The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Note On Graunt's “observations.”
• To the Right Honourable John Lord Roberts 1 , Baron of Truro , Lord Privy Seal , and One of His Majesties Most Honourable Privy Council.
• To the Honourable S R Robert Moray 1 , Knight, One of His Majestie's Privy Council For His Kingdom of Scotland , and President of the Royal Society of Philosophers Meeting At Gresham- Colledg , and to the Rest of That Honourable Society.
• The Preface.
• Natural and Political Observations, &c.
• Chap. I.: Of the Bills of Mortality, Their Beginning, and Progress. 1
• [chap. II.] 1: General Observations Upon the Casualties.
• Chap. III.: Of Particular Casualties.
• Chap. IV. of the Plague.
• Chap. V.: Other Observations Upon the Plague, and Casualties.
• Chap. VI.: Of the Sickliness, Healthfulness, and Fruitfulness of Seasons.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Difference Between Burials and Christenings.
• Chap. VIII.: Of the Difference Between the Numbers of Males and Females.
• Chap. IX.: Of the Growth of the City.
• Chap. X.: Of the Inequality of Parishes.
• Chap. XI.: Of the Number of Inhabitants.
• Chap. XII.: Of the Country-bills.
• The Conclusion.: an Appendix 1 .
• Appendices to Graunt's Observations.
• Quantulumcunque Concerning Money. 1682
• Note On the Essays In “political Arithmetick.”
• Another Essay In Political Arithmetick, Concerning the Growth of the City of London: With the Measures, Periods, Causes, and Consequences Thereof.1682. By Sir William Petty , Fellow of the Royal Society. London: Printed By H. H. For Mar
• Observations Upon the Dublin-bills of Mortality, M D C L X X X I. State of That City.
• Further Observation Upon the Dublin-bills: Or, Accompts of the Houses, Hearths, Baptisms, and Burials In That City.
• Two Essays In Political Arithmetick, Concerning the People, Housing, Hospitals, &c. London and Paris.
• Observations Upon the Cities of London and Rome.
• Five Essays In Political Arithmetick, Viz.
• Note On the “five Essays.”
• To the King's Most Excellent Majesty.
• The First Essay.
• The Second Essay.
• The Third Essay.
• The Fourth Essay 1 Concerning the Proportions of People In the 8 Eminent Cities of Christendom Undernamed , Viz.
• The Fifth Essay. Concerning Holland and the Rest of the United Provinces.
• A Treatise of Ireland, 1687. the Elements of Ireland; and of Its Religion, Trade & Policy. By Sir William Petty , Fellow of the Royal Society.
• Note On the “treatise of Ireland.
• An Essay In Political Arithmetick Concerning Ireland 1 .
• Preface.
• Chap. I.: By This Title We Mean the Several Points Following. (vizt)
• Chap. II.: The State of the Case Represented In Terms of Number, Weight, and Measure; and Thereby Made Capable of Demonstrations. ( Vizt )
• Chap. III.: The 6 First Mention'd Points Are Proved Out of the 20 Suppositions Or Assertions Next Before-going. ( Vizt )
• Chap. IV.: How to Enable the People of England and Ireland to Spend 5 Millions Worth of Commodities More Than Now: and How to Raise the Present Value of the Lands and Goods of Ireland From 2 to 3.
• Chap. V.: That the King's Revenue In England and In Ireland, Supposed to Be 2070 Thousand Pounds, Will Be Increased to Above ⅕ Part More (vizt) to 1 Above 414 Thousand Pounds; and Even to 450 Thousand Pounds: So As to Be In All 2520 Thousand Pounds.
• Chap. VI.
• Chap. VII.: How to Take Away All the Evils Arising From Differences of Births, Extractions, Languages, Manners, Customs, Religion, and Laws, and Pretence Whatsoever.
• Chap. VIII.: How the Names, Bounds, Titles, and Values, of Lands May Be Settled and Ascertained; With Remedy of the Miscarriages, Which Have Happened In the 35 Years Last Past In the Disposures of Them.
• Chap. IX.: A Repetition and Enlargement of What Has Been Here Said.
• An Appendix of Objections to This Essay, With Answers to the Same.
• Appendix.
• Bibliography of the Printed Writings of Sir William Petty 1 .
• Supplement to the Bibliography of Petty's Works.
• Bibliography of the Natural and Political Observations.

APPENDICES TO GRAUNT's OBSERVATIONS.

APPENDIX I.

Though Graunt appears to have written, in addition to the “Observations,” something on the advance of excise and something on religion, it is probable that nothing else from his pen has been preserved save the following brief note in Birch's History of the Royal Society, vol. 1. p. 294:—

19 Aug. 1663. “Mr Graunt brought in his account of the multiplication and growth of carps and salmons; which was ordered to be registered, as follows:

A pond new digged in Deptford for horses and other cattle to water in the year 1658, two male and two female carp being then put in with intention to breed; in the year 1662 the pond being tainted with fish, so that the cattle refused to drink, there were then taken out of this pond eight hundred, seventy and odd carps, of about nine inches in length, some more, some less; a great number of smaller fish being left for breeders.

And in the Severne and elsewhere it hath been experimented, by fastening of small pieces of tape or silk through the gills of young salmon, that in two years they have advanced to near three foot in length.”

APPENDIX II.

The following abstract of the weekly bills of mortality of London for the years 1597–1600, hitherto unprinted, are among the Ashmole MSS. (824, f. 196–199) in the Bodleian Library. They fill a portion of the gap between the series of bills for 1578–1583 printed by Dr Creighton and Graunt's tables. They indicate the growth of population in the urban district and establish affirmatively the comparative freedom of the city from the plague during four years of peculiar interest in the history of the English drama.

QUANTULUMCUNQUE
CONCERNING MONEY.
1682

NOTE ON THE “QUANTULUMCUNQUE.”

Sir William Petty's
Quantulumcunque concerning Money, 1682.

To the Lord Marquess of Halyfax.

SUppose that 20s. of new mill'd Money1 doth weigh 4 Ounces Troy, according to Custom or Statute. Suppose that 20s. of old Eliz. and James's Money, which ought also to weigh four Ounces Troy2 , doth weigh three Ounces Troy; and vary variously between 3 and 4 Ounces, viz. none under 3, and none full 4.

Suppose that much of the new mill'd regular Money is carried into the East-Indies, but none of the old light and unequal Money.

QUESTIONS.

Qu. 1. Whether the old unequal Money ought to be new Coined, and brought to an equality?

Answ. It ought: Because Money made of Gold and Silver is the best Rule of Commerce and must therefore be equal, or else it is no Rule; and consequently no Money, and but bare Metal which was Money before it was worn and abused into Inequality.

Qu. 2. At whose Charge?

Answ. At the States Charge, as it now is: Because the Owner was no cause of its Inequality, but the States neglect in preventing and punishing such Abuses, which are remedied by new Coinage.

Qu. 3. Of what weight and fineness ought the new Shilling to be?

Answ. Of the same with the other present new Money, and which the old was of, when it was new: Because all must be like, all according to the Statute; and all fit to pay ancient Debts, according to what was really lent. ‖

Qu. 4. Suppose 20s. of old Money may make but 18s. of new, who shall bear the loss of the two shillings?

Answ. Not the States: Because men would clip their own Money: But the Owner himself must bear the loss, because he might have refused light and defective Money, or put it away in time; it being sufficient that he shall have new regular beautiful Money for his old unequal Money, at the States Charge, Ounce for Ounce weight.

Qu. 5. After this Reformation of Coin, Will more Silver be carried out of England, suppose into the East Indies, then before; and to the Damage of England?

Answ. Somewhat more: But none to the Damage of England, Eo Nomine; but rather to its Profit: Because the Merchant will be considered for the Manufacture of the new Money; besides the Metal of it, as he only was when he carried out Spanish Reals.

Qu. 6. Whereas the Merchant carries Scarlet and Silver to the Indies, will he not now carry only the new coined Silver?

Answ. The Merchant will buy as much Scarlet as he can for 100 new Shillings, and then consider whether he shall get more Silk in the Indies for that Scarlet than for another 100 of the like Shillings: And, according to this Conjecture, he will carry Scarlet or Shillings in specie, or part one, part the other, if he be in doubt.

Qu. 7. But will not England be impoverished by Merchants carrying out the said 100 Shillings?

Answ. No, if he bring home for them as much Silk as will yield above 100 Shillings, (perhaps 200 Shillings) in Spain, and then bring the same 200 into England: Or, if he bring home as much Pepper as an English man will give him 200 of the like Shillings for. So the Merchant and England shall both Gain by Exporting the 100 Shillings1 .

Qu. 8. But if the new Shilling were but ¾ths of the weight as formerly, then the Merchant would not meddle with them at all, and so secure this fear of Impoverishment?

Answ. The Merchant would Export then, just as before; Only he will give but ¾ so much Pepper, or other Indian Goods, for the new retrenched Shilling as he did for the old: And would accept in India ¾ as much Pepper as he formerly had for the old: And consequently there would be no difference, but among a few such Fools as take Money by its name, and not by its weight and fineness.

Qu. 9. If a Shilling was by new Coinage reduced to ¾ of its present weight, should we not thereby have ⅓ more of Money then now we have, and consequently be so much the richer? ‖

Answ. You would indeed have ⅓ part more of the new christned Shillings; but not an Ounce more of Silver, nor Money; nor could you get an Ounce more of Forreign Commodities for all your new multiplied Money than before; Nor even for any Domestick Commodities; but perhaps a little at first from the few Fools above mentioned. As for Instance; Suppose you buy a Silver Vessel from a Goldsmith weighing 20 Ounces, at 6s. per Ounce, making 6 Pounds2 or 24 Ounces of Coined Silver; now suppose that the said 6 Pounds were reduced from weighing 24 Ounces to weigh but 18 Ounces upon the new Coinage; but be still called 6 Pound even by the King's Proclamation; Can it be imagined that the Goldsmith will give his Vessel weighing 20 Ounces of wrought, for 18 Ounces of unwrought Silver? For the Workmanship of Money is of little value. Now the Absurdity is the same in all other Commodities, though not so demonstrable as in a Commodity whose Materials is the same with Money.

Qu. 10. Cannot Authority Command that men should give as much Commodity for the new retrencht Money, as for the old which weighed ⅓ part more?

Answ. Then the effect of such Authority would also be to take away ⅓ of all mens Goods, which are Commodities beyond Seas; and give the same to Forreigners, who would have them for ¾ of the usual quantity of Silver: And the same Authority would take away from the Creditor ⅓ of the Money which was due before the Proclamation.

Qu. 11. Whereas you suppose retrenching ¼ in the new Coinage; Suppose it was but , how would the matter be then?

Answ. Just the same: for Magis & minus non mutant speciem: But it were better you supposed that one Shilling were to be taken for 10 or 20, then the Absurdity would be it self so visible, as to need no such Demonstration, as is needful in such small matters as Common Sence cannot discern: For if the wealth of the Nation could be decupled by a Proclamation, it were strange that such Proclamations have not long since been made by our Governours.

Qu. 12. Will not some men, having occasions to buy Commodities in Forreign Parts, carry out all Money, and so not Vend or Export our own Commodities at all?

Answ. If some English Merchants should be so improvident, yet the Forreign Merchants would buy up such English Commodities as they wanted, with Money brought into England from their respective ‖ Countries, or with such Commodities as England likes better than Money. For the vending of English Commodities doth not depend upon any other thing, but the use and need which Forreigners have of them. But were it not a folly for an English man not to carry Lead into Turkey; but go thither with Money, in his Ballast, and so loose the Freight of the Lead, which he might sell there; And that a Ship should come from Turkey with Money, in her Ballast also, to fetch Lead from England, which might have been carried at first by the English Ship? No: The Art of a Merchant is to consider all those Matters, so as no Prince's Proclamation concerning the Weight and Denominations of Coins, signifies anything to Forreigners when they know it, nor to his own Subjects pro futuro, what e're Disturbances it may make amongst them pro prœterito. We say again; it were better for a Prince owing 20s. to say he will pay but 15s. than disguising his own particular purpose, to say that all Landlords shall henceforth take 15s. Rent for 20s. due to them by their Tenants Leases; and that he who hath lent 100l. on the Monday, (the Proclamation of Retrenchment coming out on Tuesday,) may be repaid on Wednesday with ¾ or 75l. of the very Money he lent two days before.

Qu. 13. Why is not our old worn unequal Money new Coined and equallized?

Answ. There may be many weak Reasons for it; But the only good one which I know, is, that bad and unequal Money may prevent hoarding, whereas weighty, fine, and beautiful Money doth encourage it in some few timorous Persons, but not in the Body of Trading men. Upon the account of Beauty our Britannia Half pence1 were almost all horded as Medals till they grew common; For if but 100 of those piece had been Coined, they would, for their Work and Rarity, have been worth above 5s. each, which for their Matter are not worth that Half penny they pass for: For in them, Materiam superabat Opus.

Qu. 14. Why hath Money been raised, or retrencht, or imbased by many wise States, and so often?

Answ. When any State doth these things, they are like Bankrupt Merchants, who Compound for their Debts by paying 16s. 12s. or 10s. in the pound; Or forcing their Creditors to take off their Goods at much above the Market rates. And the same State might as well have paid but ¾ of what they ow'd, as to retrench their Money in General to ¾ of the known weight and fineness. And these practices have been compassed by Bankers and Cashiers, for oblique Considerations, from the Favourites of such Princes and States. ‖

Qu. 15. It is then the Honour of England that no such Tricks have been practiced, though in the greatest Streights that ever that State hath been in?

Answ. It hath been their Wisdom, and consequently their Honour to keep up a Rule and Measure of trade amongst themselves, and with all Nations.

Qu. 16. But is there no Case wherein Money may be justly and honourably raised?

Answ. Yes, in order to Regulation and Equalizing of Species of Coines; As when two Species of one Weight and Fineness are taken at different Rates, then the one may be raised or the other depressed: But this must be rated by the estimation of the whole World as near as it can be known, and not by any private Notion; and the like may be done between Gold and Silver1 .

Qu. 17. What do you think of the rising or falling of the Price of Lands, from this following Instance, viz. A piece of Land was sold 60 Years ago for 1000l. that is, for a 1000 Jacobusses; and the same Land is now sold for 1000l. or 1000 Guineas, and the Guinea is but ⅚ the weight of the Jacobus. Is the Land cheaper now than 60 Years ago?

Answ. It looks like a Demonstration that it is: Yet if Gold be not Money, but a Commodity next like to Money, and that Silver be only Money; then we must see whether 1000 jacobusses would then purchase no more Silver than 1000 Guineas will do now: For if so, the Land was heretofore and now sold for the same Quantity of Money, though not of Gold; and is neither risen nor fallen by what hath been instanced.

Qu. 18. What is the difference between retrenching or raising of Money, and imbasing the Mettle of the same, as by mixing Copper with Silver?

Answ. The first is the better of the two, if such Mixture be of no use in other things: For if 20s. which contains 4 Ounces of Silver, should be reduced to 3 Ounces of Silver, it is better than to add one Ounce of Copper to the same, in order to make 4 seeming Ounces as before: For if you come to want the said 3 Ounces of Silver mixt with Copper, you must lose the Copper, upon the Test, and the Charge of Refining also, which will amount to above 4 per cent.

Qu. 19. What do you object against small silver Money; as against Single Pence, Two Pences, &c.?

Answ. That the Coinage of small Pieces would be very chargeable, and the Pieces themselves apt to be lost, and more liable to wearing; for little of our old small Money is now to be seen, and our Groats are worn away to Three half Pence in Metal. ‖

Qu. 20. What do you say of Money made wholly of baseMetal such as Farthings, &c.?

Answ. That the want of Materials ought to be made up by the fineness of Coinage, to very near the intrinsick Value; or what is gained by the Want of either, to be part of the King's Revenue.

Qu. 21. Which is best, Copper or Tin, for this purpose?

Answ. Copper: Because it is capable of the most imitable and durable Coinage: though the Copper be Foraign, and Tin a Native Commodity. For suppose Copper and Tin of the same Value in England; yet if 100 Weight of Tin sent to Turky will fetch home as much Silk as will fetch above 100 of Copper from Sweden, in such Case the Difference between Native and Foreign is nothing.

Qu. 22. This Doctrine may extend to a free exportation of Money and Bullion, which is against our Laws: Are our Laws not good?

Answ. Perhaps they are against the Laws of Nature, and also impracticable: For we see that the Countries which abound with Money and all other Commodities, have followed no such Laws: And contrarywise, that the Countries which have forbid these Exportations under the highest Penalties, are very destitute both of Money and Merchandize.

Qu. 23. Is not a Country the Poorer for having less Money?

Answ. Not always: For as the most thriving Men keep little or no Money by them, but turn and wind it into various Commodities to their great Profit, so may the whole Nation also; which is but many particular Men united.

Qu. 24. May a Nation, suppose England, have too much Money?

Answ. Yes: As a particular Merchant may have too much Money, I mean coined Money, by him.

Qu. 25. Is there any way to know how much Money is sufficient for any Nation?

Answ. I think it may pretty well be guessed at; viz. I think that so much Money as will pay half a Years Rent for all the Lands of England, and a Quarters Rent of the Houseing, and a Weeks Expence of all the People, and about a Quarter of the Value of all the exported Commodities, is sufficient for that purpose. Now when the States will cause these things to be computed, and the Quantity of their Coins to be known, which the new Coining of their old Money will best do, then it may also be known whether we have too much or too little Money.

Qu. 26. What remedy is there if we have too little Money? ‖

Answ. We must erect a Bank, which well computed, doth almost double the Effect of our coined Money: And we have in England Materials for a Bank which shall furnish Stock enough to drive the Trade of the whole Commercial World.

Quest. 27. What if we have too much Coine?

Answ. We may melt down the heaviest, and turn it into the Splendor of Plate, in Vessels or Utensils of Gold and Silver; or send it out, as a Commodity, where the same is wanting or desired; or let it out at Intrest, where Intrest is high.

