[ 2 5 l 3 
§ 5 *. It is therefore fufficiently demonflrated, that 
Dr. Halley’s table ought not, in M. de BufFon’s opi- 
nion, to be excluded from the clafs of thofe, which 
“ are the only tables, upon which the probabilities 
«« of the life of mankind in general can be eftablifhed 
<f with any certainty far from being comprifed, in 
his fevere judgment, among thofe of authors, “ whofe 
“ refearches, however ample, and the refult of long 
“ ftudy, can afford only diftant approaches to the 
“ knowlege of the mortality of mankind in general.” 
§ 6. M. de Buffon begins his table of the probabili- 
ties of life with a term, which precedes that of a year 
old, called zero d’age ; and from M. Dupre’s obferva- 
tions, affigns to it a duration of 8 years. I firft 
thought it an error of the prefs ; but there is no room 
for this doubt, after what M. de Buffon fays, “ We 
« fee by this table (fays he) that one may reafon- 
“ ably hope, that is, lay an even wager, that an in- 
« fant juft born, or who has no age , will live eight 
“ years : that an infant, who is a year old, will live 
« thirty-three years,” fcfc. This little fpace of eight 
years ftruck me ; becaufe all the obfervations, which 
I know, are very far from it. I had therefore re- 
courfe to the fource, to the obfervations of Mr. Dupre 
himfelf, and I found it was a miftake of M. de Buffon;. 
the mean life of infants of no age being, according 
to M. Dupres tables, twenty-and-five years and up- 
ward ; and, from the obfervations of Juftel, which 
Dr. Halley made ufe of, the mean life of a child of 
no age is above twenty- and-feven years. 
§ y. I might make an end here, if the fubjed did 
not abfolutely require my offering a word concerning 
the nature of both Juftel’s and M.Dupre’s obfervations. 
I i 2 The 
