pulation from procreation only; and which would give a doubling from natural causes of once in 50 instead of once in 25 years; a conclusion which, whether critically exact or not, is, I am sure, and will subsequently shew, to be nearer to truth than the latter is to possibility.

"But supposing we were to say, contrary to fact and evidence, that not more than 5000 had annually proceeded to America from all parts of the world within the last century, would the half of the former sum, namely, 3,376,333, thus added to the population of the country from internal procreation, raising the latter, therefore, from 4,485,377 to 7,861,710, be immaterial? This calculation would lengthen the period of doubling in America to about 35 years, agreeably to the former table in the preceding chapter. And this I am convinced is a far more rapid duplication than has ever taken place in that country from" procreation only.

66

Emigration to America did not, however, commence with the year 1720; on the contrary, thousands were annually proceeding to that country half a century before that period."

With the "vague, bombastic declamation," the " ejaculations, apostrophe, metaphors, similes," contained in the above passage, the Reviewer, does not meddle! Neither does he take any notice of the very ingenious and satisfactory calculation, by which Mr. Sadler shows, that 10,000 emigrants would give an annual addition of 5748 marriages, being to those taking place in the native population, as 1 to 7; nor of Table XXIII., showing the vast effect of such, or even a less proportion of additions. If he had profited by the instruction contained in this part of Mr. Sadler's "declamation," if he had studied these arithmetical "ejaculations," he would have been saved from the blunder, into which he has fallen, in inferring from the rate of increase, in the slave population of the United States, from 1810 to 1820, that they would double their numbers from procreation alone, in twenty-five years. Emigration will enable a community to double its numbers, in five, or ten, or twenty years; and after emigration had ceased, such a community would, for a time, increase at a rate which would double its numbers, in a shorter period than would be otherwise possible, because it would contain a disproportionate number of the reproductive class. "In 1810 the slave trade had been but recently abolished," and though there were more males than females, that circumstance was much more than compensated, by the excessive proportion, in which their numbers consisted of persons in the vigour of life, as compared with the young and the aged. As the latter acquire their just proportions, every succeeding census will show a slower rate of increase, till the effect of the momentum occasioned by transportation has ceased.

Mr. Malthus maintains that population has a tendency to double itself in 12 years, and that the tendency to multiplication,

which is resisted and checked by vice and misery, is one which would double population in every country, in that period. Table XVI. shows the prolificness required to produce such confusion :

"First, all marry, and at the age of twenty; Second, all the marriages are prolific, and to the astonishing extent of ten children each, one with another; Third, all these marriages are prolific the ensuing year, and thence in alternate years for eighteen subsequent ones, till the number of ten children each is produced; Fourth, none of these numerous offspring die unmarried, but, on the contrary, they all live to form that union at the same early age, and in their turn become equally prolific, a state of increase, in short, in which every individual in the third descent has one hundred, and in the fourth a thousand descendants, and so on through all succeeding generations; Lastly, must be added a fact relative to this calculation not a whit more surprising than those previously mentioned, there are to be no deaths in this miraculously multiplying community! Then we find that a doubling every 12 years is barely made up. an alleged calculation of Euler's or the vague appeal of Mr. Malthus to the experience of some unnamed country or countries, redeem this ratio of human increase, constructed as it must be upon such assumptions, from the derision it merits ?"

Can

Table XVIII. shows what additional prolificness must be assigned, if due allowance be made for deaths. Then

"All must marry, and at as early a period as twenty years of age; all the married must be fruitful, and to the extent of fifteen children each : of these fifteen children, as many as ten must live to marry, and at the same early age, and must in their turn be equally prolific; and so on. Every father, therefore, must be the parent of fifteen children in the first descent, of 165 in the second, of 1665 in the third; and if he could survive till he had seen the last complete their quota to this state of prolificness, he would reckon upon 16,665 great-great-grandchildren. Moreover, it must be observed, that these are the bare average numbers demanded in order to this ratio of increase from every married individual. I leave to the reader's imagination how far, therefore, even this state of fecundity must be enlarged to make up for cases of positive or comparative sterility in the married, and for those marriages which would be dissolved by premature mortality, before they had produced the given number of children, all which occurrences, it must be borne in mind, are as common and as inevitable, in all communities, as death itself: he will not readily overrate the addition that must of necessity be made to the medium of fifteen children, in order to make up that average as resulting from the totality of cases."

A duplication in 25 years, is repeatedly asserted by Mr. Malthus, to be the "slowest rate" of American increase. To show what physical impossibilities are involved in this assertion, which constitutes a main article in the Malthusian creed, and in the belief of which impossibilities, the Reviewer has renewed his profession, Table XXI. has been constructed with data, furnished by

Mr. Malthus himself; showing the progress of a population, in which the marriages take place at 23, each having out of 5.265 births, 3 which live to marry, all such surviving to the age of 65; the existing progenitors of the two first couples being 2 individuals. The progress of this population, consisting of 63 individuals, is pursued yearly, from the year 1 to the year 206, and what is the result?

128

"Commencing first with the year after the marriage of our first couples, there are then in existence 83 individuals; these doubled every 25 years, 8 times would bring the period down to the year 202, and would give, according to our geometricians, 2218 souls. But what would be the actual number in being at the latter period, allowing arithmetic to determine?-168, and (to be exact) 11 parts of another! In the year 6, there are 10 persons in the table; these, doubled as before, would amount to 27303; but, in the year 206, to which those doublings would extend, there are 180 only found;-less than one-fifteenth part! Particular periods may indeed be selected in the table whence to commence the series, which will somewhat diminish these enormous disproportions; but then these periods will exhibit population under circumstances such as never exist in reality, as has been before sufficiently adverted to. Thus, were we to begin reckoning from the year in which the first marriages take place, and before a single child has been born, and when therefore. the actually prolific are nearly two-thirds of the whole, the 6, doubled 8 times, would, according to our theorists, become, in the year 201, 1706 individuals; but alas for their accuracy, less than one-eleventh of their calculation, only 16877, are found in this instance, favourable as it is to the principle of multiplication! Nothing, therefore, can redeem their confident assertion regarding their" slowest rate of increase,” in making which they are so "perfectly sure that they are far within the truth," and concerning which it appears that" all colncurring testimonies agree," from being one of the wildest and most falacious guesses that ever imposed upon the credulity of mankind."