Qu. 28. What is Interest or Use-Money?

Answ. A Reward for forbearing the use of your own Money for a Term of Time agreed upon, whatsoever need your self may have of it in the mean while.

Qu. 29. What is Exchange?

Answ. Local Interest, or a Reward given for having your Money at such a Place where you most need the use of it.

Qu. 30. What is the Trade of a Banker?

Answ. Buying and selling of Interest and Exchange: Who is honest only upon the Penalty of losing a beneficial Trade, founded upon a good Opinion of the World, which is called Credit.

Qu. 31. You were speaking of base Money and Farthings, which are generally below the intrinsick Value, and therefore ought not to be permitted to increase ad infinitum. Is there any way to know how many were enough?

Answ. I think there is: viz. Allowing about 12d. in Farthings, to every Family; So as if there be a Million of Families in England (as I think there be) then about 50000l. in Farthings would suffice for Change; and if such Farthings were but ⅕ below the intrinsick Value, a Nation would pay but 10000l. for this Convenience: But if this way of Families be not Limitation enough, you may help it by considering the smallest Piece of Silver Money current in the Nation; which how much lesser it is, by so much lesser may the Number of Farthings be: The use of Farthings being but to make up Payments in Silver, and to adjust Accompts: To whihc end of adjusting Accompts let me add, that if your old defective Farthings were cryed down to five a penny, you may keep all Accompts in a way of Decimal Arithmetick, which hath been long desired for the ease and certainty of Accompts.

Qu. 32. What do you think of our Laws for limiting Interest? ‖

Answ. The same as limiting the Exportation of Money; and there may be as well Laws for limiting Exchange also: For Interest always carrieth with it an Ensurance praemium, which is very casual, in Ireland there was a time when Land (the highest Security) was sold for 2 Years Purchase: It was then naturally just to take 20, 30, or 40 per cent. Interest; whereas there the Law allows but 10. And since that time, Land being risen to 12 Years purchase, responsible Men will not give above. 8. And insolent1 . Men will offer Cent. per Cent. notwithstanding the Law. Again, suppose a Man hath 100l. of Land, worth 20 Years Purchase, and another 100l. in Houses, worth 12 Years and an other 100l. in Shipping, worth 2 Years Purchase; and another in Horses, worth 6 Months Purchase; Is it not manifest he must have a greater Yearly pramium for lending his House than his Land, his Ship than his House, and his House than his Ship? For if his Horse be worth 100l. he cannot hire him out for less than 10s.per diem, whereas the Land will not yield a Groat for the same time; and these Hires are the same with Interest.

Price 2d.2

LONDON Printed in the Year, 1695.

NOTE ON THE ESSAYS IN “POLITICAL ARITHMETICK.”

ANOTHER
ESSAY
IN
Political Arithmetick,
Concerning the Growth of the
CITY
OF
LONDON:
WITH THE
Measures, Periods, Causes, and Consequences thereof.1682.
By Sir William Petty, Fellow of the ROYAL SOCIETY.
LONDON:
Printed by H. H. for Mark Pardoe, at the Black Raven, over against Bedford-House, in the Strand. 1683.

NOTE ON “ANOTHER ESSAY IN POLITICAL ARITHMETIC.”

THE STATIONER

To the Reader.

THe ensuing Essay concerning the Growth of the City of London was entituled [Another Essay]1intimating that some other Essay had preceded it, which was not to be found. I having been much importuned for that precedent Essay2 , have found that the same was about the Growth, Encrease, and Multiplication of Mankind, which Subject should in Order of Nature precede that of the Growth of the City of London, but am not able to procure the Essay itself, onely I have obtained from a Gentleman3 , who sometimes corresponded with Sir W. Petty, an Extract of a Letter from Sir William to him, which I verily believe containeth the scope thereof; wherefore, I must desire the Reader to be content therewith, till more can be had.had.

The Extract of a Letter concerning the scope of an Essay intended to precede Another Essay concerning the Growth of the City of (London), &c. An Essay in Political Arithmetick, concerning the Value and Encrease of People and Colonies.

THE scope of this Essay, is concerning People and Colonies, and to make way for Another Essay concerning the Growth of the City of London. I desire in this first Essay to give the World some light concerning the Numbers of People in England, with Wales, and in Ireland; as also, of the number of Houses, and Families, wherein they live, and of Acres they occupy.

2. How many live upon their Lands, how many upon their Personal Estates, and Comerce, and how many upon Art, and Labour; how many upon Alms, how many upon Offices and Publick Employments, and how many as Cheats and Thieves; how many are Impotents, Children, and decrepit Old men.

3. How many upon the Poll-Taxes in England, do pay extraordinary Rates, and how many at the Level1 .

4. How many Men and Women are Prolifick, and how many of each are Married or Unmarried.

5. What the Value of People2 are in England, and what in Ireland at a Medium, both as Members of the Church or Commonwealth, or as Slaves and Servants to one another; with a ‖ Method how to estimate the same, in any other Country or Colony.

6. How to compute the Value of Land in Colonies, in comparison to England and -Ireland.

7 How 10 thousand People in a Colony may be, and planted to the best advantage.

8. A Conjecture in what number of years England and Ireland may be fully peopled, as also all America, and lastly the whole habitable Earth.

9. What spot of the Earths-Globe were fittest for a general and universal Emporium, whereby all the people thereof may best enjoy one anothers Labours and Commodities.

10. Whether the speedy Peopling of the Earth would make

• 1. For the good of Mankind.
• 2. To fulfil the revealed Will of God.
• 3. To what Prince or State the same would be most advantageous. ‖

11. An exhortation to all thinking Men to salve the Scriptures and other good Histories, concerning the Number of People in all Ages of the World, in the great Cities thereof, and elsewhere.

12. An Appendix concerning the different Number of Sea-fish and Wild-fowl, at the end of every thousand years, since, Noah's Flood.

13. An Hypothesis of the use of those spaces (of about 8,000 miles through) within the Globe of our Earth, supposing a shell of 150 miles thick.

14. What may be the meaning of Glorified Bodies, in case the place of the Blessed shall be without the Convex of the Orb of the fixed Stars, if that the whole System of the World was made for the use of our Earths-men. ‖

The Principal Points of this Discourse.

1. THAT London doubles in Forty Years, and all England in Three hundred and sixty Years.

2. That there be, Anno 1682. about Six hundred and seventy Thousand Souls in London, and about seven Millions four hundred Thousand in all England and Wales, and about twenty-eight Millions of Acres of Land1 .

3. That the Periods of doubling the People, are found to be in all Degrees, from between Ten, to Twelve hundred Years.

4. That the Growth of London must stop of its self, before the Year 1800.

5. A Table helping to understand the Scriptures, concerning the Number of People mentioned in them. ‖

6. That the World will be fully Peopled within the next Two Thousand Years.

7. Twelve Touch-stones2 , whereby to Try any Proposal, pretended for the Publick Good.

8. How the City of London may be made (Morally speaking) Invincible.

9. An Help to Uniformity in Religion.

10. That 'tis possible to increase Mankind by Generation four times more than at present.

11. The Plagues of London is the Chief Impediment and Objection against the Growth of the City.

12. That an Exact Account of the People is Necessary in this Matter. ‖

Of the Growth of the CITY of LONDON: And of the Measures, Periods, Causes, and Consequences thereof.

BY the City of London, we mean the Housing within the Walls of the Old City, with the LibertiesWhat is meant by London. thereof, Westminster, the Borrough of Southwark, and so much of the built Ground in Middlesex and Surrey, whose Houses are contiguous unto, or within Call of those afore-mentioned. Or else we mean the Housing which stand upon the Ninety seven Parishes within the Walls of London; upon the Sixteen Parishes next, without them; the Ten Parishes of Westminster, and the Seven Parishes ‖ without them all; all which One hundred and thirty Parishes1 are comprehended within the Weekly Bills of Mortality2 .

The Growth of this City is Measured, 1. By the Quantity of Ground, or Number of Acres upon which itWhat is meant by the Growth of London. stands. 2. By the Number of Houses, as the same appears by the Hearth-Books and late Maps. 3. By the Cubical Content of the said Housing.

4. By the Flooring of the same. 5. By the Number of Days-work, or Charge of Building the said Houses. 6. By the Value of the said Houses, according to their Yearly Rent, and Number of Years Purchase. 7. By the Number of Inhabitants; according to which latter sense only, we make our Computations in this Essay.

Till a better Rule can be obtained, we conceive that the Proportion ‖ of the People may be sufficiently Measured by the Proportion of the Burials in such Years as were neither remarkable for extraordinary Healthfulness or Sickliness.

That the City hath Increased in this latter sense, appearsIn what Measures the City hath Increased. from the Bills of Mortality, represented in the two following Tables, viz. One whereof is a continuation for Eighteen years, ending 1682, of that Table which was Published in the 117th. pag. of the Book of the Observations upon the London Bills of Mortality, Printed in the Year 1676. The other sheweth what Number of People dyed at a Medium of two Years, indifferently taken, at about Twenty Years distance from each other. ‖

1

According to which latter Table, there dyed as followeth. ‖

The latter of the said two Tables.

There dyed in London, At a Medium between the Years.

1

Wherein Observe, That the Number C. is double to A. and 806 over. That D. is double to B.2 within 1906. That C. and D. is double to A. B. within 293. That E. is double to C. within 1435. That D. and E. is double to B. and C. within 3341. And that C. and D. and E. are double to A. and B. and C. within 17363 . And that E. is above Quadruple to A. All which differences (every way considered) do allow the doubling of the People of London in forty Years, to be a sufficient estimate thereof in round ‖ Numbers, and without the trouble of Fractions. We also say, That 669930 is near the Number of People now in London, because the Burials are 22331. which Multiplyed by 30, (one dying Yearly out of 30, as appears in the 94 pag. of the afore-mentioned Observations4 ) maketh the said Number; and because there are 84 Thousand Tenanted Houses (as we are Credibly Informed5 ) which at 8 in each, makes 672 Thousand Souls; the said two Accounts differing inconsiderably from each other.

We have thus pretty well found out in what Number of Years (viz. in about 40,) that the City of London hath doubled, and the present Number of Inhabitants to be aboutThe People of London are about the Eleventh part of all England and Wales. 670 Thousand. We must now also endeavour the same for the whole Territory of England and Wales. In Order whereunto, we ‖

First say, That the Assessment of London is about an Eleventh part of the whole Territory1 , and therefore, that the People of the whole may well be Eleven times that of London, viz. about 7 Millions,The people of England about 7 Millions and 400 thousand. 369 Thousand Soúls; with which Account that of the Poll-money, Hearth-money2 , and the Bishops late Numbring of the Communicants3 , do pretty well agree; wherefore, although the said Number of 7 Millions, 369 Thousand, be not (as it cannot be) a demonstrated Truth, yet it will serve for a good Supposition, which is as much as we want at present.

As for the time in which the People double, it is yet more hard to be found: For we have good Experience (in the said 94 pag. of the afore-mentioned Observations) That ‖ in the Countrey, but one of fifty dye per Annum; and by other late Accounts, that there have been sometimes but 24 Births for 23 Burials, The which two points, if they were universally, and constantly true, there would be colour enough to say, that the People doubled but in about 1200 Years. As for Example: Suppose there be 600 people, of which let a fiftieth part dye per Annum, then there shall dye 12 per Annum; and if the Births be as 24 to 23, then the Increase of the People shall be somewhat above half a Man per Annum, and consequently the supposed Number of 600, cannot be doubled but in 1126 Years, which to reckon in round Numbers, and for that the afore-mentioned Fractions were not exact, we had rather call 1200.

There are also other good Observations, That even in the Countrey, one in about 30, or 32 per Annum ‖ hath dyed, and that there have been five Births for four Burials1 . Now, according to this Doctrine, 20 will dye per Annum out of the above 600, and 25 will be Born, so as the Increase will be 5, which is a hundred and twentieth part of the said 600. So as we have two fair Computations, differing from each other as one to ten; and there are also several other good Observations for other Measures.

I might here Insert, That although the Births in this last Computation be 25 of 600, or a Twenty fourth part of the People; yet that in Natural possibility, they may be near thrice as many, and near 75. For that by some late Observations, the Teeming Females between 15 and 44, are about 180 of the said 600, and the Males of between 18 and 59, are about 180 also, and that every Teeming Woman can bear a Child ‖ once in two Years; from all which it is plain, that the Births may be 90. (and abating 15 for Sickness, Young Abortions, and Natural Barrenness) there may remain 75 Births, which is an Eighth of the People; which by some Observations we have found to be but a two and thirtieth part, or but a quarter of what is thus shewn to be Naturally possible. Now, according to this Reckoning, if the Births may be 75 of 600, and the Burials but 15, then the Annual Increase of the People will be 60; and so the said 600 People may double in 10 Years, which differs yet more from 1200 above-mentioned. Now, to get out of this Difficulty, and to temper those vast disagreements, I took the Medium of 50 and 30 dying per Annum, and pitch'd upon 40; and I also took the Medium between 24 Births and 23 Burials, and 5 Births for 4 Burials, ‖ viz. allowing about 10 Births for 9 Burials; upon which Supposition, there must dye 15 per Annum out of the above-mentioned 600, and the Births must be 16 and two Thirds, and the Increase I, and two Thirds, or five Thirds of a Man, which Number compared with 1800 Thirds, or 600 Men, gives 360 Years for the timeThat the time of doubling is here and now 360 Years. of doubling (including some Allowance for Wars, Plagues, and Famine, the Effects thereof, though they be Terrible at the Times and Places where they happen, yet in a period of 360 Years, is no great Matter in the whole Nation For the Plagues of England in 20 Years hath carried away scarce an Eightieth part of the People of the whole Nation; and the late 10 Years Civil Wars, (the like whereof hath not been in several Ages before) did not take away ‖ above a fortieth part of the whole people.)

According to which Account or Measure of doubling, if there be now in England and Wales, 7 Millions 400 Thousand People, there were about 5 Millions 526 Thousand in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign, Anno 1560. and about two Millions at the Norman Conquest, of which Consult the Dooms-day Book, and my Lord Hale's Origination of Mankind1

Memorandum, That if the People double in 360 Years, that the present 320 Millions computed by some320 Millions now in the World. Learned Men, (from the Measures of all the Nations of the World, their degrees of being Peopled, and good Accounts of the people in several of them) to be now upon the Face of the Earth1 , will within the next 2000 Years so increase as to give one ‖ Head for every two Acres of Land in the Habitable part of the Earth. And then, according to the Prediction of the Scriptures, there must be Wars and great Slaughter, &c.

Wherefore, as an Expedient against the above-mentioned difference between 10 and 1200 Years, we do for the present, and in this Countrey admit of 360 Years to be the time wherein the People of England do double, according to the present Laws and Practice of Marriages.

Now, if the City double its People in 40 Years, and the present Number be 670 Thousand, and if the whole Territory be 7 Millions 400 Thousand, and double in 360 Years, as aforesaid; then by the underwritten Table it appears, that Anno 1840, the People of the City will be 10718880, and those of the whole Country but 10917389, which is but inconsiderably more. Wherefore ‖ it is Certain and Necessary that the Growth of the City must stop before the said Year 1840: And will be at its utmost height in the next preceding Period, Anno 1800, when the Number of the City will be Eight times its present Number, viz. 5 Millions 359 Thousand. And when (besides the said Number) there will be 4 Millions 466 Thousand to perform the Tillage, Pasturage, and other Rural Works Necessary to be done without the said City, as by the following Table, viz.

Now, when the People of London shall come to be so near the People of all England, Then it follows,That London will be at its highest growth, and eight times as great as now, Anno 1800. That the Growth of London must stop before the said Year 1842, as aforesaid, and must be at its greatest height Anno 1800, when it will be eight times more than now, with above four Millions for the Service of the Countrey and Ports, as aforesaid.

Of the afore-mentioned vast difference between and 1200 Years for doubling the People, we makeA digression of the use of the vast difference between 10 and 1200 Years of doubling. this use, viz. To justifie the Scriptures and all other good Histories concerning the Number of the People in Ancient Time. For supposing the eight Persons who came out of the Ark, Increased by a Progressive doubling in every 10 Years, might grow in the ‖ first 100 Years after the Flood from 8 to 8000, and that in 350 Years after the Flood (when abouts Noah dyed) to one Million, and by this time 1682, to 320 Millions (which by rational conjecture, are thought to be now in the World) it will not be hard to compute, how in the intermediate Years, the Growths may be made, according to what is set down in the following Table, wherein making the doubling to be 10 Years at first, and within 1200 Years at last, we take a discretionary liberty, but justifiable by Observations and the Scriptures for the rest, which Table we leave to be Corrected by Historians, who know the bigness of Ancient Cities, Armies, and Colonies in the respective Ages of the World, in the meantime affirming that without such difference in the Measures and Periods for doubling (the extreams whereof we have demonstrated ‖ to be real and true) it is impossible to solve what is written in the Holy Scriptures and other Authentick Books. For if we pitch upon any one Number throughout for this purpose, 150 Years is the fittest of all round Numbers; according to which, there would have been but 512 Souls in the whole World in Moses's time (being 800 Years after the Flood) when 603 Thousand Israelites of above 20 Years Old (besides those of other Ages, Tribes, and Nations) were found upon an exact Survey appointed by God1 , Whereas our Table makes 12 Millions. And there would have been but 8000 in David's Time, when were found 1100 Thousand of above 20 Years Old (besides others, as aforesaid) in Israel, upon the Survey instigated by Satan2 , whereas our Table makes 32 Millions. And there would have been but a quarter of a ‖ Million about the Birth of Christ, or Augustus his Time, when Rome and the Roman Empire were so great, whereas our Table makes 100 Millions. Where Note, That the Israelites in about 500 Years between their coming out of Egypt to David's Reign, increased from 603 Thousand to 1100 Thousand.

