274 Mr. Gompertz’s analysis applicable to the 
beyond that term the process as in the last example. This is 
according to the hypothesis of equality of chance, so often 
mentioned and used by Mr. Morgan, &c. 
Example 3. On the contingency of A’s dying after C in 
the life time of A, This should come in the last article, as it 
does not involve the double fluent, but is given here not to 
interrupt the order in which I have taken my examples: the 
solution is — fluent of - • 1 — ~jy— ' ~r~> and is the 
a a s 
chance of A’s dying in the life time of B, — the chance of A’s 
dying in the life time of both A and B. Hence the assurances 
is determined from those cases, as Mr. Baily I12S done page 
273 - 
Example 4. On the contingency of A’s dying last ; on the 
condition that C dies before B. This will evidently be fluent 
of ' ■ (fluent of (1 17 “) — £7“"') = if all the contingen- 
c.ies are supposed to commence with x = o, and the fluents be 
corrected to vanish with x = 0, fluent of 
r L a +. r L 6+x 
Mi . fl uen t 0 f Mf . MT) = j _ Mi + fluent of 
Mi . M* - V- fluent of Mi . Mi + fluent ofM 
a, c 
jt . 
• — ; and the manner of obtaining each of these fluents has 
been already delivered ; and thence may the assurances be de- 
J e-\-x 
termined. If we originally in the expression fluent of 1 
c 
