“a 
1805.] 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magaxine. , 
SIR, 
ae you appear to have completed the 
Abftraéts givenin the late Numbers 
of your Magazine, of the Returns made 
under the Population A&, for England 
aid Wales, I beg leave to offer a few re- 
marks thereon. 
It could not be expected that an, under- 
taking of fuch an extenfive nature would 
be ftriGly complete and correct ; and, in 
fact, though the enumeration was or- 
dered to be made in England and Wales 
on the xoth of March, 1801, and the ge- 
neral abftract of the returns was not laid 
before Parliament till the middle of De- 
eember following, there were many places 
from-which returns had not then been re~ 
ceived, which places, of courfe, could not 
heincluded in the account. It is hikewife 
deficient from the carelefs manner in 
which it was taken in many places, and, 
in fome inftances, from the ignorance of 
the people, who, conficering it as a pre- 
paratory ftep to inrollment for military 
fervice, or a poll-tax, probably omitted 
fome of the members of their families. 
Thefe cantes mutt have rendered the 
total amount of the a¢count fomewhat be- 
low the truth. The difficulty and labour 
of arranging fuch a multiplicity. of ill- 
formed materials, may eafily have occa- 
fioned errors either of deficiency or excels ; 
and creat attention muft have been requi- 
hte to detect errors of the preis in print- 
ing a document of this nature. Itis not, 
t erefore, furpriing that fome iasccura- 
cies fhould appear, though it may be pro- 
per to corre& them as tar as poffible.— 
The following are a few inftances : 
The fummary of the county of Suffolk 
appears to de fhort caft 1000. The hun- 
dred cf Welteafwith, in the county of 
Suffex, is fhort caft 70; and the hundred 
of Aldweeke, in the fame county, is caft 
160 too much. The hundred of Chippen- 
ham, in the county of Wilts, is fhort caf 
: 10 5 and the fummary of the county fhort 
calt sooo. It is highly probable that a 
more particular examination of the ac- 
count would deteét other errors of this 
Mature.* 
The total of inhabited honfes in Eng- 
land is fated to he 1,467,78053 bunt tne 
“errors jut mentioned being correcied, will 
pmake the number 
, 
This, 
114745740. 
\ * In the total of the county of Surrey, the 
Perfons employed in agriculture are {tated at 
“Only 2746. This is certainly an error, as 
the totais of the hundreds make the number 
24,976. 
Montuiy Mas. No 128, 
On the Population, Sc. of Great Britains 
Qi 
however, is lefs than the real amount.— 
_ From a comparifon of the totals of houfes 
and perfons with the number of returns 
that have been received, it appears highly 
probable, that the erhee of houfes.in the 
places from. which returos had not been 
-received at the time, of making up the ac- 
count, was:at leaft. 8000. There are 
other. places which returned the number of 
perfons, but not of houfes.. The number 
of perfons in thefe places in England is 
12,953, which, at 52 to a houfe, makes 
the houfes 2314.. Thefe additions in- 
creafe the total. number of houfes in Eng- 
land. to 1,485,054. The total number 
of houfes in Wales, according to the re- 
turhs, Is 10%,053, i which may be added 
about 600 for returns not ierciye ds mak. 
ing the number. 108,653." “The total 
number of houfes in Eogiand and Wales 
thus appears to be 155935707: 
At the beginning of the laf century, 
Dr. Davenant publithed an Account, con- 
taining the total number of houfes. in 
England and. Wales, according to. ,the 
hearth-books of Lady-day, 1690. There 
is no reafon to doube that this account was 
as correét as that which has been lately 
taken; and. a comparifen of the tetals 
ieee an increale, from AG, to 1801, of 
45492 houfes; witch, at 53 perfons to 
a 2 hou, makes an increafe of 155365 057 
inhabitants. , his appears to be the leaft 
increafe. that.can be affigned; but it has 
certainly been greater, on See of the 
numberof foldiers and feamen far exceed- 
ing thofe employed in 1690. 
‘Previous to the late enumeration, many 
perfons who had paid considerable. atten. 
tion to the fubject, were cf opinion, that, 
during the laft century, the population’ had 
declined confiderabiy ; 3 and the moft au- 
thentic evidence which then exifted, cer-' 
tainly appeared to warrant this Sets 
fion, ‘The total number of houles 
1690 WaS 1,319,215. According to ee 
returns fince made by the furveyors of 
houfe and window-duties, the total num- 
ber of houtes in 1759 was only 986,482, 
and in 1781, 1,005,810. Suppofing 
thefe numbers to be. equally accurate, it. 
was impoflible to draw any other conelu- 
TKIP Foo 2S CS OE ST, ECS LD REE ea ae, 
- * In the Obfervations on the Refults of the 
Population-A@, the number of places from 
which returns ‘of the, parifh-regifters were, 
fuppofed to be wanting, are {tated at.260 in 
England, and 19 in Wales ; but the number of, 
places from which returns ‘of the enumeration 
had not been received, is not given. The 
additions made above, on this account, are, 
however, probably much below the truth. 
et fion 