On the other hand, if we pitch upon a less Number, as 100 Years, the World would have been over-peopled 700 Years since. Wherefore, no one Number will solve the Phœnomena, and therefore we have supposed several in Order to make the following Table, which we again desire Historians to Correct, according to what they find in Antiquity concerning the Number of the People in each Age and Countrey of the World.

We did (not long since) assist a worthy Divine3 , writing against some ‖ Scepticks, who would have baffled our belief of the Resurrection, by saying, that the whole Globe of the Earth could not furnish Matter enough for all the Bodies that must Rise at the last Day, much less would the surface of the Earth furnish footing for so vast a Number; whereas we did (by the Method afore-mentioned) assert the Number of Men now living, and also of those that had dyed since the beginning of the World, and did withal shew, that half the Island of Ireland would afford them all, not only Footing to stand upon, but Graves to lye down in, for that whole Number; and that two Mountains in that Countrey were as weighty as all the Bodies that had ever been from the beginning of the World to the Year 1680, when this Dispute happened. For which purpose I have digressed from my intended purpose, to insert ‖ this Matter, intending to prosecute this hint further, upon some more proper Occasion.

A Table showing how the People might have doubled in the several Ages of the World.

Anno after the Flood.

It is here to be Noted, That in this Table we have assigned a different Number of Years for the time of doubling the People in the several Ages of the World, and might have done the same for the several Countries of the World, and therefore the said several Periods assigned to the whole World in the Lump, may well enough consist with the 360 Years especially assigned to England, between this Day, and the Norman Conquest; And the said 360 Years may well enough serve for a Supposition between this time, and that of the Worlds being fully Peopled; Nor do we lay any stress upon one or the other in this disquisition concerning the Growth of the City of London.

We have spoken of the Growth of London, with the Measures and Periods thereof, we come next to the Causes and Consequences of the same. ‖

The Causes of its Growth from 1642 to 1682, may be said to have been as followeth, viz. From 1642 to 1650, That Men came out of the Countrey to London, to shelter themselves from the Outrages of the Civil Wars, during that time; from 1650 to 1660, The Royal Party came to London, for their more private and inexpensive Living; from 1660 to 1670, the Kings Friends and Party came to receive his Favours after his Happy Restauration; from 1670 to 1680, The frequency of Plots and Parliaments might bring extraordinary Numbers to the City; But what Reasons to assign for the like Increase from 1604 to 1642, I know not, unless I should pick out some Remarkable Accident happening in each part of the said Period, and make that to be the Cause of this Increase (as Vulgar People make the Cause of every Mans Sickness to be ‖ what he did last eat) wherefore, rather than so to say quidlibet de quolibet; I had rather quit even what I have above-said to be the Cause of London's Increase from 1642 to 1682, and put the whole upon some Natural and Spontaneous Benefits and Advantages that Men find by Living in great more than in small Societies; and shall therefore seek for the Antecedent Causes of this Growth, in the Consequences of the like, considered in greater Characters and Proportions.

Now, whereas in Arithmetick, out of two false Positions the Truth is extracted, so I hope out of two extravagant contrary Suppositions, to draw forth some solid and consistent Conclusion, viz.

The first of the said two Suppositions is, That the City of London is seven times bigger than now, and that the Inhabitants of it are four ‖ Millions 690 Thousand People, and that in all the other Cities, Ports, Towns, and Villages, there are but two Millions 710 Thousand more.

The other Supposition is, That the City of London is but a seventh part of its present bigness, and that the Inhabitants of it are but 96 Thousand, and that the rest of the Inhabitants (being 7 Millions 304 Thousand) do Co-habit thus, 104 Thousand of them in small Citics and Towns, and that the rest, being seven Millions 200 Thousand, do Inhabit in Houses not contiguous to one another, viz. in 1200 Thousand Houses, having about 24 Acres of Ground belonging to each of them, accounting about 28 Millions of Acres to be in the whole Territory of England, Wales, and the adjacent Islands; which any Man that pleases may Examine upon a good Map. ‖

Now, the Question is, In which of these two Imaginary states, would be the most convenient, commodious and comfortable Livings?

But this general Question divides it self into the several Questions, relating to the following Particulars, viz.

1. For the Defence of the Kingdom against Foraign Powers.

2. For preventing the Intestine Commotions of Parties and Factions.

3. For Peace and Uniformity in Religion.

4. For the Administration of Justice.

5. For the proportionably Taxing of the People, and easie Levying the same.

6. For Gain by Foraign Commerce.

7. For Husbandry, Manufacture, and for Arts of Delight and Ornament. ‖

8. For lessening the Fatigue of Carriages and Travelling.

9. For preventing Beggars and Thieves.

10. For the Advancement and Propagation of Useful Learning.

11. For Increasing the People by Generation.

12. For preventing the Mischiefs of Plagues and Contagions. And withal, which of the said two states is most Practicable and Natural, for in these and the like particulars, do lye the Tests and Touch-stones of all Proposals, that can be made for the Publick Good.

First, as to Practicable, we say, That although our said Extravagant Proposals are both in Nature possible, yet it is not Obvious to every Man to conceive, how London, now seven times bigger than in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign, should be seven times bigger than now it is, ‖ and 49 times bigger than Anno 1560. To which I say, 1. That the present City of London stands upon less than 15001 Acres of Ground, wherefore a City, seven times as large may stand upon 10500 Acres, which is about equivalent to a Circle of four Miles and a half in Diameter, and less than 15 Miles in Circumference. 2. That a Circle of Ground of 35 Miles Semidiameter will bear Corn, Garden-stuff, Fruits, Hay, and Timber, for the four Millions 690 Thousand Inhabitants of the said City and Circle, so as nothing of that kind need be brought from above 35 Miles distance from the said City; for the Number of Acres within the said Circle, reckoning one2 Acre sufficient to furnish Bread and Drink-Corn for every Head, and two Acres will furnish Hay for every Necessary Horse; And that the Trees which may grow in the Hedge-rows of the ‖ Fields within the said Circle, may furnish Timber for 600 Thousand Houses. 3. That all live Cattel and great Animals can bring themselves to the said City; and that Fish can be brought from the Lands-end and Berwick as easily as now. 4. Of Coals there is no doubt: And for Water, 20s. per Family (or 600 Thousand pounds per Annum in the whole) will serve this City, especially with the help of the New River. But if by Practicable be understood, that the present state may be suddenly changed into either of the two above-mentioned Proposals, I think it is not Practicable. Wherefore the true Question is, unto or towards which of the said two Extravagant states it is best to bend the present state by degrees, viz. Whether it be best to lessen or enlarge the present City? In Order where-unto we enquire (as to the first Question) which ‖ state is most Defensible against Forraign Powers, saying, that if the above-mentioned Housing, and a border of Ground, of 3 quarters of a Mile broad, were encompassed with a Wall and Ditch of 20 Miles about (as strong as any in Europe, which would cost but a Million, or about a Penny in the shilling of the House-Rent for one Year) what Foraign Prince could bring an Army from beyond Seas, able to beat, 1. Our Sea-Forces, and next with Horse harrass'd at Sea, to resist all the fresh Horse that England could make, and then Conquer above a Million of Men, well United, Disciplin'd, and Guarded within such a Wall, distant everywhere 3 quarters of a Mile from the Housing, to elude the Granadoes and great Shot of the Enemy? 2. As to Intestine Parties and Factions, I suppose that 4 Millions 690 Thousand People United within this great ‖ City, could easily Govern half the said Number scattered without it, and that a few Men in Arms within the said City, and Wall, could also easily Govern the rest unarmed, or Armed in such manner as the Soveraign shall think fit. 3. As to Uniformity in Religion, I conceive, That if St. Martins Parish may (as it doth) consist of about 40 Thousand Souls, That this great City also may as well be made but as one Parish, with 7 times 130 Chappels, in which might not only be an Uniformity of Common Prayer, but in Preaching also; for that a thousand Copies of one Judiciously and Authentically Composed Sermon might be every Week read in each of the said Chappels without any subsequent Repetition of the same, as in the Case of Homilies. Whereas in England (wherein are near 10 Thousand Parishes, in each of which upon Sundays, Holy-days, ‖ and other Extraordinary Occasions, there should be about 100 Sermons per Annum, making about a Million of Sermons per Annum in the whole:) It were a Miracle, if a Million of Sermons Composed by so many Men, and of so many Minds and Methods, should produce Uniformity upon the discomposed understandings of about 8 Millions of Hearers.

4. As to the Administration of Justice. If in this great City shall dwell the Owners of all the Lands, and other Valuable things in England; If within it shall be all the Traders, & all the Courts, Offices, Records, Juries, and Witnesses; Then it follows, that Justice may be done with speed and ease.

5. As to the Equality and easie Levying of Taxes, It is too certain, That London hath at some time paid near half the Excise of England; and that the people pay ‖ thrice as much for the Hearths in London as those in the Countrey, in proportion to the People of each, and that the Charge of Collecting these Duties, have been about a sixth part of the Duty it self. Now, in this great City the Excise alone according to the present Laws, would not only be double to the whole Kingdom, but also more equal. And the Duty of Hearths of the said City, would exceed the present proceed of the whole Kingdom. And as for the Customs, We mention them not at present.

6. Whether more would be gain'd by Foraign Commerce1 .

The Gain which England makes by Lead, Coals, the Freight of Shipping, &c. may be the same, for ought I see, in both Cases. But the Gain which is made by Manufactures, will be greater, as the Manufacture it self is greater and better. For in so vast ‖ a City Manufactures will beget one another, and each Manufacture will be divided into as many parts as possible, whereby the Work of each Artisan will be simple and easie; As for Example. In the making of a Watch, If one Man shall make the Wheels, another the Spring, another shall Engrave the Dial-plate, and another shall make the Cases, then the Watch will be better and cheaper, than if the whole Work be put upon any one Man. And we also see that in Towns, and in the Streets of a great Town, where all the Inhabitants are almost of one Trade, the Commodity peculiar to those places is made better and cheaper than elsewhere. Moreover, when all sorts of Manufactures are made in one place, there every Ship that goeth forth, can suddenly have its Loading of so many several Particulars and Species as the Port whereunto she is bound ‖ can take off. Again, when the several Manufactures are made in one place, and Shipped off in another, the Carriage, Postage, and Travelling-charges will Inhance the Price of such Manufacture, and lessen the Gain upon Foraign Commerce. And lastly, when the Imported Goods are spent in the Port it self, where they are Landed, the Carriage of the same into other places, will create no surcharge upon such Commodity; all which particulars tends to the greater Gain by Foraign Commerce.

7. As for Arts of Delight and Ornament,

They are best promoted by the greatest Number of Emulators. And it is more likely that one Ingenious Curious Man may rather be found out amongst 4 Millions than 400 Persons. But as for Husbandry, viz. Tillage and Pasturage, I see no Reason, but the second state (when ‖ each Family is charged with the Culture of about 24 Acres) will best promote the same.

8. As for lessening the Fatigue of Carriage and Travelling,

The thing speaks it self, for if all the Men of Business, and all Artisans do Live within five Miles of each other; And if those who Live without the great City, do spend only such Commodities as grow where they Live, when the charge of Carriage and Travelling could be little.

9. As to the preventing of Beggars and Thieves,

I do not find how the differences of the said two states should make much difference in this particular; for Impotents (which are but one in about 600) ought to be maintained by the rest. 2. Those who are unable to work, through the evil Education of their Parents, ought (for ought I know) to be maintained ‖ by their nearest Kindred, as a just Punishment upon them. 3. And those who cannot find Work (though able and willing to perform it) by reason of the unequal application of Hands to Lands, ought to be provided for by the Magistrate and Land-Lord till that can be done; for there needs be no Beggars in Countries, where there are many Acres of unimproved improvable Land to every Head, as there are in England. As for Thieves, they are for the most part begotten from the same Cause; For it is against Nature, that any Man should venture his Life, Limb, or Liberty, for a wretched Livelyhood, whereas moderate Labour will produce a better. But of this see Sir Thomas Moor, in the first part of his Utopia1 .

10. As to the propagation and Improvement of Useful Learning, ‖

The same may be said concerning it as was above-said concerning Manufactures, and the Arts of Delight and Ornaments; for in the great vast City, there can be no so odd a Conceit or Design, whereunto some Assistance may not be found, which in the thin, scattered way of Habitation may not be.

11. As for the Increase of People by Generation,

I see no great difference from either of the two states, for the same may be hindred or promoted in either, from the same Causes.

12. As to the Plague,

It is to be remembred that one time with another, a Plague happeneth in London once in 20 Years, or there-abouts; for in the last hundred Years, between the Years 1582 and 1682, there have been five great Plagues, viz. Anno 1592, 1603, 1625, 1636, and 1665. And it is also to ‖ be remembred that the Plagues of London do commonly kill one fifth part of the Inhabitants. Now, if the whole People of England do double but in 360 Years, then the Annual Increase of the same is but 20000, and in 20 Years 400000. But if in the City of London there should be two Millions of People, (as there will be about 60 Years hence) then the Plague (killing one fifth of them, namely, 400000 once in 20 Years) will destroy as many in one Year, as the whole Nation can re-furnish in 20: And consequently the People of the Nation shall never Increase. But if the People of London shall be above 4 Millions (as in the first of our two Extravagant Suppositions is premised) then the People of the whole Nation shall lessen above 20000 per Annum. So as if People be worth 70l. per Head (as hath elsewhere been shown1 ) ‖ then the said greatness of the City will be a damage to it self and the whole Nation of 14 hundred Thousand pounds per Annum, and so pro rata, for a greater or lesser Number; wherefore to determine, which of the two states is best, (that is to say, towards which of the said two states Authority should bend the present state) a just Balance ought to be made between the disadvantages from the Plague, with the Advantages accruing from the other Particulars above-mentioned; unto which Balance a more exact Account of the People, and a better Rule for the Measure of its Growth is Necessary, than what we have here given, or are yet able to lay down. ‖

Post-script.

IT was not very pertinent to a Discourse concerning the Growth of the City of London, to thrust in Considerations of the Time when the whole World will be fully Peopled; and how to justifie the Scriptures concerning the Number of People mentioned in them; and concerning the Number of the Quick and the Dead, that may Rise at the last Day, &c. Nevertheless, since some Friends liking the said Digressions and Impertinencies (perhaps as sauce to a dry Discourse) have desired that the same might be explain'd and made out. I therefore say as followeth.

1. If the Number of Acres in the Habitable part of the Earth, be under ‖ 50 Thousand Millions; if Twenty Thousand Millions of People, are more than the said Number of Acres will feed; (few or no Countries being so fully Peopled;) and for that in six doublings (which will be in 2000 Years) the present 320 Millions will exceed the said 20 Thousand Millions.

2. That the Number of all those who have dyed since the Flood, is the sum of all the Products made by Multiplying the Number of the doubling Periods mentioned in the first Column of the last Table, by the Number of People respectively affixed to them, in the third Column of the same Table; the said sum being Divided by 40 (one dying out of 40 per Annum, out of the whole Mass of Mankind) which Quotient is 12570 Millions; Whereunto may be added, for those that dyed before the Flood, enough to make the lastmentioned ‖ Number 20 Thousand Millions, as the full Number of all that dyed, from the beginning of the World, to the Year 1682; unto which, if 320 Millions, the Number of those who are now alive, be added, the Total of the Quick and the Dead, will amount but unto one fifth part of the Graves, which the surface of Ireland will afford, without ever putting two Bodies into any one Grave; for there be in Ireland 28 Thousand square English Miles, each whereof will afford about 4 Millions of Graves, and consequently above 114 Thousand Millions of Graves, viz. about 5 times the Number of the Quick and the Dead, which should arise at the last Day, in case the same had been in the Year 1682.

3. Now, if there may be place for five times as many Graves in Ireland, as sufficient for all that ever ‖ dyed; And if the Earth of one Grave weigh five times as much as the Body Interr'd therein, then a Turf, less than a Foot thick, pared off from a fifth part of the surface of Ireland, will be equivalent in bulk and weight to all the Bodies that ever were Buried; And may serve as well for that purpose, as the two Mountains afore-mentioned in the body of this Discourse. From all which it is plain, how madly they were mistaken, who did so petulantly vilifie what the Holy Scriptures have delivered.

FINIS.

OBSERVATIONS
UPON THE
Dublin-Bills
OF
MORTALITY,
M D C L X X X I.
State of that CITY.

By the Observator1 on the LONDON Bills of MORTALITY.

LONDON:

Printed for Mark Pardoe, at the Sign of the Black Raven, over against Bedford-house in the Strand. 1683.

NOTE ON THE DUBLIN “OBSERVATIONS.”

OBSERVATIONS
upon the
DUBLIN-Bills of Mortality, 1681.
and the
State of that CITY.

THE Observations upon the London-Bills of Mortality have been a new Light to the World; and the like Observation upon those of Dublin, may serve as Snuffers to make the same Candle burn clearer.

The London-Observations flowed from Bills regularly kept for near One hundred years; but these are squeezed out of Six stragling London-Bills, out of Fifteen Dublin Bills, and from a Note of the Families and Hearths in each Parish of Dublin; which are all digested into the one Table or Sheet annexed, consisting of Three Parts, markt A, B, C; being indeed the A, B, C, of Publick Oeconony, and even of that Policy which tends to Peace and Plenty. ‖

Observations upon the Table A.

1. THe Total of the Burials in London, (for the said Six stragling years mentioned in the Table A) is 120170; whereof the Medium or Sixth part is 20028; and exceeds the Burials of Paris, as may appear by the late Bills of that City.

2. The Births, for the same time, are 73683, the Medium or Sixth part whereof is 12280, which is about Five eighth parts of the Burials; and shews, that London would in time decrease quite away, were it not supplyed out of the Countrey, where are about Five Births for Four Burials, the proportion of Breeders in the Country being greater than in the City.

