There are, however, three exceptions to this general rule that province boundaries followed those of the earlier distritos.

The first of the exceptions relates to the municipal district of Guines. When the provinces were formed Guines was divided, the western part going to Habana province, the eastern to Matanzas. The territory transferred to Matanzas province comprised the ayuntamientos of Alfonso XII, Bolondron, and Union de Reyes, as given in the census of 1887. The dividing line as given in the Gonzalez map of 1881 varies somewhat from that in the United States War Department map of 1898. As most of the territory, the status of which is uncertain, is part of a great marsh (Cienaga de Zapata) the difference between the two maps does not materially affect the statistics of population. The population of the eastern portion of the old district of Guines—the part joined to Matanzas province-was mostly, in 1861, settled in the northern part, near a line of railroad running east and west and connecting the cities of Guines and Matanzas.

The second exception relates to the district of Sancti Spiritus. When the provinces were organized this district was divided, the division line following the courses of the Jatibonico del Norte and the Jatibonico del Sur rivers. The western part was assigned to the province of Santa Clara; and the eastern part, comprising the ayuntamientos of Moron and Ciego de Avila, was included in the province of Puerto Principe. In 1861 the teritory affected was well populated.

The third exception, one of slight importance, is a change of division line which occurs in but one map. In the War Department map of 1898 the southeastern boundary of Puerto Principe, separating it from Santiago de Cuba, varies slightly from that of all the other maps examined. It follows the Jobaba River to within a few miles of its mouth, then runs due west to the Sevilla River and down that to the coast. The other maps make the boundary line follow the Jobaba River down to the coast. This also was the boundary line of the district of Puerto Principe in 1861.1 There are no towns in the narrow strip of coast in question, and the variation can have no important bearing on the population statistics. In a comparison of the population statistics of 1861 with those of 1887 care should be taken to deduct the figures of the ayuntamientos of Alfonzo XII, Bolondron, and Union de Reyes from the total population of the nine districts, including Guines, which are now comprised in the province of Habana. The population of the ayuntamientos of Moron and Ciego de Avila should likewise be deducted from the total of the six districts, including Sancti Spiritus, which are now comprised in the province of Santa Clara. In the light of the foregoing explanations and references, it becomes possible to estimate the population in 1861 of the areas included in each province under the royal decree of June 9, 1878. The population of Pinar del Rio and Santiago de Cuba in 1861 can be found by adding together the populations of four distritos gubernativos in the former case and eight in the latter. But for the other four provinces an adjustment is necessary. The population in 1887 of that part of Guines included in Matanzas province was 29,622. This, added to the population of Habana province in 1887 (451,928), gives 481,590 as the population at that time of Habana province plus the part of Guines in Matanzas. The population of that part of Guines was 6.1592 per cent of the total population, 481,590. Assuming that its population was in 1861 the same percentage of the total, the population of this part of Guines in 1861 may be estimated at 25,846. Subtracting this amount from the total population in 1861 of Habana province plus the part of Guines in Matanzas, we have 393,789 as the estimated population of Habana province in 1861.

The boundary line established in 1878 between Santa Clara and Puerto Principe provinces cuts across the district of Sancti Spiritus, and a similar method of estimating

1This difference is probably due to an error in the War Department map. So we are informed by the Cuban supervisors.

the population of the part included in the province of Puerto Principe has been followed. This part had in 1887 a population of 16,848. The population of Santa Clara in that year was 354,122. The entire area coming nearest to Santa Clara in 1861 thus had a population in 1887 of 370,970. The part lying without the province of Santa Clara had a population in 1887 4.5416 per cent of the total. Assuming that its proportion of the total population in 1861 (viz, 284,218) was the same as in 1887, the population of that region in 1861 was 12,908. Subtracting this from 284,218, we have 271,310 as the estimated population of Santa Clara in 1861. Adding it to the population of the district of Puerto Principe, we have 85,702 as the estimated population of Puerto Principe in 1861.

On these assumptions the following table has been constructed:

Estimated population of the Cuban provinces in 1861, based on the results of the censuses of 1861 and 1887.

The official Spanish publications giving the results of past censuses of Cuba are difficult to find either in libraries or in the book market. An order for them sent to Madrid was fruitless. A circular letter sent to the leading libraries in the United States was almost equally without result. The primary sources which were found available are as follows:

1. A copy of the census of 1841 in the Boston Athenæum Library,' which was kindly lent to the Congressional Library for the purposes of this study.

