In like manner the Gentleman reasons very inaccurately about his second division, containing the lesser market and country towns, having supposed in them 200,000 taxed houses: For from one instance of the market town of Langborne, having found the whole number of houses to be to the cottages as 445 to 229, or the rated homes to the cottages as 216 to 229, he supposes the like proportion in all the market towns. That is, tho' there be perhaps above 300 market towns in England, he supposes each of them has the same proportion of the poor in it as the single town of Langborne; which is unreasonable to imagine. For every one of them may have a different proportion, according to the various circumstances of their trade and situation. But yet from this strange and uncertain way of reasoning, without any induction, and from one instance among 300 cases at least, he concludes by proportion, that there are 388,646 houses in the country market towns, of which there are 188,646 cottages, besides those in the cities and great towns.
In the next place, as to his third class, the cities and great towns, he allows, that my proportion may be among them, viz. that the rated houses are to the cottages as 690,000 to 200,000, or 69 to 20: For he thinks, that it cannot be any-where but in the most flourishing places. And therefore, as he has arbitrarily placed 260,000 taxed houses in them, he computes that they must contain 84,058 cottages. But he has given no proof, that my proportion is only in the most flourishing places, besides these few instances that he has produced; which are nothing to form any general conclusion upon. For if we were to be directed by a few cases, we might think that there were much fewer cottages than I have allowed. There are some parishes, in which there are none at all. In the great parishes of St. James's and St George's Westminster, in which there are about 7000 houses, there are none: in the country parish of Chiselherst in Kent, where there are above 100 houses, there are but three: and in many parishes there is not one in 20. So that from particular instances, there is nothing to be concluded. But in all Middlesex, London, Westminster, and Southwark included, in which the poor are as numerous as in most places in the kingdom, because of the numbers of labouring people that flock hither for imployment, there is nearly the same proportion that I have assigned. For from a late survey in that district, as I am informed, there are 87,614 houses in the whole, and of these 19,324 cottages, and 4810 empty. Which indeed shews, that we are not so populous, in and near the metropolis, as is commonly supposed, and much less than I had calculated in my first letter: For from this account, if it be true, there are not above 530,000 people in that compass; of which, within the bills of mortality, there die about 25,000 yearly; that is, not less than one in 20.
As to what the Gentleman mentions concerning the militia, he seems to be much mistaken. For if the proportion be as he says, that one in 45 is levied, this directly proves the number of people in England and Wales to be about five millions and an half, according to my calculation; because the electors or balloters are the fencible men, or those able to carry arms. And if the whole levy be 32,000, then 45 multiplied by 32,000 will give 1,440,000 for all the fencible men in England. But Dr. Halley has clearly shewn, that the fencible men are one quarter of the whole people, children included; and therefore, four times 1,440,000, or 5,760,000, will be the whole number of the people; which is nearly what I have made them.
And thus, having seen how he has established his numbers in opposition to me, let us now, in the next place, consider what he has said with regard to the increase of our people. He says, whether the kingdom is really in a declining or increasing state, is a problem not to be solved by calculation: And yet he himself can guess by appearances, that it has greatly increased within these 40 years. But, by his good leave I must tell him, that it is a problem in political arithmetic to be solved from some data, as well as others. If the number of people be nearly found, and the general proportion of births to burials, at an average, thro' the kingdom be known, with the annual losses of our fencible men, at a moderate computation; from these data, I say, any one, who understands numbers, will easily determine whether we are increasing or decreasing. And accordingly, I have shewn, that the annual increment of our fencible men is not much above 8000, which number is consumed by our annual losses; and therefore we are not in an increasing state. For the whole number of people must always be in proportion to the fencible men; so that, if there is no increase of them, there can be none upon the whole.
It is true, I am the first who ventured upon a solution of this question; but when I consider what I have done, I cannot see but that the principles upon which I reasoned are right. The data are, I think, exact enough to discover our state. And Dr. Halley's rule to compute the fencible men, where our losses are to be reckoned, is undoubtedly true. So that if there is any difficulty, it is in fixing the general proportion between births and burials, thro' the kingdom, viz. 112 to 100; which I have taken from Dr. Derham, who had collected many observations; being a greater proportion than Sir William Petty allowed. And which if it is thought too small, it is to be considered, that within the bills of mortality the births are much under the burials as 4 to 5; and in some of the great towns there are fewer births than burials, and in others they are nearly equal; so that these reduce the proportion that arises from the villages and open country.
