1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Ohio

OHIO (see ). In 1920 Ohio still held the fourth place among the states of the American Union, with a pop. of 5,759,394, an increase of 992,279 or 20.8% for the decade 1910-20. This was the largest rate of increase since the Civil War. The density of pop. rose from 102.1 per sq. m. in 1900, to 117 in 1910, and 141.4 in 1920. There was a marked increase in the negro pop. of the cities by migration from the far South, and of the foreign element from other states and from abroad. More significant was the drift from rural districts to cities. In 1900 the urban pop. in cities and incorporated villages of 2,500 inhabitants or more formed 48.1% of the total, in 1910 55.9% and in 1920 63.8 per cent. Virtually two-thirds of the people of Ohio in 1920 lived in urban communities. The largest change was in the strictly rural, that is, unincorporated territory. Each successive decade since 1900 has shown an absolute decline in the rural population. The number of cities containing more than 25,000 inhabitants increased (1910-20) from 14 to 22, of those of more than 100,000 from five to seven.

The following table shows the pop. and percentages of increase of all cities of over 30,000 inhabitants:&mdash;

(1919)

(U.S. Census Reports)

History.—The chief political advance in the decade 1910-20 was the progress in adapting the constitution and the system of administration to the new needs of the state.

More significant of the purpose to adapt state government to the needs of the time is the legislative history. In 1909 Ohio had the customary administrative system composed of special boards, commissioners, bureaus and departments created to meet special problems as the Legislature had recognized them, but with overlapping jurisdiction and uncertain responsibility. In hardly any respect was the state service adequate or modern. In charge of the charitable and penal institutions, for example, were 18 or 19 separate boards, competing for support, maintaining as many accounting systems, failing wholly in coordination. Successive Legislatures took up during the following decade the problem of reorganization. For a time, chiefly during the years 1909-15, the legislators seemed to be working towards a commission type of administrative organization. Then followed a period of hesitation in which party politics interfered with progress, 1915-7. The third stage of opinion, following 1917, strongly favoured a single executive officer, appointed by the governor.