the dull magnificence of Berlin, the Anglified elegance of Dresden, the small-beer architecture of Munich, even the national waters of the wide and winding Rhine,' and the old Germanic glories of Cologne, are little to them at the moment of leaving for the land of plenty. The same want of capital, and of an active, energetic middle class, to stimulate industry and make a division of labor, which has produced in Ireland the voluntary immigration of its best laborers, is causing the same results in the centre of Europe."

CHAPTER III.

PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE OF IMMIGRATION.

WITHIN the last year past a labored effort has been made to satisfy the public that a large amount of property is brought into the country by foreign immigrants, and that, independent of their labor, they contribute largely to the wealth of the States. This is, however, an argument more specious than it will probably, upon a close examination, be found sound. It is, of course, impossible to ascertain within even an approximation of accuracy, what amount of personal property is thus brought into the country. According to a statement in Hübner's Jahrbücher, the immigrants registered in Berlin in 1851, being 5,018 in number, took with them property amounting in the aggregate to $323,250, which apportioned equally among them would have been between $64 and $65 for each. But this can by no means be regarded as a fair basis to rest a calculation upon. Since Castle Garden, in New York city, has been made a depot for the immigrants, an attempt has been made, by the Commissioners of Immigration, to learn from each immigrant landing the extent of his pecuniary means, and the information thus received is paraded before the public by certain New York journals as evidence of the amount of wealth these immigrants add to the country. On classifying the passengers, the information thus derived from them would seem to confirm what has long been regarded as a fact, and no doubt is so, and that is, that the Germans are best off, and bring the largest amount of property with them. Their confessed means are said to average $60 per man, woman and child, while the Irish are said to bring an average of $30 each with them. During the month of August, 1855, the first seventeen days of it 4,318 passengers were landed at the Garden, including 148 who had visited Europe and returned, and they are reported by the Commissioners to have brought with them the aggregate sum of $293,469 47, being an average of $67 97 for every man, woman and child landed at the depot. Although this report may in this instance be correct, a fact which is by no means certain,

it can still not be regarded as any fair criterion to estimate the amount of capital brought into the country by immigration during the last ten years past. It is not reasonable nor likely that each immigrant from Ireland had, on arriving here, $60 or even $30 in his pocket, of all those whom starvation during the famine in that country induced to migrate hither. The time was when many considered themselves lucky to have means enough to pay their passage, and arrive here with a half dozen British pennies in their pockets. It is true, Ireland is more prosperous now, and the immigration may embrace a class who are, generally, not without some means; but it is very doubtful whether they average $30 per head.

It would be probably a much safer and more accurate calculation, to assume for its basis, that the average amount of property brought by each immigrant during the last ten years past, was $15. Bishop Hughes himself claims no larger amount; for but a short time since be averred in the Freeman's Journal that to be the sum. Taking that, then, as the amount, and what is the aggregate sum that has been brought into the country by them from the beginning of 1850 to the close of 1854? During that period 1,983,882 persons are reported by the State Department at Washington to have arrived, which at the rate of $15 per head, would make the sum of $29,758,220. Now, to arrive at a correct conclusion, and ascertain whether there is a balance in favor or against the country, let us take an account of the other side of the question and strike a balance sheet. By the general report of the British Immigration Commissioners, made on the first of May last, the amounts remitted from this country, by bankers and merchants, to Ireland alone, during the same period, was as follows: in 1850, £957,000; in '51, £990,000; in '52, £1,404,000; in '53, £1,439,000; aud in '54, £1,730,000-making an aggregate in the five years of £6,520,000, which, when converted into our currency, sums up $28,948,800. We have thus a balance left in favor of this country of less than $1,000,000, without taking into account the amounts sent to Ireland through private sources, which cannot be ascertained, and without counting a dollar of the large amount remitted by the Germans and immigrants from other countries for like purposes. It is clear, therefore, and requires no further demonstration by figures, that immigrants do not, by the property they bring with them, add to our national wealth, but that, on the contrary, they contribute to swell the coffers of the countries of their birth, by remitting a larger amount of money than they bring with them.

But we are not yet done with the reckoning. The case has not been much more than half stated. We have ascertained, provided our premises be correct, (and the Freeman's Journal is our authority for assuming $15 to be the sum brought by each,) the amount brought into the country by

immigration, and, we think, satisfactorily shown, that, instead of one dollar of it being contributed to the common fund of the nation, they have remitted all and more to the countries from whence they migrated. Having contributed nothing to the aggregate wealth of the country, what claim then have they to its charitable consideration? And yet, whose means but the natives of this country and those now identified with them, feeds their paupers and educates their children? And how much of the public expenses is incurred by the crimes committed by the vicious portions of them, which has to be borne also by those among whom they have sought a home? These are questions yet to be taken into consideration before the balance sheet can properly be closed, and, when they are, they will be found to put at rest the claim now preferred in favor of immigration. A brief examination of the pauperism in the United States, the crimes committed, and the expenses incurred thereby, will show a heavy balance against immigration and in favor of the natives.

CHAPTER IV.

PAUPERISM.

