. Mr. Wood in reply to Mr. Good on the Poor. 
ried milk at 2d. per galion. Potatoes 
cot us 1s. 3d. per bufhel of 95 pounds, 
and the quantity now vied, is 13 bufhels 
per week. Peas, oatmeal, falt, and sro- 
ceries coft us the laft year, with a larger 
family, rl. 5s. per week. Ac general frore 
book is regularly kept, wherein 1s enter- 
ed in columns, the confumption 
of each ae for every day in the week, 
at the end of which, ‘it is caft up, ba- 
fepar rato 
Gaew 
‘danced with the itock of each articie re- 
maining upon hand, examined and fioned 
by a dir Boe . From that ftore- book, the 
following account has been taken by 
felf; and I pled aay, veracity for the 
“accuracy of the fratement. 
Ww eekly confumption of Provifions in 
the Shrewfbury Houfe of Induftry for tour 
weeks, from De! 2 25 to Dec. 30, 1798- 
eg 
pe * 
Ei ‘s d. 
Butcher's meat, S8e Ib. at 2id- 5 16 8 
"sm 
Flour, + 173 éIb. the produce of 30 
uthels of corn at 2a 8d. ped 10 OO 
18 buthels of potatces, 951b. to 
ee aes Be Cel okt Cee oO 


Saar ae - - — Aone £1 B81 G 
22 gailons of better eee: at rod. 
Pee dere - - 0 18 4 
74 1D. of che eaee £4. Becine mabe he 4 
456 gallons of adi ned milk and 
a db. oes aS ap eR eB ASN 8 
Peas, oatmeal, falt, and gvoceries 1 § 0 
Weekly coft of Provilions «£123 6 7 
‘The number of our prefent family is 
274; and Mr. Good will find that the 
above fum, divided by 274, does not a- 
mount to 1s. ¢d. each. He will alfo find, 
i ti 
iS 
ofc) 
S 
upon compari 
our dietary, as 
pet 1g count ve the fam 
U 
lis 
mo 
(e 
\= 
eee 
rod 
(e) 
r 
' 
fay 
et 
ie ting, as he li 
of his Difiertation, th a a coni fdeable 
ap sition of them ao children.—WV ill 
Mr. Good usw fay, that—my ‘error, 
thot ae not fo enormous, pe rendered more 
and conipicuous than before ? 
—« the error he at firft fulbe 
; ! 

7 ara ntti Irme A 
iS NOW confirt }ea 
Pers <5 ee ee be tase 
den a. —tlt really 
i 
Cy 
o> 63 
hema f 
Pts 
Q 
So 
(4°) ee 
cn 
r 0h 
' eh 
Lay) 
On a 
fa 
| ‘ery 
(Fi 
iat 
lent 
a 
fess 
pool 
Lee} 
ponat fat 
tort Pye wa 
m 
mn St 
@) 
a 
lt 
pe 
[ok 
3 

bed @ Led oI, 
We) 
unpoie qa 
no W Ae when it is dipped in oi 
muit beg eee to f 
itt H 
man Wirth Whom 
= 
Ae: 
~- + =e, + 
A ee eS LAA by Sryeereor ~ 
lent aflertion ; or, that the dageer 
Uae. 
lifts.» "This is not. thas liberal ditcatiion 
which in my poor opinicn can alone be 
gratifying to liberal minds, or profitable 
to the public. In queftions of political 
ceconomy, fuch artifices are peculiarly 
improper. 
If I had knowingly attempted to de-_ 
ceive or miflead nay, if I had not been 
particularly cautious net to be myfelf de- 
ceived or mifled ;’ before I committed my- 
felf by the Cie of an y faéts fo in- 
terefting to the community; I had in- 
deed delerved the lath of Mr. Geod’s cri- 
ticifms. -He, can “* trace no feveri 
HH pone that neither Mr. Good, nor 
any other man, could, on fucha fubjedt, 
have ee an accuieeee WOVe ee. 
Should he regard fuch an attempt to de- 
ceive as a venial offence, we muft conti- 
nue to differ; for I regard it as a capital 
crime. ao however, my confcience 
tells me, I have nothing to fear. 
Mr. Good enlarges much, on the cir- 
cumftance of my having flated that out of 
91 children born in the houfe, net one 
had died within the month.—To fate the 
raphiwould not fe well have 
~ 
» 

aaa o purpofe. My words were, 
«« that of thele (g1) only two had died n 
the houfe, ane two more out at nurfe, ail 
at the age of two months.” The fa& 
is it aoe ae The dire€tors of the 
Shrevibury Houfe ferve for three years, 
aad then r fee e. Soon after I had quitted 
the dircétio on, I publifhed my account of 
this Eftablifhment ; and, in confequence 
f the c 
COrr repondenes it produced with 
wiett, [ fearched the becks, and 
ferigtly quefti oned the ea There 
was 0 wire rv of any deaths, but thofe I 
e fecretary affured me there 
; had no reafon thez,. to 
5 ae various proofs 
al © 
tasay 
my 
1 
r a rt 
; 
lgent iu his accounts; and he has 
y been removed. - I do therefore now 
believe it poffible, that he may not have 
kept 4 correct regift er. In my laft letter, 
Tadmitted this, and might have hoped, 
that Mr. Good would have given me cre- 
it for the-admiffion. I can, however, 
fay on my own knowledge, whilit twice 
in the direStion, that im 1 confequence of 
the advantages enjoyed by the mothers 
and the tender attention paid to them 
during their lying-in month, the mortality 
of the children has been remarkably fmall: 
much, very much lefs than in the old work- 
houles, or among the poor of the town in 
own dweilings. I believe no doubt 
has for a long time been entertained of the 
falubri ity of our Houle of Induftry. 
their 
What 

