 Author:
 Gordon, Charles Alexander, Sir
 Publication Info:

London:
Bailliere, Tindall, and Cox,
1877,
pg 198
Text on page 198
198 OUR TRIP TO BURMAH.
1871, or 2*83 per cent. The returns for the previous ten years were as under:a
Year. Population. Increase on previous years. Percentage of Increase.
1862 2,020,634
1863 2,092,041 71,407 3*53
1864 2,196,180 104,139 497
1865 2,273,049 76,869 3*50
1866 2,330,453 57,404 2*52
1867 2,392,312 61,859 2*65
1868 2,395,985 3,673 0*15
1869 2,463,484 67,499 2*81
1870 2,491,736 28,252 114
1871 2,562,323 70,587 2*83
1872 Census . 2,747,148 184,825 7*21
These figures show an increase of 726,514, or within a fraction of 36 per cent, on the population during ten years. In accepting this large increase, it will be noted that the census returns give an increase over the previous year's population returns of 184,825, or 7*21 per cent.; also that the average increase from year to year during the previous nine years was only 2*68 per cent. The difference is obviously due to the closer counting; and there is no reason to suppose that there was in reality any exceptional increase in the year 1872. Assuming, therefore, that the unusual increase shown was due to the accuracy of the enumeration, and that the population actually increased only to the average extent of 2*68 per cent.^ the increase for the year would be 68,670, which, added to the returns of the previous year, gives an increase in ten years of 539,772, or 26*71 per cent, on the population of 1862. This leaves 186,742 to represent the residuumathe uncounted portion in previous yearsaof which a proportion also must be taken as increase since 1862. Calculating this in the same way, the increase of the uncounted portion would be 24,143, or 1*15 on the population of 1862,aso that the increase ofThese figures show an increase of 726,514, or within a fraction of 36 per cent, on the population during ten years. In accepting this large increase, it will be noted that the census returns give an increase over the previous year's population returns of 184,825, or 7*21 per cent.; also that the average increase from year to year during the previous nine years was only 2*68 per cent. The difference is obviously due to the closer counting; and there is no reason to suppose that there was in reality any exceptional increase in the year 1872. Assuming, therefore, that the unusual increase shown was due to the accuracy of the enumeration, and that the population actually increased only to the average extent of 2*68 per cent.^ the increase for the year would be 68,670, which, added to the returns of the previous year, gives an increase in ten years of 539,772, or 26*71 per cent, on the population of 1862. This leaves 186,742 to represent the residuuma the uncounted portion in previous yearsa of which a proportion also must be taken as increase since 1862. Calculating this in the same way, the increase of the uncounted portion would be 24,143, or 1*15 on the population of 1862,a so that the increase of