number of males in the country comes much nearer to the number of females. Thefe facts he adds, feem to fhew sufficiently that human life in males-is more brittle than in females, only in confequence of adventitio caules, or of fome particular debility, that takes place in polished and luxurious focieties, and especially in great towns.

The fubject, which our Author next inveftigates, is the state of population in this kingdom; he begins with painting out the principal caufes, which obstruct population in any country, and then examines the truth of the fact with respect to our own. country. Luxury and the engroffing of farms are two unquestion able fources of national depopulation and mifery. Luxury: enervates and debilitates the inhabitants of any kingdom, deftroys virtuous in luftry, and brings on poverty, dependence and venality. With refpect to the custom of engroffing farms, Mr. Muret (a writer of whole remarks our Author has made confiderable ufe in this part of his fupplement) obferves, with the highest reafon, that a large tract of land, in the hands of one man, does not yield fo great a return, as when in the hands of feveral, nor does it employ fo many people; and, as a proof of this, he mentions two parifhes in the district of Vaud, one of which (once a litle village) having been bought by fome rich men, was funk into a single demesne, and the other (once a fingle demefne) having fallen into the hands of fome pealants, was become a little village. By the laws of Licinius no Roman was to hold more than feven jugera of land. Only revive, fays Mr. Sufmilch, this law, or that of Romulus, which limited every Roman to two jugera, and you will loon convert a barren defart into a bufy and crowded hive.' Both Mr. Muret and Sufmilch obferve, that the increase of pallurage has the fame effect with the engroffing of farms; much more ground, when employed in this way, being neceffary to maintain the fame number of people, than when employed in tillage. However the opulent farmers and landlords may find their account in this evil, it is private benefit derived from public calamity, and the facrifice of the nation to a temporary advantage. We have, for many years, been feeling the truth of this obfervation. The high price of all the means of subsistence, occafioned certainly by this practice as well as by the heavy weight of our taxes, has long been the object of univerfal complaint; and it is growing more fo every day, and fpreading every where, checking marriage, loading our manufactures, and diminishing the number of our people.

That this is more than groundlefs declamation will appear from the following eftimate. Dr. Davenant (the best of all political writers) tells us, that at Michaelmas, in the year 1685,

it appeared by a furvey of the hearth books*, that the number of houfes in all England and Wales was 1,300,000, of which 554,631 were houfes of only ote, chimney, and the number of houfes in 1690 was 1,319,215At the refloration, it appeared by the fame hearth books, that the number of houfes in the kingdom was 1,230,çcg the interval, therefore, between the restoration and the revslution, the people of England had increased above 300,000 and of smaller tenements, Dr. Davenant obferves, there had been, from 1666 to 1688, about 70,000 new foundations laid. But what a melancholy reverse has taken place fince? In 1759, the number of houses in England and Wales was 986,482; of which not more than 330,000 were cottages having lefs than feven windows. In 1766, notwithftanding the increafe of buildings in London, the number of houfes was reduced to 980,692. According to thefe accounts then, our people have, fince the year 1690, decreased near a million and a half. And the wafte has fallen principally on the inhabitants of cottages; nor indeed could it fall any where more unhappily; for, from cottages our navies and armies are fupplied, and the lower people are the chief ftrength and fecurity of every flate. What renders this calamity more alarming is, that the inhabitants of the cottages thrown down in the country, fly to London and other towns, there to be corrupted and perish. I know I fhall be here told that the revenue thrives. But this is not a circumftance from which any encouragement can be derived. It thrives, by a caufe that is likely in time to deftroy both itself and the kingdom; I mean, by an increase of Juxury, producing fuch an increafe of confumption and importation, as fecretly accelerates ruin, while at prefent (as far as the revenue is concerned) it overbalances the effects of depopulation. -What remedies can be applied in fuch circumftances?-This is a queftion of great importance, which requires a more deep and careful difcuffion than I am capable of giving it. I will therefore anfwer generally and briefly in a ftyle and language fimilar to Mr. Muret's.

Enter immediately into a decifive enquiry into the state of population in the kingdom.-Promote agriculture.-Drive back the inhabitants of towns into the country.-Establish fome

* At this time there was a tax of two fhillings on every fire hearth; which was taken off at the revolution, becaufe reckoned not only a great oppreffion to the poorer fort, but a badge of flavery on the whole people; expofing every man's houfe to be entered into and fearched at pleasure by perfons unknown to him.' Preamble to the act for taking away the revenue arifing by hearth money, 1 William and Mary, chap. 10.

regulations for preferving the lives of infants.-Difcourage luxury, and celibacy, and the engroffing of farms.-Let there be entire liberty; and maintain public peace by a government founded not in conftaint, but in the refpect and the hearts of the people. But above all things, if it be not now too late; find out means of avoiding the miferies of an impending bankruptcy, and of eafing the nation of that burden of debts and taxes under which it is finking.-But I am crying in vain.Corruptions and follies of the worst fort have, I am afraid, taken too deep root among us.'

To this long extract we may properly fubjoin our Author's eftimate of the number of people in England and Wales. It appears, that the number of inhabitants to a house at Leeds, Shrewsbury, Holycrofs and Northampton is 4', 4, 41 and 43 refpectively. Whence it follows, that five perfons to a house is an allowance large enough for London, and too large for England in general. And if the number of houfes in the kingdom be stated at a million, the number of people in England and Wales will be four millions and a half, allowing 4% to a houfe; and five millions, allowing five to a house. The former is probably too large an allowance; but the latter is certainly fo. The number of people in the kingdom may, therefore, be stated as probably not more than four millions and a half; but certainly not five millions.

