2,609
-1,431
- 7.6
- 4.5
Dorchester North
114,627
120,055
122,095
+ 5,426
+2,040
+ 4.7
+ 1.7
Dorchester South
50,947
74,445
78,128
+23,498
+3,685
+46.1
+ 4.9
East Boston
60,778
59,242
62,565
- 1,536
+5,123
- 2.6
+ 5.3
Hyde Park
18,209
24,498
27,502
+ 6,289
+5,004
+54.5
+12.5
Jamaica Plain
36,808
44,542
45,451
+ 7,754
-1,091
+21.0
- 2.4
North End
31,685
27,518
25,411
- 5,865
-4,407
-12.2
-15.8
Roxbury
105,771
105,790
104,518
+ 19
-1,272
—
- 1.2
South Boston
65,439
59,728
57,562
- 5,711
-2,566
- 8.7
- 4.0
South End
72,819
60,506
55,295
-12,515
-5,215
-16.9
- 8.6
West End
40,699
28,028
28,687
-12,671
+ 659
-51,3
+ 2.4
West Roxbury
51,^56
47,414
50,272
+16,158
+2,858
+51.7
+ 6.0
DENSIll' OF POPULATION
Similarly, the changes of population have not been great in the four-
year period. No great industrial or business projects have been constructed to
clear away whole residential sections, and large housing projects have not as
yet been started, (Table 2.)
vihen figures for 1920, 1950, and 1954 were compared, it was found that
those for census tracts F-5 and F-6 fluctuated considerably, due to a different
tabulation of the inhabitants of the Wayfarers' Lodge, and the men stationed
■with the Coast Guard in 1930. Undoubtedly, therefore, the copulation of the
North End as given in the 1930 census was greater and its density higher than in
actuality; but even if corrections were made, it would have been then, as it
still is, by far the most densely populated district in the whole city. (Map III.)
c
rn
■ s
o
\' ?
1 o -
>
» i! .
Z
l ^S ■
a
i gS' '
, .
■^
KV
(.)
! S 1
(A
' 5
-H
E r.
o
D
E
>
s
■<^.-
<$■'>
-\
/
<M
''-'!»:- y
/
(\
^^
\.
> /
X
,> /^
X
,#•
N^
\
y
.^i
\/
^t^^>^
f\ /
"%
?-rit
^3.
^
\
^
■C,-
iSi
f
O O ->, -D
S S :: ?
g S • S ^
5 i i "
E ? ;; T
If^
J ^
2 ro \^
J. c T^
\
^-^ -v^
-6-
•TABLE 2. DENSITY OF POPULATION IN 1930 AND 1954 BY HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
Health and
Welfare Area
Number of Acres
Inhabited
1950
1954
Number of Persons
per Inhabited Acre
1950 1954
Boston
6«945
7.028
112
110
Back Bay
Brighton
Charlestoim
Dorchester North
Dorchester South
East Boston
Hyde Park
Jamaica Plain
North End
Roxbury
South Boston
South End
West End
West Roxbury
233
235
167
155
712
728
79
76
124
119
256
256
1,105
1,106
109
110
955
961
78
81
295
292
201
214
559
550
46
50
648
655
69
66
35
35
799
675
730
750
145
145
280
275
214
210
188
188
322
295
84
84
334
342
1,017
1,074
47
47
UNEMPLOYMENT
Unemployment Among General Population
The "Census of Unemployment in Massachusetts" contains information as
to thie number and kinds of persons i^o were unemployed on January 2, 1934, In
every cily and town of the state a house-to-house canvass was made, and persons
were classified according to age, sex, color, usual occupation, whether or not
they were wholly or partially employed, whether or not they desired jobs, and,
if unemployed, for how long« Certain figures were compiled by census tracts,
(1)
and while not appearing in the published report, except in one summary table, are
on file in the office of the Boston Council of Social Agencies for the use of
those interested.
Cl)- Report of the Census of Unemployment in Massachusetts, p, 218.
-7-
(1)
One fact which this census determined was the number of employable
workers - those actually at work, or seeking work - in each tract and area. The
niimber of emT)loyable persons has been used here as the base in calculating the
percentage of unemployment, rather than the total population, which includes
children, old people, and persons not seeking employment, a group which varies
considerably in different areas.
TABLE 5. EMPLOYABLE PERSONS IN POPULATION, JANUARY P, 1954
(2)
Figures from Massachusetts Census of Unemployment
Total Population
Persons Not
Seeking
Employable
Persons
Health and
EmDloyment
Welfare Area
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Boston
774.470
100
457.405
56.5
357.067
43.5
Back Bay
56,191
100
14,598
S9,8
21,795
60.2
Brighton
54,965
100
29,957
54,5
25,028
45.5
Charlestown
50,232
100
18,069
59.8
12,165
40.2
Dorchester North
122,095
100
70,658
57,9
51,455
42.1
Dorchester South
78,128
100
46,240
59.2
51,888
40.8
East Boston
62,366
100
39,273
63.0
25,092
57.0
Hyde Park
27,502
100
16,906
61.5
10,596
S8,5
Jamaica Plain
43,451
100
25,030
57.6
18,421
42.4
North End
23,411
100
13,635
58.2
9,776
41.8
Roxbury
104,518
100
60,104
57.5
44,414
42.5
South Boston
57,562
100
54,271
59.7
25,091
40.5
South End
55,293
100
25,905
45.2
51,590
56.8
West End
28, -6 87
100
14,149
49.3"
14,558
50»7
West Roxbury
50,272
100
30,850
61.5
19,442
58.7
(1)- "Employable Persons - Includes all persons 14 years of age or over, who were
employed or who were able to work and seeking employment. Pupils in school,
housewives, persons unable to work, retired and aged persons, and persons
voluntarily unemployed for other reasons were not considered as employable.
For puTDoses of this census, children vinder 14 years of age were considered
as unemployable for the reason that under the provisions of the National Re-
covery Act the employment of children londer 14 years of age is prohibited."
Report on the Census of Unemployment in Massachusetts, p. 10,
(2)- The figures in Table 3 and Table 4 differ in several instances from those
already published in the preliminary report. This is due to two reasons:
(a) The figures in this text include the inhabitrmts of all institutions,
whereas those in the preliminary rer>ort exclude a certain number al-
ready noted,
(b) The figvires in this text were compiled from tabulations obtained from
the Census of Unemployment, Later adjustments, concerned largely with
the institutional population, have proved, under Dresent conditions,
to be extremely difficult to check. However, in no instance is the
discrepancy so great that it materially alters the percentage in £iny
one category.