By the above Table, it will be found, that the numbers double in somewhat more than 47 years; that there is 1 marriage in every 126 1 birth in 25%; 1 death in 44. The geometric ratio of 25 years would multiply 100 persons in 425 years into 13,107,200, whereas the increase resulting from Mr. Malthus' own measure of prolificness, as evolved in the table would produce in about the same term only 51.200; not half the population of the city of New York.

As Mr. Mathus derived his measure of the force of the " principle of population" from America, so he derived his proofs of the miseries resulting from a redundant population from China. These countries are the alpha and omega of his system. By more comprehensive research and more skilful methods of analytic and synthetic reasoning Mr. Sadler has shown that in both in

stances his facts and inferences are completely erroneous. He has shown how the rapid multiplication of the population of America has been effected by emigration, and could not possibly have been effected by procreation alone. He has shown that the population of China is less than 100 to the square mile; that it is not chargeable with the crime of infanticide, and exhibits all the indications of plenty and happiness. With respect to America it was not so easy for Mr. Malthus to discover the truth, as it was not known to their own writers, and has now for the first time been established; but with respect to China the evidence in disproof of his allegations was profusely scattered through the pages of Du Halde, Semeda, Grosier, Braam, Macartney, Staunton, Barrow, Ellis and Abel. Mr. Malthus was bound to show why the Jesuits were more entitled to credit, or to correct his statements in accordance with the reports of later and more trust-worthy witnesses.

As the preventive check was in no repute in China his theory required that proportionate virulence should be given to the positive checks, but the actual phenomena are the reverse. On the other hand as the positive checks are not sensibly felt in England, it was equally imperative to reinforce the preventive check; but again facts refuse to give the slightest support to his hypothesis. "It may fairly be said," are the words of Mr. Mathus, "that not more than one half of the prolific power is called into action in England," on the supposition that were all to marry at 20, there would be one annual marriage in every 60, instead of 1 in 120, as at present. One marriage in 60 would imply one married person in 30, but as there is only one birth in every 35, there must be, according to Mr. Malthus, one seventh more persons annually married in England than are annually born,were it not for the preventive check. We have seen that where all who lived to the nubile period married and where the population doubled in 47 years, the marriages were only 1 in 126. After various proofs and illustrations on this point Mr. Sadler observes, "I call upon this writer therefore, either to prove the possibility of his assertions, or to withdraw them; not in a tacit and unnoticeable manner, but openly and honestly as the cause of truth, and the interests of human nature, deeply involved in the important question, imperiously demand.”

Mr. Malthus supposed that the preventive check prevailed still more in Norway, and less in Sweden than in England, and that its prevalence in these two last countries was increasing. Mr. Sadler proves that the reverse of all these suppositions was the truth.*

*Vol. 2, p. 131, 261, 531.

It is a prominent part of the Malthusian doctrine that production precedes population; that" deaths make room" for marriages; that after years of extraordinary mortality there is an extraordinary increase of marriages; and that in all times and in all countries the rate of prolificness is invariable, except that it is greater where the marriages take place at an earlier period, and less where they take place at a later. Now Mr. Sadler has proved that population precedes and is the cause of production; that after years of extraordinary mortality there are fewer marriages but more births; that prolificness is affected by the age at which marriages take place, but in a manner opposite to that which the Malthusians suppose; that it is greatest in seasons and climates of unusual sickliness, and where there is most labour and privation, and least where ease and wealth are in greatest abundance. The mass of accordant evidence which Mr. Sadler has accumulated on these points must satisfy the most scrupulous inquirer; it is conclusive.

Mr. Malthus supposed that he had found a strong confirmation of his theory, that deaths make room for marriages, in Susmilch's table of marriages, births, and deaths in Prussia and Lithuania from 1692 to 1757. A plague raged in the years 1709 and 1710, and Mr. Malthus supposes that 12,028 marriages took place in the year 1711, being double the average number of the preceding eight years; but Mr. Sadler shows that the 12,028 marriages are inserted, in the table as the total of the two years 1710 and 1711; and that Susmilch's table is throughout adverse to Mr. Malthus' hypotheses. In the second edition of his Essay Mr. Malthus had fallen into the extraordinary mistake of supposing that from tables of annual births and marriages it would be impossible to tell," whether the prolificness in the marriages of any country were such as to yield 2 births, or 100 births in the course of their duration;" and that if the quotient obtained by dividing the births by the marriages were, for instance, 4, it would only show that of an uncertain number of births to each marriage 2 live to marry, and 2 die in infancy and celibacy. "This," he says, "is a most important and interesting piece of information." In the third and subsequent editions the passage is withdrawn, but the error reappears in the following comment on Susmilch's table :

"On an average of the 46 years after the plague, the proportion of an"nual births to annual marriages is as 43 to 10; that is, according to the principles laid down in the fourth chapter of this book, out of 43 children born, 20 of them live to be married. The average proportion of births to deaths during this period is 157 to 100. But to produce such an in*crease, on the supposition that only 20 children of 43, or 2 out of 4,