shewn that the later divisions were still more prolific than the former ones, and even the last than the first; at least, as it respects permanent increase. Indeed, it is singular that the last-mentioned year, the thirtysecond, is, of all I have in my original table, the most prolific. But this, I repeat, it is unnecessary to do; no man contemplates so atrocious a proposition as that of carrying the preventive check to any such lengths; and if he did, the folly of the attempt would be abundantly sufficient to counteract it.

(21) But it is evidently impracticable for me to present the facts in detail, upon which the last proof of the principle at issue is founded, as to do so would be, in effect, to publish a remodelled record of the peerage of the kingdom; and as some, perhaps, may be disposed to doubt either the accuracy or fidelity with which I have presented the results, which I have deduced from my own careful examination of that voluminous public record, I shall dwell no further on the demonstration, conclusive as it is to myself, but proceed to an appeal, of a nature far more public and general, with which I shall close the inquiry; though by so doing I shall, in some measure, forestall a part of the argument which has, hereafter, to be pursued more into particulars.

(22) I need not premise that the prevalence of the preventive check, in the same country, is, generally speaking, sufficiently indicated by the proportion of the marriages to the population; and that where these are more numerous, they are, unquestionably, more early also. The following table, then, which is only a short synopsis of others, which will follow in their proper place, including, as it does, all the countries where the facts necessary for the determination of the question are known, will finally settle the question.

TABLE XLVII.

SHEWING THE EFFECT OF THE "PREVENTIVE CHECK" ON THE FECUNDITY OF MARRIAGES IN ENGLAND, BOTH IN TOWNS AND THE COUNTRY AT LARGE: ALSO IN FRANCE, PRUSSIA, AND THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS.

(23) Thus is it, that arithmetic decides, touching "the preventive check," which has been put forth as the redeeming feature of a system that, with equal ignorance and presumption, pronounces on the redundancy of human beings, and teaches, that this hateful expedient is the sole redress of the wrongs which Nature otherwise would inevitably inflict upon her offspring. It is difficult to say, whether the folly, the cruelty, or the crime of acting upon such a notion would be the most conspicuous.

284

CHAPTER XVIII.

OF THE COMPARATIVE CORRECTNESS OF REGISTERS, AND ON THE CONTINUATION OF THAT INCREASE IN POPU

LATION WHICH THEY AT PRESENT INDICATE.

(1) BEFORE Concluding this exposition of the numerical errors on which the modern theory of population is mainly founded, a few words are due to the examination of those rates of increase which have been deduced from the censuses of different countries during the present century, since the commencement of which this branch of national statistics has been generally attended to. Circumstances have existed, which have been insufficiently noticed, affecting the correctness of these deductions; and others during the same period have also occurred, fatal to the accuracy of all computations which extend to successive periods in any country the rate of increase that seems to have taken place during this: I mean circumstances totally unconnected with that law of population about to be developed, and which will prove that such calculations are directly contrary to the immutably established laws of Nature. I shall confine my observations to this country, and if they are true, they are equally applicable to all others.

(2) To advert then to the three censuses of this country, in the years 1801, 1811, and 1821. The first was unquestionably deficient, and among other reasons for this in particular, because no inconsiderable proportion of the people regarded the measure as, in one way or other, preparatory to some further fiscal,

or military regulation. Its deficiency, however, has been, in some degree, supplied by Mr. Rickman, whose talents and industry, displayed in arranging and publishing our censuses, considering their nature, are beyond all praise. The succeeding one of 1811 would probably be less incorrect; but still, the former suspicions could not have been yet entirely allayed, the country remained under similar circumstances, being still at war, and subject to increasing imposts. The third, and last, was doubtless the least deficient, as it is in the nature of these enumerations to become the more complete the oftener they are taken, and as the altered circumstances of the nation had completely allayed those apprehensions, which, however groundless, I well remember to have been prevalent.

(3) Now, if the preceding statements are correct, and there was a deficiency in the amount of the first census, and also in the second, though considerably reduced, but in the third, if the numbers may be considered complete, as Mr. Rickman shews was in all probability the case, it follows, of course, as an arithmetical fact, that the rate of increase in the population in both periods, as calculated on the apparent numbers at the commencement and termination of each, has been overstated, and the calculation necessarily errs in excess, by the difference which the proper rectification of the foregoing censuses would create. I conceive this fact is too clear to need exemplification; I will therefore proceed to substantiate the assumption on which it is founded, by something more convincing than general admissions, however reasonable; confining the proof to an examination of the two last censuses, and to the female divisions of each, in order to obviate any objections that might be grounded on

circumstances which have doubtless occasioned, in the interim, great fluctuation in the male part of the pulation.

po

(4) The total number of females, of all ages, returned as in existence in the census of 1811, was 4,963,064; those in that of 1821, 5,777,758; exhibiting, therefore, an increase during the interval, of 16.42 per centum. The last I hold to have been sufficiently, and perhaps almost precisely accurate; but that the former was deficient, and consequently that no such increase occurred during the interim, and I prove it thus the survivors of the whole of the population of 1811 would be, in 1821, ten years of age, and upwards. In the last census the sexes are further divided into ages, and of the age of ten and upwards, I find there are 3,659,757 out of the 5.021,563, being the whole amount so discriminated. But the whole number of females, as before stated, was 5,777,758, leaving 756,195 therefore as unclassed. Now, admitting that this deficiency was proportionate throughout all the classes of the census (and to suppose otherwise, would still further aid the conclusion at which I aim, as the enumerations were less likely to be defective in the adult than in the infant population,) and then the proportion above ten years of age of these 756,195 would be 551,121, which, added to the 3,659,757 actually enumerated, make in all 4,210,876 out of the 5,777,758 ten years old and upwards, and consequently the survivors of the 4,963,064 females of all ages existing in 1811.

(5) But this is impossible. Out of 4,963,064, a large number of whom must, of course, have been children, and a due proportion of the rest at an advanced age, 4,210,576 could not have been in existence ten years afterwards. In that case 752,488 only