-8-
The percentage of persons irtio were wholly tin employed, on this basis,
ranged all the way from 40,2 per cent in the North End to 12 per cent in Back
Bay. (Table 4, Chart I), It must be remembered that the census of xinemploy-
ment was taken before the establishment of the ERA, and that the CWA had not
even reached its peak. The census listed those employed on government projects, -
11,948 for the whole city. Thotagh the North End health and welfare area shows
the greatest proportion of unemployment, two census tracts in East Boston, how-
ever, - B-1 with 51 per cent and B-4 with 49,9 per cent - show the highest per-
centage of unemployment in the city, (Map IV,)
Twice before, tinemployment figures by census tracts have been avail-
able. The number of unemployed was established when the United States Census
was compiled on April 15, 1950, A second count was made by the Census Bureau
in January of the following year. In these tabulations unemployed oersons were
grouped in one of two categories: first, that composed of persons out of a job,
able to work and looking for work; and second, that composed of p-^rsons having
jobs but on lay-off without pay. All persons who were sick or voluntarily idle
were not considered to be unemployed, (Table 5,) Actual comparisons of the
three tabulations do not yield valid results. Since the first two were made in
different months, there were bound to be seasonal fluctuations. Again, no
exact comparison ?rith the figures of the Census of Unemployment can be made as
the total number of employable persons is used as a base in this discussion,
while the percentages of the other two are based on the total population.
However, these three tabulations can be tied together by ranking the
health and welfare areas according to the degree of unemployment in any one,
no matter how figured, and then comparing these relative ratings. In Table 6
the area which has the highest percentage of unemployment in any one year is
rated as one, while that with the lowest is rated as fourteen, the others com-
-9-
W00O'^«t-00i-4O00CVirHlOO
'I'
to
-p
c
a
H
&
0)
I§
<H
o
01
m
n
(D
m
rl
tn
m
s
o
Cm
m
0)
K
t^
OU
U5
Wl
H "* -^
I>-T}<IOOSH<OHO<DO
wSPc-t-iH'^CDWODWt-WtD
^ S rH to O^ O to O W W UJ CD O W W
HH^O(^iWHlHHtOr^^Ol-^r^
t-occpto«>wop-'<<«c<pca«co>tc
• ••••••♦••••••
»o^lOCy>'^HOiHtDOO'*^OlO
Wt-tOOlO«3r-t^WC>U5C-C-U5
OOCDCOtOHOtOW-^COCViC^OJKi
oooooooooooooo
• ••••••••••••-?
oooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooo
bOOOtOl^OOWtOr-ICO'^r-jOOON
0>W<DtOOOC3505Wt-HOSO>»0^
t--OH'*ODOU>'*l~-"*OtOU5-;J'
Hi«wHHtogog<n2;tOrH212
WWH'^'OWrHrH ^OJtOiHrH
EH
§
pa
g
o
in
0)
:^:3
o o
7Z CO
o --f a)
mux:
m CO o
C <B
O rH
■P >1 IX,
m U
0 cd *
m ^ iJ ^
-p <D a) +s
01 73 a tn
C? >j C5 O
H C t-> »
§
-P
to TS .ia
O C "O H
^ :S 5 -p +5
X n 3 tn tn
O O O Q) 0)
CrJ CO CO & S
o
(/D <
O ce:
QQ <
UJ
- ^
I- [iJ
P
CL
z
u
I
>
O
_i
a.
1
o u. o
§ O £^
uJ
>-
^ S 5
u. V) ■")
I-
h-
UJ
X
o
<
CO
in
<
CO
-I
a:
QC I-
O (/5
ca UJ
5
liiii
I
13
O
z
I- o
CO (-
< CO
UJ O
I I I I I I I I I I i~'~r
I I I I
I I I I
3
I I I I
I I I
M I I ' I I
o
?
o
TO
z
o
H
W
o
(D
So
o
2 D
UJ <
O u
< oc
O 1"
uJ
J q:
z
>
o
z
uJ u
I o
h a
u
> S
CQ u
bj
I
I-
>-
3
O
u
o
z
h-
<
I
u
-10-
CQ
PQ
H
to
m
05
n
iH
a)
iH
•
o
t
a
3
s
•-»
-»;
•
m
m
0)
a
(d
o
H
to
O
U
0)
Oh
T)
Q>
>
O
(H
f-t
P
«
Q
+3
V
O
C
EH
1
C\i
o
CO
05
^
§
m
U
CL, O
m
w
5)
o
01
td
o
3
o
CL, O
ri a
u
(0
c
o
O to -P
to -p td
o
CT>
cd
0)
-P 01
H «H
Q) Q)
to
w
00
o
t-
o
o
O
o>
«
00
00
lO
lO
CD
00
to
CD
to
<D
r-t
O
«
lO
to
o>
00
tCCv:t~lO«CO>tOO>HOODO>C^O
• •••••••••••••
OrHWWWtOtOOtOWWtOrHW
lOOf-ICOCOt^W"*0»OrHC^W5'4'
H0>tDC-WlOOO«OtD00Tj<0)C-
W«D0005C3>tOOOTi<OOrH«CtOTl<0)
Oi f-< W
CW
c\:
^OOPtOHOCWtOUJOPWUJOO
'sJ'^OOC^C-HOOtDCnOirHI/^OOu:)
r-i iH iH iH
^OOtOr^OO«DH^OIOWO
O«*rH«pOOtO0000«D^tO
C^t>-00C-»O0)O00«*tO«DtOW00
51 w
OrH»«Ope^t-Tj<WtDQOO^C^O
• •••••••••••••
i-i rH H Cv2 r-i H iH
W C- r)t
tot^wr>-'*otow<Dtt>'^^
lO^eOfH^OOHOO^tDHlOO
05^tDt~-c\J!Ooowwiotoe-r~oo
rHtOlOHt~O>Wt'3<DW00iHC\itO
^Tftoojt-eccroptotoo^tcO
• •••••••••••••
OOWOOHOOHHi-l<NiOrH
C- W
- .rH«Dt0000>O"5j*Tl<^I>00t^
UlHtOI/5wU5WC~tD«300U:i«DC^
iHWC~-0>OOJWtOtOtOlO'*iH^
<yitot^w^wjtDto^o>ooto«ooc>
• •••••••••••••
rHWCVitOWtOWCViHWtOCOtOiH
H
tDWOOt-OJOitOlO^OOtOOOOO
t-tO0005t-3i«DOHO0it-OC0
to H H
H to to CN2 to i-t
to C~ O r-( H 0> to
Cv2C\2lO^tOn<tOtOCvi^Tl<00^
t^ W 00 t- W 00
tO^0JtOQ0ONU300WOC~tDt~
C0CViOJ<Dt~WC-0JtOlO^^00rH
00lOlOO>C\JOJa0tO»O'*00Wi-HtO
HH'<l'CvJCv2 HtO'SliWWJrHr-l
C^WtOtOlOCv200O200
00tDeDlO'!l*'^O)^H
QOtOCOO'^WTJ<lOOOC~l>-
O 00 «D 00 ^
O) <M O
U>
C\2 iH
OOtDiHO^C3>Tl<Ti4t-ioO>OOOC^
tOlOtOWt~lOCv2^CJO»n«OW'*
:3:S
fe^g^
a
pq -p ®
0
Si <-f
+j
^< bO U
m
0 ^ cd
0
cd fn ^
m
03 OQ 0
u
o
0)
P
to
(U
o
o
CO
(D
-P
0}
(D
J3
g
•p
»
O. "O
CQ
0
u
cd
cd tS
P3
(X
0
•55
-P
0}
CO
T)
S ^4
cd
>^
(d 0
W
tc
•-J »!
m
t>*
-p
r-f
0
•H
cd
h
^
OS
-P
•P
es
§
:3
6
to
?
a>
0
^
^
•g
'3
CO
•H
t<
0
<D
m
-p
•
0
-§
^
X!
