itnessed in oriental cities scourged by the plague. After a temporary
decline, the visitation recurred in all its severity, and in July the
deaths of a few persons in the highest circles occasioned a panic in the
west end of London. Still the declared number of deaths in the
metropolitan area was only 5,275, showing a far lower rate of mortality
in London than in Paris at the same time, and much lower than in London
itself during the epidemic of 1849, when statistics were more
trustworthy. None of the cholera epidemics, however, approached in
deadliness the plagues of 1625 and 1665. In the latter year the number
of deaths in London from plague alone represented about one-fifth of the
entire resident population--a proportion equivalent to a mortality of
above 200,000 in the London of 1831-32. This comparative immunity was
partly due to improved sanitation, the vigorous development of which may
be said to date from the first visitation of cholera.

The census taken in 1831 revealed an increase of population, which,
though not equal to that of the preceding decade, indicated a most
satisfactory growth of wealth and employment. It was found that Great
Britain contained about 16,500,000 inhabitants, but of these, as might
be expected, a smaller percentage was employed in agriculture and a
larger percentage in manufacturing industry than in 1821. It has been
calculated that since the end of the great war the accumulation of
capital had been twice as rapid as the multiplication of the people,
but, in spite of this, pauperism, as measured by poor law expenditure,
had increased almost continuously since 1823, and emigration received a
startling impulse in 1831-32. Rick burning and frame breaking were the
joint result of childish ignorance, miserable wages, mistaken taxes on
the staple of food, and poor laws administered as if for the very
purpose of encouraging improvidence and vice. All these causes were
capable of being removed or mitigated by legislation, for even the rate
of wages was kept down by the ruinous system of out-door relief. But it
was only a few thoughtful persons who then appreciated either the extent
or the real sources of the mischief, and the disputes which soon arose
about the proper remedies to be applied have been handed on to a later
age.

Next to parliamentary reform the state of Ireland was by far the most
important subject which engaged the attention of the legislature in
1831-32. The population had i