2. A copy of the Spanish census of 1861 in the Congressional Library at Washington.

3. A MS. copy of the Spanish census of 1877, obtained from London through the courtesy of the Royal Statistical Society, in whose library the volume is contained. 4. A copy of the Spanish census of 1887, kindly lent by the Cornell University Library.

As these are all the primary sources which have been available, recourse was necessarily had to secondary authorities. A list of past censuses of Cuba and summary of results is contained in a footnote to the German periodical, Die Bevölkerung der Erde, Volume VII, page 80. This table was sent in manuscript to the editors of that journal by the statistical section of the department of agriculture of Habana. It agrees in substance with the table found on page 92 of Mr. Robert P. Porter's Industrial Cuba, but gives more detail, classifying population both by sex and race. Even these lists, however, lengthy as they are, do not include all the censuses mentioned in the secondary authorities. The following table has been compiled from various

1 Resumen del Censo de Poblacion de la Isla de Cuba a fin del año de 1841. Habana, 1842, pp. 70.

books, and gives in chronological order the alleged census population of Cuba and the authority therefor:

To one familiar with the labor and cost of taking a genuine census the very length of the preceding list is enough to arouse distrust. That 33 censuses should have been taken in the island of Cuba in a period of less than a century and a quarter is so unlikely as to raise a strong presumption against the claim of these figures to set forth the results of independent enumerations. The weight of the presumption increases when one notices that between 1841 and 1860 ten different returns are reported that is, one about every two years.

To aid in determining the value of these figures a detailed analysis is submitted. They fall into two classes, those from official sources and those from secondary authorities. We pass over the first class and offer the following notes, gathered from various publications, upon the second class:

Census of 1768.-Humboldt says: "The earliest official enumerations of which I could learn during my stay at Habana were those made by order of the Marquis de la Torre in 1774 and 1775 and Don Luis de las Casas in 1791." Several other authorities consulted-viz, Pezuela, D'Harponville, and Delitsch-speak of the census of 1774 as the first census of the island. Furthermore, the history of Cuba between the years 1768 and 1774 offers no explanation for the loss of over 30,000 people in the course of six years. Hence it seems probable that no census of Cuba was taken in 1768.

Census of 1774 or 1775.-Although in the passage just quoted Humboldt speaks of these as two separate enumerations, yet he explains the word "enumeration" by the Spanish phrase padrones y censos, and subsequently uses the word padron alone. As this word means some form of tax list or other registration rather than a census proper,1 it seems likely that the two different results were obtained by combina

1A padron in the broadest sense is simply a roll or list. Its definition in the dictionary of the Spanish Royal Academy is "a catalogue or roll made to show by name the citizens or residents." The special meaning of the word padron is a register kept by each municipal district and containing the names, addresses, ages, and other details regarding the residents. This list was usually under the charge of the police

tion of a single count with registration returns, if indeed any independent count was taken. The very slight differences between the figures returned for 1774 and the three reports for 1775 support this hypothesis. The figures, 171,626, given by Humboldt in one place, and those given by Pezuela (172,620) in his article on population,1 are clearly but variant forms of the 171,620 given by two other authorities as the result of the census of 1774. Humboldt also says regarding this census: "I can not answer for the correctness of the table quoted from the census of 1775, for I have not seen the official documents." Without attempting to reproduce all the minor discrepancies between the several authorities, the following further analysis of the figures for 1774 may be given: Whites, 96,440; colored, 75,180. The whites are classified as 55,576 males and 40,864 females. The colored are classified into 30,847 free and 44,333 slaves. The free are classified into 11,640 negroes and 19,207 mulattoes. At this time also, according to Pezuela, there were 29,588 occupied dwellings, not counting 90 churches, 52 parochial houses, 20 monasteries, 3 nunneries, 2 colleges, and 19 hospitals.

Census of 1787.-No important reference has been found to this census except in the authority cited in the table. The other authorities generally refer to the count of 1791-92 as the second census of Cuba. The figures themselves, too, arouse distrust by stating that the population of Cuba increased only about 5,000 in the twelve years from 1775 to 1787, and then increased 96,000 in the next five years. Hence the figures of 1787 must be set down as an estimate.