This fupplement contains additional obfervations concerning the schemes of the focieties for providing annuities for widows and for perfons in old age; and we are of opinion that the author has happily fuggefted a fhort and a very easy method of examining the fufficiency of thofe inftitutions that propose the benefit of widows. Nor can we conceive, how any, who pay the least regard to juftice or humanity, can perfift in fupporting selfish schemes, which were originally founded in ignorance, and and which, in their confequences, are productive of fo much mifchief. Those who have begun to reform their very defective plans do well; but unless they proceed far enough in their reformation, others, that have actually broken up, have done much better. There are fome of thefe focieties ftill, which are blind to the evidence laid before them, and deaf to every remonftrance. Is it poffible then to speak of these associations (which enjoin contributions on their members near a half below what they ought to be) with too much feverity? Can any be. nevolent perfon fee them, without concern, going on with schemes, that have been demonftrated to be infufficient, and fure to end in confufion and calamity? One fociety boafts, that it confifts of 1100 members; and another that it poffeffes an income of 8500l. per annum. What is this but fhamelessly boasting of the extenfive mischief they are doing? Some time

H 4

ago

ago they might have pleaded ignorance; but this is a plea they cannot now make.' The Author has fuggefted the following reafons to prove, that the interpofition of the legislature would be highly proper, fhould thefe focieties continue much longer deaf to the calls of juftice and humanity.

First, They are laying the foundation of much future mifchiefs; and no government ought to fee this with a careless eye. Secondly, The principle by which they are upheld is bafe and iniquitous. Thirdly, There are many honeft men in these focieties, who, having, through mifinformation, had the misfortune to enter into them, now repent, and would be glad to withdraw. But, having made confiderable payments which they cannot get back, they are forced to go on with further payments, in order to avoid lofing all their former ones. Thefe perfons with for affiftance from the legiflature; and their cafes, I think, require affiftance. Fourthly, The fufferers by these affociations may, perhaps, fome time or other, come to be burdens on the public. Such was the cafe both of the charitable corporation and of the company of Mercers. I will add, that it feems to me, that were these focieties indeed formed on durable plans, there would be reason for fubjecting them to fome regulations. In all of them the annuities are to commence many years before old age; and in fome, at almost every age. Such annuities were they to become very common in a state, might have a bad effect, by weakening the motives to industry, and promoting diffipation and idlenels.'

The Author concludes these remarks with the plan of an affociation for the benefit of age, together with a table, fhewing the value of the annuities defcribed to purchafers of all ages from 15 to 40. To his obfervations on the establishment of this kind in Scotland, he fubjoins this general inference, which we shall tranfcribe in juftice to thofe that are concerned; Upon the whole, I am fatisfied that there is no reason for being in pain about this fcheme.'-And then adds, Caution and vigilance, however, will be always proper. Events have hitherto favoured it. Hereafter, perhaps, they may try it; and deviations from probability may take place which cannot now be suspected.'

ART. IV. Whitaker's Hiftory of Manchester concluded. See our last Month's Review.

HEN towns are erected, their increasing inhabitants are

W to look, for a fupply of provifions, to the country around

them and the confequence of an increased demand will naturally be an improved culture of the earth, as the most rational means of producing a greater quantity of grain, and other kinds of vegetables, for the better fuftenance of man and beast. Accordingly, the useful arts of agriculture (we find) had been

long

long fuccessfully profecuted among the Romans; and the fame arts had been as fuccefsfully purfued by all the tribes of the Gallic and many of the British Celtæ. But as the Celta varied from the Italians in fome particulars of their rural conduct, the two different modes of management compofed two diftinct fyftems of agriculture. Of thefe the Britons of Mancunium might be naturally expected to have adopted the Roman; but they actually adopted the Celtic. The latter had been long tried in thefe northern climates, had been long approved by their brethren of Gaul and South-Britain, and was therefore fuppofed to be beft adapted to the latitude of Lanca-' fhire.'-But among the various manures with which the Roman farmers enriched their lands, they were totally unacquainted with the use of marle. The Celta of Britain and of Gaul were the first that had marked this unctuous clay in the bosom of the earth, and the first that had drawn it out, and applied it to the purposes of agriculture. This they had found the most forceable and lafting of all manures, and had given it the honourable appellation of marrow, marg, margil, or marl.—

"This manure was peculiarly adapted to the ftrangely contrariant nature of the Mancunian foil, which is a compact clay, a light morass, a strong gravel, or a deep fand. This manure must have been now first introduced into the precincts of the town, where it is ftill the one principal manure of the lands, and the one principal caufe of their great fertility. This manure must have been now first introduced into the county, where and in the adjoining Chefhire, the use of it is better understood than in any other part of the kingdom, and in both which it has changed the broad extent of our [formerly] barren heaths and turfy motfes into fome of the best lands within them.'

The remainder of this chapter is employed in defcribing the gradual alteration that took place in the drefs and way of living amongst the Britons, after they became fubject to the Roman power-they foon adopted the more civilized manners of their conquerors, and were thereby better qualified to partake of the various advantages of focial life, to many of which they had hitherto been abfolute ftrangers.

Chap. 8. treats of the economy of the Roman government here. The conquered regions of Britain were divided into fix provinces, and were governed by fix prætors and fix quæstors. Each province formed a diftinét government of itself, and each was governed by a diftinct prætor and quæftor. But they all acknowledged one head within the island, and were all fubject to the one authority of the proconful, the legate or the vicar of Britain. The taxes impofed upon the provincial Britons confifted of four or five different articles,' viz. an impofition upon burials, a capitation-tax,-a land-tax, amounting to a

tenta