metropolis were 1,505, and the average number of deaths in the corresponding week of the preceding ten years was 1,638.6. Are we to conclude, then, that in 1874 the deaths fell exactly 133.6 below the average? If the population had remained stationary, this would be a fair inference from the data. But the average population of London in the ten years ending 1873 was 3,092,336, whereas in 1874 the estimated population had risen to 3,400,701. We have, then, the proportion

3,092,336 3,400,701 1,638.6: 1,802 the average

number of deaths corrected to increase of population. So that the deaths in this first week of August, 1874, fell 297 short of the corrected average of the ten preceding years. In comparing, then, the mortality statistics of a locality at one period with those at another, fluctuations of population have to be taken into account, besides many other circumstances such as prosperity or the reverse, peace or war, mildness or severity of the weather, social condition, occupations, etc., of the people, completion of drainage works, improved water supply, and so on.

It may also become necessary to compare the vital statistics of one place with those of another. Apart from the consideration of all the conditions just spoken of, we have in this case to bear in mind the relative proportions of the populations of the places compared.

For instance, the average number of deaths in London in the first 20 weeks of 1874 was 1,465'6; in Dublin the corresponding number in the same period was 164 1. From these statements merely we cannot compare the death-rate in the two cities. But if we take the population of London to be eleven times that of Dublin, and multiply 164.1 by 11, we have a direct comparison instituted.

164.1X11=1,805 1,

a figure considerably above that of the average weekly deaths in London-namely, 1,465.6. Or we can take the converse, and divide 1,465 6 by 11. Then =133.2, the weekly number of deaths in

1,465.6
11

Dublin corresponding to 1,465.6 in London. If we wish for extreme accuracy in the calculation, since London is not quite eleven times as

It is generally admitted that the estimate of the duration of sickness published by the Highland Society is too low. Mr. Ansell has compiled Tables based upon an examination of the Records of various Friendly Societies in the 5 years, 1823-1827, which give a higher average amount of sickness; and Mr. Neison has similarly investigated the subject with a like result. The following Abstract enables us to compare the relative merits of the conclusions arrived at:

Annual Amount of Sickness to each Person,

expressed in Weeks.

Neison.
Average of
Rural, Town,
and City
Districts in
England

CHAPTER VI.

STATISTICS OF BIRTHS.

Influences to which Man is subject-Birth-rate-Prolificness of a Population-Prolificness of Marriages Statistics of Births-Influence of Sex, controlled by City Life and Illegitimacy-Explanations of the excess of Male Births-Influence of Age; of Place; of PeriodsDependence of Birth-rate on Marriage-rate-Influence of Seasons; Hours of the Day; Professions, Mode of bringing up, &c.; MoralityIllegitimacy - Influence of Political and Religious Institutions — Still-Births.

M. QUETELET, in his Physique Sociale, includes the influences to which mankind is subject in the two following groups: :

(1.) Purely physical or natural,1 such as (a) Sex, (b) Age, (c) Place, (d) Periods, (e) Seasons, (f) Hours of the Day. (2.) Moral or disturbing, such as (a) Profession, Mode of bringing up, etc., (b) Morality, (c) Civil and Religious Insti

tutions.

2

He points out also that by the operation of this second group man is distinguished from the lower animals.3 It must not be forgotten that the word "man" is here used in the sense indicated in Chapter V., as implying the species, or, in the words of Quetelet, l'homme moyen, in contradistinction to the individual man. It will be convenient in this and the next chapter to consider the beginning and ending of the life of man as subject to these groups of influences.

Birth-rate. By this term is commonly meant the proportion of births which takes place each year to the total population of a country or district or town. This proportion may be expressed in either of two ways. Thus, we may

1 Les causes naturelles.

2 Les causes perturbatrices.

3 "C'est par ses forces morales que l'homme se distingue des animaux, qu'il jouit de la faculté de modifier, du moins d'une manière apparente, les lois de le nature qui le concernent, et que peut-être, en déterminant un mouvement progressif, il tend à se rapprocher d'un état meilleur."Loc. cit. Vol. i., p. 146.

say that the birth-rate in Dublin in 1873 was 1 in 35 of the population, or that it was 29 per 1,000 of the population. The proportions from which these results are obtained are respectively :

(1.) 9,032 (the number of births in 1873): 314,666 : : 1:34.7.

(2.) 314,666 9,032 1,000: 28.7.

It will be seen from the following pages that the height of the birth-rate is usually a valuable indication of the prosperity and physical welfare of a community. A high birth-rate in the presence of a low death-rate implies that a population is living under the most favourable conditions possible as regards health, vigour, and longevity. Health, because a larger proportion of the population survives to a marriageable age-vigour, because more individuals are fitted to propagate their species-longevity, because the more numerous the births are to a marriage, the greater the presumption that a long interval exists between the mean period of marriage and the mean period of death. At the same time, unless a high birth-rate be coincident with a large area of habitable country and material prosperity sufficient to support the rapidly-increasing population, the consequences to national health will be very serious in the end. Acland writes: 1

Dr.

"It is not possible to reflect on this subject without recognising the truth of the proposition that, making every allowance for the action of counteracting causes, excessive development of a population on a limited area like Great Britain must in the end be disastrous to the nation, unless, first, the population can be kept healthy, and, secondly, the commodities of life are obtainable to a commensurate extent. The arithmetical bearings of this point have been worked out by Mr. Samuel Ruggles, in a report to the President of the United States.

"The conclusion, then, seems almost forced upon us, that whenever our population increases beyond the power of our area to maintain it,

1 National Health. P. 25.

two effects will follow, more especially in times of commotion-increased pauperism, increased disease among the adults. If philanthropic or legislative efforts succeed, there will be added the rearing of wretched children, incapable in body and mind; multiplication of lunatic asylums, reformatories, and workhouse schools, and crushing taxation of the industrious, capable, and healthy.

"Conversely, if the preventive checks of Malthus, and especially education (in which I place first, moral culture, however attained), can be brought into operation, two results might be expected-first, that the population may be kept in some check; and secondly, that the internal administration of the country may be greatly improved by the political sense of the masses. Through these two causes there may be hope for the nation. It is doubtless true, first, that in the history of the world we have seen nations almost brought to a stand by epidemics, as, for instance, in various parts of Europe during the fourteenth century by the astonishing ravages of Black Death; secondly, some check is induced by wars; and thirdly, an excessive mortality of children produces the same results. The operation of these natural checks is eminently uncertain, and to count upon them as substitutes for self-control, prudence in marriage, and good political administration, is deliberately to substitute the instinctive life of brutes or savages for the progressive experience, the reason and morality of the human race, and to accept the destiny which such life brings with it. When savages and brutes meet in conflict with civilised man, that destiny has usually been extinction."

The annual number of births enables us to estimate the prolificness of a country. But it must be remembered that in the general birth-rate are included the births of illegitimate as well as of legitimate children. If we except the former, we arrive at the prolificness of marriages—a subject of rather less importance to the State in some respects. As Quetelet points out, the question of the production of illegitimate children is one of deep interest. First, because illegitimacy brings individuals into the world who are without the means of subsistence, and who will thus become a burden to the State; and, secondly, because the debt thus incurred is likely to remain unpaid, such individuals being generally feeble and seldom reaching a healthy maturity.

According to the Registrar-General's (England) Report for 1871, the birth-rate in that year for England and Wales