The population in 1810, compared with that of 1800, corrected as proposed in this chapter, implies a less rapid increase than the difference between the two enumerations; and it has further appeared that the assumed proportion of births to deaths as 47 to 29 is rather below than above the truth. Yet this proportion is quite extraordinary for a rich and well-peopled territory. It would add to the population of a country one-79th every year, and were it to continue, would, according to table ii. ch. xi. of this book, double the number of inhabitants in less than fifty-five years.

This is a rate of increase which in the nature of things cannot be permanent. It has been occasioned by the stimulus of a greatlyincreased demand for labour, combined with a greatly increased power of production, both in agriculture and manufactures. These are the two elements which form the most effective encouragement to a rapid increase of population. What has taken place is a striking illustration of the principle of population, and a proof that in spite of great towns, manufacturing occupations, and the graduallyacquired habits of an opulent and luxuriant people, if the resources of a country will admit of a rapid increase, and if these resources are so advantageously distributed as to occasion a constantly increasing demand for labour, the population will not fail to keep pace with them.

1825.

Since the publication of the last edition of this work in 1817, a third census of the population has taken place, and the results are highly worthy of our attention.

According to the enumeration in 1821, and the corrected returns of 1811 and 1801, as given in the preliminary observations to the published account by Mr Rickman, the population of Great Britain was in 1801, 10;942,646; in 1811, 12,596,803, and in 1821, 14.391,631.

These numbers taken as first stated, and including the very large numbers of males added in 1811 for the army and navy, give an increase of 15 per cent. in the ten years from 1800 to 1811, and only 141 per cent. from 1810 to 1821.1 But it is calculated that out of the 640,500 males added for the army, navy, and merchantservice, above one-third must have been Irish and foreigners. Adding therefore only 30 to the resident population in 1801 and 1811, and on account of the peace allowing only for the absent males in 1821, the population of England and Wales at the three different periods, without reference to any supposed deficiency in the first enumeration, will stand thus: in 1801, 9,168,000; in 1811, 10,502,500; and in 1821, 12,218,500, giving an increase in the interval between 1800 and 1811 of 14 per cent., and in the interval between 1810

1 Preliminary Observations, p. viii.

and 1821 of 16 per cent. The first of these two rates of increase would double the population in 51 and the other in 46 years. however there must always be some uncertainty respecting the proportion of the persons employed in the army, navy, and merchant service, properly belonging to the resident population, and as the male population is on other accounts more frequently on the move than the female, it has been judiciously proposed to estimate the rate of increase by the female population alone. The number of females in Great Britain was in 1801, 5,492,355; in 1811, 6,262,716; and in 1821, 7,253,728, giving an increase in the first period of 1402 per cent. and in the second of 15·82.1

The increase of Scotland taken by itself was in the first period 13 per cent., and in the second 143. The increase of England and Wales, exclusive of Scotland, appears to be almost exactly the same; particularly in the second period, whether we estimate it from the females alone, or from the whole population, with the proposed allowances for the army and navy, &c., a proof that these allowances are not far from the truth. At the same time it should perhaps be remarked, that if, on account of the war during the greater part of the period from 1800 to 1821, there must have been a greater portion of the male population destroyed than usual, the increase of the whole population ought not to be so great in proportion as the increase of the females; and that if such an increase appears, it is probably owing to too great a number of males having been added to the resident population for the army and navy, or to an influx from Scotland and Ireland.

The numbers above-mentioned and the rates of increase have been stated as given by Mr Rickman in the "Preliminary Observations to the Population Abstracts." But in the former part of this chapter I assumed on what appeared to me to be sufficient grounds that the first enumeration was not so correct as that of 1811, and it is probable that the enumeration of 1811 is not quite so correct as that of 1821. In this case the rates of increase in the two periods will not be so great as above stated, but still they will appear to be very extraordinary.

According to the assumed estimate the population, as given in the enumeration of 1801, was about 119,000 short of the truth; and if on this ground we take the female population of the census in 1801 as deficient 60,000, and suppose that in 1811 it was deficient 30,000, the numbers of females in England and Wales at the different periods will stand thus: In 1801, 4.687,867; in 1811, 5,313,219; and in 1821, 6,144,709; giving an increase of 13.3 per cent. in the period from 1800 to 1811, and of 156 per cent. in the period from 1800 to 1821; making the rate of increase in the former period such as, if continued, would double the population in about 55 years, and in the latter, such as would double it in 48 years. Taking the 1 Preliminary Observations, p. viii.

whole 20 years together, the rate of increase would be such as, if continued, would double the population in about 51 years.

This is no doubt a most extraordinary rate of increase, considering the actual population of the country compared with its territory, and the number of its great towns and manufactories. It is less however than that which is stated in the "Preliminary Observations to the Population Abstracts." Yet even according to this slower rate of increase it is necessary to suppose that the omissions in the parish registers, particularly in regard to the births, have latterly rather increased than diminished; and this is rendered probable by a statement of Mr Rickman in the "Preliminary Observations. He says "the question respecting unentered baptisms and burials showed a difference of nearly four to one in the degree of deficiency in the year 1811, the annual average number of unentered baptisms (as stated at the end of the several counties) having been 14,860; of burials (setting aside London) 3899; at present the proportion is five to one in the degree of deficiency, the annual average number of unentered baptisms (as stated at the end of the several counties) being 23,066; of burials (setting aside London) 4657." And he goes on to say, "Nor does this represent the full amount or proportion of unentered baptisms, the clergy of the most populous places, especially where many of the inhabitants are dissenters, usually declining to hazard an estimate." A burial-ground, on the contrary, is a visible object, and among the persons connected with it, the clergyman can usually procure an account (more or less accurate) of the number of interments.

