JB/009/043/001

Click Here To Edit

Appropriation

W Is there any one in whose eyes the dur
notion of Objections obviated indefensible natural
right would appear to afford an objection to the
worth regarding?

Upon the principle & utility the measure appears
to stand pretty clear of objection: but prejudice
has raised up in other instances a sort of
phrase, which with some people to some eyes might perhaps
have appear to afford an objection in this. Such
a breach in the course of a natural succession
would be a violation of natural rights, which
it is the business of law to protect and not to
violate.

The phrase natural right, when opposed to
utility is altogether an unmeaning one. To
say to a legislature acknowledged to be supreme
you have no right to do so and so, although it
would be of advantage to the state is only another
way of saying – I don't like you should do so
and so, though I can't tell why.

Arguments however must be accommodated
not only to mens reasons but in some instances
to what they are much more governed by, their
prejudices and affections.

To combat For combatting suffering This prejudice, which bearing no
relation to reason is not to be combatted influenced wrought upon by reason,
the

Identifier: | JB/009/043/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 9.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering	not numbered
Box	009	Main Headings
Folio number	043	Info in main headings field	appropriation supply
Image	001	Titles	note continued
Category	correspondence	Number of Pages	4
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f17 / f18 / f19 / f20
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::l munn [britannia with shield emblem]]]
Marginals	jeremy bentham	Paper Producer	benjamin constant
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public	see note to letter 680, vol. 4	ID Number	3344
Box Contents