Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
are at the best inferior to those in the country; new openings for trade
would add not only to the marriages but to the deaths and the
births.[390] The presumption was not all in favour of healthiness; and
the registers at that particular time could not tell the whole
truth;—the drain of recruits for foreign service would keep down the
lists of burials at home, while allowing an increase of births and
marriages.[391] For these and other reasons, Malthus, while he agrees
with Rickman that the general health has improved, trusts little to his
calculations from registers; and concludes that even the census gives us
no clear light on the movement of population in the eighteenth century.
We can be certain that population increased during the last twenty years
of it, and almost certain that the movement was not downwards but
upwards since the Peace of Paris; and we have good ground for believing
that it was rather upwards than downwards even in the earliest years of
the century, during the good harvests and the long peace of
Walpole,[392] and that over the whole country the movement of population
was less fluctuating in England than on the Continent.[393] The author’s
admission, that the proportions of the births, deaths, and marriages
were very different in our country in his time from what they used to
be,[394] seems to put the census of 1801 out of court altogether in the
question of depopulation, especially as there were no previous
enumerations with which to compare it. The figures from the parish
registers for the whole of the century, that were included in the
“returns pursuant to the Population Act,” in addition to the
enumeration, turned out on examination to be unsatisfactory.[395]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account