3. The Burials in Dublin for the said Six years, were 9865, the Sixth part or Medium whereof is, 1644, which is about the Twelfth part of the London-Burials; and about a Fifth part over. So as the people of London do hereby seem to be above Twelve times as many as those of Dublin.

4. The Births in the same time at Dublin, are 6157, the Sixth part or Medium whereof is 1026, which is also about five eighth parts of the 1644 Burials; which shews, that the ‖ proportion between Burials and Births are alike at London and Dublin, and that the Accompts are kept alike; and consequently are likely to be true, there being no Confederacy for that purpose: Which if they be true, we then say,

5. That the Births are the best way1 (till the Accompts of the people shall be purposely taken) whereby to judge of the Increase and Decrease of People, that of Burials being subject to more Contingencies and variety of Causes.

6. If Births be as yet the measure of the People, and that the Births (as has been shewn) are as Five to Eight, then Eight fifths of the Births is the number of the Burials, where the year was not considerable for extraordinary Sickness or Salubrity; and is the Rule whereby to measure the same. As for Example: The Medium of Births in Dublin was 1026, the Eight fifths whereof is 1641, but the real Burials were 1644; so as in the said years they differed little from the 1641, which was the Standard of Health; and consequently, the years 1680, 1674, and 1668, were sickly years, more or less, as they exceeded the said Number 1641; and the rest were healthful years, more or less, as they fell short of the same number. But the City was more or less Populous, as the Births differed ‖ from the Number 1026; viz. Populous in the years 1680, 1679, 1678, & 1668: For other causes of this difference in Births, are very occult and uncertain.

7. What hath been said of Dublin, serves also for London.

8. It hath already been observ'd by the London-Bills, That there are more Males than Females1 . It is to be further noted, that in these Six London-Bills also; there is not one instance either in the Births or Burials to the contrary.

9. It hath been formerly observ'd, That in the years wherein most dye, fewest are born, & vice versâ2 . The same may be further observ'd in Males and Females, viz. When fewest Males are born, then most dye: for here the Males dyed as Twelve to Eleven, which is above the mean proportion of Fourteen to Thirteen, but were born but as Nineteen to Eighteen, which is below the same.

Observations upon the Table B.

1. FRom the Table B, it appears, That the Medium of the Fifteen years Burials, (being 24199) is 1613, whereas the Medium of the other six years in the Table A, was 1644, and that the Medium of the Fifteen ‖ years Births (being in all 14765) is 984, whereas the Medium of the said other six years, was 10263 . That is to say, there were both fewer Births and Burials in these Fifteen years, than in the other six years; which is a probable sign that at a Medium there were fewer People also.

2. The Medium of Births for the Fifteen years being 984, whereof Eight fifths (being 1576) is the Standard of Health for the said Fifteen years; and the triple of the said 1576, being 4728, is the standard for each of the Ternaries of the Fifteen years within the said Table.

3. That 2952, the triple of 984 Births, is for each Ternary the Standard of Peoples increase and decrease from the year 1666 to 1680 inclusive, viz. The People increased in the second Ternary, and decreased from the same in the Third and Fourth Ternarys, but re-increased in the Fifth Ternary beyond any other.

4. That the last Ternary was withal very healthful, the Burials being but 4624, viz. below 4728, the Standard.

5. That according to this proportion of increase, the Housing of Dublin have probably increased also. ‖

Observations upon the Table C.

1. FIrst, from the Table C, it appears, 1. That the Housing of Dublin is such, as that there are not five Hearths in each House one with another, but nearer five than four.

2. That in St. Warburghs Parish are near six Hearths to an House. In St. Johns five. In St. Michaels above five. In St. Nicholas within above six. In Christ-Church above seven. In St. James's, and St. Katherines, and in St. Michans, not four. In St. Kevans about four.

3. That in St. James's, St. Michans, St. Brides, St. Warburgh, St. Andrews, St. Michaels, and St. Patricks, all the Christnings were but 550, and the Burials 1055, viz. near double; and that in the rest of the Parishes the Christnings were five, and the Burials seven, viz. as 457 to 6341 . Now whether the cause of this difference were negligence in Accompts, or the greaterness of the Families, &c. is worth inquiring.

4. It is hard to say in what order (as to greatness) these Parishes ought to stand, some having most Families; some most Hearths, some most Births, and others most Burials. Some Parishes exceeding the rest in two, ‖ others in three of the said four particulars, but none in all four. Wherefore this Table ranketh them according to the plurality of the said four particulars wherein each excelleth the other.

5. The London-Observations reckon eight heads in each Family1 ; according to which estimation, there are 32000 Souls2 in the 4000 Families of Dublin; which is but half of what most Men imagine; of which but about one sixth part are able to bear Arms, besides the Royal Regiment.

6. Without the knowledge of the true number of People, as a Principle, the whole scope and use of the keeping Bills of Births and Burials is impaired; wherefore by laborious Conjectures and Calculations to deduce the number of People from the Births and Burials, may be Ingenious, but very preposterous.

7. If the number of Families in Dublin be about 4000, then Ten Men, in one week (at the Charge of about Five pound, Surveying Eight Families in an hour) may directly, and without Algebra, make an Accompt of the whole People, expressing their several Ages, Sex, Marriages, Title, Trade, Religion, &c. and those who survey the Hearths, or the Constables or Parish Clarks, (may, if required) do the same ex Officio, and without other ‖ Charge, by the Command of the Chief Governor, the Diocesan, or the Mayor3 .

8. The Bills of London have since their beginning, admitted several Alterations and Improvements; and eight or ten pound per annum surcharge, would make the Bills of Dublin to exceed all others, and become an excellent Instrument of Government. To which purpose the Forms for Weekly, Quarterly, and Yearly Bills are humbly recommended, viz.1

A Weekly Bill of Mortality for the City of Dublin, Ending the day of 1681.

A Quarterly Bill of Mortality, Beginning and ending for the City of Dublin.

An Account of the People of Dublin for one year, Ending the 24th of March, 168½.

A
POSTSCRIPT
TO THE
STATIONER.

WHereas you complain, that these Observations make no sufficient Bulk, I could answer you. That I wish the Bulk of all Books were less; but do never-the-less comply with you in adding what follows, viz.

1. That the Parishes of Dublin are very unequal; some having in them above Six hundred Families, and others under Thirty.

2. That, Thirteen Parishes are too few for Four thousand Families; the midling Parishes of London containing One hundred and twenty Families; according to which rate, there should be about Thirty three Parishes in Dublin.

3. It is said, that there are Eighty four thousand Houses or Families in London, which is Twenty one times more than are in Dublin; and yet the Births and Burials of London are but Twelve times those of Dublin: which shews that the Inhabitants of Dublin are more crowded and streightned in their Housing, than those of London; and consequently, that to increase the Buildings of Dublin, will make that City more conformable to London.

4. I shall also add some Reasons for altering the present forms of the Dublin-Bills of Mortality, according to what hath been here recommended, viz.

1. We give the distinctions of Males and Females in the Births onely; for that the Burials must, at one time or another, be in the same proportion with the Births. ‖

2. We do in the Weekly and Quarterly Bills propose, that notice be taken in the Burials of what numbers dye above Sixty and Seventy, and what under Sixteen, Six, and Two years old; foreseeing good uses to be made of that distinction.

3. We do in the Yearly Bill, reduce the Casualties to about Twenty four, being such as may be discerned by common sense and without Art; conceiving that more will but perplex and imbroil the Account. And in the Quarterly Bills, we reduce the Diseases to Three Heads, viz. Contagious, Acute, and Chronical; applying this distinction to Parishes, in order to know how the different Scituation, Soil, and way of living in each Parish, doth dispose Men to each of the said Three Species: and in the Weekly Bills we take notice not only of the Plague, but of the other Contagious Diseases in each Parish; that strangers and fearful ‖ Persons may thereby know how to dispose of themselves.

4. We mention the Number of the People, as the Fundamental Term in all our proportions; and without which, all the rest will be almost fruitless.

5. We mention the number of Marriages made in every Quarter, and in every year; as also the proportion which Married Persons bear to the whole; expecting in such Observations to read the improvement of the Nation.

6. As for Religions, we reduce them to Three, viz. 1. Those who have the Pope of Rome for their Head. 2. Who are Governed by the Laws of their Country. 3. Thosè who rely respectively upon their own private Judgments. Now whether these distinctions should be taken notice of or not, we do but faintly recommend, seeing many Reasons pro and con for the same: and therefore although we have mentioned it as a matter fit to be considered, yet we humbly leave it to Authority. ‖

FURTHER
OBSERVATION
UPON THE
Dublin-Bills:
OR,
ACCOMPTS
OF THE
Houses, Hearths, Baptisms, And Burials in that
CITY.

The Second Edition, Corrected and Enlarg'd.

By Sir WILLIAM PETTY, Fellow of the Royal Society.

LONDON: Printed for Mark Pardoe, at the Sign of the Black Raven, over against Bedford-House in the Strand. 1686.

NOTE ON THE “FURTHER OBSERVATIONS.”

In 1686 the Further Observations were prefixed to the Observations upon the Dublin Bills as issued in 1683, and the whole was put forward as a “second edition, corrected and enlarg'd.” In fact, however, the original Observations of 1683 were not even reprinted in 1686, the left-over sheets being utilized, and the only change being the suppression of the 1683 title given at p. 479. The following four pages, therefore, include all that was ever added to the 1683 Observations.

The STATIONER
TO THE
READER.

I Have not thought fit to make any Alteration of the first Edition, but have only added a New Table, with Observation upon it, placing the same in the front of what was before; which perhaps might have been as well placed after the like Table at the 8th Page of the first Edition.

Further Observations upon the Dublin Accompts of Baptisms and Burials, Houses and Hearths, viz.

THe Table hath been made for the Year 1682, wherein is to be noted, ‖

1. That the Houses which Anno 1671, were but 3850 are Anno 1682, 6025; but whether this difference is caused by the real encrease of Housing, or by fraud and defect in the former Accompts, is left to consideration. For the Burials or People have increased but from 1696, to 2263, according to which proportion, the 3850 Houses Anno 1671, should Anno 1682 have been but 5143, wherefore some fault may be suspected as aforesaid, when Farming the Hearth-mony was in agitation1 .

2. The Hearths have encreased according to the Burials, and ⅓ of the said increase more, viz. the Burials Anno 1671 were 1696, the ⅓ whereof is 563, which put together makes 2259, which is near the number of Burials Anno 1682. But the Hearths Anno 1671 were 17500, whereof the ⅓ is 5833, making in all but 23333; whereas the whole Hearths ‖ Anno 1682 were 25369, vis. ⅓ and better of the said 5833 more.

3. The Housing were Anno 1671, but 3850, which if they had encreased Anno 1682 but according to the Burials, they had been but 5143, or according to the Hearths, had been but 5488, whereas they appear 6025, encreasing double to the Hearths. So as 'tis likely there hath been some errour in the said Account of the Housing, unless the new Housing be very small, and have but one Chimney apiece, and that ¼ part of them are untenanted. On the other hand, 'tis more likely that when 1696 dy'd per An. there were near 6000; for 6000 Houses at 8 Inhabitants per House, would make the number of the People to be 48 Thousand, and the number of 1696 that died according to the Rule of One out of 30, would have made the number of Inhabitants about 50 Thousand: For which reason I continue to ‖ believe there was some Errour in the Accompt of 3850 Houses as aforesaid, and the rather because there is no ground from experience to think that in II year, the Houses in Dublin have encreased from 3850 to 6025.

Moreover, I rather think that the number of 6025 is yet short, because that number at 8 heads per House makes the Inhabitants to be but 48200; whereas the 2263 who died in the year 1682, according to the aforemention'd Rule of one dying out of 30 makes the number of People to be 67890; the Medium betwixt which number and 48200 is 58045, which is the best estimate I can make of that matter, which I hope Authority will ere long rectifie, by direct and exact Enquiries.

4. As to the Births, we say that Anno 1640, 1641, and 1642, at London, just before the Troubles in Religion began, the Births were ⅚ of the ‖ Burials, by reason I suppose of the greaterness of Families in London above the Country, and the fewer Breeders, and not for want of Registring. Wherefore, deducting ⅙ of 2263, which is 377, there remains 1886 for the probable number of Births in Dublin for the year 1682; whereas but 912 are represented to have been Christen'd in that year, though 1023 were christened Anno 1671, when there died but 1696; which decreasing of the Christnings, and increasing of the Burials, shews the increase of Nonregistering in the Legal Books, which must be the increase of Roman Catholicks at Dublin.

The scope of this whole Paper therefore is, That the People of Dublin are rather 58000, than 320001 ; and that the Dissenters, who do not Register their Baptisms, have encreased from 391 to 974: but of Dissenters, none ‖ have increased but the Roman Catholicks, whose Numbers have encreased from about 2 to 5 in the said Years. The exacter Knowledge whereof, may also be better had from direct Enquiries.

FINIS.

WHITE-HAll

Aug. 26th 1686.

Let this Paper be printed

Sunderland P.

TWO
ESSAYS
IN
Political Arithmetick,
Concerning the
People, Housing, Hospitals, &c.
London and Paris.

By Sir WILLIAM PETTY, Fellow of the Royal Society.

• ——Qui sciret Regibus uti
• Fastidiret olus1

LONDON, Printed for F. Lloyd in the Middle Exchange next Salisbury-House in the Strand. 1687.

NOTE ON THE “TWO ESSAYS.”

TO THE
KING's
Most Excellent MAJESTY.

IDo presume, in a very small Paper, to shew Your Majesty that Your City of London seems more considerable than the Two best Cities of the French Monarchy, and for ought I can find, greater than any other of the Universe, which because I can say ‖ without flattery, and by such Demonstration as Your Majesty can examine, I humbly pray Your Majesty to accept from

Your Majesty's
Most Humble, Loyal
and Obedient Subject,

William Petty.

AN
ESSAY
IN
Political Arithmetick,
BY
Sir WILLIAM PETTY,

Tending to prove that London hath more People and Housing than the Cities of Paris and Rouen put together, and is also more considerable in several other respects1 .

1. THE Medium of the Burials at London in the three last years, viz. 1683, 1684 and 1685, (wherein there was no extraordinary Sickness, ‖ and wherein the Christenings do correspond in their ordinary proportions with the Burials and Christenings of each year one with another) was 22337, and the like Medium of Burials for the three last Paris Bills we could procure, viz. for the years 1682, 1683 and 1684 (whereof the last as appears by the Christenings to have been very sickly) is 198871 .

2. The City of Bristol2 in England appears to be by good estimate of its Trade and Customes as great as Rouen in France, and the City of Dublin in Ireland appears to have more Chimnies than Bristol, and consequently more People, and the Burials in ‖ Dublin were Anno 1682 (being a sickly year) but 2263.

3. Now the Burials of Paris (being 19887) being added to the Burials of Dublin (supposed more than at Rouen) being 2263, makes but 22150, whereas the Burials of London were 187 more, or 22337, or as about 6 to 73 .

4. If those who die unnecessarily, and by miscarriage in L'hostel Dieu in Paris (being above 3000) as hath been elsewhere shewn4 , or any part thereof, should be substracted out of the Paris Burials aforementioned, then our assertion will be stronger, and more proportionable to what follows ‖ concerning the Housing of those Cities, viz.

5. There were burnt at London, Anno 1666, above 13000 houses, which being but a fifth part of the whole, the whole number of houses in the said year, were above 65000; and whereas the ordinary Burials of London have increased between the years 1666 and 1686, above one third the total of the houses at London Anno 1686, must be about 87000, which Anno 1682, appeared by accompt to have been 840001 .

6. Monsieur Morery, the great French Author of the late Geographical Dictionaries2 , who makes Paris the greatest City in the World, ‖ doth reckon but 50000 houses in the same, and other Authors and knowing Men much less; nor are there full 7000 houses in the City of Dublin, so as if the 50000 houses of Paris, and the 7000 houses in the City of Dublin were added together, the total is but 57000 Houses, whereas those of London are 87000 as aforesaid, or as 6 to 9.

7. As for the Shipping and foreign Commerce of London, the common sense of all Men doth judge it to be far greater than that of Paris and Rouen put together.

8. As to the Wealth and Gain accruing to the Inhabitants of London and Paris by Law-suits (or La chicane)3 I onely say that the Courts ‖ of London extend to all England and Wales, and affect seven Millions of People, whereas those of Paris do not extend near so far: Moreover there is no palpable conspicuous argument at Paris for the Number and Wealth of Lawyers like the Buildings and Chambers in the Two Temples, Lincoln's Inn, Gray's Inn, Doctors Commons, and the seven other Inns in which are4 Chimnies, which are to be seen at London, besides many Lodgings, Halls, and Offices relating to the same.

9. As to the plentifull and easie living of the People we say,

1. That the People of Paris to those of London, being as about ‖ 6 to 7, and the Housing of the same as about 6 to 9, we infer that the People do not live at London so close and crouded as at Paris, but can afford themselves more room and liberty.

2. That at London the Hospitals are better and more desirable than those of Paris, for that in the best at Paris there die 2 out of 151 , whereas at London there die out of the worst scarce 2 of 16, and yet but a fiftieth part of the whole die out of the Hospitals at London, and ⅖ or 20 times that proportion die out of the Paris Hospitals which are of the same kind; that is to say, the number of those at London, who chuse to lie sick in Hospitals rather than ‖ in their own Houses, are to the like People of Paris as one to twenty; which shews the greater Poverty or want of Means in the People of Paris than those of London.

3. We infer from the premisses, viz. the dying scarce 2 of 16 out of the London Hospitals, and about 2 of 15 in the best of Paris, (to say nothing of L'hostel Dieu) That either the Physicians and Chirurgeons of London are better than those of Paris, or that the Air of London is more wholesome.