•«-s
^
m
T3
•H
cd
3
H
r-l
t
.2
0
X
§
tlQ
•t
§
5
0
t
T3
0
+>
<D
H
3
m
0
•H
V
fc
^4
•V
Cd
M
<M
U
<i-l
m
cd
g
?
0)
>»
tn
0
Cd
Cd
■P
iH
(D
(P
C
u
H
0
ed
,Q
«H
01
-P
r-{
•
3
(D
3
A
^
»
(0
^
a>
0
m
-o
tj
•"-a
XI
§
S
0
PQ
cd
"-i
5
r-t
0
1
Cd
c
-P
>
(D
0
3
cd
^0
5
Si
^1
to
CO
m
0
<D
a
a
tM
P
0
0
<d
to
03
CD
•p
1^
Fh
(K
CO
(1)
0)
^
•a
0^
p^
^
0)
•p
'
1
Cm
•H
<l
m\
(D
t§
m
m
m
n
m
<D
O)
cd
cd
Si
5
iH
iH
EH
0
0
1
1
1-1
W
-11-
ing in between. In each of the three years there was little variation in the
comparative standing of the areas as regards unemployTnent. The North End al-
ways showed the greatest proportion, i^ile the South End, South Boston and
East Boston, and Charlestown varied slightly as to position from year to year,
but always showed higher percentages of unemployment than other areas. The
Back Bay area in each of the three counts showed the lowest percentage of imem-
ployment.
T43LE 6.
RANK OF HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS IN DNEMPLOYMENT
1950, 1951, AND 1954
(1)
Health and
Welfare Area
January
1954
January
1951
April
1950
North End
1
1
East Boston
2
S
South Boston
5
4
South End
4
Z
Charlestown
5
6
Roxbury
6
5
Hyde Park
7
7
Dorchester North
8
8
Dorchester South
9
9
?/est End
10
10
Jamaica Plain
11
12
West Roxbury
12
11
Brighton
15
15
Back Bay
14
14
(1)- 1 - Highest percentage of unemployment,
14 - Lowest percentage of xonemployment .
1
4
5
2
5
6
9
8
10
7
11
12
15
14
Unemployment Among Young People
Young people who have recently left school and ^o have been unable to
find employment since that time, are probably receiving more study and thought
than any other group in the community, Figiures showing unemployment among young
people by census tracts are not available, but those for the city as a urtiole
show the general trends.
-12-
The high oercentage of boys and girls from 14 to 17 years of age ^o
were classified as "not seeking employment", was, of course, due to the fact
(1)
that school attendance is the highest in this group. Not until the 18-year
age group was reached did this distribution change. Then, as one would expect,
the proportion of those seeking emplo3nnent became rapidly much greater, es-
pecially among boys, (Table 7.)
TABLE 7,
EMPLOYABLE WORKERS AND THOSE NOT SEEKING EMPLOYMENT,
AMONG YOUNG PERSONS 14-20 YEARS OF AGE, BOSTON
Age Groups
Total Not Seeking Employment Employable Workers
Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent
14
Years
15
n
16
ti
17
ti
18
IT
19
n
20
H
21-
.24 "
Girls
14
Years
15
II
16
II
17
n
18
n
19
It
20
It
21-
■24 "
6,595
6,070
6,502
6,209
6,128
6,169
6,026
24,811
6,407
6,117
6,474
6,167
6,570
6,458
6,600
28,891
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
6,582
6,027
5,502
4,256
2,552
1,522
826
2,570
6,405
6,075
5,679
4,254
2,721
1,970
1,768
9,810
99.8
15
99.5
45
87.5
800
68.5
1,955
41.5
^ f o9d
21.4
4,847
15.7
5,200
10.4
22,241
99.9
99.5
87.7
69.0
41.4
50.5
26.8
54.0
4
42
795
1,915
5,849
4,488
4,852
19,081
.2
.7
12.7
51.5
58.7
78.6
86.5
89.6
.1
.7
12.5
51.0
58.6
69.5
75.2
66.0
(1) - The increase in attendance in Boston public high schools in the past six
years is noted in the following figures:
1929
26,014
1952
1950
27,595
1955
1951
29,089
1954
29,466
50,687
51,759
-15-
TJnemployment was parituclarly high in the yoionger groups of those
seeking work, and diminished r'lther steadily as the age increased. On the
whole, \jnemplo5Tnent among the girls was slightly lower than among the boys,
(Table 8, Chart II,)
TABLE 8. EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF YOUNG PERSONS 14-20 YEARS OF iO^E, BOSTON
Age Groups Employable Vvorkers Viiholly Unemployed
Number Number Per cent
15 1
45 28
14 Y
ears
15
II
16
It
17
11
18
II
19
n
20
II
21-24
It
Girls
14
Years
15
11
16
II
17
n
18
tt
19
n
20
It
^1-
■24 "
800 582 72,8
1,953 1,562 69.7
5,596 2,173 60.4
4,847 2,472 51,0
5,200 2,286 44,0
22,241 7,570 34.0
4 2 —
42 52 —
795 615 77.4
1,913 1,290 67.4
5,849 2,166 56,5
4,488 2,195 48.9
4,832 1,912 53,6
19,081 4,634 24.3
* Percentage not computed where base figure is less than 100,
Unemployment Among The Colored
There has been conjecture as to the comDarative degree of unemoloy-
ment among white and colored persons. The 1934 Census of unemployment fur-
nished information on this point. Two sets of comparable figures, neither of
which was altogether satisfactory, were available. First, those which showed
the percentage of unemployment among white and color-^d nersons in the city as
-14-
■a whole; and second, those which showed it in a group of census tracts in which
colored residents were numerous.
There are nine census tracts in Boston having a colored population of
more than 500, Figures for these tracts and for the city as a whole are given
in the following tables.
Unemployment among colored persons was higher than it was among white
persons for Boston as a whole, being 55,9 per cent in the former, and 25,9 per
cent in the latter instance.
TABLE 9.
UNEMPLOIMENT AMONG RACIAL GROUPS IN BOSTON
JANUARY 2, 1954
Figures from Massachusetts Census of Unemployment
Racial
GrouDS
Employable
Persons
Persons
Wholly Ur. employed
Number
Per cent
Number
Per cent
White
Colored
Other
527,205
9,965
846
100.0
100.0
100.0
84,754
5,576
182
25.9
55,9
21.5
In the nine census tracts already mentioned, unemployment among the
colored residents was generally higher than among the white residents, althoiigh
in two instances - census tracts R-1 and R-5 - the reverse was true, (Table 10.)
