The proportion which their present numbers bear to the numbers of the rural population does not exceed one to six, whereas the urban population of the Atlantic border is not less than one to three of the rural. This disproportion of city and rural population will hereafter change more rapidly in favor of the interior than the Atlantic cities, because of the greater fertility of soil producing more food from an equal amount of labor; and also, by reason of the more rapid growth of the general population, of which an increasing proportion will prefer city to country life. Will it not be so? Will not the general increase of population be greater in the interior States? Will not the productions of the soil increase faster? And can there be a doubt that the large disproportion in the distribution of the population between city and country, in the interior, will be lessened, so that, instead of being, as now, only one to five or six, they will rapidly approach the proportion of one to two or three? Here, then, are the sources of superior increase so obviously true, as to need only to be stated to insure conviction.
Let us now compare the growth, for the thirty years since 1830, of the five largest Atlantic cities, with the five largest cities of the plain, and, by its side, extend the comparison to 10, 15, and 20 of the largest city of each section:
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | ||||
| New York and accessories | 235,000 | 1,170,000 | |||
| Philadelphia | " | 170,000 | 700,000 | ||
| Baltimore | " | 83,000 | 250,000 | ||
| Charleston | " | 31,000 | 60,000 | ||
| 599,000 | 2,380,000 | ||||
| Increase 4 times. | |||||
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | ||||
| Cincinnati and suburbs | 28,000 | 250,000 | |||
| New Orleans | " | 47,000 | 270,000 | ||
| St. Louis | " | 6,000 | 170,000 | ||
| Chicago | " | 100 | 150,000 | ||
| Pittsburg | " | 17,000 | 145,000 | ||
| 98,000 | 2,885,000 | ||||
| Increase 9 times. | |||||
Let us now compare the ten largest of each section.
| Atlantic. | ||||
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | |||
| The aggregate of the five largest as above | 579,000 | 2,370,000 | ||
| Providence | 17,000 | 55,000 | ||
| Lowell | 6,500 | 40,000 | ||
| Washington | 19,000 | 60,000 | ||
| Albany | 24,000 | 65,000 | ||
| Richmond | 16,000 | 35,000 | ||
| ——— | ——— | |||
| 661,000 | 2,625,000 | |||
| Increase 4 times. | ||||
| Interior. | ||||
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | |||
| Aggregate as above | 98,000 | 885,000 | ||
| Buffalo | 9,000 | 100,000 | ||
| Louisville | 10,500 | 80,000 | ||
| Milwaukee | 50 | 75,000 | ||
| Detroit | 2,000 | 80,000 | ||
| Cleveland | 1,000 | 70,000 | ||
| ——— | ——— | |||
| 120,550 | 1,290,000 | |||
| Increase 10 7-10. | ||||
Aggregate of the ten, with five more of each section added, added, to wit:
Aggregate of the fifteen, with five more added in each section:
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | |||
| Aggregate as above | 716,500 | 2,760,500 | ||
| Springfield, Mass | 7,000 | 24,000 | ||
| Worcester," | 4,500 | 24,000 | ||
| Bangor, Me. | 3,000 | 23,000 | ||
| Patterson, N. J. | 5,000 | 22,000 | ||
| Manchester, N. H. | 50 | 22,000 | ||
| ——— | ——— | |||
| 736,500 | 2,875,500 | |||
| Increase 3 8-10 times. | ||||
| 1830. | 1860 Est. | |||
| Aggregate as above | 137,250 | 1,485,000 | ||
| Dayton | 3,000 | 24,000 | ||
| Indianapolis | 1,500 | 22,000 | ||
| Toledo | 30 | 20,000 | ||
| Oswego | 3,200 | 20,000 | ||
| Quincy | 1,500 | 20,000 | ||
| ——— | ——— | |||
| 149,700 | 1,591,000 | |||
| Increase 10 6-10 times. | ||||
From the above tables, we see that the city of New York, with its neighboring dependencies, will have made in growth in thirty years, between 1830 and 1860, increasing its population 5 times. During the same period,