be flated at a million. Five perfons to a houfe is too large an allowance, as appears from the accounts in page 6, &c. It follows, therefore, that the number of inhabitants in England and Wales must be short of five millions.

In the kingdom of Sweden the number of inhabitants was 2,446,394, in 1763.-In the kingdom of Naples (one of the two Sicilies) it was 4,311,503, in 1777.-In all France, 25,741,320, in 1772.

Thefe facts fhew, in a ftriking light, the fuperiority which arts, commerce, fcience, induftry, and liberty give to a people, England does not confift of many more inhabitants than the kingdom of Naples; but in refpect of dignity, weight, and force, the kingdom of Naples, compared with it, is nothing. Not long ago, this little island, with its dependencies, like the ftate of Athens formerly among the Greeks, was the arbiter of Europe, and more than a match for all the three kingdoms Į have mentioned, with Spain added to them.

• Secondly. The great difparity between the numbers of people in the higher and the lower ranks of life feems to deferve particular observation, as it may be collected from the foregoing accounts. Families living in houfes having feven windows or lefs, muft confift of perfons in the lowest ftations; and yet the number of these houses was 688,903 in 1777. Add to thefe fuch of the lowest people as live in the remaining 263,603 houses; and it will appear, that the people of property and opulence in the state, compared with the reft, are indeed a very small body. And yet their number is now greater in this country than it ever was; and, very probably, it is much greater in this country than in any other. It is proper to add, that this obfervation fhews us diftinctly why no taxes in a ftate can be very productive, which do not reach the lower as well as higher ranks of people.

But, thirdly, what requires moft to be attended to, is the certain evidence which the preceding accounts give of the progress of depopulation in this kingdom.-The number of houfes in England and Wales was at the Revolution 1,319,215. The number of houses now is not a million. Our people, therefore, fince that æra, have decreased near a quarter.'

Our author proceeds to fhew the progress of depopulation, with the facts which confirm it;' and the caufes of our depopulation. Among many other reflections and deductions here made, are the following:

The honourable Mr. Grenville, in a pamphlet entited Confiderations on the Trade and Finances of the Kingdom, after giving the fame account with that here given of the houses in England and Wales in 1759 and 1761, expreffes the utmost furprize at the proofs of depopulation which it afforded, and obferves, that the deftruction of 5790 houfes in fo fhort a space as eight years, is such a symptom of diftress as requires every at

24

tention

tention to check the progrefs of the evil.-Relief to the lande intereft is now (he adds) no longer the concern of individuals only who are to receive that relief, but is become an important national concern."-What would he have faid, had he known that the depopulation which shocked him was proeeding fo rapidly as I have fhewn; that no attention would be given to it; that the public burdens, inftead of being leffened, would increafe; and that he himself had laid the foundation of fuch an increase of them as would, in a few years, bring the nation to the brink of ruin?

The increase in the higher claffes of houfes has been for fome time, obvious to every one. It may be imagined, that this implies fuch an increase of people in the middle and higher ranks of life, as makes amends for the depopulation among the lowest ranks. But the truth is, that no fuch conclufion can be drawn. One of the principal caufes of this increase has been that very evil which has destroyed the common people; or the increase of luxury. This, I think, has been demonftrated by the ac count I have given of London,- -It muft, however, be ac knowledged, that in many of our towns, and particularly our manufacturing towns, there has been a great increase of people as well as of houfes; but it should be confidered, that it has been derived from the depopulation of country parishes and villages, the inhabitants of which, by removing to thefe towns, and many of them thriving there, and living in better houfes, have increased the number of fuch houfes at the expence of meaner houses. This increase of people, therefore, in our towns has either quickened depopulation; or, if not, it must have been owing entirely to the increase of trade. From the accounts of the exports at the cuftom-houfe it appears, that for fome years before 1765 they were at the higheft, and that they have fince decreafed. This decrease, however, has been more than compenfated by the increase of our home confumption, occafioned by a vaft increase of luxury; and this, though it has operated fatally among the body of the lower people, has, in one way, contributed to retard the progrefs of depopulation; I mean, by furnishing an increafe of employment, and confequently of the means of fubfiftence, for our manufacturers and artizans. But though depopulation has been thus checked, yet it has proceeded rapidly; and if we afcribe one half of the increase in the higher claffes of houfes to this caufe (or a real increafe of people) and the other half to luxury, as before explained, we fhall, I think, reckon very moderately; and it will appear, that in eighteen years near 200,000 of our common people have been loft.

