View report page

12
females arose from the larger proportion of females alive; as
the census of 1851 showed that there were 33,346 females iu
Hackney, to 25,083 males, and the census of 1861, that there
were 47,337 females to 35,958 males. To a certain extent this
great disproportion of females to males was caused by the very
great preponderance of female to male servants. Thus iu 1851
there were 3914 female to 361 male servants; and 1861, there
were 5271 female to 459 male servants.
The total deaths of males in the 21 years were 18,135, aud
of females, 18,521, so that the proportion of female deaths was
nothing like so large as the ratio of female to male population.
This arose again in part from the excess of female servants; for
as a large number of them must have come from the country or
other metropolitan districts, by far the largest proportion would,
if attacked with illness, return to their homes, and not die in
the district. But this will not account for anything like all the
excess, as it has been known for very many years that a much
larger rate of male than of female deaths happen in the first
year of life, not only in England but abroad. Thus in my
essay on the relative mortality of males and females, I showed
that out of 3,329,412 deaths of childreu under 5 years in
England, France, Belgium, Prussia, Sweden and Norway, no
less than 1,781,073 were of males, against only 1,548,339 of
females, or only 8,693 females to each 10,000 males.
By examining the foreign tables to ascertain the ratio of
female to male still-born children, I found that there were 723
females only to each 1000 males, and it is therefore evident
that there exists a greater tendency to death in male than in
female children. This is strengthened by the following table,
which was compiled from 100,000 deaths, uuder 5 years, in
England aud in the metropolis.