THE published Census returns of 1850, are lamentably deficient in detailed information on the subject of paupers and convicts. We learn from it, however, that the amount of public means expended, within the year preceding 1850, for the support of paupers, was two millions, nine hundred and fifty-four thousand, eight hundred and six dollars; and the number of paupers supported within the same year, in whole or part, was one hundred and thirty-four thousand, nine hundred and seventytwo, of which number over one-half were foreigners, there being sixtysix thousand, four hundred and thirty-four native born, and sixty-eight thousand, five hundred and thirty-eight of foreign birth. It thus appears that of the 2,244,625 foreign born population in the United States, at that time, one of at least every thirty-three was a pauper, supported at the public expense, while of the 19,979,563 native born, including the free colored and those returned as of unknown birth, only one of every three hundred was thus a charge on the public.

Of the amount expended, and the number supported the year mentioned, there was expended in the free States $2,451,917 in the support of 113,712 persons, of whom 50,023 were natives, and 63,689 were foreigners; while in the slave States there was expended $502,889 in the support of 21,260, of whom but 4,849 were foreigners.

Of the foreign paupers maintained in the free States, those of Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania, had 55,480, being seven-eights of the whole number, while the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, and New Jersey, had 5,594, leaving but 2,615 scattered over the Western and Northwestern States. New York had 40,580 foreigners and 19,275 natives, as paupers, being one of every sixteen of the foreign population of the State, and but one of every one hundred and twenty-seven of its native population. Massachusetts had 9,247 foreigners and 6,530 natives, being one of every eighteen of its foreign population, and but one of every one hundred and twenty-eight of its native born citizens. Pennsylvania had 5,653 foreigners and 5,898 natives, being one of every fifty-four of its foreign born, and but one of every three hundred and forty-two of its native population.

Of the foreign paupers maintained in the slave States, those of Maryland and Missouri had 3,348, leaving but 1,501 in the remaining States, of which South Carolina had 329, and Louisiana 290. In Maryland, there were 2,591 native and 1,903 foreign paupers, being one of every one hundred and sixty-nine of its native, and one of every twenty-eight of its foreign population. Missouri had 1,729 foreign and 1,248 native paupers, being one of every forty-two of its foreign, and one of every four hundred and eighteen of its native born population.

It is quite apparent from these statistics that the free States are burthened with a large foreign pauper population, exceeding in number the native born who are supported at the public expense, while in the slave States there is but one pauper of foreign birth to three native born.

Professor De Bow's Compendium of the Census has an imperfect table, giving the number of paupers in poor-houses, on the 1st of June, 1850, from which the following facts are gleaned :

There were then in the poor-houses of Massachusetts 3,712 persons, not including the out-of-door paupers who received public support, of which number there were 989 foreigners, being over one-third of the whole number, of whom 803 were Irish, 13 German, and 173 from other countries.

In the poor-houses of Maryland there were then 988, of which number there were 243 foreigners, being near one-fourth of the whole number, of whom 128 were Irish, 88 German, and 27 from other countries.

In Missouri there were in the poor-houses then 276, of which number there were 151 foreigners, being over one-half, of whom 77 were Irish, 43 German, and 31 from other countries.

In Virginia there were then 1,539 in the poor-houses, of which number but 40 were foreigners, of whom 30 were Irish, 5 German, and 5 from other countries.

In Indiana there were 427, of whom there were 49 Irish, 16 German,

and 18 from other countries, making 83, being about one-fifth of the

number.

In North Carolina they had 873, and but 2 Irishmen, 2 Germans, and 4 other foreigners.

From other sources than the Census returns of 1850, such as the Prison Discipline Journal, American Register, American Almanac, Reports of Benevolent Societies and Institutions, Commissioners of the Poor, Prison Inspectors, &c., the following additional information is derived on the subject:

In Massachusetts, there were relieved and maintained at the public expense, from 1837 to 1840, the aggregate number of 8,671 persons, of whom 6,104 were foreigners, being over two-thirds of the number; for the years 1850, 51, 52, 53, ending November 1, the whole number amounted to 107,776, of which 48,469 were foreigners, being not quite one-half, and of these over 40,000 were from England and Ireland.

According to the report of an association for relieving the poor in New York city, it alone relieved in that city, during the year 1854, about 27,000 persons, of whom, though the number was not given, there can be little doubt the greater portion were foreigners.

The number received into the Baltimore alms-house, during the year 1851, was 2,150, of which number about 900 were Irish and Germans; and of 2,358 admitted to the same institution in 1854, there were 1,397 foreigners, of whom 641 were German, and 593 Irish.

So the Society for the relief of the poor in Philadelphia, report that for the year ending March 31, 1855, there were received into their Home establishment 1,266 persons, of whom there were 816 foreigners, 182 of unknown birth, and 268 Americans; of the foreigners there were 605 Irish, 122 English, 41 German, 32 Scotch, 7 French, 3 Welsh, 2 Italian, 2 West Indian, 1 from Switzerland, and 1 from St. Helena.

The whole number of paupers received into the Blockley (Philadelphia) Alms-house, in 1848, was 3,584; of these there were 1,141 natives, 2,345 foreigners, 98 unknown; of the foreigners, there were 1,650 Irish, 435 Germans, 227 English, 46 Scotch, 16 French, 3 Canadians, 3 Spaniards, 3 Polish, 3 from West Indies, 2 from South America, and 2 Russians.

A late report of the superintendent of the Louisville alms-house states the number of inmates to be 164, of whom 135 are foreigners and 29 natives, being over two-thirds of foreign birth of the whole number maintained by that city.

The Buffalo Advertiser gives the following statement of the number committed to the work-house in that city, for the last four years past: