CHAPTER III

IMMIGRATION AND COLONISATION

Immigration is a vital problem for the Argentine—Table of the population per Province and per Territory. Its sparsity—The Exceptional situation of the Argentine as the objective of European emigration—The poor results hitherto obtained through default of colonisation—The faulty division of the public lands—History of immigration in relation to colonisation—The nationality of immigrants.

The economic and financial organisation of the Argentine being now assured, and peace without and within being established, while at the same time the revolutionary spirit of the bad old days has gradually disappeared, the great problems which the country has to face to-day are principally those dealing with the development of agricultural and industrial production and its outlets.

But among these problems none is more vital to the future of the Argentine than the problem of filling the vast gaps of empty territory with new elements of population.

Here, according to the last official data, are the figures relating to the distribution of the population in the Provinces and National Territories:—

Area in
sq. miles		Population
in 1908
ProvinceofBuenos Ayres and Capital117,5632,427,628
””Santa Fé50,784772,410
””Córdoba62,000477,680
””Entre Rios28,709399,333
””Corrientès32,494317,247
””Tucuman8,903280,311
””Santiago de l’Estero39,660192,639
””Mendoza56,350174,619
””Salta62,040141,610
””Catamarca48,408103,680
””San Juan33,630105,684
””San Luis28,460103,367
””La Rioja34,45086,352
””Jujuy18,93056,945
————————
Carry forward,622,3815,328,907

Area in
sq. miles		Population
in 1908
Brought forward,622,3815,328,907
Territoryofthe Pampa56,17051,673
””Misionès8,59038,748
””Neuquen42,23518,020
””Rio Negro75,72615,961
””Chaco52,60413,838
””Formosa41,2946,309
””Chubut92,6805,244
””Santa Cruz107,8601,742
””Les Andes24,9861,245
””Tierra del Fuego8,2771,222
————————
1,137,8035,792,807

The above figures prove more eloquently than any other argument that the supreme necessity of the Argentine people at the present time is an increase of population. The territory of the Republic has an area of more than 1,130,000 square miles, and its population amounts to no more than 5,792,807, which gives a density of 5·1 persons per square mile. One should also recollect, in order to grasp the true significance of these figures, that of those 5,792,807 inhabitants, 157,963 inhabit the 43,000 acres which form the site of Buenos Ayres; so that only 4,634,841 remain to people the rest of the country, a fact which still further lessens the density of the population.

This density varies in different regions and in different Provinces; thus the eastern or coastal region, formed by the Federal Capital and the Provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, Entre Rios, and Corrientès, has 17·08 inhabitants to the square mile, while that of the centre, which comprises Córdoba, San Luis, and Santiago de l’Estero, has only 5·8. As we penetrate further inland the density grows still less, until in the western or Andean region, formed by the Provinces of Mendoza, San Juan, La Rioja, and Catamarca, the figure is barely 2·7. In the northern region, embracing the Provinces of Tucuman, Salta, and Jujuy, there are 5·23 inhabitants per square mile.

But it is in the National Territories—in one of which more than one important European people could find room to spare—that we find the lowest density. There the desert reigns in all its desolation. The Territory of El Pampa, whence so much wealth has been drawn of late years, and

whose area is 56,200 square miles, contains barely 52,000 inhabitants; that of Rio Negro, whose area is 45,600 square miles, contains but 16,000, while in the Territory of Santa Cruz, situated on the shores of the Atlantic, in which there are important ranches, and which might contain a numerous pastoral and maritime population, there are only 1742 souls to its 58,890 square miles. All these figures prove that the Argentine is, without metaphor, a desert nation, and that for the present and for a long time to come, its peopling will constitute its great national need.

To this affirmation we must add another no less certain: that in the normal order of human events, and in accordance with the economic and sociological laws that govern European nations, there is no country in the world which assures the labourer who establishes himself upon its soil of such perspectives of wealth and welfare. All things compete to make it a paradise of immigration: the softness and variety of its climate, the richness of its soil, the extent of its territory, the enormous inland waterways which cross it, and the facilities of communication with the European consumers of its produce, with whom the Argentine is connected by one of the most reliable ocean traffic-ways in the world.[29]

[29] The distance of nearly 7200 miles from Buenos Ayres to the French ports is crossed by the great transatlantic liners in from eighteen to twenty-one days. The Argentine Parliament has voted a law authorising the Government to give a subsidy of £400 monthly to any company adopting the refrigerator system and undertaking to make the voyage to Lisbon or Vigo in fifteen days.

The United States, which have hitherto been the objective and centre of attraction to which men of initiative have converged from all parts of the world, are beginning to experience all the troubles familiar to European nations as the result of an excessive population.[30] It is for this reason

that they are striving, by all the means in their power, to restrain the stream of immigration that pours upon their shores.

[30] The population of the United States is hardly yet excessive; the country is very much more than self-supporting, and many States and Territories are sparsely settled. The real source of trouble is that many of the national resources are locked up in the hands of Trusts or private owners; and the effect of railway combinations and of produce trusts all over the country is resulting in a state of affairs similar to that produced by a lack of communications and also an effect similar to that of over-population. It is obvious that both causes make for emigration, as the English immigrant in Canada, who finds all the best locations occupied by Americans, has cause to know.—[Trans.]

Australia, which was also only recently one of the great centres of immigration, has during these last few years suffered terrible economic shocks, of which the effect has been to divert the stream of new arrivals.[31] Moreover, as a rival of the Argentine, Australia has two causes of inferiority: her rigorous climate, which exposes the country to violent extremes of temperature, passing from intolerable heat to a bitter cold, and, on the other hand, a distance from the European countries to which she exports her products double that between the banks of the Plata and Europe.

[31] Here again the trouble is partly due to the back-blocks being taken up by large settlers, and still insufficient means of transit.—[Trans.]

Having thus made it clear that the Argentine Republic is in an exceptional position to attract and to support a large European population, the time has come to measure the distance travelled, and to note the progress realised, so that we may see whether the results obtained are in proportion to the perfect adaptation of the soil to immigration.

Without being too pessimistic, we are forced to recognise that all efforts hitherto made by the Argentine to increase its population have hitherto remained without appreciable effect.[32]

[32] It is one of the disadvantages of immigration from a very poor country where there is no political oppression, that immigrants will return to it, after saving money in a country where money is cheap and the standard of living higher, as the work of a few years will establish them comfortably in their native country. This is especially true of Italian emigrants. The evil will doubtless be overcome by a measure comparable to the “Homestead Act” of the United States, in conjunction with national loans of capital or of farms as going concerns, to be bought by payment at a low interest, which would result in a population of peasant owners in comfortable circumstances.—[Trans.]

Colonisation, that is, the peopling of the country, was inaugurated in the Argentine by the initiator of all true progress—Rivadavia—who founded the first colony of Santa Catalina. This work was intelligently and enthusiastically continued by Mitre and Rawson, in 1863: it was then vigorously pushed by Sarmiento during his extremely progressive administration; but as a matter of fact, in spite of all these efforts, colonisation has not given

the results that were expected of it. To explain this lack of success, we must suppose that the work has not been promoted according to the indications of science and experience, and that a variety of events, uncontrollable by the human will, has thwarted the praiseworthy intentions of the Government. Otherwise it is impossible to account for the fact that the Republic contains less than 6 million inhabitants, whereas its soil would support 100 millions.

To attain the primordial object of peopling the country, the Argentine has had at its disposal, among others, one very important means—the public lands—a means which other nations in similar circumstances have employed with excellent results, but which in this case has unhappily not produced the same happy effect, being manipulated by inexperienced or thoughtless hands.

Various laws have been voted in the Argentine, tending to augment the population by means of colonisation. All systems have been tried successively, and one and all have failed. “This failure,” says M. Eleodore Lobos, in an extremely instructive volume published under the modest title, “Notes on the Land Laws” (Annotations sur la législation des terres), “is an incontestable fact, and must be attributed not only to economic, administrative, and political conditions, but also to the freedom with which the soil has been divided into lots of enormous area, and the obstacles opposed to the easy and secure acquisition of small properties. In other terms, our politicians have effected the very reverse of a rational colonisation, and have established a system of large properties instead of subdividing the land between the colonists according to their productive capacities.”

This error was recognised by the Government more than fifteen years ago; but the influence of speculators, who profit from this short-sighted policy, has been more powerful than all attempts at reform.

“To understand the matter,” says the same author, “we have only to see with what indifference to the public weal the executive, during the last twenty-five years, has disposed of 67,817,000 acres of uncultivated soil, which formed part of the national domain. The laws voted were impotent to prevent the disposal of these public lands in large parcels,

so that the disposal of these lands failed to draw the population which these vast domains could support.”

The real beginning of Argentine immigration was when the tyranny of Rozas was overthrown on the 3rd of February, 1852, and a regular Government established, which voted a fundamental law of which the object was “to cherish the general welfare, and to secure the advantages of liberty to every citizen, to posterity, and to all people of the earth who desire to live on Argentine soil.” From this moment a powerful current of European immigration set in; turned aside from time to time by financial crises, plagues,[33] and war; but never completely arrested. Industry, commerce, and agriculture, which had so far slumbered, received a considerable stimulus from this new source. In a single year more immigrants entered by the port of Buenos Ayres than had for many years entered the whole country.

[33] The term used, fléaux, would probably include yellow fever, drought, locusts, cattle disease, bad harvests, etc., etc.—[Trans.]

The public administration did not take the trouble to keep an exact record of the number of immigrants before the year 1853; and between 1854 and 1870 we have simply the number of new arrivals, without any further details. Only since 1870 have the official statistics classed the immigrants according to nationality, and only since 1881 have they recorded other details, such as sex, age, profession, education, etc.

During the last six months of 1854, 2524 persons entered the country; in 1855, 5912; in 1856, 4672; in 1857, 4951, in 1858, 4658; and in 1859, 4735; or 27,452 in six years: that is, far more than had entered during two centuries of colonial life.

In the decade formed by the years 1860-1869, the number of immigrants increased to 134,325; in the years 1870-1879, to 264,869; but the highest figures, no less than 1,020,907, were reached between 1880 and 1889. But we must confess that during this decade certain artificial means were employed to recruit the population in Europe; such means as gratuitous passages, which brought to the Argentine a number of useless people, unfitted for any productive task whatever.

During the following decade, 1890-1899, which saw the terrible banking smash and the loss of public credit, as a result of every kind of excess, the immigration diminished slightly—to 928,000 persons—and at certain moments emigration also made itself felt, in such proportions that it amounted to a veritable exodus. The departure of those who failed to make money in the Argentine or find the work they sought amounted to 552,172, the largest figures that have so far been recorded.

Unhappily this double stream of immigration and emigration has continued up to the present. Thus, in 1900-1904, 601,682 immigrants entered the country; but, on the other hand, 384,000 emigrants left it. Such figures as these denote a grave disorder in the assimilative faculty of a nation. Matters were no better in the three years 1905-1907, since although 781,796 immigrants entered from Europe and from Montevideo, 324,687 emigrants left during the same period, leaving a total of only 457,108 in three years.

In the previous period, from 1900-1904, the diminution of the current of immigration was explained by various causes: in the first place, by bad harvests, the suspension of important public and private undertakings, the fear of war over the frontier question, the dearness of living, the difficulties experienced by the immigrant in settling in the national or private colonies: the excessive price of land and the high rents in the more promising agricultural districts, the insecurity of life for man and beast, the abuses of the authorities, especially in districts remote from the centres of population, and the tardy, costly, and faulty nature of justice.

But since this period many of these causes have disappeared, thanks to the splendid harvests of the last few years, and to the period of rapid economic expansion upon which the Republic has entered. It is difficult, under these conditions, to explain the still existing lack of immigration, which denotes a disorder of the assimilative faculties of the country.

Among the causes likely to prevent immigration there is one which must not be too closely insisted upon: the increasing cost of living. But it is the European mode of

life that is dear, while in the country districts existence costs next to nothing, as the colonist himself produces practically every alimentary necessity.

We must also note that every year numbers of harvesters arrive from Europe, earn good wages, save money, and return to their native countries directly after the harvest.

In 1905, 1906 and 1907 the migratory movement was represented, as we have seen, by 781,795 immigrants and 324,687 emigrants. If we allow that each of these latter took away with him a sum of £30, as the Department of Immigration has calculated, it follows that from this cause alone nearly £10,000,000 left the country during this period of three years.

Here are some figures taken from an official publication dealing with the migratory movement, which relate both to immigration and emigration, and show which European countries have chiefly contributed to the current of immigration. Italy and Spain, as will be seen, furnish the greatest number of immigrants.

Immigration and Emigration.

Year.Immigrants.Emigrants.Excess in favour
of Immigration.
1904125,56738,92386,644
1905177,11742,869134,248
1906252,53660,124192,412
1907209,10390,190118,913
1908255,71085,412170,298

Immigration from 1857 to 1908.

Italians1,799,423
Spaniards795,243
French188,316
English42,765
Austro-Hungarians59,800
Germans40,655
Swiss28,344
Belgians20,668
Other Nationalities203,242
————
Total3,178,456

As we have already observed, one of the causes which impede emigration is to be found in the faulty distribution of the soil, the obstacles which the agricultural immigrant

has to surmount before he can become the proprietor of even a scrap of ground; and in the lack of serious attempts at colonisation, which would provide the cultivator with the means of working his holding and finally of becoming its proprietor. “How many immigrants,” says Señor Girola, “coming to this country with the idea of buying a little piece of land, have been forced to abandon their dream, on account of the difficulties put in the way of their obtaining the desired holding!”[34]

[34] Investigacion agricola, 1904, Carlos D. Girola.

Far from encouraging the promotion of a class of small land-owners, the State has assisted in the establishment of enormous holdings, which are the chief obstacle to the peopling of the country. In place of dividing into small allotments, accessible to modest fortunes, the great stretches of land near the railways or the ports, and offering them for sale at low prices in the European communities from which a number of immigrants come each year, as is done by the United States, Australia, and Canada, the Argentine administration has subjected all the operations of purchase to long and wearisome formalities which quickly exhaust both the savings and the patience of the purchaser.

Argentina, then, if she wishes to solve this vital problem of colonisation, which is for her the problem of immigration, must give careful thought to the adoption of some well-devised scheme, with the object of subdividing the present great parcels of land, and of attaching the agriculturalist to the land he tills, by allowing him to become its owner. Without this necessary reform, the country will continue to experience the phenomenon of temporary immigration; the immigration of men who return to their own countries as soon as they have been able to save a little money: a process exceedingly prejudicial to the best interests of the country.