But if we were to make a calculation from the births and burials, only in the villages and open country; which Dr. Derham has found to be at an average as 117 to 100, or nearly as 7 to 6; and suppose this to obtain all over Britain and Ireland, in the towns as well as the country, which is surely more than the truth; we shall then find, that the annual increment cannot be more than 9000 fencible men; which corroborates my former estimate. For, to compute it by the principles I have formerly endeavoured to establish; let the number of our people in Britain and Ireland be eight millions and an half, that is, five and an half in England and three millions in Scotland and Ireland; because some Irish Gentlemen have assured me, from some facts, that there is half a million more in their country than I formerly allowed; for I did not pretend to calculate them; and then the annual number of the dead, in Britain and Ireland, being one in 40, will be about 212,500; which will be to the births as, 100 to 117: And therefore the births must be 248,625, and the increase 36,125; of which the fourth part is about 9000 for the fencible men, which I am persuaded is more than the real number.
Now let any one compute our losses in the moderate way that I have done, and he will easily see, that they cannot be less than this number; and consequently we are far from increasing. And indeed it is evident from the number of empty houses thro' the kingdom, mentioned above, viz. one in seventeen, or 58,000, and one in twelve of those that are taxed within the bills of mortality. For it is impossible, if we were increasing, that there could be so many empty; And therefore the appearance of so much building is only the effect of our luxury, requiring larger, more convenient, and more elegant houses, and not caused by our increase.
However, the Gentleman objects to all this, and says, that he has examined the Registers of some neighbouring parishes, and particularly of three that are perfect; and he finds, that the burials are to the baptisms as 83 to 149; which may possibly be the case, as I myself have known it in one parish in the Isle of Wight, where the place is healthy, and people generally marry. But does he imagine that this proportion is general all over England? If so, we should increase in a rapid manner indeed! for then we should double our people in 35 years, if it were not for our losses; which no reasonable man will venture to say. He does not reflect, that in many country places, from their bad situation, there is very little increase, and in some towns none at all, and in others a decrease, continually supplied from the neighbouring country. Within the bills of mortality there are annually 5000 burials more than the births; and consequently, to maintain our numbers here, there must be a yearly supply of 5000; which destroys the whole increase of six or seven counties. And Dr. Derham found, from the accounts he had of country parishes, that in general among them the proportion of births to burials was not greater than 117 to 100, as we mentioned above; so that nothing can be concluded from particular healthy places. The question is, what is the result upon the whole thro' the kingdom? what is the general proportion of the births to burials, from which the increase is to be estimated? and which Sir William Petty says is 111 to 100, and Dr. Derham as 112 to 100. See if he can disprove these numbers by putting together all the different accounts from every corner, among the towns as well as the country; and if he cannot, to argue only from a few instances is nothing to the purpose; for where there is a multitude of different cases, they must all be considered, to arrive at the general truth. But even in the particulars he mentions, he has not completed his argument; for, to make it conclusive, he should have shewn, that, within these last forty years, the time, he thinks, of our great increase, in those parishes the number of houses or people were increased, in proportion almost as the births were above the burials, as 149 to 83: and if that cannot be made to appear, it is plain, that, for all he has said, the annual increase may be constantly consumed by our losses.
And now the worthy Gentleman having endeavoured to shew, from the case of a few parishes in the country, that we are in an increasing state, he proceeds to give me his serious advice in two particulars:
First, That I would reconsider a proposition advanced by me, That all reasonable ways of increasing our people, even to the naturalizing of foreigners, would be for the public welfare. In answer to which kind admonition I must say, that I have often considered the thing, as far as I can; and I think this may be easily shewn against any political writer. That it is the interest of a government, when they have powerful and dangerous neighbours, to increase their people by all reasonable means, even to the inviting of foreigners, so far as the natural produce of the country can sustain them; and that it is the fault or weakness of an administration not to be able to employ them. And in Britain, where they can have the assistance of the produce of so many large and fruitful countries of their own in America, I will venture to say, that it is an error in their policy, not to endeavour to increase their people; by which they might be more formidable, and perhaps stronger than their grand Enemy. The present King of Prussia has shewn the utility of this within his dominions; by which he has been enabled to make such a figure in Europe.