'[ i68 ] 
highly ufeful. But a doubt having arllen, whether 
that could properly, or with any accuracy, be ufed 
by us at London, as we are in a different country, 
and perhaps in a different way of life, I have been 
at fome pains to inquire into this, and fatisfy myfelf 
about the objeclions. And I imagine, that I can 
now fliew how that table may be altered, to fuit our 
cafe with fufficient exadnefs. 
In the London bills of mortality, for the lafl 30 
years, there is always added an account yearly of the 
number of burials under each age, at the diflance of 
ten years, and of children more particularly under 
two years, between two and five, and between five 
and ten ; which numbers are curious and ufeful. And, 
I believe, though there may fometimes be fome in- 
accuracies and omilfions, thefe numbers are as ex- 
adly given as in our cafe can be expeded : and what 
may be objeded, is not fo much to the incorrednefs 
of them, but to what arifes from our circumffances, 
that will not allow them to be proper, to fliew the 
probabilities of life in all its periods. 
As I am inclined to think, that no table can be form- 
ed from them, as they are at prefent, that will be fuf- 
ficiently accurate above 20 years of age, I fliall make 
fome obfervations that feem to fliew this, before I pro- 
ceed to what I have propofed. And that we may have 
a more accurate view of the numbers, and be able 
more certainly to reafon about them, let us take the 
fums of all the burials under each age, for the lafl 
ten years, from 1744, to 175-3 inclufive,; and then 
the tenth part of thofe fums will give, at an average, 
the burials at each particular age in a year : And 
'they will Hand as in the 2d column of the annexed 
table. 
