The first attempt to determine how great the number of immigrants was dates back to 1871 when a study by Leone Carpi was published; then, in 1874, an important paper, Dell’Emigrazione in America, was written by our fellow countryman Giovanni Florenzano. At the time he had to wait until 1876 in order to have the first look at the systematic creation of the Community statistics that were prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture. The first records that were about our region were those provided by Giovanni Florenzano, and had been taken from the statistical picture of emigration to the Neapolitan regions, extracted from L’Italia Economica. Unfortunately, however, they are divided not by cities but by districts (the province of Salerno was divided into four districts: Salerno, Campagna, Sala and Vallo della Lucania).
Therefore, we know that in 1872, 4,530 people (including women and children) emigrated from our region: 140 people (8 women and 10 children) departed from the district of Salerno, from a total population of 248,576 inhabitants; 194 (including 8 illegal immigrants) left, instead, from the district di Campagna (103,839 inhabitants); 1657 (of which 31 illegal immigrants left from the district of Vallo della Lucania (100,109 inhabitants) and 2,521 (of which 105 illegal immigrants) left from the district di Sala (86,108 inhabitants). In the first half of 1873, a total of 1,575 people left our province: 61 from the district of Salerno, 136 from Campagna, 591 from Vallo and 787 from Sala.
As it can be seen from the interpretation of the data, the greatest number of departures took place in the two districts south of the regions of (Vallo and Sala) and the explanation is simple. They were the two areas that were worse off, both from a social and economic point of view. Certainly the better one of this situation was the district of Salerno, both for the presence of the port in the capital city, and for the business of the factories located in the Valley of Irno that had employed many people.
Here is the analysis of some findings. According to the first census of the Kingdom, the population of the area was 58,649 people. From 1861 to 1911, due to the persistence of the economic depression, emigration was already happening before the Unity, and continuing with greater intensity, so much so, that the population remained just over 45,000 people, decreasing more than 23%. In Vallo di Diano the centres most affected by the decrease were Padula (with a percentage of 30%, not surprisingly defined as “the country of the Americans),” San Pietro al Tanagro (28%), Buonabitacolo (24%), San Rufo (20%) and Polla (10%).
From 1884 to 1915 almost 55,000 people emigrated from Vallo di Diano, with an annual average just over 1,400. The peak occurred in 1887 with 2,675 emigrants and the cities that were most interested in the phenomenon were Sala Consilina, Atena Lucana, Polla, Padula and Montesano. In the same period, that is from 1884 to 1915, 1,747 people left San Rufo while the greatest period was in 1896 with 101 departures.
After the halt caused by the First World War, in 1919, the migration movement resumed with an annual average of about 800 departures, with a high of 1,000 departures in 1920. During the Fascist period, the autarkic policy of the Regime and the restrictions placed on immigration by the United States of America, where in the meantime the migratory flow had shifted, recorded an increase in the population of 11,000 units in 1936 compared to 1911.
Today, emigration is on the rise. In the last 25 years about three million people have emigrated from Southern Italy. This has been pointed out by the SVIMEZ report, in the economy of Mezzogiorno, a yearly publication, published a few years ago.
At this point we can also ask ourselves if emigration has been a positive or negative thing for Italy. To answer this question, the expressions of three authoritative politicians of the time have been considered, Giovanni Camera, Giustino Fortunato and Giovanni Florenzano, who had lived at the time that the phenomenon was in full expansion.
The Honorable Chamber was very interested in emigration, and in 1910, on behalf of the President of the Council of Ministers, carried out a mission to Latin America to see in person the problems of his fellow countrymen who had left. The deputy of the Vallo di Diano had considered emigration, “a positive phenomenon, mainly from an economic point of view because in most cases the money earned abroad was sent to the wives and children left in Italy.”
Among those who thought just like Giovanni Camera, was Giustino Fortunato, who said, ”emigration is not an artificial fact but an inescapable necessity, likewise, a great asset: the southern provinces of the mainland have to blame him for the disappearance of brigandage and the infamous trafficking of children.” Giovanni Florenzano, on the other hand, was clearly against emigration.Even before he was elected to Parliament, in 1874 Florenzano had published a book entitled, Dell’emigrazione italiana comparata alle altre emigrazioni europee: studi e proposte. On the contrary to emigration, he considered it “the loss of many strong youthful forces in agriculture.” There were never any agreements on this point of view of this subject: the bourgeoisie (the category to which the Florenzano family belonged) claimed that it was a negative fact; the peasants, on the other hand, considered emigration a positive fact because work abroad, however tiring, enabled them to live a better life.
Today, however, we have to consider that emigration is coming back: there are many of our fellow countrymen who would like to reestablish a connection with their origins, since they desire or need to return but the reason does not matter. Also, this does not completely depend on them, but even more on how we are going to welcome them.
It also depends on how strong they actually miss one’s own country, and this has been attested by a brief letter that was sent on March 18, 1931 from Atlantic City, New Jersey, by Dionigi Lorenzo of Roscigno, to the country’s mayor, Dr. Silvio Resciniti. What had happened? Since the war memorial had to be built, the Podestà turned to the Roscignoli of America to ask for a substantial sending of dollars. Dionigi Lorenzo replied as follows: “Dear D. Silvio, answering your two letters, the description and the contract of the Lagana company – Naples. Everything is well like the letters of the small changes say and not that the contract will shorten. I will listen to everything // I just want to see what you know how to do by representing me, of this saying a new monument // you will build something of importance, as long as it is better than that of Bellosguardo. I no longer prolong myself from your side, you have received my sincere greetings to all of you and I am your aff.mo. Dionigi Lorenzo.” After reading this letter a very clear fact emerges: Dionigi Lorenzo had made his fortune in America but had not forgotten his own country.