UnemDloynent among colored women was greater than it was among the men in six of
the nine tracts, and was also greater than it was among white women in the same
number of instances,
DELINQUENCY
Census tract statistics are heir to ills which are common to all
statistics. They must, accordingly, be interpreted with discrimination. Great
pr'^caution must be taken when numbers are small. This difficulty is met parti-
cularly in the matter of delinquency figures, where in any one tract the numbers
are small, and are, accordingly, subject to wide statistical fluctuations. For
-15-
to
^ If
o c
<c, 0)
K a
o
1=) a
to a
o &
w ^
s o
M
(D
o «
w «
Q. to
3
p ^
2 «
to
n
0)
a
o
o
o
o
Si
Q
e
o
tn
0)
-1
t30
•H
'O
0)1
D-, 'r-l
(U
0)
a>!
CM Q)
3H
g
o
a 03
<U Pi
to
r-i
■^
U5
to
tc
rH
00
lO
9
to
•
•
iH
CD
•
lO
to
lO
'1'
r-i
to
00
to
in
•
to
to
•
CO
to
•
•
o
CO
•
o
rH
•
O
•
•
00
to
•
o
lO
to
•
lO
in
•
c
•
lO
to
•
o
to
o
•
•
to
•
lO
to
iO
•
to
tfj
•
to
C\i
•
o
to
Cvi
•
lO
to
«
to
•
CD
•
lO
IT,
•
o
•
to
•
to
a.
•
to
cv
•
en
•
Cvi
to
to
•
J8
r-i
•
—I
to
•>*
to
r-i
iH
H
CO
CO
o
H
to
c^
05
Cvi
lO
rH
CD
C-i
to
lO
iH
O
o
Oi
in
lO
cv:
C\i
o>
H
00
o>
t-
■*
00
-^
CNi
CO
00
lO
to
to
a.
to
to
OJ
in
to
to
•
to
Oi
rH
to
to
o
•3
o
H
to
rH
to
05
to
CO
lO
to
to
00
H
to
to
CO
to
02
CO
to
to
to
en
o>
to
C\i
C\2
lO
rH
to
05
to
C\2
O
t<^
to
8
en
to
CO
lO
to
t-i
to
lO
C^2
05
to
to
to
CO
en
r-i
to
to
C\i
Cvi
cn
to
00
C\2
00
00
to
C\.'
o
H
£35
to
O
to
to
lO
C\i
Oi
CO
(O
m
to
CO
oo
r-i
to
O
O
lO
to
CO
to
0>
to
Cvi
to
•^
rH
OJ
OJ
to
CVi
to
■<t
o
Ui
C^
00
to
en
'S'
ri
^
I/}
I
CJ
I
h3
to
"=/
Kj
Ql
1
1
ci
J.
>-3
t3
cy
-16-
eacample, a tract may have 500 children between the ages of 7 and 16. In one
year 10 juvenile delinquents would give it a delinquency rate of 20 per 1000
juvenile population. In the next year there might be 20 delinquents, <vhich
would cause its rate to jump to 40 - a rise probably out of all proportion in
apparent importance to the problems involved. The difficulty of small numbers
can be overcome in two ways: emnual figures can be collected for larger dis-
dricts, for example, health and welfare areas; or figures for census tracts
can be averaged over a period of time. Either process produces larger numbers
which are more stable. Rates for individual census tracts for any one year,
when numbers are small, should be regarded only as danger signals indicating
the need for further and more intensive study.
In 1950 the Massachusetts Probation Commission instituted a comprehen-
sive stfitistical system which yielded, among other things, counts by census
tracts of Boston's delinquents from 7-16 (Juvenile Delinquents), and from
17 - 20 years of age. The older group showed a delinquency rate far higher than
that of the juvenile group, and seemed, therefore, to present the greater pro-
blem of the two. Unfortunately, curtailment in the office of the Probation Com-
mission resulted in the abolition of the compilation of statistics by census
tracts of the older group. It is to be hoped that it can be restored in the
near future, both because the problems which the older group present are of major
importance, and, as already described, because continuity is a factor of prime
importance in this method of recording. Since no information is available for
the older group which has not already been published, no figures are given here.
Fortunately, statistics for juvenile delinquents are available for four years.
The number of juvenile delinquents has not varied greatly in the city
as a whole in any one of the four years for which figures are available, (Table
11, Chart III, Map V,) Generally speaking, the congested districts - Charles-
town, East Boston, the North End, South Boston, the South End, and the West End -
-17-
en
g
g a
?! O
crcu m
a u
^ <n a)
iH O <C
® M
O ?D
0) O pH
(H iH I
•H t-
a ^^
0) 0)
§^
^
^1 TD
CC O
o
^ (D
to
05
to
+>
ci
0}
0)
Q
a>
•H
fl
>
3
o
•i
to
CD
fH
to
Oi
lO
05
to
to
5 u
•H as
+> <D
cd >-)
3 to
P.rH
O I
»
9
0)
OJ
-a
^
0)
JS
u
-p
(0
rH
v.
Cj
r-<
<D
0)
K
'^
to
«
05
ov
a.
w
o
to
to
to
o
to
in
to
«
CD
Cv2
•p
tot
03
lOOl005'*C^aC.tOC\iCVitOtDl«0»
tOWCDWt-C^O)f-lrH«D«DC^tOtO
HHCJrH to r-H-^HCviWin
a- o> i-i 00 ":> o» iH OS OS o> 0". •«}> to a.
• •••••••••••••
r-IOiLOt»JlOt^(HO>tOKJ«DCViQOl«
a. o>^oiot^osiotD<ooO'<*'too
• • ••••••••••••
(Ha3V/5OtD'#C~05>'3tOWC--t^U3
rH WH to lOHWWtO
'*i-lt^tD^JD<-itOt-01HVOlO'<S<
• •••••••••••••
W'*Ot.J0000C0(H00O^C-0>00
WrHt-'JrH (O t-t^WWtOlfi
05OHOWU5CC/00'>!»-WWWWilO
O5>5}<tO"<*O>O5W^aDtDiHlO00a0
iHiHtOH tQiHrHWHtOWtO
^'*HrHC00>C\iO>0>HtCtO00tO
W^-•*05^-TJ^tO«DlOlOr^lOtO•^
rHC^i -^ iHCvitOrHiH
•^ ^ to rH 0>
W t- •««' H 00
•<l't0HU300tOU3O>
^COWTjicOtDtOtO
W Oi W iH W
loiObOjDOcoifipigppO'*
Ti< o e»-
w
- - - — _ , lO C~- <D
lD^C-OiC^OOWO<D
■^ w to w w w
o •* <o -^ o
^ O 03 05 t>'j
t-t (H W
Q0f-lt<3tOtOH00'*lO
to CD t>- O ^ 'J 05 I>- to to to
H^ HrHWtOiHH
O«0t-0000HtOHtOU5iOt-00lO
(HWW'S'iHlOtDOOCOtOco'^C-rH
0'<3<tDOr-icoioai«oot-05'*aj
*% v^ a^ Vk •«
W t>- lO
North kJl
South 14
rH
LO
to
5
■^
CO rH
rH rH
a
10
to
i
M U
§
(d
: — 1
0
1^
o
<0 0)
-P
A4 Ou -O
to
■o
XI
!>> C -P
«j o <n
p -p
CO
^
rS
0
s
TJ
X
to m
0
cd
a
^m
w
.g
0
CD -p a;
0) O
CQ
a.
