During the civil wars, the diminishing influences indicated in the reverse of this statement were at work with an intensity unequalled in any other period of our modern history, so that there can be no doubt that our then "unhappy divisions" did most materially retard the numerical increase of the population, as well as the progress of science and the useful arts. Such is the inevitable consequence of war: of civil war in a tenfold degree. And our parish register books, all of which I doubt not show similar facts, place this in the most unfavourable light; for, through the spread of nonconformity, the unsettled state of the times, and the substitution during the protectorate of the registration of births which might or might not be communicated to the elected parish register, for that of baptisms which the parish priest would both celebrate and register, the names of very many of those born into the world would be altogether omitted from these records. It may be interesting to show the effects of some of these causes by the subjoined extracts from the registers themselves, which I transcribe from the Chronicon Mirabile of the late Sir Cuthbert Sharpe.—(Vide pp. 17. 18. 22. 23. 70. 121. and 156.)
Staindrop, Durham.—"1644. From this time to 1646, through want of a Minister, and carelessness of ye Cleark, during ye wars, much of ye Register is lost, only here and there a name registered."
"1652. June 14. Mem. From this time till August there was noe Minister, soe that ye children were carried to other parishes to be baptized."
St. Helen's Aukland, Durham, A.D. 1633.—"Mr. John Vaux, our minister, was suspended.... Mr. Robert Cowper, of Durham, served in his place, and left out divers christenings unrecorded, and regestered others disorderly."
Gainford, Durham.—"Courteous Reader, this is to let thee understand that many children were left unrecorded or redgestered, but the reason and cause was this; some would and some would not, being of a fickle condition, as the time was then; this being their end and aim, to save a groate from the poor Clarke, so they would rather have them unredgestered—but now ... it is their design to have them redgestered."
Lowestoft, Suffolk, 1644 ... "For some time following there was in this Town neither Minister nor Clarke, but the inhabitants were inforced to procure now one and then another to baptize their children, by which means there was no Register kept, only those few hereafter mentioned weare by myself baptized in those intervalls when I enjoyed my freedom."
Hexham, Northumberland, c. 1655.—"Note y't Mr. Will. Lister, Minister of S't. John Lees in those distracted times, did both marry and baptize all that made ther application to him, for w'ch he was sometimes severely threatened by y'e souldiers, and had once a cockt pistoll held to his breest, &c., so y't its no wond'r y't y'e Registers for these times are so imperfect, and besides, they are extremely confused."
In the Preface to the Enumeration Abstract of the Census of 1841, pp. 34-37., your correspondent will find information and statistics relative to the estimated population of England and Wales, 1570-1750, compiled from the parish registers, and—
"calculated on the supposition, that the registered baptisms, burials, and marriages, on an average of three years, in 1570, 1600, 1630, 1670, 1700, and 1750, bore the same proportion to the actual population as in the year 1801."
From the Table, pp. 36, 37, it appears, that whilst the population (estimated) in the thirty years 1600-1630 increased upwards of 16 percent., in the forty years 1630-1670 it increased a mere trifle over 3 per cent. only. In no fewer than twenty English counties, the population, estimated as before, was absolutely less in 1670 than in 1630; and in Kent, the county in which Chart is situate, the decrease is striking: population of Kent in 1630, 189,212; in 1670, 167,398; in 1700, 157,833; in 1750, 181,267; and in 1801, the enumerated population was 307,624.
Your correspondent might also find it useful to consult Sir William Petty's Political Arithmetic, the various documents compiled at the different censuses, and the Reports of the Registrar-General.
ARUN.
PARISH REGISTER STATISTICS.—CHART, KENT.
Your correspondent "E.R.J.H." (No. 21. p. 330.) inquires whether any general statistical returns, compiled from our early parish registers, have been published. It must be a matter of regret to all who are acquainted with the value of these national records—which for extent and antiquity are unequalled in any other country—that this question cannot be answered affirmatively. By the exertions of the late Mr. Rickman, their importance, in a statistical point of view, has been shown, but only to a very limited extent. In 1801, being entrusted with the duty of collecting and arranging the returns of the first actual enumeration of the population, he obtained from the clergyman of each parish a statement of the number of baptisms and burials recorded in the register book in every tenth year from 1700, and of marriages in every consecutive year from 1754, when the Marriage Act of George II. took effect. The results were published with the census returns of 1801; but, instead of each parish being separately shown, only the totals of the hundreds and similar county divisions, and of a few principal towns, were given. In subsequent "Parish Register Abstracts" down to that of 1841, the same meagre information has been afforded by an adherence to this generalising system.