'I will only obferve farther, that fince the Revolution, most of the caufes of depopulation have prevailed fo much as to render it an evil which could not but happen. The causes I mean arethe increase of our navy and army, and the constant supply of men neceffary to keep them up-a devouring capital, too large

for the body that fupports it-the three long and deftru&tive continental wars in which we have been involved-the migrations to our settlements abroad, and particularly to the East and West Indies the ingroffing of farms-the high price of provifions→→→→ but above all, the increase of luxury, and of our public taxes and debts.'

These reflections, which are contrasted with the state of population in other countries, and with the causes of this difference, fhewing that they are peculiar to this country, exhibit a gloomy picture indeed!

The remaining part of this pamphlet is the Appendix, which gives a general account of the objections made by Mr. Eden to the preceding articles, and an examination of the arguments by which he endeavoured to establish them. A complete view of thofe objections and the remarks made on them, can only be obtained from a perufal of the work itself; suffice it, therefore, to extract fome few of the conclufions here made. And firft, notwithstanding the great increase of houfes in London, Dr. Price thinks it has been more populous than it is at prefent.

I have observed in the preceding Essay, that there is reason to believe, that even London was more populous at the Revolution, than it is now. The number of houfes in the bills of mortality, as given from the hearth-books by Sir William Petty in 1687; and in London, Middlefex, and Weftminster, as given by Dr. Davenant in 1690; compared with the accounts now kept by the furveyors of the houfe duties, gives a direct and pofitive proof of this. And it is confirmed by a comparison of the annual average of burials within the bills of mortality, for five years before the Revolution, with the average for the fame number of years at prefent.Mr. Eden has objected only to the laft of these arguments; and, in order to overthrow it, he compares the annual average of burials for fifteen years before the revolution (which was 21,657), with the annual average for feventeen years ending in 1778, which was 22,763.-Here a remark juft made must be repeated. This is one of the cafes in which averages for long terms prove nothing. London, after the fire in 1666, rofe from its ruins with great improvements, and increafed very faft; and, at the beginning of the period for which Mr. Eden's average is taken, two of the principal parishes in Weftminster, namely, St. James and St. Anne, were not included in the bills.-On the contrary, during the fecond period, London appears to have been decreasing. For five years, at the beginning of it, or from 1762 to 1766, the annual average of burials was 25,084. For the five years ending in 1772, it was 22,950; and for five years, ending in 1778, it was 2c,835.-It is, therefore, only the average at the

end

end of these two periods that furnishes any evidence in the fent queftion.

pre

It is again objected, that Pancras and Marybone, two of the most populous parishes in London, are not included in the bills. In answer to this, it is enough to fay, that there were at the Revolution twelve other parishes omitted; and that thefe omiffions, together with the omiffions of the burials among diffenters, muft, probably, have occafioned then much greater deficiencies in the bills than exist now. In thefe twelve parishes there were buried, in the years immediately fucceeding thofe in which they were taken into the bills, 5000 annually. In Pancras and Marybone, the annual burials for ten years, ending in 1772, were 1041. See Treatife on Reverfionary Payments, p. 204, 3d. Edit.-It is, therefore, of little confequence in the prefent enquiry, that these two parishes are out of the bills. The increase of buildings has, by no means, been confined to them. It has extended itself to moft of the principal parishes within the bills; and yet the number of burials is confiderably lower than it was when this increase begun. The increase, therefore, has been merely an increase of buildings, arifing from luxury; and this has been diftinctly exhibited to us in that part of London which lies within the walls, where, though the number of houfes cannot be much less, the burials have funk gradually from 3139 (the annual medium at the Revolution) to 1428, the annual medium for five years ending in 1779.'.