0
«
^ --■
4: ^
•H
j::
3 jb
J3
a: Qo ^1
0 0
P'
Q)
CC
-p
43 HJ
■P
-p
-p
O -H cS
u u
tfi
T3
e
^.
T< 3
3
to
CO
<a u ^
0 0
0"
>>
d
0
0 0
0
Q)
Q}
m m o
Q 0
W
3:
•-?
B
ft; w
W
s.
S
o
f-
C/D
UJ
<
O
CO
<
UJ
>
bj r^
'Z. cc
^^ _l =5 o\
UJ UJ Q- -
S ^ 7 :;;
— X (3s
-J Id z -
UJ < UJ
Q ui ^
id 03 O
>
O
o
o
cc
LiJ
Q.
<
CC
o
o
kVWWWWWV
^Vxx^^
i
v\\\\n
^v-- . - ■ ■ ■ :
K ^^"^'-
#^
^^
■^^
^ I UJ X
m CC I- h-
-^ o 2 ^
JS- Q !±^ O
^^^^1
[^j^;
\'\V^^^\^\\<\\';s:^ct:<:^
>^:- \:- ->x-V-^^': A>^H
i
^
WWWV
|^|^^^^^:: '.
K^^^x^^VVV^^VV^^^^
r^:^^
^^^^^
^^^^^^
l\^:-'. ,. '■■'v^^NK--'.|
E
^:^^cHHE^HHa
^
i
^^^^ssss^^■^^ ^<vx< cx cv; :^^^^v^^<^<^^ cx
k^<.<.-\^^<.^^-^-^^^^^
f^^^^^^-^^' '
VVVVVVVV'
rTV
t
k\\\\\\Xxx\\\x\x\\\\\\\\\\\V
^-^^^^^^^^^^^:^^^S^^
k\\\\\\\\\^\\V\\\^^^^
I I I I
"^^^s^^^^^^
I I I I
I- o
X<x<x^^<x^^^^^
,, , , AX^^.^^^^^^'X-X^^^^^
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
^
o
o
o
o
<r5
r3
UJ
a
<
to
^ uJ
- ^
Z
o
(0
o
m
6
z
o
o
w
o
z
o
1-
0 >-
CD O
z
UJ U
1 13
I- tr
ffl
u
ui I
5^
a >
UJ ID
(t
a a
u
h
3
y
o
z
h
cr:
<
I
O
^x.
-18-
•show the highest Dronortion of delinquency. There is surprisingly little change
between the comparative rankings of the different areas from year to year. One
may have a delinquency rate which is a little lower in any one year, but by and
large, the delinquency rates in each have stayed at a fairly constant level,
(1)
TABLE 12. RAM OF HEALTH AND ?/ELFARE AREAS IN JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
Health and
Welfare Area 1954 195? 1952 1951
West End 1 1
North End -22
East Boston S 5
Charlestown 4 5
South End 5 4
South Boston 6 6
Back Bay 7 8
Roxbury 8 7
Dorchester North 9 9
Brighton 10 10
Jamaica Plain 11 11
Hyde Park 12 12
Dorchester South IS 15
West Roxbury 14 14
(1) - 1 - Highest delinquency r^te.
14 - Lowest delinquency rate.
The number of juvenile delinquents for the last two years is consider-
ably less than for the first two years - an encouraging sign, perhaps, in tliese
days when the devastating effects of the depression are thought to be underitining
morale at every point,
HEALTH
From the first, the Boston Health Department has been one of the organ-
izations most closely concerned with the conoilation of statistics by census
tracts, for through its good offices the Federal Census *"ipures of 1950 were ob-
tained and the first street list was published. Each year it compiles statis-
tics for general and infant mortality and for tuberculosis.
1
2
2
5
3
1
5
5
4
U
6
4
7
6
8
7
10
10
9
9
11
8
14
12
12
15
15
14
V)
-19-
Infant Mortality
Infant mortality rates are the ratio of the number of denths of in-
fants under one year to the n\imber of births, exclusive of still births, in a
calendar year. Since the number of deaths in any one census tract In any one
year is usually small, infant mortality rates by census tracts are subject to
the TDitfalls already outlined in the section on juvenile delinquency. The same
precautions must, therefore, be taken in their interpretation as with deliu-
quency rates by census tracts. Annual figures for health and welfare areas, an<
rates based on the average number of cases in four years for each census tract,
are used in these considerations of infant mortality.
The general trend of the infant mortality rate for the city and the
state as a whole for the five-year period, 1950-1S34, was downward.
Infant Mortality Rates:
Mas
sachusetts
Boston
1950
60.3
66.6
1931
54,8
59.4
1952
52.9
57.5
1935
52.0
58.9
1934
49,2
54.8*-
* Includes non-residents. Rate exclusive of non-residents
would probably be slightly lower.
Infant mortality rates in the different health and welfare areas fluc-
tuated more than did those of unemployment and delinquency. It has already been
shown that certain areas maintain a fairly steady relative rank as regards these
other factors, A few areas show a certain degree of consistency in their rank
year by year,- Charlestown, East Boston, and the South End, usually having high
rates, and Jamaica Plain, Dorchester South, and "est Roxbury having low rates;
but otherwise the districts fluctuate considerably from year to year. (Table
13, Chsrt IV, Table 14.)
-20-
►J
m
o
to
i-H
M
U
OQ
O
o
o
0)
D
a>
cd
«
xi
-P
CQ
Xi
-PI
0)'
O
O
t-l
.£5
z
^1 T3
c^ O
I 0)
■* a.
to
to
to
O
f-l
to
05
to
to
o
to
■ to
u
•H
o
u
ID
fe:
•a
x;
•p
w
to
to
C3^
K.
