Fifty-ninth street; and in them the increase is 32,110. Apparently more than seventy per cent. of the growth of New York during the past four years has been north of Fifty-ninth street. Not only must this comparatively fixed condition of New York below Fifty-ninth street remain or become more and more marked, but the line of division between the growing and the fixed parts of the city must rapidly shift from Fifty-ninth street to One Hundred and Tenth street. For of the area between Fifty-ninth street and One Hundred and Tenth street a substantial part is devoted to Central Park, and is unavailable for residences. Furthermore, the presence of Central Park causes land east and west of it to be much sought after, and to command high prices. That part of New York, therefore, which lies between Fifty-ninth street and One Hundred and Tenth street is to be largely taken by people whose means are abundant, and of the space not already occupied, but a small part will be left for the sort of population from which Brooklyn draws its chief and characteristic growth.

How far existing conditions may be disturbed by new means of transit or by new works of life in New York City, no one can now tell. At present, the broad fact is, that the whole area of Brooklyn (excepting only the more remote parts of the Twenty-sixth Ward, the former town of New Lots) is nearer in distance to the New York City Hall than that part of New York City lying above One Hundred and Tenth street.

Furthermore, the residence area lying between Fifty-ninth and One Hundred and Tenth streets in New York is not one-seventh of that lying between lines of like distance in Kings County.

To attempt a close estimate of the future population of New York and Brooklyn might be neither wise nor profitable. Some conception of the general course or character of that development is the most that is practicable. All nineteenth century progress discloses a tendency to concentration of population. In our own country the inhabitants of cities formed one-thirtieth of the population in 1790; one-eighth in 1850; and nine-fortieths or half way between one-fifth and one-fourth in 1880. In this State a full one-half of the population dwelt in cities in 1880. The proportion now is not less than three-fifths, and is rapidly approaching, if it has not already reached, five-eighths.

The population of the Union since 1820 has increased at a rate varying by decades from over 35 per cent. to 22.65 per cent. The lowest rate was that of the war decade. The rate per decade since 1870 has been more than 30 per cent. The population of the cities of New York and Brooklyn has at all times increased more rapidly than that of the nation. This was true even during the war decade, although the marked falling off of their rate of growth in that decade disclosed a decided sensitiveness to whatever influences accelerated or retarded national growth. New York and Brooklyn, indeed, have at all times shown by their rate and character of progress and growth that they are reflections of the development of the nation rather than of that of any State or locality. We may, therefore, safely say that the growth of the united population of New York and Brooklyn hereafter, as in the past, will depend chiefly upon the general progress of the whole nation. How rapid this progress will continue, how great proportions it may finally attain can only be vaguely conjectured. Lincoln's forecast of two hundred and fifty millions of souls during the life time of people who were in existence in 1861, would seem to have been over-sanguine, although it was not without parallel or precedent. The decade between 1850 and 1860, at the close of which he was speaking, had witnessed a most rapid national growth, that is, a rate of more than thirty-five per cent. for the whole Union. Percentages decline as aggregates increase. The rate of thirty per cent. which has prevailed since 1870, would not produce two hundred and fifty millions (250,000,000) of people until after 1940. It is too much to assume that such a rate of national growth will continue. Its continuance for so long a period would involve an increase of over forty millions (40,000,000) between 1920 and 1930, and over fifty-five millions (55,000,000) between 1930 and 1940. It seems more reasonable to expect a gradual decline in the rate of increase, and that the relation between this country and Europe will more closely approach an equilibrium, accompanied or followed by a diminution of the force of immigration as a factor in our national growth. Immigration in the past has fluctuated widely. The total number of immigrants landing in this country for the whole decade closing in 1880, was less than that for the first five years of the present decade. To what degree the population of the future will dwell in cities can perhaps best be foretold by present indications in our own land, or by the conditions prevailing in more thickly settled nations. Present indications here, as has been pointed out, suggest a city growth more rapid than that of the remainder of the population. Among the older nations, the population of the British Isles may be said to resemble our own most closely. The population of Great Britain and Ireland in 1881 was thirty-five millions (35,000,000). More than one-tenth of this population was contained in London alone. Such an urban population manifestly sustains itself largely if not chiefly upon the commercial and maritime importance of the nation containing it, and only to a minor degree upon the community surrounding it. This condition of existence may never be as emphatically true of the population about the port of New York as it is of the population of London, yet it has always been believed that the final commercial position of our nation must be one of commanding importance. That belief compels the inference that the great port of the nation and of the continent must continue to attract an enormous population. That the present rate of growth, which adds 30 per cent. to the population of New York, and more than 40 per cent. to that of Brooklyn, in every ten years, will endure, need not be expected. The results of a computation upon such a basis seem incredible, since they call for a population of three million five hundred thousand (3,500,000) in New York in 1920, and of two million two hundred thousand (2,200,000) in Brooklyn at the same time. But we may well believe that in the nation there will be a gradual approach to the density of population now maintained in older countries; that this port will hold its place as a general point of concentration and distribution for the nation, the continent, perhaps for the world; and that the excess of residence area in and about our own city over the corresponding area of New York must continue to tell in our favor, probably with increasing force.

Looking back no further than 1850, and comparing the two cities with each other, the following table shows their numbers and rate of growth in the successive decades:

As the present Twenty-sixth Ward of Brooklyn was not a part of the city in 1880, a comparison of the population of Brooklyn, as the city is now constituted, with the population of the City