RAS-1996 — Page 118

89

5%

2.992 females aged 25-30 in 1911, 2,795 in 1921

Census Report 1911, Table XXI

Census Report 1921, Tables XXIV-XXVII

Based on a figure of double the female population since the male population is clearly significantly distorted by immigration

* See JW Hayes, The Hong Kong Region 1850-1911: Institutions in Town and Countryside.

Hamden, Connecticut, 1977

** Census Report, 1977, Tables IX and X. No detailed breakdown of Place of Birth of the

Floating population is included in the 1911 Census

C. I

The statistics for Place of Birth in the 1921 Census give a somewhat different picture. There (Census Report, 1921, Table XI) the place of birth of 34,724 Northern District males and 36,311 Northern District females are given, of which only 88% (males) and 82% (females) were born within the New Territories. The sharply higher figures for persons born outside the New Territories seems to be due to three factors. The first is the time of the Census. The 1921 Census was taken during the cooler weather (March-April) as compared with the 1911 Census (April-June). Numbers of stonecutters, itinerant weavers, etc., are likely to have been higher in 1921 as it is known from oral evidence that many of these village-to-village traders went back to their own families in villages outside the New Territories for the summer and harvest seasons, and would thus have been enumerated in 1921 but not in 1911. This is doubtless the reason the 1921 Census shows a far higher figure for males born in Kwai Shun District (997 compared to 354), and also for males from the area north of Canton (241 as compared to 23), although the numbers from Ka Ying and other East River areas were lower (142 as compared to 177). This may also be the reason for higher recorded numbers of males from other inland areas in 1921 (Sze Yap 77 as compared to 25, and Shiu Hing area, 95 as to 19). With the exception of Kwan Shun, all the 1921 figures for these areas show far fewer females than males (Kwan Shun, 1507 females; north of Canton, 1-42; East River, 72; Sze Yap, 16; Shiu Hing, 45). The effects of the Ching Ming Festival, and the remaining 1920 refugees are responsible, almost certainly, for the much higher numbers of San On born males (1213 in 1921, only 243 in 1911), and may in part also account for the increase in Tung Kun males (385 in 1921, 163 in 1911). Most of the difference, however, must be due to a more careful enumeration of the boat people in the area. The higher numbers recorded in 1921 for males born in the Delta (750 as against 234), the Chin Chau area (143 as against 9), Hong Kong (226 as against 10), and Macao (25 as against nil), must be due to this factor. The reduction in the numbers of women recorded as born in Hong Kong (1208 as against 2383 in 1911) may be due to errors in the 1911 record. Because of these differences, it is difficult to compare the two Censuses directly with regard to these statistics. It is considered likely that the 1911 figures are closer to the actual position of long-term land population residents born outside the area. The information in the 1921 Census does not permit any direct comparison with the Place of Birth figures for Southern District in 1911, since the 1921 figures include New Kowloon as well as the Islands.