On these grounds it would appear probable that owing to the increasing number of dissenters, or other causes, the omissions in the registers of births had been lately increasing rather than diminishing. Yet it has been thought that since the Act of 1812 the registers of births have been more carefully kept; and it is certain that in the 10 years ending with 1820, the proportion of births to marriages is greater, though the proportions of births and marriages to the whole population are both less than they were either in 1800, or in the ten years ending with 1810. Under these circumstances, it may be advisable to wait for further documents before any fresh conclusion is drawn respecting the probable amount of omissions in the births and burials. What may be considered as certain is, that whereas the supposed admissions of one-6th in the births and one-12th in the burials, with a proper allowance for the deaths abroad, are more than sufficient to account for the increase of population during the twenty years from 1781 to 1801, according to the numbers stated by Mr Rickman, they are not sufficient to account for the increase of population in the 20 years from 1801 to 1821, according to the enumerations.

I have heard it surmised that the enumerations, particularly the two last, may by possibility exceed rather than fall short of the

truth, owing to persons being reckoned more than once, from their having different places of residence. It must be allowed that this supposition would account for the fact of the diminished proportions of births and marriages to the whole population, notwithstanding the apparent increase of that population with extraordinary rapidity. But the same diminished proportions would take place owing to a diminished mortality; and as a diminished mortality has been satisfactorily established on other grounds, it will fairly account for much of what appears. And if anything can justly be attributed to over enumerations, it must be of trifling

amount.

That there are great omissions both in the births and burials, and greater in the former than in the latter, it is quite impossible to doubt. The testimony of all the clergy concerned in making the returns was, according to Mr Rickman, uniform in this respect. And if we suppose only the same proportion of omissions from 1801 to 1821 as we supposed from 1781 to 1801, and commence with the census of 1801, on the presumption that the number of double entries in that enumeration would be balanced probably by the number of deficiencies, it will appear that the excess of the births alone, excluding the deaths abroad, would bring the population to within 184,404 of the enumeration of 1821, and including the allowance for deaths abroad (which in this case, from a comparison of the excess of male births with the male and female deaths, appears to be 128,651), to within 313,055.

On the supposition of such an amount of double entries unbalanced by deficiencies in the two last returns, the enumerations would still show a very extraordinary increase of population. The rate of increase in the period from 1801 to 1811 would be nearly 13 per cent. (1288) which would double the population in about 57 years; and in the period from 1811 to 1821 it would be very nearly 15 per cent. (1495), which would double the population in 50 years.

Under the uncertainty in which we must remain at present as to whether the enumerations partially err in defect or in excess, I have not thought it advisable to alter the amended table of the population from 1781 to 1811, given in the former part of this chapter. It is founded on a principle so very much safer than an estimate for the births alone, that it must at any rate show the progress of the population more correctly than that given in the "Preliminary Observations."

The more indeed the population returns are considered, the more uncertain will appear all estimates of the past population founded on the assumptions that the proportion of the births will always be nearly the same. If the population since the year 1801 were to be estimated in the same way as Mr Rickman has estimated it before that year, it would appear that the population in 1821, instead of

being, according to the enumeration, 12,218,500, would only be 11,625,334, that is 593,166 or nearly 600,000 short of the enumeration of 1821. And the reason is that the proportion of births to the population, which, estimated in the way suggested by Mr Rickman, and without allowing for omissions, was in 1821 only as 1 to 36-58, was in 1801 as much as 1 to 34.8.

Supposing the enumerations to be correct, the varying proportions of the births (without allowance for omissions, and comparing the population at the end of each term with the average births for the five preceding years) would be for 1801 as 1 to 348, for 1811 as 1 to 353, and for 1821 as 1 to 36:58.

Similar and even greater variations will be found to take place in regard to the proportions of the marriages to the population.

In 1801 the proportion was 1 to 1222, in 1811 1 to 1266, in 1821 1 to 1311; and if, assuming that for the 20 years ending with 1820, the marriages, in which it is supposed that there are very few omissions, would remain in the same proportion to the population as in 1801, we had estimated the population by the marriages, the numbers in 1821, instead of being 12,218,500, would only have been 11,377,548, that is 840,952 short of the enumeration of 1821.

It appears then that if we can put any trust in our enumerations,1 no reliance can be placed on an estimate of past population founded on the proportions of the births, deaths, or marriages. The same causes which have operated to alter so essentially these proportions during the 20 years for which we have enumerations may have operated in an equal degree before; and it will be generally found true that the increasing healthiness of a country will not only diminish the proportions of deaths, but the proportions of births and marriages.

CHAPTER X.

OF THE CHECKS TO POPULATION IN SCOTLAND AND IRELAND.

AN examination in detail of the statistical account of Scotland would furnish numerous illustrations of the principle of population; but I have already extended this part of the work so much that I am fearful of tiring the patience of my readers, and shall therefore confine my remarks in the present instance to a few circumstances which have happened to strike me.

On account of the acknowledged omissions in the registers of births, deaths, and marriages, in most of the parishes of Scotland, few just inferences can be drawn from them. Many give extra

1 The migrations into England from Ireland and Scotland may account for some portion of the excess of the enumerations above what is warranted by the excess of the births above the deaths.