1811.] 
times, it is said, of suck a nature, as to 
render it doubtful whether they are spi- 
ritual, or otherwise. 
That J may not however be thought 
too hasty in my ridicule of Mr. Hawes’ 
consultation with Nature, I will examine 
his results. He says, that he finds, (from 
this consultation) that the * probability 
that a man, aged 46, shall attain to the 
age of 56, or live 10 years, is equal to 
oe d the probability that 
30-0000 9°3"S and the probability tha 
a woman, aged 40, shall attain to the 
age of 50, or live 10 years, is equal to 
1 9°2425 
10 0000 ° 
those persons shall live 10 years, is equal 
; 
to 20999 » Will the reader “think 
10-0000 iy 
any ridicule too severe after noticing this 
But the probability that both 
; 9°0959 
sult? For the fraction ———— which 
sha 10-0000 
. Mr. Hawes finds by consulting Nature, to 
express. the probability of both persons 
surviving for the specified time, is greater 
219 
10°0000 
_ finds, from the same consultation, to 
express the probability that one only of 
those persous would be living at the end 
of the said time; that is to say, that it is 
more likely that two persons should be 
both found alive at the end of any given 
time, than that one of them only should 
survive tothe end of the said tine! Mr, 
Hawes further says, that he finds (whe- 
ther from the same consultation of Na- 
ture, or from any after interview with the 
goddess, he has omitted to state) that it 
is more probable that three persons, 
whose ages are 20, 30, and 40, should 
all be foand alive at the end of fifteen 
years, than that the person whose age is 
40, should alone be found alive ‘at the 
end of that time; for he finds the fraction 
13-0505 
15 VO0O 
all of them will continue so long, but 
2°5836 
than the fraction which he 
to express the probability that 
only the fraction to express the 
15 0000 
probability that the person, aged 40, 
will continue to the same period. And 
thus, Mr. Editor, from that glorious in- 
flux of light which has fallen upon us, 
through the liberality of your corre- 
spondent, we are now to believe, that, if 
there be a hundred persons of the same 
age, it will be more probable that they 
should all be found alive at the end of 
any specified time, than that some one 
of them only should be found alive at she 
Doctrines of the Probabilities of Life. 
419 
end of the said time. One almost won- 
ders how such an instance of absurdity 
could have escaped even Mr. Hawes 
himself, accompanied as it is with sneers 
of contempt upon the most accurate of 
all sciences, the mathematics, and upon 
the ever-to-be-revered names of Halley, 
De Moivre, Simpson, Dodson, and Price, 
But lest our minds should not be suf- 
ficiently illuminated by the light which 
Mr. Hawes has shed upon,us in the com- 
munication of the results of his consul= 
tation with Nature, which have .been 
above stated, or rather, perhaps, that 
his readers might entertain a due sense 
of the high estimation in which Nature 
held this, her darling son, from che 
length of her conference with him; this 
gentleman has added, as a conclusive ar 
gument for the ignorance of Halley, 
De Moivre, Price, &c, &c. that he finds 
(from his consultation with Nature, mind | 
ye) that the probabilities of a person 
aged 15, continuing in being 10, 20, 30, 
40, 50, 60, 65, 70, and 80, years, will be 
respectively *9°5837, 18°2394, 25°9894, 
32°8101, 38-2624, 41°8909, 42°8573, 
43°3278, and 43°5094; thus making the 
probability that a person should be found 
alive at the end of 80 years, nearly five 
times as great as the probability that the 
same person will be found alive at the 
end of only 10 years. Bravissimo, Mr. 
Hawes! Bravissimo Dame Nature, Mr. 
Hawes’ confidential adviser ! 
Your correspondent concludes his 
communication with the like expressive 
modesty with which he commenced it; 
for he says, that he trusts he has suce 
ceeded “ in representing the fallacy of a 
doctrine so confidentially authorised, so 
mathematically tolerated, and so impli 
citly acquiesced in, during the last hun- 
dred years;” and, by way of climax, 
closes with, “ It is only left me now to 
enquire, on which side of the question, 
conviction preponderates?”’—-Yes, Mr. 
Hawes, you need not for one moment 
doubt but your readers are fully con- 
vinced, that the “suggestions” of Dr, 
Halley were foolish; that the ‘ adop- 
tion” of those suggestions by Mr. De 
Moivre affords a proof of ignorance, the 
“adherence” to them by Mr. Simpson, 
an astonishing instance of obstinacy; the 
“ confidence” placed in’ them by Mr, 
Dodson, a display of rashness; the 
‘espousal” of them by Dr. Price, an 
* The reader will observe, that there are 
no denominators to these numbers. * 
* The editor presumes, however, that dee 
nominators are to be understogd, | 
indication 
