1803 } 
London or Paris, rather than in their own 
workthops. The'experience of the older 
country, acquired by extenfive patronage 
and vigorous competition, infure’ it ad- 
vantages, which the younger one cannot 
p offefs. Nor is this obfervation on the 
w orks of mere art wholly inapplicable to 
the advancement of literature and tafe, 
which alfo depends, in fome meafure, 
On extraneous circumitances. I think I 
have the authority of Dr. Johnfon for a 
high eftimation of the fuperior advantages 
enjoyed. by literary men in the Britifh Me- 
tropolis, - 
I know not how ferioufly to advert to 
the American newfpapers, as ‘¢ another 
caufe of their prefent bad tafte.”’ It muft be 
confefled that they are ‘* vehicles of rancour 
and abufe,”? which have been too fre- 
quently recurred to within the laft feven 
or ten years,. by the parties deemed Fede- 
ral and Democratic; and I admit, that the 
licentioufnefs they exhibit is not exceeded 
even during the popular elections, of 
which more enlightened Britons are wit- 
nefies, at leaft once in feven years. But 
what man of commoncandourcan, without 
a bluth, inform your numerous readers,that 
the ‘elegant amufement”’ of throwing dirt 
and filth ** engages all rauks’? in Ameri- 
ca? By the kindnefs of my foreign friends 
IT am occafionally furnifhed with-the newf- 
papers publifhed in different parts of the 
Weltern Continent, and I have obferved 
in none of them the regular arrangement 
of matter reprefented by Mr. X. or the 
accuracy of his defcription in any other 
refpects. Whatever trafh may occafionally 
occupy the political department, their ad - 
vertifements and domeftic occurrences have 
no other than Joca/ claims to originality ; 
the phrafeology ufually adopted generally 
being a faithiul imitation of that ufed in 
this country. Perhaps, in the advertife- 
ments, the {ubftitution of the words plan- 
tation for farm, towz/bip for parifh,and 
Jpivits for rum, and a few other deviations 
from the Englith ftandard, were thofe 
which this faftidious obferver confidered fo 
uncouth, as to authorife his afferticn, that 
they are ‘ wholly unintelligible to the 
Englith reader.” 
The caftigations of candid criticifms 
(aad fuch, Sir, Iam fure, your’s ale always 
intended to be) fhould every where be 
fubmitted to and improved with gratitude; 
but I am, neverthelefs, confident, that the 
auteur imputed to the Anglo- Americans 
will repel with indignation the animad- 
‘verfions of a writer, who, while affecting 
_ Fhe character of a judge, and even on 
Burials unreturned in the Bills. 
213 
your own bench, aflumes that of a calum- 
niator. VESPUTIUS. 
London, March 3, 1803. 
ee 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
) N perufing the article figned J. J. G, 
in your laft Number, it jeems not 
to have occurred to him, that the Paro. 
chial Accounts of the Deaths in London 
are very inaccurate, as to alcertaining the 
fact of the number of deaths in London 
per annum; for, fince the year 1745, 
which is the period he takes his proofs 
from, there have been introduced Meffrs. 
Whitfield’s and Wefley’s Burial-grounds, 
Lady Huntingdon’s in the Spa-fields, as 
well as feveral others, none of which are 
given any accountof in the Parochial Lifts, 
and which bury feparately, every year, as 
many as fome of the principal parifhes, and 
the number of which falls little fhort of 
from 3 to 40c0 per annum, which is near- 
ly one fifth part of the whole number faid 
to be buried within the bills of moréality. 
This number has been regularly on the in- 
creafe fince the opening of thefe grounds 5 
which accounts for the apparent dimi- 
nution of the burials from the Parochial 
Bills. Hoping that this hint may be the 
means of obtaining fome more exact ac- 
count from thefe places of public burial 
(which are not parochial). of the annual 
number they bury, I remain your’s &c. 
Feb. 9, 1303. . W.P. 
P. S. Some years fince the burial-fees at 
Lady Huntingdon’s, in the Spa-fields, were 
fo’extremely low, that the poorer clafs of 
people from all the furrounding parifhes bu- 
ried their dead at this place for cheapnefs; and 
I have known fix and eight funerals there of 
anevening. Whether this is the cafe now, I 
have not the means of knowing. 
<a ; 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR; 
OUR popular work has fufficiently 
awakened the curiofity of the public 
to the fubject of local defcriptions in ge- 
neral, by furnifhing, from time to time, 
interefting and fatistactory details of many 
of the moft confiderable towns and cities 
of Great Britain. As, however, I do not 
recolleé&t to have feen in your journal, at 
any time, a fufficiently circumftantial de- 
fcription of the town and port of King- 
fton upon Hull, IT am fully perfuaded you 
would be much pleafed that any one of 
pa competent 