10. As for the other great Cities of the World, if Paris were the greatest we need say no more ‖ in behalf of London. As for Pequin in China, we have no account fit to reason upon; nor is there anything in the Description of the two late Voyages of the Chines's Emperour from that City into East and West Tartary2 , in the years 1682 and 1683, which can make us recant what we have said concerning London. As for Dely and Agra belonging to the Mogull we find nothing against our position, but much to shew the vast numbers which attend that Emperour in his business and pleasures.

11. We shall conclude with Constantinople and Gran Cairo; as for Constantinople it hath been said by one who endeavour'd to shew ‖ the greatness of that City, and the greatness of the Plague which reigned in it, that there died 1500 per diem, without other circumstances: To which we answer, that in the year 1665 there died in London 1200 per diem, and it hath been well proved that the Plague of London never carried away above ⅕ of the People, whereas it is commonly believed that in Constantinople, and other Eastern Cities, and even in Italy and Spain, that the Plague takes away ⅖ one half or more; wherefore where 1200 is but ⅕ of the People it is probable that the number was greater, than where 1500 was ⅖ or one half, &c. ‖

12. As for Gran Cairo it is reported, that 73000 died in 10 weeks or 1000 per diem1 , where note, that at Gran Cairo the Plague comes and goes away suddenly, and that the Plague takes away 2 or ⅗ parts of the People as aforesaid; so as 73000 was probably the number of those that died of the Plague in one whole year at Gran Cairo, whereas at London Anno 1665, 97000 were brought to account to have died in that year. Wherefore it is certain, that that City wherein 97000 was but ⅕ of the People, the number was greater than where 73000 was ⅖ or the half. ‖

We therefore conclude, that London hath more People, Housing, Shipping and Wealth, than Paris and Rouen put together; and for ought yet appears, is more considerable than any other City in the Universe, which was propounded to be proved. ‖

AN
ESSAY
IN
Political Arithmetick,
BY
Sir WILLIAM PETTY,

Tending to prove that in the Hospital called L'hostel Dieu at Paris, there die above 3000 per Annum by reason of ill accommodation.

1. IT appears that Anno 1678 there entred into the Hospital of La Charité 2647 Souls, of which there died there within the said year 338, which ‖ is above an eighth part of the said 2647, and that in the same year there entred into L'hostel Dieu 21491, and that there died out of that number 5630, which is above one quarter, so as about half the said 5630, being 2815, seem to have died for want of as good usage and accommodation as might have been had at La Charité1 .

2. Moreover in the year 1679 there entred into La Charité 3118, of which there died 452, which is above a seventh part, and in the same year there entred into L'hostel Dieu 28635, of which there died 8397; and in both the said years 1678 and 1679 (being very different in their degrees of ‖ Mortality) there entred into L'hostel Dieu 28635 and 21491, in all 50126, the Medium whereof is 25063, and there died out of the same in the said Two years 5630 & 8397, in all 14027, the Medium whereof is 7013.

3. There entred in the said years into La Charité 2647 and 3118, in all 5765, the Medium whereof is 2882, whereof there died 338 and 452, in all 790, the Medium whereof is 395.

4. Now if there died out of L'hostel Dieu 7013 per annum, and that the proportion of those that died out of L'hostel Dieu is double to those that died out of La Charité (as by the above ‖ Numbers it appears to be near there abouts) then it follows that half the said Numbers of 7013 being 3506, did not die by natural necessity, but by the evil administration of that Hospital.

5. This Conclusion seem'd at the first sight very strange, and rather to be some mistake or chance than a solid and real truth, but considering the same matter as it appeared at London, we were more reconciled to the belief of it, viz.

1. In the Hospital of St. Bartholomew in London there was sent out and cured in the year 1685, 1764 Persons, and there died out of the said Hospital 252. ‖ Moreover there were sent out and cured out of St. Thomas's Hospital 1523, and buried 209, that is to say, there were cur'd in both Hospitals 3287, and buried out of both Hospitals 461, and consequently cured and buried 3748, of which number the 461 buried is less than an eighth part; whereas at La Charité the part that died was more than an eighth part; which shews that out of the most poor and wretched Hospitals of London there died fewer in proportion than out of the best in Paris.

2. Farthermore, it hath been above shewn that there died out of La Charité at a Medium 395 per annum, and 141 out of Les ‖ Incurables making in all 536; and that out of St. Bartholomew's and St. Thomas's Hospital, London, there died at a Medium but 461, of which Les Incurables are part; which shews that although there be more People in London than in Paris, yet there went at London not so many People to Hospitals as there did at Paris, although the poorest Hospitals at London, were better than the best at Paris; which shews that the poorest People at London have better accommodation in their own houses, than the best Hospital of Paris affordeth.

6. Having proved that there die about 3506. Persons at Paris unnecessarily to the damage of France, we come next to compute the value of the said damage and of the Remedy thereof, as follows, viz. the value of the said 3506 at 60 li. Sterl. per head, being about the value of Argier Slaves, (which is less than the intrinsick value of People at Paris) the whole loss of the Subjects of France in that Hospital seems to be 60 times 3506 li. Sterl. per Annum, viz. 210 thousand 360 li. Sterl. equivalent to about two Millions 524 Thous. 320 French Livers.

7. It hath appeared that there came into L'hostel Dieu at a Medium 25063 per Annum, or 2089 per Mensem, and that the whole stock of what remain'd in the ‖ precedent Months is at a Medium about 2108 (as may appear by the third Line of the Table N° 5, which shall be shortly published)1viz. the Medium of Months is 2410 for the sickly year 1679, whereunto 1806, being added as the Medium of Months for the year 1678, makes 4216, the Medium whereof is the 2108 above mentioned; which number being added to the 2089 which entred each Month, makes 4197 for the Number of Sick which are supposed to be always in L'hostel Dieu one time with another.

8. Now if 60 French Livers per Annum for each of the said 4197 sick Persons were added to ‖ the present ordinary Expence of that Hospital (amounting to an addition of 251 Thousand 820 Livers) it seems that so many lives might be saved as are worth above ten times that sum, and this by doing a manifest deed of Charity to Mankind. ‖

Memorandum, That Anno 1685, the Burials of London were 23222, and those of Amsterdam 6245; from whence, and the difference of Air, 'tis probable that the People of London are quadruple to those of Amsterdam1 .

WINDSOR,
Sep. 21st 1686.
I do hereby License these Obervations to be printed.

Sunderland P.

OBSERVATIONS
UPON THE
CITIES
OF
LONDON
AND
ROME.

By Sir WILLIAM PETTY, Fellow of the Royal Society.

LONDON, Printed for Henry Mortlocke, at the Phœnix, in St. Paul's Church-Yard, and F. Lloyd, in the middle Exchange next Salisbury-House in the Strand. 1687.

OBSERVATIONS
UPON THE
CITIES
OF
LONDON and ROME.

1. THAT before the year 1630, the Christnings at London exceeded the Burials of the same1 , but about the year 1655 they were scarce half; and now about two thirds2 . ‖

2. Before the Restauration of Monarchy in England, Anno 1660, the People of Paris were more than those of London and Dublin put together, whereas now, the People of London are more than those of Paris and Rome, or of Paris and Rouen3 .

3. Anno 1665 one fifth part of the then People of London, or 97 thousand died of the Plague1 , and in the next year 1666, 13 thousand Houses or one fifth part of all the Housing of London were burnt also.

4. At the Birth of Christ, old Rome was the greatest City of the World, and London the greatest ‖ at the Coronation of King James the Second, and near 6 times as great as the present Rome, wherein are 119 thousand Souls besides Jews2 .

5. In the years of King Charles the Second his death, and King James the Second his Coronation (which were neither of them remarkable for extraordinary Sickliness or Healthfulness) the Burials did wonderfully agree, viz. Anno 1684, they were 23202, and Anno 1685 they were 23222, the Medium whereof is 23212. And the Christnings did very wonderfully agree also, having been Anno 1684, 14702, and Anno 1685, 14732, the Medium whereof is 147163 , which consistence was ‖ never seen before, the said number of 23212 Burials making the People of London to be 696360, at the rate of one Dying per annum out of 30.

6. Since the great Fire of London, Anno 1666 about 7 parts of 15 of the present vast City hath been new built, and is with its People increased near one half, and become equal to Paris and Rome put together, the one being the Seat of the great French Monarchy, and the other of the Papacy.

FINIS.

WHITE-HALL,

Feb. 18th, 168 . Let this be printed.

Sunderland P.

FIVE ESSAYS
IN
Political Arithmetick,
VIZ.

I. Objections from the City of Rey in Persia, and from Mons^rAuzout, against two former Essays, answered, and that London hath as many People as Paris, Rome and Rouen put together.

II. A Comparison between London and Paris in 14 particulars.

III. Proofs that at London, within its 134 Parishes named in the Bills of Mortality, there live about 696 thousand People.

IV. An estimate of the People in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Venice, Rome, Dublin, Bristoll and Rouen, with several observations upon the same.

V. Concerning Holland and the rest of the VII United Provinces.

By Sir WILLIAM PETTY, Fellow of the Royal Society.

Invidiam augendo ulciscar.

LONDON, Printed for Henry Mortlock at the Phœnix in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1687.

NOTE ON THE “FIVE ESSAYS.”

Vendredy au soir.

Ce billet est pour vous supplier Monsieur de ne vouloir pas mettre l'endroit de la lettre de Monsieur Auzout ou il parle de celuy qui luy a dit qu'il n'y a que vingt quatre mil maisons parceque cecileur nuirait a tous deux et on me reprocherait d'estre cause de leur malheur. on est si delicat en france que la moindre chose qu'on trove disadvantageuse au pays chocque les gens ou les rend suspects. il faut mettre qu'on a dit a Monsieur Auzout qu'il n'y avait que vingt quatre mil maisons sans nommer celuy qui luy a dit. Vous en pouuez deuiner la raison. J'attends ce plaisir la de votre bonte et suis Vostre tres humble et tres obeissant serviteur

Justel.

For Mr Edmond Halley to be left with Mr Henry Hunt at Gresham College in bishopgatestreet London.

Accordingly no extract from Auzout's letter was published with Petty's three papers.

The Five Essays were published in English and French on opposite pages, each version having its own pagination. The French, here omitted, is a fairly close translation of the English. They were reviewed in Leclerc's Bibliotheque universelle et historique, VIII. Mars, 1688.

TO THE
KING's
Most Excellent MAJESTY.

SIR,

YOur Majesty having graciously accepted my two late Essays, about the Cities and Hospitals of London and Paris, as also my Observations on Rome and Rouen; I do (after six Months1 waiting for what may be said against my several Doctrines, by the able men of Europe) humbly present Your Majesty with a few other Papers upon the same Subject, to strengthen, explain and enlarge the former; hoping by such real arguments, better to praise and magnifie Your Majesty, than by any other the most specious Words and Elogies that can be imagined by

Your Majesty's
Most humble, loyal
and obedient Subject,

William Petty.

The FIRST ESSAY.

IT could not be expected that an assertion of London's being bigger than Paris and Rouen, or than Paris and Rome put together, and bigger than any City of the World, should scape uncontradicted1 ; and 'tis also expected, that I (if continuing in the2 same persuasion) should make some reply to those contradictions. In order whereunto,

I begin with the ingenious Authour of the3Republiq des Lettres4 , who saith that Rey in Persia is far bigger than London, for that ‖ in the sixth Century of Christianity (I suppose, An. 550 the middle of that Century) it had1 15000, or rather 44000 Moschees, or Mahometan Temples; to which I reply, that I hope this Objector is but in jest, for that Mahomet was not born till about the year 570, and had no Moschees till about 50 years after.

2 In the next place I reply to the excellent Monsr. Auzout3 Letters from Rome, who is content that London, Westminster and Southwark, may have as many people as Paris and its Suburbs; and but faintly denieth, that all the Housing within the Bills, may have almost as many people as Paris and ‖ Rouen, but saith that several Parishes inserted into these Bills, are distant from, and not contiguous with London, and that Grant so understood it4 .

To which (as his main if not his onely objection)1 we answer: 1. That the London Bills appear in Grant's Book, to have been always since2 the year 1636, as they now are. 2. That about 50 years since, 3 or 4 Parishes, formerly some what distant3 were joyned by interposed Buildings, to the Bulk of the City, and therefore then inserted into the Bills. 3. That since 50 years, the whole ‖ buildings being more than double; have perfected that Union, so as there is no House within the said Bills, from which one may not call to some other House. 4. All this is confirmed by Authority of the King and City, and the Custome of 50 years4 . 5. That there are but 3 Parishes under any colour of this Exception, which are scarce part of the whole.

Upon the whole matter, upon sight of Monsr. Auzout's large Letter, dated the 19th of November, from Rome, I made Remarques5 upon every Paragraph therof; but suppressing it(because it lookt like a War against a worth Person ‖ with6 whom I intended none, whereas in truth it was but a reconciling explication of some doubts) I have chosen the shorter and softer7 way of answering Monsieur Auzout as followeth, viz. ‖

Concerning the number of People in London, as also in Paris, Rouen and Rome, Viz.

89

12345678

12345678

9 Which number of 114,284 is probably more People than any other City of France contains. ‖

The SECOND ESSAY.

As for other Comparisons of London with Paris, we farther repeat and enlarge what hath been formerly said upon those matters, as followeth, viz.

1. That 40 per Cent. die out of the Hospitals at Paris where so many die unnecessarily, and scarce of that proportion out of the Hospitals of London, which have been shewn to be better than the best of Paris.

2. That at Paris 81280 Kitchins, are within less than 24000 ‖ Street-dores1 , which makes less cleanly and convenient way of living than at London.

3. Where the number of Christnings are near unto, or exceed the Burials, the People are poorer, having few Servants and little Equipage.

4. The river of Thames is more pleasant and navigable than the Seyne, and its Waters better and more wholesome; and the Bridge of London, is the most considerable of all Europe.

5. The Shipping and foreign Trade of London is incomparably greater than that at Paris and Rouen. ‖

6. The Lawyers Chambers at London have 2772 Chimnies in them, and are worth 140 thousand Pounds sterling, or 3 millions of French Livers, besides the dwellings of their Families elsewhere.

7. The Air is more wholesome, for that at London scarce 2 of 16 die out of the worst Hospitals, but at Paris above 2 of 15 out of the best. Moreover the Burials of Paris are ⅕ part above and below the Medium, but at London not above , so as the intemperies of the Air at Paris is far greater than at London.

8. The Fuel cheaper, and lies in less room, the Coals being an ‖ wholesome sulphurous bitumen.

9. All the most necessary sorts of Victuals, and of Fish, are cheaper, and Drinks of all sorts in greater variety and plenty.

10. The Churches of London we leave to be judg'd by thinking that nothing at Paris is so great as St. Paul's was, and is like to be, nor so beautifull as Henry the seventh's Chapel.

11. On the other hand, 'tis probable, that there is more Money in Paris than London, if the publick Revenue (grosly speaking, ‖ quadruple to that of England) be lodged there.

12. Paris hath not been for these last 50 years so much infested with the Plague as London; now that at London the Plague (which between the year 1591 and 1666, made 5 returns, viz. every 15 years, at a Medium, and at each time carried away ⅕ of the People) hath not been known for the 21 years last past, and there is a visible way by God's ordinary Blessing to lessen the same by ⅔ when it next appeareth1 .

13. As to the Ground upon which Paris stands in respect of London, we say, that if there be 5 Stories ‖ or Floors of Housing at Paris, for 4 at London, or in that proportion, then the 82 thousand Families of Paris stand upon the equivalent of 65 thousand London Housteds, and if there be 115 thousand Families at London, and but 82 thousand at Paris, then the proportion of the London Ground to that of Paris is as 115 to 65, or as 23 to 13.

14. Moreover Paris is said to be an Oval of 3 English Miles long and 2½ broad, the Area whereof contains but 5½ square Miles; but London is 7 Miles long, and 1¼ broad at a Medium, which makes an Area of near 9 square Miles, which proportion of 5½ to 9 differs little from that of 13 to 23. ‖

15. Memorandum, That in Nero's time, as Monsr. Chivreau reporteth1 , there died 300 thousand People of the Plague in Old Rome; Now if there died 3 of 10 then, and there, being a hotter Countrey, as there dies 2 of 10 at London, the number of People at that time, was but a million, whereas at London they are now about 700 thousand. Moreover the Ground within the Walls of Old Rome was a Circle but of 3 Miles diameter, whose Area is about 7 square Miles, and the Suburbs scarce as much more, in all about 13 square Miles, whereas the built Ground at London is about 9 square Miles as ‖ aforesaid; which two sorts of proportions, agree with each other, and consequently Old Rome seems but to have been half as big again as the present London, which we offer to Antiquaries. ‖

The THIRD ESSAY.

PRoofs that the number of People in the 134 Parishes of the London Bills of Mortality, without reference to other Cities, is about 696 thousand, viz.

I know but three ways of finding the same.

1. By the Houses, and Families, and Heads living in each.

2. By the number of Burials in healthfull times, and by the proportion of those that live, to those that die. ‖

3. By the number of those who die of the Plague in Pestilential years, in proportion to those that scape.

The First way.

To know the number of Houses I used three methods, viz.

1. The number of Houses which were burnt Anno 1666, which by authentick Report was 13200; next what proportion the People who dyed out of those Houses, bore to the whole; which I find Anno 1686, to be but part, but Anno 1666 to be almost ⅕, from whence I infer the whole Housing of London ‖ Anno 1666 to have been 66 thousand, then finding the Burials Anno 1666 to be to those of 1686 as 3 to 4, I pitch upon 88 thousand to be the number of Housing Anno 1686.

2. Those who have been employed in making the general Map1 of London, set forth in the year 1682, told me that in that year, they had found above 84 thousand Houses to be in London, wherefore Anno 1686, or in 4 years more, there might be or 8400 Houses more (London doubling in 40 years) so as the whole, Anno 1686 might be 92400. ‖

3. I found that Anno 1685, there were 29325 Harths in Dublin, and 6400 Houses, and in London 388 thousand Harths, whereby there must have been at that rate 87000 Houses in London. Moreover I found that in Bristol there were in the same year 16752 Harths, and 5307 Houses, and in London 388 thousand Harths as aforesaid; at which rate there must have been 123 thousand Houses in London, and at a Medium between Dublin and Bristol proportions 105 thousand Houses.

