lut on in France and America. In this peroration, however, the population of France is eftimated at THIRTY MILLIONS! and our author, as if he was alarmed at the extravagance of the affertion, has added fome calculations, in the Appendix, to fupport it. Dr. Price's character as a calculator may diffeminate error; and the flips of his pen fhould be guarded against. We are not afraid to fay that he has added one-fifth to the real popula ion; and that his reprefentations are fallacious, not without the appearance of unfairnets. In Sweden, the only kingdom where bills of mortality are carefully kept and contrasted with actual enumeration, the ave rage number for 21 years was 2,310,160; the births 90,245, nearly 1 in 25; the deaths 66,759, 1 in 343. In France, for fix years, to 1780, the number of births was 958,419, and of deaths 834,865. The numbers are taken from Mr. Necker, and our author has broken Mr. Necker's average of ten years into two parts, that he may calculate with more advantage to his own caufe, from the last only. If we take the real numbers for this feries they will be 940,935 and 8,184.9 8. It has been ufaal with unbiaffed calculators, particularly in cafes of mortality, not to chufe a lefs period than ten years, for the average. Again, our author prefers the fame proportion of deaths as occurs in Sweden, a country where there are few manufactures, few large cities, well regulated hofpitals, and where, as we are credibly informed, the practice of medicine is conducted with great ability. In our Appendix we have given the comparative mortality of the French hofpitals: it is enough to obferve in this place that, on an average, 1 in dies: we will allow 10; and, for the other extreme, we will take the boasted province of Vaud in Switzerland, where only 1 in 45 dies annually. If the difference 35 be halved, it will give for the multiplier 17, instead of 34. If we contider the whole kingdom of France to be half as healthy as the Pays de Vaud, which, adverting to the drawback from the great mortality in the hofpitals and fimilar inftitutions, is allowing much, the multiplier will be 221, instead of 343. Mr. Necker, whofe great object it was to increase the population, makes the multiplier 293; but from every comparative view that we can take, making every poffible allowance, it cannot be put higher than 284. We have now before us hiftories of continued and extenfive epidemics, where from 1 in 7 to 1 in 16 are faid to have died, independent of the mortality of hofpitals. It is equally forpriling that Dr. Price fpeaks with fuch complacency of the data for afcerta ning the population of France, when he has mifrepresented fome facts, and appears to be ignorant of the existence of others. Is it not unaccountable that, in his fituation, he should have been unacquainted with the feries of memoirs published by Meffrs. de Sejour, le marquis de Condorcet, and de la Place, on the fubject of the population of France, in the fucceffive annual volumes of the Royal Royal Academy? Or with M. de la Place's very fcientific memoir in the volume for 1783, p. 693? The feries is not yet fipifhed; but tables are published in each year, containing the different returns. In a whole kingdom, Dr. Price obferves, that the births are more variable than the deaths. As we have not the work which he quotes at hand, where fome proofs feem to be given, we cannot combat the observation; but it appears furprifing, that a general caufe hould be attended with more uncertain effects than ane acting irregularly as the winds, and variably as the weather. In this cale, however, the calculation from the births is checked by actual enumeration in Valenciennes and Burgundy. M. Moheau, in his Recherches fur la Population de France,' has made many trials, and checked his calculations by experiment, fo that this method may be at least fafely employed in the queftion before us. The academicians employ 26 as a multiplier of the births; but, on more accurate examination, 25 feems the more accurate number. M. de la Place has shown, in his Calculation of Probabilities, that it is a million to one if the numeration be extended to about 1,200,000, that the factor, formed on it, fhould not bring out the refult accurate to half à million. The last table that we have feen is in the volume for 1785, reviewed partly in our Appendix; for though we have examined the fubfequent one, no table occurs. The births in 1781 were 965,648, which multiplied by 26, deducting the popu lation of Corfica, makes near 26 million. If we multiply by 25 it is reduced to 25,476,375. Even with the inhabitants of Corfica, and ufing the largest multiplier, the number scarcely exceeds twenty-fix millions; the utmost extent that can be allowed to the population of France, and most probably much beyond the truth. The deaths mentioned by Dr. Price, viz. 834,865, if multiplied by 28, would give only 23,793,652: we ought, howver, to add, that the boasted data are defective. The returns were not regular. In 1781, no unhealthy year, the deaths were 948,502, including Corfica, which, if we allow of Dr. Price's multiplier, would produce an enormous population, and shows that ours, fixed at 28, is probably too large. The other parts of the Appendix are, the French Declara tion of Rights, with fome remarks, and the Reports of the Society for Commemorating the Revolution, held the 4th of November laft. The factor 25 has been formed on an actual enumeration of nearly double this number. Since writing the above, we have feen fome calculations, in manufeript, made a few years fince, where the multiplier is 28; a coincidence which adds to the ftrength of our argument, as it was drawn from fources very different from those we employed. We shall make no apology for the length of this article; its object is to obviate error, and this defign requires no little care in the fteps that are taken. The political tendency of increafing the population of France we cannot perceive; but we find it connected with a wish to depreciate the character, the population, and the refources of England. This connexion has led to the enquiry, in which we think the question is fet on its proper bafis. Dr. Price's decifions on questions of calculation night otherwife be fuppofed decifive; and it might be thought that fpeaking pofitively implied an accurate acquaintance with the fubject. Popular Commotions confidered as Signs of the approaching End of the World. A Sermon, preached in the Metropolitical Church of Canterbury, on Sunday, September 20, 1789: with an occafional Preface. By William Jones, M. A. F. R. S. 410. 15. 