The corrections applicable to the returns of males could not be even approximately determined without taking into account the effects of emigration upon the numbers of that sex. And as the rates of mortality are subject to considerable variation, year by year, I came to the conclusion that more reliable results must be sought by the aid of—

(1) Estimates of the numbers of the recorded deaths which happened amongst persons born in each quinquennial period. [6]

(2) A computed allowance for unregistered births in excess of the unregistered deaths of infants.

(3) Estimates of the loss or gain of population through migrations at each age.

Table III exhibits the results obtained by computing the first and second of these elements, and showing the remaining difference between the two sets of census figures, as the combined result of migrations and errors.

On examining this table, I thought it extremely probable that the numbers of deaths at high ages were exaggerated, because I know of no reason for supposing that the census numbers at such ages are less than the truth; and if they are equal to or more than the real numbers of the living, we are compelled to conclude either that there is a considerable immigration of old people, or, what seems much more compatible with such knowledge as we possess, a tendency exists to exaggerate the ages both of the living and the dying amongst those who are over seventy years old.

By the aid of the “English Life Table No. 3” it was ascertained that in a population resulting from births increasing at 1 per cent. per annum, the following numbers would represent the proportions of persons living and dying at high ages:—

Ages.

Living.

Ages.

Living.

Proportion of theformer to the latter.

Males.

Fem’l’s.

Males.

Fem’l’s.

Males.
as 100 to

Fem’l’s.
as 100 to

75 & under 80

373054

428741

74½ & under 79

369162

420783

99.0

98.1

80 „ „ 85

174287

213540

79 ,, ,, 84

207496

250662

119.1

117.4

85 „ „ 90

59641

79253

84 „ „ 89

76091

99340

127.6

125.3

90 ,, ,, 95

13652

20037

89 „ „ 94

19023

27331

139.3

136.4

95 „ „ 100

1887

3119

94 „ „ 99

2934

4728

155.5

151.6

100 & upwards.

145

279

99 and upwards

260

484

179.3

173.5

Ages.

Deaths.

Ages.

Deaths.

Proportion of theformer to the latter.

Males.

Fem’l’s.

Males.

Fem’l’s.

Males.
as 100 to

Fem’ls.
as 100 to

75 & under 85

78695

84957

74½ & under 84

79184

84673

100.6

99.7

85 „ „ 95

19617

24868

84 „ „ 94

24024

29893

122.5

120.2

95 & upwards

932

1476

94 and upwards

1393

2152

149.5

145.8

From the above table it may be deduced that, supposing persons aged 71–75 call themselves (or are described as being) on an average six months older than their true age, and if after 75 the exaggeration averages an entire year, a very great impression must be thereby made upon the returns.

Having arrived thus far, I thought it would be convenient in the first instance to try whether these suggestions, which I imagine will be deemed moderate and probable, would suffice to explain the apparent influx of aged persons, shown in Table III; and whether other suppositions, not less reasonable, would serve to overcome the remaining difficulties which appear on the face of that table.