Lastly, By Certificate from the Harth-Office, I find the Houses within the Bills of Mortality to be 105,315. ‖

Having thus found the Houses, I proceed next to the number of Families in them, and first I thought that if there were 3 or 4 Families or Kitchins in every House of Paris, there might be 2 Families in of the Housing of London; unto which supposition, the common opinion of several Friends, doth concur with my own conjectures.

As to the number of Heads in each Family, I stick to Grant's observation in page1 of his fifth Edition, That in Tradesmen of London's Families, there be 8 Heads one with another, in Families of higher Ranks, above 10, ‖ and in the poorest near 5, according to which proportions, I had upon another occasion2 pitch'd the medium of Heads in all the Families of England to be 6兓, but quitting the Fraction in this Case, I agree with Monsieur Auzout for 6.

To conclude, the Houses of London being 105315, and the addition of double Families 10531 more, in all 115846; I multiplied the same by 6, which produced 695076 for the number of the People.

The Second way.

I found that the years 1684 and 1685, being next each other, and ‖ both healthfull, did wonderfully agree in their Burials, viz. 1684 they were 23202, and Anno 1685 23222, the Medium whereof is 23212; Moreover that the Christnings 1684 were 14,702, and those Anno 1685 were 14730, wherefore I multiplied the Medium of Burials 23212 by 30, supposing that one dies out of 30 at London, which made the number of People 696,360 Souls1 .

Now to prove that one dies out of 30 at London, or thereabouts, I say,

1. That Grant in the2 page of his fifth Edition, affirmeth from observation, that 3 died of 88 per ‖ an. which is near the same proportion.

2. I found that out of healthfull places, and out of adult persons, there dies much fewer, as but 1 out of 50 among our Parliament men, and that the Kings of England having reigned 24 years one with another, probably lived above 30 years each.

3. Grant, page hath shewn3 that but about 1 of 20 die per an. out of young Children under 10 years old, and Monsr. Auzout thinks that but 1 of 40 die at Rome, out of the greater proportion of adult persons there, wherefore we still stick at a Medium to the number 30. ‖

4. In 9 Countrey Parishes lying in several parts of England, I find that but one of 37 hath died per an. or 311 out of 11507, wherefore till I see another round number, grounded upon many observations, nearer than 30, I hope to have done pretty well in multiplying our Burials by 30, to find the number of the People, the product being 696,360, and what we find by the Families they are 695,076, as aforesaid.

The Third way.

It was prov'd by Grant1 , that ⅕ of the People died of the Plague, but Anno 1665 there died of the ‖ Plague near 98 thousand persons2 , the Quintuple whereof is 490 thousand, as the number of People in the year 1665, whereunto adding above ⅓, as the increase between 1665 and 1686, the total is 653 thousand, agreeing well enough with the other two Computations above mentioned.

Wherefore let the proportion of 1 to 30 continue till a better be put in its place.

Memorandum, That 2 or 3 hundred new Houses would make a Contiguity of 2 or 3 other great Parishes, with the 134 already mentioned in the Bills of Mortality; and that an oval Wall of about 20 Miles in compass would enclose the ‖ same, and all the Shipping at Deptford and Black-wall, and would also fence in 20 thousand Acres of Land, and lay the foundation or designation of several vast advantages to the Owners, and Inhabitants of that Ground, as also to the whole Nation and Government. ‖

The FOURTH ESSAY1

Concerning the proportions of People in the 8 eminent Cities of Christendom undernamed, viz.

1. WE have by the number of Burials in healthfull years, and by the proportion of the living to those who die yearly, as also by the number of Houses and Families within the 134 Parishes, called London, and the estimate of the Heads in each, pitch'd upon the number of People in that City to be at a Medium 695718. ‖

2. We have, by allowing that at Paris above 80 thousand Families (viz. 81280) do live in 23223 Houses, 32 Palaces, and 38 Colleges, or that there are 81,280 Kitchins within less than 24 thousand Street-dores; as also by allowing 30 Heads for every one that died necessarily there; we have pitch'd upon the number of People there at a Medium to be 488055, nor have we restrained them to 300 thousand, by allowing with Monsr. Auzout 6 Heads for each of Morery's 50 thousand Houses or Families.

3. To Amsterdam we allow 187350 Souls, viz. 30 times the number of their Burials, which were 6245 in the year 1685. ‖

4. To Venice we allow 134 thousand Souls, as found there in a special account taken by authority, about 10 years since, when the City abounded with such as returned from Candia, then surrendered to the Turks1 .

5. To Rome we allow 119 thousand Christians and 6000 Jews, in all 125 thousand Souls, according to an account sent hither of the same by Monsr. Auzout2 .

6. To Dublin we allow (as to Amsterdam) 30 times its Burials, the Medium whereof for the last 2 years is 2303, viz. 69090 Souls. ‖

7. As to Bristol, we say that if the 6400 Houses of Dublin, give 69,090 People, that the 5307 Houses of Bristol, must give above 56 thousand People; Moreover, if the 29325 Harths of Dublin give 69,090 People, the 16,752 Harths of Bristol, must give about 40 thousand; but the Medium of 56 thousand and 40 thousand is 48 thousand.

8. As for Rouen, we have no help, but Monsr. Auzout's fancy of 80 thousand Souls to be in that City, and the conjecture of knowing Men that Rouen is between the and ⅛ part of Paris, and also that it is by a third bigger than Bristol; By all which, we estimate ‖ (till farther light) that Rouen hath at most but 66 thousand People in it.

Now it may be woundred why we mentioned Rouen at all, having had so little knowledge of it; Whereunto we answer, that we did not think it just to compare London with Paris, as to Shipping and foreign Trade, without adding Rouen thereunto, Rouen being to Paris as that part of London which is below the Bridge, is to what is above it.

All which we heartily submit to the correction of the Curious and ‖ Candid, in the mean time observing according to the Gross numbers undermentioned.

Observations on the said 8 Cities.

thousand, or 17 thousand less than the 696 thousand of London alone.

2. That the People of the 2 English Cities and Emporiums, viz. of London 696 thousand, and Bristol 48 thousand, do make 744 thousand, or more than

3. That the same 2 English Cities seem equivalent

If there be any Errour in these Conjectures concerning these Cities of France, we hope they will be mended by those whom we hear to be now at work upon that matter1 . ‖

4. That the King of England's 3 Cities, viz.

5. That of the 4 great Emporiums, London, Amsterdam, Venice and Rouen, London alone is near double to the other 3, viz. above 7 to 4.

6. That London (for ought appears) is the greatest and most considerable City of the World, but manifestly the greatest Emporium.

When these Assertions have past the Examen of the Critiques, we shall make another Essay, shewing how to apply those Truths to the Honour and Profit of the King and Kingdom of England2 . ‖

The FIFTH ESSAY.

Concerning Holland and the rest of the United Provinces.

SInce the close of this Paper, it hath been objected from Holland, That what hath been said of the number of Houses and People in London is not like to be true; for that if it were, then London would be the ⅔ of the whole Province of Holland. To which is answered, That London is the ⅔ of all Holland and more, that Province having not a Million and 44 thousand Inhabitants (whereof 696 m. is the ⅔) nor above 800 ‖ thousand, as we have credibly and often heard; for suppose Amsterdam hath, as we have elsewhere noted1 187 thousand, the seven next great Cities at 30 thousand each one with another 210 thousand, the 10 next at 15 thousand each 150 thousand, the 10 smallest at 6 thousand each 60 thousand, in all the 28 walled Cities and Towns of Holland 607 thousand, in the Dorps and Villages 193 thousand, which is about one Head for every 4 Acres of Land; whereas in England there is 8 Acres for every Head, without the Cities and Market Towns.

Now, suppose London having 116 thousand Families, should have 7 Heads in each, the medium between Monsr. Auzout and Grant's ‖ reckonings, the total of the People would be 812 thousand, or if we reckon that there dies one out of 34 (the Medium between 30 and 37 above mentioned2 ) the total of the People would be 34 times 23212, viz. 789208, the Medium between which number, and the above 812 thousand is 800604, somewhat exceeding 800 thousand, the supposed number of Holland1 .

Farthermore, I say that upon former searches into the Peopling of the World, I never found that in any Countrey (not in China it self) there was more than one Man to every English Acre of Land (many Territories passing for well peopled, where there is but one Man for ten ‖ such acres) I found by measuring Holland and West-Frizia, alias North-Holland, upon the best Maps, that it contained but as many such Acres as London doth of People, viz. about 696 thousand Acres; I therefore venture to pronounce (till better informed) That the People of London are as many as those of Holland, or at least above ⅔ of the same; which is enough to disable the Objection above mentioned; nor is there any need to strain up London from 696 thousand to 800 thousand, though competent reasons have been given to that purpose, and though the Authour of the excellent Map of London, set forth Anno 1682, reckoned the People thereof (as by the said Map2 appears) to be 1200 ‖ thousand, even when he thought the Houses of the same to be but 85 thousand.

The worthy person who makes this objection in the same Letter also saith,

1. That the Province of Holland, hath as many People as the other 6 United Provinces together, and as the whole Kingdom of England, and double to the City of Paris and its Suburbs; that is to say, 2 millions of Souls1 . 2. He says that in London and Amsterdam, and other trading Cities, there are 10 Heads to every Family, and that in Amsterdam there are not 22 thousand Families. 3. He excepteth against the Register alledged by Monsr. Auzout, which ‖ makes 23223 Houses and above 80 thousand Families to be in Paris, as also against the Register alledged by Petty, making 105315 Houses to be in London, with a tenth part of the same to be of Families more than Houses, and probably will except against the Register of 11632 Houses to be in all England, that number giving at 6⅓ Heads to each Family, about 7 millions of People, upon all which we remark as followeth, viz.

1. That if Paris doth contain but 488 thousand Souls, that then all Holland containeth but the double of that number, or 976 thousand, wherefore London containing 696 thousand Souls, hath above ⅔ of all Holland by 46 thousand. ‖

2. If Paris containeth half as many People as there are in all England, it must contain 3 millions and a half of Souls, or above 7 times 488 thousand, and because there do not die 20 thousand per an. out of Paris, there must die but one out of 175, whereas Monsr. Auzout thinks that there dies one out of 25, and there must live 149 Heads in every House of Paris mentioned in the Register, but there must be scarce 2 Heads in every House of England, all which we think fit to be reconsidered.

I must as an English Man take notice of one point more, which is, ‖ that these Assertions do reflect upon the Empire of England, for that it is said, that England hath but 2 millions of Inhabitants, and it might as well have been added, that Scotland and Ireland, with the Islands of Man, Jearsey and Gearnsey have but ⅖ of the same number, or 800 thousand more, or that all the King of England's Subjects in Europe are but 2 millions and 800 thousand Souls, whereas he saith, that the Subjects of the 7 United Provinces are 4 Millions. To which we answer, That the Subjects of the said 7 Provinces, are by this Objectour's own shewing, but the Quadruple of Paris, or 1932 thousand1 Souls, Paris containing but 488000, as afore hath been prov'd, and we do here affirm that England ‖ hath 7 millions of People, and that Scotland, Ireland, with the Islands of Man, Fearsey and Gearnsey, hath ⅖ of the said number, or 2 millions 800 thousand more, in all 9 millions 800 thousand; whereas by the Objectour's doctrine, if the 7 Provinces have 1932 thousand People, the King of England's Territories should have but of the same number, viz. 1351 thousand whereas we say 9800 thousand, as aforesaid, which difference is so gross as that it deserves to be thus reflected upon.

To conclude, we expect from the concerned Critiques of the World, that they would prove, ‖

1. That Holland and West-Frizia, and the 28 Towns and Cities thereof, hath more People than London alone.

2. That any 3 the best Cities of France, any 2 of all Christendom, or any one of the World, hath the same, or better Housing, and more foreign Trade than London, even in the year that King James the Second came to the Empire thereof.

THE END

A TREATISE OF
IRELAND, 1687.
THE
ELEMENTS OF IRELAND;
AND OF ITS
Religion, Trade & Policy.
By Sir WILLIAM PETTY, Fellow of the
Royal Society.

• Ut parêre Greges, Armenta, atque Arva, Colono;
• Ut variaelig; Gentes Uniri foeligdere certo
• Possint: Edoceo, Ponique Horrentia Martis
• Arma. Favete, precor dij qui posuistis et illa!
• Surgite jam, Superi! Vastisque incumbite Coelig;ptis!
• Ut Populi coëant; Quingentos qui, suprà et, Annos
• Discrepuêre? Unum et fiant tua Regna, Jacobe.

[Now first printed from Additional MS, 21,128 in the British Museum.]

NOTE ON THE “TREATISE OF IRELAND.

The Contents of the Treatise as given by the MS. are so confused that a hint as to its essential structure may be acceptable. It propounds “a perpetual peace and settlement of Ireland, with the natural union of both kingdoms and peoples.” The means for effecting this end are explained in nine chapters, together with an appendix containing eight objections, which the author answers seriatim. The first chapter puts forth six propositions, the execution of which would bring about the settlement of Ireland. The feasibility of these propositions Petty undertakes to demonstrate. The second chapter contains, in twenty postulates, the existing “state of the case reduced to terms of number, weight and measure.” In the six following chapters the six propositions of chapter one are taken up in turn, and each is established—to the satisfaction of the author at least—by reference to one or more of the twenty postulates of chapter two. The ninth chapter recapitulates the whole argument. In the MS. this chapter is followed by Another View of the same Matters by the Way of a Dialogue between A and B. In fact, however, the discussion in this Dialogue refers to other matters than those discussed in the Treatise, while the following Objections refer to the Treatise exclusively. The insertion of the Dialogue between the Treatise and the Objections thus breaks the formal continuity of Petty's argument. I have accordingly treated the Dialogue as a separate essay, printing it, as Petty's Contents directs, after the Objections instead of before them.

An Essay in Political Arithmetick concerning Ireland1 .

Tending to shew

1. The Political Anatomy of that Kingdom.

2. The Commotions and Bruileries, that Happen'd there from Anno 1641, to Anno 1666.

3. The Foreign Trade of that Nation Anno 1685.

4. The Proportion between the English and Irish both in Number and Weight.

5. Several Decays in Ireland between the year 83 & 87.

6. The Waxing and Waning of the King's Revenue there, in the said Five Years, with the Causes thereof.

7. That Estates in Ireland may be Improv'd from Two to Three, with a Perpetual Settlement of the same, and Rooting up all the Causes of Discords, which have infested that Countrey for above 500 Years.

8. That therewith the Revenue of the Church of England, & of particular Landlords, there may be increased from 3 to 4.

9. And the King's Revenue from 4 to 5 without being a sensible Burden to the People; so as the King may have Six millions for every 4th. Year, supposed to be Warr.

10. How Fears and Jealousies concerning Religion, &1 even the Test, may vanish of themselves.

11. How the King's Subjects may be doubled in 20 Years, & also United.

12. That the King of England's Territories and People may in Weight and Substance be little inferior to those of France, by a safe and sufficient Liberty of Conscience perpetuated.

13. That there may be a real Mare Clausum begun in Ireland; and that the King has a more Natural Right to Sovereignty within the same, than any of his circumjacent Neighbors.

The Contents of a Treatise, concerning Ireland.

1. It propounds a perpetual Settlement of Ireland, with a Natural Improvement and Union of England and Ireland, by Transplanting a Million of People (without Distinction of Parties) out of Ireland into England: Leaving in Ireland onely enough Hands to manage as many Cattle as that Countrey will feed. [Preface, p. 555.]

2. Against which it is Objected, That the Costs and Losses of the said Transplantation, and Cattle Trade, will be 4 Millions of Money. In Answer to which [Preface, p. 555.]

3. The said Grand Proposal is divided into Six Points; and each of them Explain'd. [Chapter I., p. 557.]

4. There are Twenty Assertions and Suppositions, express'd in Terms of Number, Weight and Measure; by which the said Six Points are Discussed. Vizt. [Chapter II., p. 558.]

1. How the People of England and Ireland do now stand mix'd, as to their Proportions between Catholiks and others; and how the same will be, after the above Transplantations: With Motives to all Persons and Parties to comply therewith. [Chapter III., p. 560]

2. That the Lands of England will be better'd by 70 Millions Sterling, or a Third Part. [Chapter IV., p. 563.]

3. That England will gain by Ireland 1500 M L per Ann. and as much as it gaineth by all the World besides. [Chapter V., p. 566.]

4. That the real and personal Estate of Ireland will rise from 2 to 3. [Chapter VI., p. 567.]

5. That the Revenues of the Church of England will rise from 3 to 4; and the King's from 4 to 5: Besides an Addition of 100 m pound per Ann. for extraordinary Church Uses. [Chapter VII., p. 568.]

6. That the Causes of Discord, which have continued in Ireland above 500 Years, arising from the Difference of Names, Births, Extractions, Language, Customes, Habits, and Religion, will all cease and vanish.An Estate shall be so settled, as to be coined into better Money, than that of Gold and Silver. [Chapter VIII., p. 570]

7. A Repetition and Enlargement of the Premisses. [Chapter IX., p. 571.]

Objections.

1. That the said Transplantation is impracticable and Utopian. [p. 574.]

2. The said Cattle-Trade is so likewise. [p. 575.]

3. That Men will comply with neither, altho’ practicable and profitable, out of mere Caprice and Perverseness. [p. 576.]

4. That the Irish will Hate and Scorn the said Transplantation, as the Abolishment of their Nation; which they will not think compensable by all the Advantages abovementioned. [p. 577.]

5. The Protestants of England will be frighted to see the Proportion between Catholicks and themselves, which is now, as 280 to one, shrink to 9 for one. [p. 578.]