f-t
to
o
05
00
o
O
00'
lO
OS
lO
1
to
r—
to
m
05
03
•
C\2
05
o
to
00
»■
-P
U-J U-J t-- <o O OO U3 Cvi t^ <' ^; iH 00 w
■«*OlOOi05tDt^00C\i'^'<fKJ00«)
tDlOC0U2*d<tD^^«DtDt~-C~'^'*
O (H CO
^
to Ni vl< 05 tu »-l lO t.3 C vi< C-
• ••••••••••••
OC\ilOtOOlOOrHC\iOOlOtOOJ
tDODlOrttD^tOinc^lOt-cOtO
CvirHO^f-IOCrHcOOCW^jCtU
toiotDOt^e--cviwa)Oi05ioix(Cvi
to KJ to to ^ lO 1/3 US to CC t> to lO VO
rH 00 UO CJ rH O O ^- W t- O) C^ u-5 CTs
• ••••••••••♦«•
00'*Cvia)OlOKJOO>05WO>02
OOlOrHlC-^t>lO'a<COlOtOOCV'l'
00 Vf 00 lO rH to %<• »-3 00 CO C<i to "-T 00
totocvtOj-g^ajc^toO^oicotooo
tOlOOOeO'OC-tO'^OOtOCDCO'^'*
'St<C>i05'<J'PJaOO>tDf-l'«l'tOr-)'#0
rH>0 K^JOlOtDr-'tOWKJtOtDOJtO
r-i iH
W'^Tj'lOQOON^JrHt^-tOtOtO'^tO
C\2tOtOWlOC-CV2'»:|<(HtOOO^W'*
t^00Wt^f-<<D^Wt-00tO00lOlO
CvJ'3<lOOtOa3CitOtOiHt-U^rHtO
w OS lo to <a lO t-
CJ u:) •># lO (X> O rH
r-) iH
Ol O O lO to 05 O
to '* Tjt O r- rH to
rJtlOrHiHWtO^rHHt-HtOCOlO
OtC>(>-'X>CVCvirHr-<(-i-=J'COH<>~lO
tOQ0^00r-<f-i<*I>-'3'CDO00tOt~-
OOt-lOtOO^E^Wt-COtOr-frH'^C^
■<* to !-■ t<.i IfJ W •><}< CO to LfJ l»; t<J r-H H
tOO)UjOC\iCVi'*C~'«3<OiOCD'^00
«s •« a^ »• A
02 r-i r-i r-i r-*
C~"*'^0^C-00t0t\if-|l0tDt-O05
lO'^lrt'^tOCVitOJOtDC^OOOT'^tO
too)'*oc>iCNi'<j't-'i'o;0!>-^t^
*^ ^ •% fV 9\
C\i rH H i-i r-i
^ o -*
03l/3tOtp ^^ -« w , ww-ws^
w^"'^oe^tHU3n;j03cot~-iDoa>
lf> O to t- CD CD
»M ^- ^- >_^ V- r-i -* t-j 03 CO t~- "3 O CJ5
tOOlOC\iWKjrJ<C0^r-li-(0D-^I>
W
o o
a CO
% u u
o (D a>
>, fl P -P 4
oj O ro (ft c;
A1 bo M
crt ^1
CV H
c o
u u
o o
c «
O i-l
P M O. "O
o oi ai w
03 Ou q
p o '
tn 'CI
C
o
-p
en 73
3 js x:
x: x:
^ p -p
ti « 3 ?
o o o o
o
p -p
(D
coraot^owwt-sa fccocoB:
0<
U
•H
f-(
^
;:!
P.
Cw
o
»
Q)
-p
B
c
•H
(DP
S
P>-P
P.
(3
a
0)
(DrH
OXi
to
•^
r-l
-p
•H
fH
n:
a)
>
a;
«J
K
-p
»-i
o
o
c
p>
tn <^
c t<;
CO
C55
r-i
B
o
U
^
O
tM t-,
in
OJ
<D
a^
^
t>0 tlO
'H
•H
^f^
;?w
o
I—
(/^ C/5 CO
o 2 f
< CD
21 LJ Ld
— q: > CO
t ^ o 7
^ ^ o I
< 09 2 o
I— ro
Q: E S £^
<
LlJ c/d
X LJ
I
CL
^^^^^v^' .
f^'^'^^
r^
^~
k\^\\v\v\,v^v.v^:v^
i.:.^
A\\V\\V'v\\\\\\'^\\V'\'
^r^^'^y:^
^^^'<^^-
l-W'VNNWw'wN
v\\\\\\\\\\\X\\-.
KV\V^:VVV\\^V\VV\\.V\VV\V\\VV^\\V\\V
[' '
X
Wwwv^ww-
?
r : ■; , , ,
s\\\ S\ s
i
f^"^
■• V ' A V V 'v \ V> ^ V >■
^SS^SSS
>■
> o
ui y
Q a.
> <
<
< <
5_ y
tU
^^^:iizr:;:zii:i
:^5S^^^?5^
^\^:>>-\\\'
[
x<<i<^'\<;^^^^^'\Kv.'\xssx^^^c^t:^
..
T
■- - ■ ■ j
\'.VV'v'>'-VVV'-V\VVV<^VVVVVV^\\^V'.\V'-'-V'-. v-
[ • .' .■ . , ■. .
e:
.^S (0
^N\'^-
s
i
I ■■'■ -....>■.■..... .. -^ —
u
^
■A'- '■'.'-
1 ;" '■— ^•--
E
^
, V V V V VV V ■
P=I=
I I M I i~r
K\\V;\V.\\\\V
.
T~ I I I I r~r^
-1-^
I I I
MM
I I I I
A^XWAXW
I I I I -T-TT
^ -1-
in (-
S o
a: 1/1
z
o
I-
I
(S
q:
03
a:
^ (^
o O
Q:: Z
o
ex
I
I- Q
ec Z
O LJ
z
ae.
X
o
Of
X <
<Q
< ID
X
I- o
D Z
O U
in
in (O
<n
"I
o
5^
01
<
O tfJ
u
_i o:
u a
z
'J z
^1
o !i
I- a
V)
0 >
n u
z
UJ UJ
1 O
I- a.
u
^E
Q UJ
U I
o: I-
<
Q. >
UJ (Q
Q:
a Q
u
(-
D
o
o
z
I-
<
I
u
-21-
(1)
TABLE 14 RANK OF HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS IN INFANT MORTALITY
1950-1935
Health and
Welfare Area 1955 1952 1951 195C
Charles town
South End
Roxbury
West End
East Boston
Brighton
South Boston
Dorchester North
North End
Jamaica Plain
Dorchester South
Back Bay-
Hyde Park
West Roxbury
1
5
1
5
2
8
4
2
S
2
7
8
4
6
14
15
5
7
5
5
6
14
10
9
7
1
6
1
8
5
9
6
9
15
2
4
10
10
12
12
11
12
11
10
12
4
5
7
15
11
8
14
14
9
IS
11
(1> - 1 - Highest infant mortality rate,
14 - Lowest infant mortality rate.
In the foiir-year period, Charlestown, South Boston, and the South End
had the highest infant mortality rates for health and welfare areas; while the
following census tracts had the highest rates among the smaller districts.
(Map VI,)
Census Tract Health and Welfare Area Infant Mortality Rate
L-5
South End
152.6
C-1
Charlestown
158,2
L-2
South End
102,7
M-2
South Boston
100.0
ea-5
South Boston
100.0
It seems to be an almost impossible task exactly to determine the
causes which create high or low infant mortality rates. After the publication
of the infant mortality statistics for 1950 and 1931, such interest was aroused
-22-
over the wide difference in the rates for Charlestoim and the West End - two
crowded tenement house districts - that a study involving both medical and
social factors was made under tiie auspices of a conmittee of the Boston Health
League, The study failed to isolate any one single fact or group of facts as
the primaiy cause in the differing rates, but pointed toward the need for
strengthening the orgamized medical facilities in Charlestown,
Tuberculosis
The statistics for tuberculosis cover two aspects of the problem,- the
number of new cases reported in the course of the year, and the number of deaths.