Census of 1791 or 1792.-The date of this census is given as 1791 by Humboldt, but as 1792 by nearly all other authorities. Delitsch in his excellent article on Cuba 2 states that the official enumerations are inaccurate and the results given by the various authorities differ. As an example he cites the case of the census of 1792, for which he gives, from different authorities not mentioned, the five figures reprinted in the preceding table, one of which agrees exactly with Humboldt's figures for 1791. The latter authority says of the second census of Cuba: "In 1804 I discussed the census of 1791 with persons who had great local knowledge. We sought to estimate the amount of the omissions by making comparisons of the several parts, and it appeared to us as a result that the population of Cuba in 1791 could not have been less than 362,700”—that is, that the census understated the true population by about 25 per cent. This population in 1792 is divided by Behm and Wagner into the following classes: Whites, 133,533; colored, 140,386. The whites are divided into 72,209 males and 61,254 females. The colored are divided into 55,930 free and 84,456 slaves. On the other hand, Pezuela divides a substantially identical total, viz, 272,301, into 82,299 white males, 71,260 white females, 15,845 free mulatto males, 18,040 free mulatto females, 9,366 free negro males, 10,900 free negro females, 5,769 slave mulatto males, 6,366 slave mulatto females, 41,955 slave negro males, and 10,500 slave negro females.

and was used for purposes of taxation. The law of 1878 required the register or padron to be corrected every alternate year. It seems probable that the earlier Cuban law was similar, and that a large majority of the alleged census returns contained in the preceding list (p. 703) were derived from these police tax lists. The care and accuracy with which such lists would be kept would differ with the strictness of supervision exercised by the authorities in Habana and with the efficiency of local officers.

1 In his Diccionario de la Isla de Cuba, see p. 729, infra.

2 In Wappäus-Stein, Handbuch der Geographie und Statistik, seventh edition, volume 1, pp. 1870-1917. See especially page 1876.

The following table brings the classification of the Cuban population in 1792 by these two authorities side by side:

One who examines carefully these two alleged census returns can scarcely escape the inference that they are diverse traditions of a single original. Whether the main variation between 1866, when Pezuela's figures were published, and 1882, when those of Behm and Wagner appeared, whereby 20,000 whites, half male and half female, were transferred bodily to the ranks of the negro slaves, was due to accident or design, is immaterial to the purpose here. In any case the conclusion seems warranted that very little weight is to be given to these figures.

Censuses of 1804 and 1810.-These returns, both total and in detail, bear evidence of being mere estimates. For each alleged census Behm and Wagner give six figures. For 1804 everyone of these figures is a round number of thousands, and for 1810 four out of six are so. This internal evidence that they are estimates and not actual counts is confirmed by the following explanation given by Pezuela (see p. 730) of the manner in which the estimate of 1810 or 1811 was made:

"By the aid of the partial registry rolls, Don Francisco Arango y Parreno compiled some notes in reference to the long interval between 1792 and 1817. According to his figures the population of the jurisdiction of Habana in 1810 was not less than 161,000 whites, 42,000 free colored, and 147,000 slaves, which represented a total of 350,000 inhabitants for the western part of Cuba. He calculated that in the eastern part, Santiago de Cuba, there were 40,000 whites, 38,000 free colored, and 32,000 slaves, making a total of 110,000 inhabitants. Seventy thousand more were found in the territory of Puerto Principe alone, including 38,000 whites, 14,000 free colored, and 18,000 slaves. In the territory of the four towns he estimated that there were 35,000 whites, 20,000 free colored, and 15,000 slaves, making a total of 70,000 inhabitants. These notes made by Arango were published July 20, 1811, by the secretary of the consulate, Don Antonio Valle Hernandez, for the use of the board of instruction. They showed an entire population of 600,000."

This explanation proves that the figures of 1810 and 1811 can not claim to rest upon an independent count, and in the light of Pezuela's further statement that no census was published between 1792 and 1817 the alleged census of 1804 is also to be rejected.

Census of 1817.-Humboldt says that the census of 1817 "is doubtless less imperfect than that of 1791. However, it, too, was an undercount, due to fear aroused in the people by an undertaking which is commonly regarded as a disastrous forerunner of new taxes. Furthermore, the provincial deputation in transmitting the results to Madrid felt bound to make two modifications: They added 32,641 whites, transient traders and ships' crews, who were in Cuba on business, and 25,976 African negroes imported during the year 1817. By this means the provincial deputation swelled the total to 630,980."

24662- -45