6. There wants an indifferent Judicature, or natural Justice, to make the Estates of Ireland, as firm as is propounded. [p. 580.]

7. That these extraordinary Proposals of Transplantation, Cattle, Trade, and Judicature, are unnecessary: For that matters are already so well in Ireland without them. [p. 582.]

Upon which Account the following Particulars are sett down. Vizt.

1. The Difference of the Price of Lands 1687, from what they were, 1683. [p. 582.]

2. The like Difference in Value of Houses, in Cities, Ports and Market-Towns. [p.583.]

3. The like in Cattle of all sorts. [p. 583.]

4. How much the People of Ireland have spent in the Years 1684, 1685, and 1686, in Drinks, and other Superfluities, above the Level of the precedent Years. [p. 583.]

5. The Value of Merchandise exported in the Years 1685, and 1686, without Return. [p. 583.]

6. An Estimate of the Moneys, Plate and other fine Goods and Furniture; which were, in the said 2 Years, conveyed out of Ireland, or other ways withdrawn from Currant Uses. [p. 583.]

7. How much the Catholicks of Ireland have Gained and how much they have Lost, by the Transactions of the said Two Years. [p. 590.]

8. What Effect the said Differences must have upon the Expense of the People, and upon such Branches of the King's Revenue, as depend thereon. [p. 589.]

9. That the Fall of Excise in the Year 1687, is not caused by the present Army's being Irish. [p. 589.]

10. A Computation of the different Values of the English and Irish, as to their Persons, and Personal Estates. [p. 592.]

11. The Causes of some Decays in Ireland, distinctly and respectively charged both upon the English and Irish. [p. 593.]

12. The State of Foreign Trade Anno 1685, with what Share each of both Parties had therein. [p. 594.]

13. The Causes of several Fears and Jealousies in Ireland. [p. 596.]

14. The Fear of Unsettlement of Land-Estates in Ireland may be, that the Acts of Settlement and Explanation were not grounded upon the several Accounts here enumerated. [p. 597.]

15. Several Conclusions drawn from the said Accounts. [p. 598.]

16. That Partiality in Justice is another Cause of Fears, with an exact Account of the Lord Dunsany's Wrongs and Relief. [p. 602.]

The 8th Objection.

[8.] That all the abovesaid Proposals are uncouth, wild, Monstrous, and Chymerical. [p. 603.]

To which is answer'd, that if the said Proposals do not please, because they seem to wast and dispeople Ireland: Another is put, of a quite contrary Nature, in the Room of it; Tending to people not onely Ireland, but all his Majesty's Kingdoms fully, and to double their present Number, within 25 years. [p. 603.]

Memorandum.

TO THE
KING's
Most Excellent MAJESTIE.

When I find out puzling and preplext Matters, that may be brought to Terms of Number, Weight and Measure, and consequently be made demonstrable; And when I find Things of vast and general Concernment, which may be discuss'd in a few Words: I willingly ingage upon such Undertakings, especially when they tend to your Majesty's Glory and Greatness, and the Happiness of your People, being one of them myself, and

Your Majesty's most Faithful
and Obedient Subject

Wm. Petty.

[1]English money was first generally milled in 1662. Lowndes, Report, 95–96.

[2]An approximate weight. In fact 12 ounces Troy of standard silver were coined into 62 shillings.

[1]Cf. Mun, England's Treasure, ch. IV., pp. 19–27 of Ashley's edition.

[2]I.e., six pounds sterling, which would weigh 24 ounces Troy upon Petty's assumption.

[1]Leake says that the Britannia half-pence were coined of copper in 1665, “but were soon called in, to please a neighbouring monarch; they are therefore not very common.” English Money, p. 371. But Ruding doubts whether any were milled before the end of 1672. Annals, II. 14–15.

[1]Petty's opinion upon the point here involved has been diversely interpreted by Lord Liverpool, Coins of the Realm (1880), pp. 137–141 and by S. Dana Horton, The Silver Pound, 165–171.

[1]The reprint in Somers’ Tracts has ‘insolvent.’

[2]The Brit. Mus. copies 8223a. 69 and 104f. 61 have not ‘Price 2d.

[1]In the first edition.

[2]“Only a sort of syllabus of it [pp 454, 455] remains.” Fitzmaurice, 216.

[3]Probably Sir Robert Southwell, through whom Petty had other dealings with Mark Pardoe, the stationer.

[1]See Treatise of Taxes, p. 62, note.

[2]Petty reckons the “value of people” variously at more than £60, Two Essays, post, at £69, Verbum Sap., p. 108, at £70, Polit. Anatomy, p. 152, Treatise of Ireland, post, and this Essay, p. 476, and at £80, Polit. Arith., p. 267.

[1]2d ed., ‘Acres of Profitable Land.’

[2]2d ed., ‘Twelve ways.’

[1]2d ed., ‘The six parishes of Westminster, and the fourteen out parishes in Middlesex and Surrey, contiguous to the former; all which one hundred and thirtythree parishes.’

[2]Petty's arrangement of ninety-seven parishes within the walls, sixteen next without, ten in Westminster, and seven without them all, is a division unknown to the bills. It probably arose from a transposition of the figures for Westminster (seven parishes) and for the parishes without them all (ten) given by Graunt. In the first edition Petty cites bills for 1665–1682, during which years the division was in fact 97, 16, 12, and 5 parishes in 1665–1670 and 97, 16, 14, and 5 parishes in 1674–1682. In the second edition, published in 1686, Petty corrected the division of the parishes (see preceding note) to correspond not to his table, which still stopped with 1682, but to the last yearly bill published when he wrote, (the bill for 1685), which included 97, 16, 14 and 6 parishes. On these changes see the Introduction.

[1]7761 is a misprint for 761, which is the reading of the second edition and corresponds to the footing.

[1]The numbers A, B, C, and D are calculated from Graunt's table, pp. 407–409. The number A, 5135, is miscalculated or misprinted; it should be 5185. The error makes, on the whole rather for than against Petty's contention.

[2]In figuring that one number “is double to” another within a certain sum, Petty uses, in every case but the first, a process indicated by the formula x = 2y ± n. But in order to get the result that “C is double to A and 806 over” one must use the formula . Had Petty calculated the relation of C to A as he does the relation of D to B, etc., the surplus would have been 1613, his erroneous valuation of A being accepted.

[3]‘1736’ should be ‘1738’.

[4]On the page cited (p. 393 of this edition) Graunt says that “about one in 32 dies.” But in the Index (p. 332) is the statement, with reference to page 93, that “at London one of thirty” dies yearly.

[5]Probably by the makers of Ogilby and Morgan's map; cf. a note to Five Essays below.

[1]By 31 Charles II., c. r. (1679), the last assessment before Petty wrote, London paid £2145 15s. 8d., Middlesex, including Westminster, £1520 5s., Surrey, including Southwark £798 10s. 1d., in all £4464 10s. 9d. or a little more than one eighth the monthly assessment of £34410 9s. 6d. But the proportion of London proper, which was the basis of Petty's earlier calculation (Verbum Sap., p. 107, note) now fell to less than one sixteenth. On the proportion of London in different assessments see Thorold Rogers, Economic Interpretation of History, 145–156.

[2]The hearth money was imposed by 14 Charles II. c. 10. By 15 Charles II. c. 13 it was enacted that whereas the revenue from hearth money had “beene much obstructed for want of true and just Accompts under the hands of the respective Occupiers of Houses Edifices Lodgings and Chambers as by the said Act is required,” therefore the account should be verified upon visitation by the constable. He should make out “a Booke or Roll fairely written wherein shall be Two Columnes, The one containing the Names of the persons and the number of Hearthes and Stoves in their respective Possessions that are chargeable by the said Act, and the other the Names of the persons… not chargeable.” This roll was to be transmitted to the high constable, then to the Justices of the peace, then to the Clerk of the peace, who should “within Two Moneths engrosse in Parchment a true Duplicate of the said Booke or Roll, which being signed by him, and by two Justices of the Peace at least of the respective County and places aforesaid shall be transmitted within one Moneth after such Engrossment into his Majestie's Courts of Exchequer.”

[3]In Stowe MS. 322 at the British Museum, ff. 89–90, is contained the following memorandum:

The Telling of Noses; Or The Number of Freeholders in England according to Sr W. P.

The MS. in the hand of a copyist, who has unquestionably misdated it, was formerly at Ashburnham Place. Eighth Report Hist. MSS. Com., App. III. p. 12. The same calculation, but at much greater length, is assigned by Sir John Dalrymple's Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland, 2d ed., appendix, pt. II. pp. 11–15, to the reign of William III. The origin of the figures is revealed by Petty's friend, Sir Peter Pett. Pett discusses “the Result of the Bishops Survey, which was made of the Province for Canterbury and wherein none under the age of Communicants or 16 were return'd, and but very few Servants, or Sons, and Daughters, or Lodgers, or Inmates of the people of several perswasions of Religion: and the thing endeavour'd was that the heads of Families or House-Keepers, i.e. Man and Wife might be truly return'd: and at that rate, the Total at the foot of the account for the Province of Canterbury is 2,228,386, the which according to the forementioned currant Rule of Calculation to be necessarily about doubled on account of the people under 16, makes the Total of the Souls in that Province to be 4 Millions 4 Hundred 56 thousand, 7 hundred seventy two; and the Province of York bearing a sixth part of the Taxes, and having therefore the 6th. part of the people, that the Province of Canterbury hath, which is 742,795, that being added to those of Canterbury, makes 5 Millions, a hundred ninety nine thousand, five hundred sixty seven.” Happy future State of England, 117–118. Writing in 1680, although his book was not published until 1688, Pett goes on to say that this enumeration was taken in 1676, that it was defective, and that the total population of England was, at the time when he wrote, more than five million two hundred thousand.

[1]Graunt, p. 390.

[1]Petty's allusion to Domesday Book rests, probably, upon such knowledge only as he drew from reading Sir Matthew Hale's The primitive Origination of Mankind considered and examined, (1672). Hale, however, does not estimate the population of England at the time of the Conquest at all. That, he thinks, would be “a labourious piece of work, but it is not difficult to be done in any one County; I have tryed the comparison in the County of Gloucester. and I do find… that the number of inhabitants now are above twenty times more than they were at that time,” p. 235. The laborious piece of work has since been performed by Sir Henry Ellis, but the “recorded population” (287,045) must be multiplied “by four, five or six, according to knowledge or taste, before the population of England will be attained.”–Maitland, Domesday Book and beyond, 408; cf. pp. 17–22, 400, 437, also Pell in Domesday Studies, I. 561.

[1]Petty's learned men have not been identified. In 1685 Isaac Vossius estimated the population of the world at 500 millions, a number which Bayle ridiculed as too large: Vossii variarum observationum liber, 68; Bayle, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, Janvier, 1685, Oeuvres, I. 212–214. See the chapter on the “Historische Entwickelung der Versuche, die Gesammt-bevolkerung der Erde zu schatzen,” in Behm and Wagner, Die Bevolkerung der Erde, II. 3–8, Petermann's Geogr. Mittheilungen, Ergänzungshand, VIII. nr. 35.

[1]Numbers i. 1–46. The precise number is 603,550. Petty has overlooked the later enumeration of 601,730, Numbers xxvi. 1–51.

[2]I Chronicles xxi. 1–8, ‘and all Israel were a thousand thousand and a hundred thousand men that drew the sword; and Judah four hundred three score and ten thousand men that drew the sword.’ The account in 2 Samuel xxiv. 1–9 gives 800000 fighting men in Israel and 500000 in Judah.

[3]Concerning his assistance to the worthy divine, Petty writes thus to Sir Robert Southwell:

Dublin 20th Augt. 1681.

Dear Cosen,

Once more pay the Postage of 4 Sheets. By ye last you saw ye Quantum of my Damage; by this you shall ye Quomodo, & consequently ye Injury. Oh! that I could get some body to read my Papers.

There is a good man about this Town writing agst Atheisme, and in particular at this time answering their Cavills against ye Resurrection; Which are, That ye whole Globe of ye Earth will not afford sufficient Matter to the Bodies that must Rise, much less will the surface thereof (say they) afford footing to all those Bodies. Now ye assistances which I have given this good man are viz.

1° Supposing ye People in England, Scotland & Ireland to be abt nine Millions, Those in Holland and Zealand abt one Million, and in France 16, I say that by comparing ye rest of ye World therewth there are but between 300 & 400 Millions of Souls now living.

2° Upon this and Grant's Measures I ascertain ye Number that ever have died since ye Creation, & find that Munster would afford them all Graves, and ye Mangerton Bodies, or ye Equivalent in weight of Earth.

Having thus help'd my Friend, I took occasion to proceed, viz.

1st I find yt ye World being 5630 years old [Scaliger's Chronology, cf. p. 388, note 1], and Adam & Eve doubling but every 200 years (as Grant also saies) there must be now 316 Millions of People upon ye Earth; wch answers admirably, and 15 a brave Argument agst Scripture-Scoffers and Prœ-Adamites.

Nevertheless upon Examination of our Friend Grant's Positions,

2dly I find People do double very differently in every Century of ye World, and have (as I think) rectitified his Doctrine, by making many Numbers in continuall Proportion.

3dly I further find, that ye World at a Medium is at this day not much better peopled then our wretched Baronies in Keery, nor above part so well as our poor Ireland is; nor above part so well as Holland, wch is over-peopled.

4thly I find yt in ye next 1400 years ye World doubling it's People in my corrected proportion, must be over-peopl'd, and then that there must be great Wars and Slaughters, and yt ye Strong must then destroy ye Weak, or ye World must (of necessity) come to an end.

5thly I find by looking far back upon ye paucity of People in ye Asyrian, Persian, and other first Monarchies, how easy a thing ‘twas for a few resolute Fellows to conquer ye World, as then it was. And that (whatever ye King of France may think) ye Universall or Great Monarchy does and will grow every Century more & more difficult by ye Course of Nature.

6thly I conclude, that as People double faster now then they did in former Ages, so ye Rents of Lands must also rise proportionably, and ye number of years Purchase also: Wherefore let us get possession of what ye Affidavit saies is kept from us.

Thus, Dear Cosen (having ended where I began) I am still Yours.

[Endorsement] Dublin, Augt. 20th. 1681. A Copy of Sr, Wm. Petty's Letter to Sr. Robt. Southwell. Abt. ye Number of Mortals, &c.

Rawlinson MS. A. 178, ff. 71–72, Bodleian Library, among the Pepys papers. The letter has been printed in Rev. John Smith's Life, Journals, and Correspondence of Pepys (1844), II. 317.

[1]2d ed.; ‘2500 Acres.’

[2]2d ed.; ‘reckoning two Acres.’

[1]2d ed.; ‘by commerce?’

[1]Lupton's ed., p. 58.

[1]See note 2, p. 454.

[1]On the significance of this apparent ascription of the London Observations to Petty, see Introduction, also an article by the editor in Polit. Sci. Quart. XI. 113, 131.

[1]On the deficiencies of the London birth returns see Graunt, p. 361, also Introduction.

[1]Graunt, p. 374.

[2]Ib. p. 368.

[3]Table A gives the births in 1672 at 987, table B at 967; these numbers are used for the averages respectively.

[1]According to table C, the total burials in the enumerated parishes are 1000, not 1055, the total christenings are 585, not 550, while the total burials in the rest of the parishes are 789, not 634 and the total christenings are 422 not 457.

[1]Graunt, p. 385.

[2]Graunt had estimated 30,000 in 1662, see p. 399.

[3]How entirely Petty's dispute about the Down Survey occupied his attention in 1659 is evident from his ignorance of the census which was taken in Dublin and elsewhere in that year. It gave the number of all the people in eleven parishes (Christ Chruch and Nicholas without omitted) at 8780. Gilbert, Calendar, IV. 571, also p. xiii. Mr Hardinge shews reason for believing that Petty had copies of the returns of that census for nearly the whole of Ireland. If he had, it is not likely that he secured them until after the writing of the Dublin Observations, as neither the Observations nor the Polit. Anat. mentions the census of 1659. See Hardinge, The earliest known MS. Census Returns of the People of Ireland, in Trans. R. I. Acad., vol. xxiv. antiquities, pp. 317–328.

[1]The tables A, B, and C are printed, in the 1683 edition, upon sheets inserted after p. 8 of the pamphlet, so that “A Weekly Bill of Mortality for the City of Dublin,” here printed on p. 487, there follows immediately after the recommendation of it.

[1]In the years 1674–75. It appears that Petty had suggested to Essex certain reforms in the collection of the hearth money, for the farm of which he was one of the bidders. Fitzmaurice, 169, Capel Letters, pp. 399–418.

[1]Petty previously calculated 32000 inhabitants in Dublin. See p. 485.

[1]

• 's i pranderet olus patienter, regibus uti
• Nollet Aristippus.’ 's i sciret regibus uti,
• Fastidiret olus, qui me notat.’ Utrius horum
• Verba probes et facta doce vel junior audi,
• Cur sit Aristippi potior sententia.

Horace, Epistles, 1. 17, 13–17.

The story of the conversation between Aristippus and Diogenes is told by Diogenes Laertius.

[1]The common notion at the time when Petty wrote appears to have been that Paris must be larger than London because the court of Louis XIV. was more splendid than that of Charles II. Petty was not the first who held London the larger, but he appears to have been the first who gave an adequate reason for his belief. Gregorio de Leti says that he himself had once believed Paris the more populous city, but ‘all the more general and infallible rules’ had shewn him the superiority of London. De Leti had unusual opportunities for observation, but his estimate of the actual population of the two cities is absurdly high. He appears to credit, somewhat grudgingly, the assertion of an (unidentified) French ambassador, who had told him that Paris contained a million and a half of people. And he is ‘forced to believe’ that in London there are not less than two million souls! Del teatro britannico (1683), p. 75. A more trustworthy account is given by Le Maire, the author of Paris ancien et nouveau, 1685. After quoting Giovanni Botero (1540–1617) on “Parigi città che di popolo & di abbondanza d'ognicosa avanza de gran lunga tutte l'altre di Christianità,” Le Maire gives the number of people and of houses in each of the sixteen quarters of La Ville de Paris—as in the case of London, an area smaller than that included in the bills of mortality–according to an enumeration made in 1684. The totals are 91,252 persons and 20,641 houses. Le Maire, pp. 5–15. The enumeration of 1684 is reprinted in Boislisle's Mémoire de la Généralité de Paris (in the Documents inédits), p. 422. A modern estimate gives 543,270 inhabitants to the Paris of 1684. Husson, Les Consommations de Paris (1856), p. 20.

