| OCR Text |
Show 1932 Decreases U. S. Weddings, Divorces - Census Officials Cite Job Scarcity as Reason. Washington. Cupid has been hit by the depression, hut his bitterest enemy, divorce, has suffered even more. The bureau of the census has disclosed dis-closed that the third year of the depression, de-pression, 1032, saw a sharp decrease both in marriages and divorces. The bureau gave no reasons, but officials of-ficials express their belief that unemployment, unem-ployment, reduced earning power, and lack of confidence in the immediate future were responsible. Marriages In 1932 totaled 9S1.750, the bureau reported, compared with 1,000,791 in 1031, a decrease of 7.5 per cent. The decline began In 1930 with a drop of 5.9 per cent. Divorces were 160,329 In 1932, compared com-pared with 1S3.6G4 In the previous year; the decrease was 12.7 per cent, while the 1930-'31 decline was 4.1 per cent There were In 1932, the bureau stated, 7.9 marriages for every 1,000 persons in the country's total population popu-lation of 124,822,000, as compared with S.5 In 1931 when the population was 124,070,000. At the same time, there were 1.28 divorces for every 1.000 of population in 1932, as against 1.4S in 1031. Viewing Figures by States. In arriving at the national percentage percent-age decrease in the number of weddings, wed-dings, the bureau found the declines in various states ranging from a drop of 43.5 per cent in Iowa to only 0.8 per cent In Texas. In ten states the bureau found increases in-creases in the number of marriages. These gains were attributed inferential infer-ential by the statistical census officials of-ficials to eluding stringent marriage laws by skipping across a state to the nearest parson in a more liberal neighboring state. "All ten states." the bureau said, "adjoin those in which recent changes made In the marriage laws require from three to five days to elapse between be-tween the application for a marriage license and the Issuance of the same." The ten states with the rate of their increased wedding activity were-Missouri, were-Missouri, 3.5 per cent ; South Dakota. 2.7 per cent; Nebraska, 6.6 per cent; West Virginia, 1.7 per cent; Mississippi, Missis-sippi, 5.1 per cent; Arkansas, 5.2 per cent ; Oklahoma, less than one-tenth of 1 per cent; New Mexico. 6 per cent; Arizona, 1 per cent, and Utah one-half of 1 per cent For every divorce In this country during 1932, the bureau disclosed,, there were 6.1 marriages. This represented repre-sented a distinct -gain for the marriages. mar-riages. Last year there were 5.8 weddings wed-dings for every divorce. Nevada Leads List Nevada, with its Reno, continued to-lead to-lead the list of states in the ratio-of ratio-of divorces to marriages. Nevada reported re-ported nearly as many endings as beginnings be-ginnings of married life. There were-only were-only 1.8 weddings for every divorce-in divorce-in the state. New York and the District Dis-trict of Columbia, on the other hand, reported 21.4 and 35.3 weddings for every divorce during the year. In Illinois during the year, the national na-tional slump In both marriages and divorces was reflected, although the decline in divorces was by far the heavier. Weddings In the state numbered num-bered 65,0SS, the bureau revealed, for a decrease of 9.1 per cent Divorces totaled 11,745, declining by 15.5 percent per-cent from the preceding year. There were 5.5 marriages for every divorce, and 8.4 weddings for every 1,000 of population in the state, as compared with 1.51 divorces. Wisconsin reported 14.035 marriages during the year, for a decrease of 5.1 per cent from 1931. Divorces totaled 2.35S in 4he state, declining by 10.9 per cent There were 6 marriages for every divorce and 4.7 weddings and 0.79 divorces for every 1,000 of population. popu-lation. In Indiana, marriages numbered 36,-105, 36,-105, dropping by 5.9 per cent, while divorces totaled 6.322 for a decrease of 13.1 per cent. For every divorce there were 5.7 weddings, while for every 1.000 inhabitants of the state there were 11 marriage and 1.93 divorces. |