6d. Robinsons. WE WE reviewed Mr. Jones' Lectures on the figurative Language of the Bible' in our LXVth volume, p. 417; and we ftill find him in dread of innovations, a dread increafed almost to apprehensive horror by the late events. In fhort, he thinks these popular commotions to be figns of the approaching end of the world. In his long preface, longer indeed than his fermon, he yery properly obferves, that The chief duty required in a preacher, is to warn all parties against the delufion of falfe principles and fashionable errors; confiftent neither with the word of God, nor with the prefervation of the public peace by the authority of magistracy, under any form of government whatsoever: to represent the dangerous confequences of affecting the licentious maxims of heathenifm; or of attending to the vifionary fchemes of modern infidels, fuch as Voltaire, who captivates the eye with a glitter of diction, but never had any just ideas of religion, government, good learning, or good manners.' Mr. Jones, with justice, reprobates Voltaire; for if to any que man the prefent commotions of France be particularly owing, it is to Voltaire. We must give up his ideas of religion; but of government, good learning, and often of good manners, his knowledge was far from being deficient. Mr. Jones's text is Luke xxi. 25, 26. And upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the fea and the waves roaring; men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after thofe things which are coming upon the earth; for the powers of heaven fhall be fhaken.' Our author remarks, that previous to the deluge, the deftruction of Sodom, and of Jerufalem, events prophetical of the last day, the fame disturbances are recorded. The words are, indeed, as he tells us, fpoken in general of all nations; but there is no reafon, as Mr. Jones has done, to confider the fea and its roaring' as figurative. After the Evangelift had defcribed the appearances on the earth, to complete the picture, he mentions the difturbances of the ocean, and the effects these phenomena have on men. In reality, however, though the reprefentation is fublime and awful, we fee little connection which it has with the present subject, and fufpect that the words have been preffed into a service for which they are not fitted: let us turn to the original. Our Saviour tells his followers, that, when they fhall hear of wars and infurrections, they must not be affrighted, for the end will not follow foon. Then too will nation rife against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:' nothing of this kind now occurs. There will be prodigies in the fky, and perfecution on earth: in this refpect too we may be at reft. But to come nearer the text. He next explains the appearances previous to the destruction of Jerufalem; and proceeds almoft in the words felected, except that our author has omitted the figns in the fun, the moon, and the ftars; unfortunately he has omitted alfo the paffage fublequent to the text, which would overturn the whole fyftem, xat Te-and then, at that time, they fhall fee the Son of Man, &c. This would be fufficient, if, as we think, and as fome commentators contend, it were really a prophecy of the end of the world; though, from the context, it feems to relate only to the deliverance of the Jews, which Mr. Beere* has told us will happen in about twenty-eight years. Thefe gentlemen, therefore, by their united efforts, may form a plaufible fyftem in either cafe, Mr. Jones is mistaken. Our author, on the oppofite end of the beam, contends against the fyftem of Dr. Price: with him liberty is licentioufnefs; the happy periods of every kingdom are thofe of monarchy; and the oppofition to monarchy is a crime. It is unfortunate for us, to be obliged always to differ; but we must difapprove of both extremes. We have already had occafion to give our opinions frequently on the fubject of government, and have decided in favour of a monarchy, always allowing, that the fource of power is the people, who may delegate that power to be executed by a magiftrate, or raife the magiflrate to an equality with themselves; and who may delegate, in his turn, the power given to him. At the fame time, it is neceffary to observe, that in the latter inftance, which, in our re We shall examine this work in our next, view of Dr. Price's fermon, we have fhewn to be the conftitution of England, the people have a right to refume this conceded power if it is improperly employed. We cannot, therefore, conclude in our author's favour, either as it regards the interpretation of the prophecy, or the political fyllem; and if Mr. Jones will reflect, that the oppofition to the defpotifm of the king of France and of the emperor, involves only a fmall portion of the globe; while the reft is almost wholly in peace, he will not, perhaps, think that these commotions are confiderable enough to fulfil the prophecy. The war with the Turks cannot be ftyled popular' commotions, and, in any view, cannot be connected with the words or fpirit of the Evangelift. Thoughts on the State of the Nation; or, the real Situation of Great Britain delineated and demonftrated. 8vo. 2s. Ridgway. IT T has been affirmed by a late celebrated nobleman*, that an Englishman is never better pleafed than when he is told that his country is upon the point of destruction. If this obfervation be really founded in fact, it must afford a very unfavourable opinion of English patriotifin, unless we shall fuppofe that fuch pleasure arifes only from a perfuafion that the prospect of national ruin is entirely chimerical. We wish that by the fame explanation we could reconcile with juftice the fentiments of the prefent author, who, at a time when the profperity of Great Britain is beheld with admiration and envy by furrounding nations, endeavours to reprefent her fituation as entirely the reverfe. The whole of this extraordinary picture he founds upon a statement, that the duties paid to the excife between the 5th of April 1788, and the 5th of April 1789, fall fhort of thofe of the former year, in the fum of 299,3931. 7s. 6d. The duties paid to the excife, he obferves, are chiefly fuch as arife from objects of domestic confumption; and as he fuppofes that the confumption measures pretty exaaly the produce of the land and the labour of the people, he therefore infers that any diminution of the excife must be accompanied with a decline of national profperity. This inference is founded entirely upon a prefumption, that the dealers in all excifeable commodities know perfectly the extent of their respective trades, and therefore take care to buy no more, and confequently to pay excife upon no more, than what will fait the immediate demand of their customers. Without enquiring at prefent whether the knowledge of the dealers be either fo accurate or fo general as the author thinks proper to reprefent, we fhall only remark, that from advancing this pro * Lord Cheerfield. pofition |