[1]In Paris there died 17,493 in 1682 and 17,764 in 1683, which, according to Petty's average of 19,887, would leave 24,404 deaths in the “very sickly” year 1684. In the first nine months of 1684, for which alone the official compilers of the Recherches statistiques could recover the figures, there died 18,737. The average mortality 1670–1675, 1678–1683 was 19,684. Recherches, II., tableau 53. The figures for 1676, 1677 and 1685–1687 are probably lost. They may perhaps be preserved in Grimperel's MS. in the Bibliothèque de l'Institut National de France (n° X. 214, 2 vols. in f°), which I have not seen.

[2]Petty's informant concerning Bristol may have been Sir Robert Southwell, whose seat, King's Weston, was near that town, cf. p. 480, note on the Dublin Observations.

[3]Six to seven is approximately the ratio between the burials of Paris alone and the burials of London.

[4]See p. 511.

[1]See p. 459, note 5.

[2]“Les Modernes assurent qu'elle [la ville de Paris] a aujourd'huy environ cinquant mille Maisons.” Le grand dictionnaire historique ou le mélange curieux de l'histoire sacrée et profane. Seconde édition, revue par M. Louys Moreri. A. Lyon, M.D.C. LXXXI., vol. II. p. 823 b.

[3]On Petty's attitude towards the law and lawyers see Fitzmaurice, 169–172.

[4]A blank in both French and English editions.

[1]The Paris bills entered the hospitals separately from the parishes in which they were situated. See p. 510.

[2]Ferdinand Verbiest, S. J. (1625–1688) wrote Voyage de l'Empereur de la Chine dans la Tartarie; aux quelles on a joint une novelle découverte aux Mexique. Paris: chez E. Michellet; 1685, 12°. Verbiest's accounts were received with great interest in Europe. An English translation of them was included in A Relation of the Invasion and Conquest of Florida by the Spaniards, under the Command of Fernando de Soto. Written in Portuguese by a Gentleman of the Town of Elvas. Now Englished. To which is subjoyned Two Journeys of the present Emperour of China into Tartary in the Years 1682 and 1683. London: printed for John Lawrence, 1686 (licensed 7 June), 12°, and a translation was also published in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xvi. no. 180, pp. 39–62. On Verbiest see R. H. Major's introduction to the Earl of Ellesmere's translation of P. J. d'Orleans's History of the two Tartar Conquerors of China, Hakluyt Soc., 1834, p. vii., also pp. 69–96, 103–131.

[1]In Hale's Primitive Origination of Mankind, 213, citing Leo's History of Africa. Such figures were frequently printed in the 17th century, e.g. Purchas, Pilgrimes (1625), p. 833.

[1]The source of this information is doubtless the Paris bills, which reported the deaths in each of the seventeen hospitals in the city and gave after 1671, a monthly État de l'hotel dieu, cf. Morand in Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, année 1771, pp. 832–842.

[1]The table was not published.

[1]In the Philosophical Transactions for July—September, 1686 (vol. XVI. no. 183, p. 152) appeared the following, unsigned:

“An Extract of two Essays in Political Arithmetick concerning the comparative Magnitudes, &c. of London and Paris by Sr. William Petty Knight, R S.S.

The excellent Author of these two Essays, has in several former of the same Nature made it appear that Mathematical Reasoning, is not only applicable to Lines and Numbers, but affords the best means of Judging in all the concerns of humane Life. In the present he endeavours to prove London, as it now is, the most considerable City now in being, by shewing it much to exceed Paris, (which not only the French but foreigners have asserted to be the chief City of Europe), both in People, Housing, and Wealth. The first by comparing the Bills of Mortality, whereby he finds that the People of London are as many as those of Paris and Rouen put together. The second by comparing the number of Houses, which by the Chimney-Books are found above 80000 in London, whereas a great Author among the French, (who seldome faile to magnifie their own things), reckons but 50000 Houses in Paris. As to the third, to wit the Wealth, he conceives that there is yet a much greater disposition, there being no comparison between them for Trade, and besides a good argument drawn from the Law-Suites of both places, he concludes from the Paris bills of Mortality, that two 5ths of the People of Paris are so poor that they chuse rather to die in Hospitals, than lie sick at their own Charges; and that a third of the whole People of that City, die out of the most wretched Hospitall of L'Hostel Dieu; wheras at London there dies scarce one in fiftie in our Hospitals. Hereupon in the second Essay, our Author extends his Charity to those poor wretches, shewing how by a reasonable expence, 3000 persons might be there saved per Annum, who die for want of good accomodation. The whole is so close writt, that it will not bear Epitomizing, wherefore I rather recommend it to the Curious who cannot but be satisfied therewith.”

end

[1]According to Graunt's table (pp. 407–8), which was probably Petty's source of information, this assertion is far from correct. In the twenty-five years from 1604 to 1630 the burials exceeded the christenings in sixteen instances, or including the plague burials in nineteen instances.

[2]

[3]As late as 1672 Graunt thought Paris more than one-fifth, but less than one-fourth larger than London (pp. 424). Petty, however, includes parishes which Graunt excluded (pp. 423, 457), and this may account for his transference to 1660 of the time when Paris exceeded London.

[1]In 1665 97,306 died, but only 68,596 were returned of the plague.

[2]“A Rome il meurt plus de 3000 personnes par an parce qu'il y a plus de cent mil ames. l'année passée il y en avoit 119825 sans les Juifs qui sont pres de trent milles. On meurt moins a Rome parce qu'il n'y a pas d'enfants a proportion des autres Villes, et bien des gens y vienent demurer ayant passé le temps auquel on meurt d'advantage. la sobriete et le soin qu'on a de la sante fait qu'on y meurt moins qu'en une Ville ou on est debauché.”…… Extract from a letter of II. Justel to the Royal Society, read 27 October, 1686; Royal Society's Letter Book, vol. x., p. 26.

[3]14716 should be 14717.

[1]The Two Essays were licensed the 26 August, 1686, the Five Essays the 18 February, 1687.

[1]The fact that the Two Essays were published in French and that an “extract” of them appeared in the Philosophical Transactions may have contributed something, perhaps, to the attention which they attracted on the continent; their subject, however, doubtless had more to do with it. Pierre Bayle reviewed them in his Nouvelles de la République des Lettres for October, 1686 (p. 1144 ff.; also in his Ocuvres diverses, pp. 661–662), and the Leipzig Acta eruditorum for October, 1687, summarized his review in connection with its notice of Petty's Further Assertion. Bayle concludes, “On attend quelques autres Pieces considerables de M. le Chevalier Petty, qui apparemment se verra critiqué bientôt par quelque Savant de Paris.” It seems that Bayle's conjecture must have been verified, for the 3rd November Justel communicated to the Royal Society that there was an answer published in France to Petty's essay on the comparison between London and Paris, and in the same month Petty was told by the King that his Essays were answering in France, and by several others that the mightiest hammers there were battering his poor anvil. Birch, IV. 500, Fitzmaurice, 285 I have found no trace of these replies, nor anything to indicate that they ever came into Petty's hands. (See “The Eighth Objection” in the Treatise of Ireland, post). Bayle's criticism, on the contrary, doubtless reached Petty in November, as the previous number of the Nouvelles, September, 1686, was received at the Royal Society 27 October, 1686. Birch, IV. 498.

[2]1686, ‘that.’

[3]1686, ‘the Nouvelles de la Rèpublique.’

[4]Bayle, commenting on Petty's assertion that London was the largest city in the world, asks, “Mais que seroit-ce en comparaison de Rey, si tout ce que les Historiens de Perse en disent étoit véritable?” He then refers to his review of The Travels of Sir John Chardin into Persia and the East Indies (London: Moses Pitt, 1686, f°), in the same number of the Nouvelles. The passage of Chardin (p. 387), which Bayle translates, runs thus: “Opposite to this [Ech-mouil] are to be seen some footsteps of that famous City of Rey, the biggest city in Asia.… The Persian Histories report, that in the time of Calife Medybilla-abou-Mohamed. Darvanich, who liv'd in the ninth Age of Christianism the City of Rey was divided into 96 Quarters, of which every one contained 46 streets, and every Street 400 Houses and ten Mosques.… Arabian writers affirm in like manner, that in the third Age of Muhametism, which is exactly at the same time, that Rey was the best peopl'd City in Asia.” This refers obviously to the ninth century, but Bayle summarizes “elle [la Geographic Persane] porte qu'au 6. siècle du Christianisme la Ville de Rey étoit divisée,” etc. And it is exclusively against this chronological blunder, perhaps caused by a misprint, that Petty directs his answer to Bayle.

[1]1686, ‘An. 550, it had.’

[2]1686: ‘The next is the excellent Monsicur Auzout from Rome, who is content that London, Westminster, and Southwark with the contigous Housing may have,’ etc. The French version of 1687 has, ‘Ensuite je repons aux lettres que l'excellent Mr. Auzout écrit de Londres., In the 1699 edition “Londres” is altered to “Rome.”

[3]Adrien Auzout, astronomer, was born at Rouen early in the seventeenth century. He was one of the first members of the Académie des Sciences, but lost his seat through an intrigue and went to Italy, dying at Rome in 1691. Auzout was a frequent correspondent of the Royal Society. Birch, IV. 162, 301; Philos. Trans. no. 1, p. 3, no. 2, p. 18, no. 3, p. 36, no. 4, pp. 55, 56, 63, 68, 69, 74, no. 7, p. 120, no. 12, p. 203, no. 21, p. 373. His letter or letters here referred to are not preserved at the Royal Society, nor do I find any allusion to his letter of 19 November in Justel's letters. He may have addressed himself to Petty directly.

[4]See p. 423.

[1]1686, ‘his main, if not only Objections.’

[2]1686, ‘to have been, since.’

[3]1686, ‘formerly distant.’

[4]1686, ‘and so long custom.’ ‘Of 50 years’ was added in 1687.

[5]1686, ‘Upon sight of Monsieur Auzouts large Letter, I made Remarques.’

[6]1686, ‘against one with.’

[7]1686, 's weeter.’

[8]1686, ‘Register.’

[9]Petty previously allowed eight heads to the tenanted house (p. 459) and later (p. 534), he assumed eight, ten or five according to social position.

[1]1686, ‘to M. Auzout's opinion.’

[2]1686, ‘was allowed by.’

[3]1686, ‘and that.’

[4]1686, ‘Number, the neat.’

[5]488,055 should be 489,555; this mistake, continued through the subsequent calculations, gives rise to errors that are mentioned in the notes. But accepting Petty's mistaken “medium of the said two Paris accounts,” his calculations are correct.

[6]“Really” apparently refers to Petty's previous use (p. 506) of 22,337 as the medium of London burials. He gets this new and higher medium by taking the years 1684 and 1685 only, instead of 1683–85, as in the Two Essays.

[7]1686, ‘part or 10531.’ The ‘10,331’ of the 1687 edition is a misprint for 10,531.

[8]115,840 is a misprint for 115,846.

[1]1686 omits 's o as.’

[2]1686, ‘the above-said Account.’

[3]‘488,055 's hould be 489,555.

[4]‘693,055’ should be 694,555.

[5]1686 omits ‘in a former letter,’ which may imply that a second letter, making the first ‘former,’ was received from Auzout between the publication of this essay in the Philos. Trans. and its issue in book form.

[6]‘2663’ should be 1163.

[7]‘114,284’ should be 112,784.

[8]1686, ‘without them, hath.’

[9]1686 omits the last paragraph ‘Which… contains,’ and concludes with the 's everal other estimates’ printed on p. 537.

[1]On the basis of one kitchen for each of Auzout's families and one street door for each of his 23,233 houses, see p. 527.

[1]Probably an allusion to Petty's plan ‘Of Lessening ye Plagues of London.’ See Verbum Sap., p. 109, note.

[1]Petty's use of Chevreau's estimate argues no knowledge of the Histoire du Monde (Paris, 1686, 2 v. 4°) beyond what he might have drawn from Bayle's words, “Il s étend beaucoup sur la magnificence de Rome… Il croit qu'il s'y est trouvé prés de quatre millions d'habitans, & il reporte que les trois cens mille personnes quiry moururent de peste en une Automne sous le regne de Neron, ne firent pas remarquer que le nombre des habitans fῦt devenu moindre. République des Letters, Nov., 1686, Oeuvres, I. 680.

[1]Petty twice refers to a map of London “set forth in the year 1682” (see also p. 542), but no such map can be found at the British Museum. Mr C. H. Coote, of the Department of Maps, thinks it probable that the map which Petty used was Ogilby and Morgan's. This map was published with the title: A large and accurate map of the city of London Ichnographically Describing all the Streets, Lanes, Alleys, Courts, Yards, Churches, Halls and Houses, &c. Actually Surveyed and Delineated By John Ogilby Esq.… dedicated and presented by… William Morgan, and was accompanied by a descriptive text entitled London Survey'd: or, an explanation of the large map of London. Giving a Particular Account Of the Streets and Lanes, in the City and Liberties. By John Ogilby & William Morgan, His Majesty's Cosmographers. London, Printed and Sold at the Authors House In White Fryers, 1677. So far as I can discover, neither the map nor the text makes any calculation of the population or of the houses of London.

[1]Page 82 of the fifth ed., p. 385 of this reprint.

[2]In some calculation now probably lost.

[1]Cf. p. 506, where, by averaging more years, Petty gets a smaller population.

[2]Page 82 of the fifth ed., p. 385 of this reprint. Graunt says that 3 died out of 11 families and guesses that the families have, one with another, 8 members.

[3]Graunt makes no such assertion. Petty's proposition appears to be a guess which may find some slight support on pp. 386–387 of Graunt.

[1]Graunt does not say this.

[2]In 1665 there died in all 97,306, whereof 68,596 of the plague. On this basis, Petty's method would give a population of about 460,000 in 1686, agreeing ill enough with the other two computations above mentioned.

[1]This essay is outlined in the “Several other Estimates” which Petty appended to the earliest publication of the First Essay (p. 512) viz.

• I. That London alone is equal to Paris, Roven, and Rome, as aforesaid.
• II. That London, Bristol, and Dublin are equal to Paris, Amsterdam, and Venice.
• III. That London alone is to Amsterdam, Venice, and Roven as 7 to 4.
• IV. That London and Bristol are equal to any four Cities of France.
• V. That Dublin is probably equal to the second best City, of any Kingdom or State in Christendome.
• VI. That London, for ought appears, is the greatest City of the World, but manifestly the greatest Emporium.

[1]In the Commonplace book of Petty's friend Dr Ent at the Royal Society (MSS. vol. 83) is a memorandum (pp. 78–79) of the number of inhabitants of Venice. The classes enumerated are noblemen, merchants, servants, artificers, beggars, friars, nuns, priests, poor in hospitals, Jews. In most cases they are distinguished as male and female, and the number of their children, male and female, is also given. The total is 134,801. If Petty's authority be, as seems not improbable, the same as that used by Ent, the chronology is confused. He was writing in 1686 or 1687. Candia surrendered nearly 20 years before, the special account is said by Ent to have been taken more than 20 years before the surrender, and Yriarte appears to assign it to the year 1582. La vte d'un patricien de Venise, p. 72. Unfortunately I have no present access to such authoritative books as might determine the question. The Present State of Venice, by J. Gailhard (1669) says that the city contains above 300,000 souls.

[2]See p. 529, and note 5.

[1]See p. 525, note.

[2]Failing health and interest in his Treatise of Ireland, printed in this volume, probably prevented Petty from writing the promised essay.

[1]See p. 538.

[2]See pp. 535–536.

[1]The Aanwysing der heilsame politike Gronden en Maximen van de Republike van Holland en West-Vriesland, Leyden, 1669, frequently attributed to De Witt, but written chiefly by Pieter de la Court, gives the return of a “very strict and severe” poll tax in 1662. There were then found but 481,934 persons in South Holland, and supposing West Friesland might yield a fourth part as many, the total population would have been 602,417. “But because possibly none but intelligent Readers, and such as have travelled, will believe, what we see is customary in all Places, that the number of people in all Populous Countries is excessively magnified, and that the Common Readers will think, that since many would be willing to evade the Poll Tax, there was an extraordinary Fraud in the Number given in: I shall therefore follow the common Opinion, and conclude, that the Number of People was indeed much greater, and that these Countries are since that time much improved in the Number of Inhabitants; and accordingly I shall give a guess as by vulgar Report, that the whole Number, without excluding any Inhabitants whatsoever, may amount to two Millions and four hundred thousand People.” P. 40–41 of the Engl. Transl., The True Interest of Holland, 1702.

[2]See p. 533, note.

[1]Van Beuningen (1622–1693), Dutch ambassador in London, was in the habit of asserting that all England had not more than two million inhabitants, and that the Netherlands were equally populous. De Leti, Del teatro britannico, 75.

[2]‘1,163’ is a misprint for 1,163,000; the French version speaks of “leregistre de 1163 m. maisons en toute l'Angleterre.”

[1]Really 1,952,000.

[1]This syllabus shews rather what Petty intended than what he accomplished. The Treatise attempts to establish but eleven of the thirteen points. To the thirteenth it pays slight attention incidentally, of the twelfth it barely makes mention.

[1]‘&’ inserted by Petty.