和訳お願いします！
In 1879-80 London incomes formed as predominant a share of all taxable business and professional incomes as did London's wealth among the very wealthy, a fact made clear in Table 3. thetwenty-eight provincial towns with populations in excess of 100,000, and with a combined population of 5,773,000, were assessed under Schedule D for ￡78,106,000, while the ten London boroughs, whose populations totalled 3,453,000, were assessed for ￡87,674,000.
No less than ￡12,297,000 in Marylebone, and ￡10,302,000 in Westminster； by contrast, Liverpool, the wealthiest provincial town, was assessedfor ￡11,014,000, Manchester and Salford together for ￡10,800,000, Birmingham for ￡4,016,000, and so on. Moreover, obviously many provincial cities like Liverpool, Bristol or Edinburgh were primarily commercial or governmental rather than industrial in their primary roles and, again, as with the 1812 data, Schedule D does not include any income arising from ground-rents, from the profits of the public funds, or from any government employees's salaries, all of which would evidently add still further to the lead of London.
Since the combined population of the leading provincial towns was two-thirds higher than the London total, it is a plausible inference that London not merely possessed a larger total business income than all of the chief provincial towns combined, but that its middle class was richer per capita and almost certainly more numerous than in the provincial towns.
