the number of Inhabitants. In like manner; it ap- 
pears from Mr. Simpfon’s Table, that, though an in- 
fant juft born in London has not an equal chance of 
living 3 years, his expe 5 iatio?i is 20 years ; and this 
number, multiplied by the yearly births, would give 
the number of inhabitants in London, were the 
births and burials equal. The medium of the yearly 
births, for the laft 10 years, has been 15,710. This 
number, multiplied by 20, is 314,200; which is the 
number of inhabitants that there would be in Lon- 
don, according to the bills, were the yearly burials 
no more than equal to the births : that is, were it to 
fupport itfelf in its number of inhabitants without 
any fupply from the country. But for the laft 10 
years, the burials have, at an average, been 22,956, 
and exceeded the chriftenings 7,246. This is, there- 
fore, at prefen t, the yearly addition of people to Lon- 
don from other parts of the kingdom, by whom it is 
kept up. Suppofe them to be all, one with another, 
perfons who have, when they remove to London, an 
,cxpt 5 iation of life equal to^o years. That is; fup- 
pofe them to be all of the age of 18 or 20, a fuppo- 
fttion certainly far beyond the truth. From hence 
will arife, according to what has been before ob- 
ferved, an addition of 30 multiplied by 7,246, that 
is 217,380 inhabitants. This number, added to the 
former, makes 531,580; and this, I think, at moft, 
would be the number of inhabitants in London were 
the bills perfect. But it is certain that they give the 
number of births and burials too little. There are 
many burying-places that are never brought into the 
bills. Many alfo emigrate to the navy and army 
and country ; and thefe ought to be added to the 
number 