Since tuberculosis rates are worked out on a basis of one case to every
100,000 population, and since the number either of new cases or deaths in a year
is not very great, even in any one health and welfare area, wide fluctuations
occur. Hence, only the rates based on the average number of cases for the four-
year period for health and welfare areas are used here. Persons concerned with
the problems of tuberculosis will, of course, want to study the more detailed
figtures which, however, because of the difficulties already outlined, should be
used only in special research.
The point of greatest significance in this consideration of tuberculo-
sis is the fact that the South End area showed such extraordinarily high rates
both for new cases and deaths. Neither is the result of a large momber in any
one year, but of a rather continuously large number in each of the four years,
(Table 15, Chart V.)
1950 1951 1952 1955
New Cases 240 214 184 157
Deaths 94 88 80 80
TABLE 15.
-ZZt
TUBERCULOSIS IN BOSTON BY HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
AVERAGE FOR FOUR YEARS, 1930 - 19b4
(2)
Health and
Total (1)
Porrulation
Tuberculo
sis
Welfare Area
New
Cases
Deatl
Number
IS
Number
Rate
Rate
Boston
774.470
4,545
146.7
1.809
58.0
Back Bay
56,191
182
125.0
50
54.5
Brighton
54,965
230
104.6
79
35.9
Charlestown
50,232
208
172.0
93
76.9
Dorchester North
122,093
550
112,6
212
45.4
Dorchester South
78,128
274
87.6
99
31.6
East Boston
62,565
5S4
155.8
114
45.6
Hyde Park
29,502
107
90.6
39
33,0
Jamaica Plain
43,451
177
101.8
85
47.7
North End
25,411
150
160.1
52
55.5
Roxbury
104,518
717
171.5
506
75.5
South Boston
57,562
587
168.6
196
85.4
South End
55,295
795
559.4
342
154.6
West End
28,687
172
149.0
60
52.2
"•est Roxbury
50,272
229
115.8
83
41.2
(1) - Plates based on 1934 enumeration of population,
(2) - Figures from the Boston Health Department.
RELIEF AND FAIJILY SERVICE
One section of "Social Statistics by Census Tracts in Boston" was de-
voted to a discussion of the distribution throughout the city of the cases of
the Department of Public Welfare, and three private family service agencies, -
the Boston Provident Association, the Family Welfare Society, and the Jewish
Family Welfare Association. Unfortunately, comparable material is not available
at this time as the earlier tabulations were the result of a special exDeriment,
In the interim, however, the Family Welfare Society has instituted
the collection of statistics by census tracts and has just made availabe
figures for its last operating year; and the Department of Public Welfare is
I
<
u
z
in
I
<
Q
ssssss
c^www
SVvVsWWVvV
kVVV\W\S>
o
en
z
O
h-
<
s
CO
co
O
CO
5
<
Ld
D
Q.
o
UJ
rr
"st
2
o
^
Q.
CO
^^™
cs
_i
o
G\
CO
C/D
LU
o
n
1
CO
LU
CO
ao
o
O
<
o
cj
-J
U
OS
Z)
CC
LJ
7'
<
LU
T
LU
CL
LU
LiJ
OQ
>
h
3
CO
<
rr
h-
tcvwwwwv
wwwww^
g^\\\\s\>
k\\\\\VCvV\\
on
UJ
1- X
</^ h-
o
UJ V
>- <
<
<<
< Q.
X
o
CO
5o
ck; Z
o
Q
OH
z
I- e
< u^
lU O
CO
>^^>NSJ^^nV»^C^
VvVvWvVvVVg^
^v\\v\\v^^^x\\s^v\\^^^
vwxv^xwwwwvo
S\\\\VVX\\VsVvVsNVV
k\^^\^\\^^^\^x\^^x\\\\\\\\vv\^x\v^^\^^^
arm:
I I I
3 L
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
u
X
O UJ
— ' ir\
f)
>-
ID
CD
X
O
lU
I?
(J
X
I- Q
r> z
o UJ
in
-24-
• incorporating the method into its newly reorganized record system* In the not
far distant futtire; therefore, statistics comparable to those of delinquency
and health will be available for this field.
Table 16 correlates the number of major service cases with the num-
ber of families in the area. While the proportion of families served in every
area is small, it is considerably greater in some areas than in others. The
large number of cases in Roxbury, <:4 per cent of the total case load, becomes of
less relative importance when due recognition is given to the population of the
area.
TABLE 16. RATIO OF MAJOR SERVICE CASES OF FAMILI WELFARE SOCIETY
TO POPULATION
(1)
Health and
(2)
Families
Family Welfare Society
Cases
Welfare Area
Per cent
Number of Families
(Exclusive of South)
Boston { End Area )
178.747
3.080 1.7
Hyde Park
Roxbury
Charles town
North End
South Boston
Jamaica Plain
East Boston
Brighton
Back Bay
West End
West Roxbury
Dorchester South
Dorchester North
6,450
26,891
7,135
5,230
13,714
11,058
13,675
15,774
11,824
7,687
U,906
17,855
29,548
223
5.5
865
3.2
192
2.7
121
2.5
508
2.2
229
2.1
229
1.7
207
1.5
147
1.2
91
1.2
123
1.0
124
.7
225
.8
(1) - Figures for the South End, in which there were 554 cases, are omitted from
this table as truly comparable figures cannot be obtained because of the
presence of large numbers of rooming houses. For a full discussion of this
point see "Social Statistics in Boston", 1933, p,23,
(2) - Figures from Massachusetts Census of Unemployment.
A study of these figures raises many questions. Is the greater demand
-25-
for service in some districts the result of greater need? Or is it the result
of special emergencies which may be present one year and absent the next? Is
the demand less in some districts because of greater activities of other family
service agencies? Or do the working agreements between all agencies, both
public and private, demand different types of service in the different areas?
Would more detailed study of other neighborhood problems result in a different
division of the load?
CONCLUSIONS
This report sujmnarizes the statistics by census tracts for Boston
now available from all sources. From the use which has already been made of
them, it is believed that they will be an essential adjunct, especially as
their scope becomes widened, to program building both of individual agencies
and of neighborhoods. It is to be hoped, therefore, that more and more those
agencies which operate on a city-wide basis - hospitals, health agencies,
character building agencies, children's agencies, as well as other family ser-
vice and relief agencies,- will build this method into their record keeping
in order that their experience may thus be pooled for this common interpreta-
tion of problems and needs.
