442 
Registers for these times are so imperfect, and besides, 
they are extremely confused.” 
In the Preface to the numeration 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 bap- 
tisms, 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 per cent., 
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 aflirma- 
tively. 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 collect- 
ing 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 sepa- 
rately shown, only the totals of the hundreds and 
similar county divisions, and of a few principal 
towns, were given. In subsequent “Parish Regis- 
ter Abstracts” down to that of 1841, the same 
meagre information has been afforded by an 
adherence to this generalising system. 
In 1836, with a view of forming an estimate of 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[No. 27. 
the probable population of England and Wales at 
certain periods anterior to 1801, Mr. Rickman, 
acting upon the result of inquiries previously made 
respecting the condition and earliest date of the 
revister books in every parish, applied to the 
clergy for returns of the number of baptisms, 
burials, and marriages registered in three years at 
six irregular periods, viz. A.D. 1570, 1600, 1630, 
1670, 1700, and 1750. The clergy, with their 
accustomed readiness to aid in any useful investi- 
gation, responded very generally to the application, 
and Mr. Rickman obtained nearly 3000 returns of 
the earliest date required (1570), and nearly 4000 
(from not much less than half the parishes of 
England) as far back as 1600; those for the more 
recent periods being tolerably complete from all 
the counties. The interesting details thus col- 
lected have not been published; nor am I able 
to say where the original returns, if still extant, 
are deposited. In pursuance of this design, how- 
ever, Mr. Rickman proceeded with these materials 
to calculate the probable population of the several 
counties on the supposition that the registered 
baptisms, &c., in 1570, 1600, and at the other 
assigned periods, bore the same proportion to the 
actual population as in 1801. The numerical 
results are embodied in a table which appears in 
the Census Enumeration Abstract for 1841 (Pre- 
face, pp. 36, 37.), and it is stated that there is rea- 
son for supposing the estimate arrived at to be an 
approximation to the truth. 
During the Civil Wars and the Protectorate, 
few parochial registers were kept with any degree 
of accuracy; indeed, in many parishes they are 
altogether defective at that period, owing to the 
temporary expulsion of the clergy from their 
benefices. It is not improbable, therefore, that 
the remarkable decrease of baptismal entries in 
the register book of Chart next Sutton Valence 
may have arisen partly from imperfect registra- 
tion, as well as from the other causes suggested. 
But the trifling increase observable after the 
Restoration undoubtedly points to the conclusion 
arrived at by your correspondent -—— that a great 
diminution had taken place in the population of 
the parish: and Mr. Rickman’s estimate above 
referred to gives a result for the entire county, 
which, if it does not fully establish the supposed 
decrease, shows at least that the registers of other 
Kentish parishes were affected in a similar man- 
ner. The following is the estimated population of 
Kent, deduced from the baptisms, burials, and 
marriages, by Mr. Rickman : — 
A.D. Population. A.D. Population. 
1570 136,710 1670 167,398 
1600 161,236 1700 157,833 
1630 189,212 1750 181,267 
The population enumerated in 1801 was 307,624, 
which had increased to 548,337 in 1841. 
Applying the average of England to the parish 
