"The great fluctuations in the marriages of England are the
results of peace after war, abundance after dearth, high wages
after want of employment, speculation after languid enterprise,
confidence after distrust, national triumphs after national
disasters." (p. 27.)
During the civil wars, the diminishing influences indicated in the
reverse of this statement were at work with an intensity unequalled in
any other period of our modern history, so that there can be no doubt
that our then "unhappy divisions" did most materially retard the
numerical increase of the population, as well as the progress of science
and the useful arts. Such is the inevitable consequence of war: of civil
war in a tenfold degree. And our parish register books, all of which I
doubt not show similar facts, place this in the most unfavourable light;
for, through the spread of nonconformity, the unsettled state of the
times, and the substitution during the protectorate of the registration
of births which might or might not be communicated to the elected parish
register, for that of baptisms which the parish priest would both
celebrate and register, the names of very many of those born into the
world would be altogether omitted from these records. It may be
interesting to show the effects of some of these causes by the subjoined
extracts from the registers themselves, which I transcribe from the
_Chronicon Mirabile_ of the late Sir Cuthbert Sharpe.--(Vide pp. 17. 18.
22. 23. 70. 121. and 156.)
_Staindrop, Durham._--"1644. From this time to 1646, through
want of a Minister, and carelessness of ye Cleark, during ye
wars, much of ye Register is lost, only here and there a name
registered."
"1652. June 14. Mem. From this time till August there was noe
Minister, soe that ye children were carried to other parishes to
be baptized."
_St. Helen's Aukland, Durham_, A.D. 1633.--"Mr. John Vaux, our
minister, was suspended.... Mr. Robert Cowper, of Durham, served
in his place, and left out divers christenings unrecorded, and
regestered others disorderly."
_Gainford, Durham._--"Courteous Reader, this is to let thee
understand that many children were left unrecorded or
redgestered, but the reason and cause was this; some would and
some would not, being of a fickle condition, as the time was
then; this being their end and aim, to save a groate from the
poor Clarke, so they would rather have them unredgestered--but
now ... it is their design to have them redgestered."
_Lowestoft, Suffolk_, 1644 ... "For some time following there
was in this Town neither Minister nor Clarke, but the
inhabitants were inforced to procure now one and then another to
baptize their children, by which means there was no Register
kept, only those few hereafter mentioned weare by myself
baptized in those intervalls when I enjoyed my freedom."
_Hexham, Northumberland_, c. 1655.--"Note y't Mr. Will. Lister,
Minister of S't. John Lees in those distracted times, did both
marry and baptize all that made ther application to him, for
w'ch he was sometimes severely threatened by y'e souldiers, and
had once a cockt pistoll held to his breest, &c., so y't its no
wond'r y't y'e {442} Registers for these times are so imperfect,
and besides, they are extremely confused."
In the Preface to the _Enumeration Abstract of the Census of_ 1841, pp.
34-37., your correspondent will find information and statistics relative
to the estimated population of England and Wales, 1570-1750, compiled
from the parish registers, and--
"calculated on the supposition, that the registered baptisms,
burials, and marriages, on an average of three years, in 1570,
1600, 1630, 1670, 1700, and 1750, bore the same proportion to
the actual population as in the year 1801."
From the Table, pp. 36, 37, it appears, that whilst the population
(estimated) in the thirty years 1600-1630 increased upwards of 16
percent., in the forty years 1630-1670 it increased a mere trifle over 3
per cent. only. In no fewer than twenty English counties, the
population, estimated as before, was absolutely less in 1670 than in
1630; and in Kent, the county in which Chart is situate, the decrease is
striking: population of Kent in 1630, 189,212; in 1670, 167,398; in
1700, 157,833; in 1750, 181,267; and in 1801, the enumerated population
was 307,624.
Your correspondent might also find it useful to consult Sir William
Petty's _Political Arithmetic_, the various documents compiled at the
different censuses, and the Reports of the Registrar-General.