APPENDIX
BOUNDARIES OF HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS IN BOSTON
-27-
BODNDARIES OF HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS IN BOSTON
HEALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
Back Bay
Brighton
Charlestown
Dorchester North
Dorchester South
CENSUS TRACTS
J-5, J-4, J-5
K-5, K-4, K-5,
S-1
Y-1, Y-2, Y-Z
Y-4, Y-5
L/""X^ \j^f^^ \^"%jf
D-l, D-2, D-5,
D-4, E-1, E-2
P-2, P-5, P-4,
P-5, P-6, Q-5,
T-1, T-2, T-3,
T-4, T-5, T-6,
T-7, T-8, T-9,
T-10, X-1
X-2, X-5, X-4,
X-5, X-6
BOUNDARIES
Charles River, Berkeley,
Back Sts., Embankment Rd,,
Beacon, Arlington, Provi-
dence, Berkeley, Stanhope
Sts., Trinity Place,
Stuart, Dartmouth Sts,,
N. y. N. H. & H. track,
Station, Parker, Conant
Sts,, Huntington, Longwood
Aves,, Muddy River, St,
Mary's, Ashby Sts,
Charles River, Ashby St,,
Commonwealth Ave,, City
Line
Mystic River, City Line,
Boston Harbor, Charles
River, City Line
Old Harbor, Freeport St,,
Old Colony Parkway, Pope's
Hill St,, Neponset Ave,,
King St,, Dorchester,
Centre Aves., Centre St,,
Codman Sq,, Talbot Ave,,
Blue Hill Ave., Huckins,
Dennis, Langdon, George,
Magazine Sts,, Norfolk
Ave,, N. Y, N. P, & H,
track, Southampton,
Ellery, Boston, Ralston
Sts,, Dorchester, Crescent
Aves,, Dorchester Raoid
Transit, 191^5 V^ard Line
Talbot Ave., Centre St,,
Centre, Dorchester Aves,,
King St,, NeDonset Ave,,
PoDe's Hill St,, Old
Colony parkway, Freeport
St,, Neponset River, Mat-
tokeeset. River Sts,, Randolph
Rd, Ku^by Rd,, Oakland,
Harvard Sts,
-28-
HKALTH AND WELFARE AREAS
East Boston
Hyde Park
CENSUS TRACTS
A-1, A-2, A-5,
A-4, A-5, A-6,
B-1, B-2, B-3,
B-4, B-6
Z-1, Z-2
Jamaica Plain
V-5, V-4, V-5,
V-6, W-1, W-2
North End
F-1, F-2, F-5,
F-4, r-5, F-6
Roxbury
R-1, R-2, R-5,
Q-2, Q-5, Q-4,
U-1, U-2, D-5,
U-4, U-5, U-6,
BOUNDARIES
Chelsea Creek, Belle
Isle Inlet, Boston
Harbor,
Old Hyde Park Line,
Turtle Pond Rd,, Wash-
ington, Beech Sts,,
Clarendon Ave,, Haute-
ville. Poplar, Dale,
Burley Sts,, MetroDoli-
tan Ave,, Mansur St,,
Grew Ave,, Cliff mont,
Canterbury Sts,, Hyde
Park Ave,, Richards Ave,,
Newbem, Wilmot, Ash-
land Sts,, Randolph Rd,,
Oakland St,, Rugby,
Randolph Rds., River,
Mattakeeset Sts., Nenon-
set River, City Line
Pond Rd,, Jamaicaway,
Castleton St,, South
Huntington Ave,, Floyd,
Cranford, Heath, Day,
Bynner, Creighton,
Centre Sts,, N, y, N. H,
& H, track, Atherton,
Washington, School Sts.,
Walnut Ave,, Sigoumey
St,, Glen Rd,, Forest,
Hills St,, Morton St,,
Arborway, N, Y, N, H, &
H, track, Aptlcou Rd,,
South St., Belgrade
Ave,, v«est Roxbury Park-
way, Centre, Church Sts,,
City Line
Charles River, Boston
Harbor, Northern, Atlan-
tic Aves,, Milk, ^Washing-
ton, School, Beacon, Bow-
doin, Chardon, Portland,
Traverse, Canal, 'Washing-
ton Sts»
Longwood, Huntington •'^ves,,
Conant, Pax-ker, Station
Sts., N. 1. N. H, & H.
track, Camden, Washington,
-29-
HaALTH AND Wi!:LFARE AREAS
Roxbury (Cont'd)
South Boston
South End
West End
West Roxbury
CEi-^SUS TRACTS
S-2, S-5, S-4,
S-5, S-6, V-1,
V-2
M-1, M-2, M-3,
M-4, N-1, N-2,
N-5, N-4, 0-1,
0-2, 0-5, 0-4,
P-1
G-1, G-2, G-5,
G-4, J-1, J-2,
I-l, 1-2, 1-5,
1-4, L-1, L-2,
L— 5 , L— 4 , If— 5 ,
L-6, Q-1
H-1, H-2, H-5,
H-4, K-1, K-2
W-5, i'<-4, W-5,
W-6
BOUNDARIES
Northampton Sts., Harri-
son Ave,, E, Lenox,
Fellows, Northampton,
Albany, Yeoman Sts,, Nor-
folk Ave., Magazine,
George, Langdon, Dennis,
Hucklns Sts., Blue Hill
Ave., Seaver St., Walnut
Ave., School, iNashington,
Atherton Sts,, N, Y, N,
H, & H, track. Centre,
Creighton, Bynner, Day,
Heath, Cranford, Floyd
Sts,, South Huntington
Ave,, Castleton St,,
Jamaicaway, City Line,
Muddy River
Fort Point Channel,
Boston Harbor, Old Har-
bor, 1925 Ward Line,
Crescent, Dorchester
Aves,, Ralston, Boston,
Ellery, Southampton Sts,,
N. Y, N, H, & H. track.
South Bay,
Fort Point Channel,
Northern, Atlantic Aves,,
Milk, Washington, School,
Beacon, Arlington, Pro-
vidence, Berkeley, Stan-
hope Sts,, Trinity Place,
Stuart, Dartmouth Sts,,
N. y. N. H. Sr H, track,
Camden, *«ashington, North-
ampton Sts,, Harrison ^ve.,
E, Lenox, Fellows, North-
ampton, Albany, Yeoman Str,,
Norfolk Ave,, N. Y. N, H.
& H. track. South Bay
•
Charles River, Berkeley,
Back Sts,, Embankment Rd,,
Beacon, Bowdoin, Chardon,
Portland, Traverse, Canal,
Washington Sts,
Arborway, N, Y. N, H, &
H, track, Morton, Forest
Hills Sts., Glen Rd., Sig-
oumey St., »*alnut Ave,,
Seaver St., Bule Hill Ave.,
-50-
HEALTH AND 'A'ELi''AfliL ABxAS
West noxbury (Cont'd)
CaibUK TRACTS
BOUNDARIES
Harvard St., Ashland Ave.,
Wilmot, Newbem Sts.,
Richards, Hyde Park Aves.,
Canterbury, Cliffmont Sts.,
Grew Ave., Mansiir St., Met-
ropolitan Ave,, Biirley,
Dale, Poplar, Hauteville
Sts., Clarendon Ave,, Beech,
Washington, Tiirtle Sts,,
Pond Rd., Old Hyde Park
Line, City Line, Chui-ch,
Centre Sts., West Roxbury
Parkway, Belgrade Ave.,
South St.
r
•2_
BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY
3 9999 06353 020 6
DEC 1 1 1935
r
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11