After feveral additional tables of comparison with respect to trade and burials at different times, Dr. Frice adds,

• What renders this a confideration yet more mortifying is, that it appears from the preceding table, that during the wars which begun in 1740 and 1755, our trade went on uniformly increafing; and that at the end of the laft war in particular, it was rifen to its highest pitch, and muft have brought in a very large favourable balance, which contributed to replace the treafure carried out, kept money at a moderate intereft, and enabled government to profecute the war with vigour, and to finish it with dignity and honour. The reverse, in every respect, is true of the prefent war. It appears, that the firft approaches of it have operated on our trade like the grafp of death; and that now, instead of bringing in, as our trade used to do, a conftant fupply of treasure in return for our manufactures, it is continually carrying out our treafure, and uniting with the demands of foreigners from our funds, and the expence of armies in diftant countries, in draining and impoverishing us.

• It will be asked, how it comes to pass, that a ftate of affairs fo detrimental, is not more felt in a diminution of the revenue; in an unfavourable courfe of foreign exchanges; and in fcarcity of cash, attended with difficulties in raifing money by public loans. The answer to this enquiry is obvious. Diftrefs has

not

not yet forced us to any great retrenchment of luxury; and the exertions of the war, the profits of contracts, and the fuccefs of our cruisers, have enriched many individuals, and occafioned an extraordinary expenditure, which has kept up the revenue. Remittances of balances due to our merchants withdrawing from trade; the fale of French fugars, and other prize goods abroad; and the fubfcriptions of foreigners to our loans, have prevented the course of exchange from becoming unfavourable. The high intereft given by government for money, draws all that can be collected of it from trade, and land and private fecurities. But above all, our paper credit fupplying us with the most convenient kind of money, we can spare our coin, which is now become an incumbrance generally avoided, and of ufe only to make up odd fums, and to carry on fmall traffic.'

We have then a particular comparison of the expences of the last and present war; and the whole terminated with this reflexion.

It is often faid that the great men in oppofition want to force themselves into power. But it is fcarcely poffible they should be fo foolish.-Involved in a most expenfive and hazardous conteft with two of the first powers in Europe-furrounding nations hoftile to us in a degree which leaves us not a friend, or even a well-wisher among them-a confiderable part of our strength torn from us, and converted against us-our refources mortgag ed beyond the hope or poffibility of redemption-a debafing and wafteful luxury deftroying public virtue, and producing a diffipation and venality in private life, and an extravagance in the. expenditure of public money, which were never equalled-and, at the fame time, a monstrous debt preffing us, and increasing rapidly, without any other fupport than a frail credit, which the firft difafter or panic may break. In fuch circumstances, wonderful must be that ambition which can render the management of our affairs an object of contention. No enemy of our prefent minifters can wish them a greater punishment, than their continuance in power to conduct the war a few years, muft prove. Mr Eden, indeed, thinks they may fucceed, and are still able to extricate us. At a juncture of unparalleled embarrassment and danger, he has undertaken to give us comfort. He exhorts us, taking things as the authors of our diftreffes have made them, to profecute the war with vigour, affuring us that we have not upon us any fymptoms of decay which should difcourage that we can bear much more, and have ftill fufficient refources left.--Entertaining other apprehenfions, I have taken another course. The difference between us is great; but there is one circumstance attending it, which, if I have been misled, will give me fome comfort.-My reprefentations will not be much regarded; or if they fhould, they can do harm only by putting the nation too much on its guard, and leading it to measures for recovering peace, and preferving its existence, which the necef

us;