JB/009/043/003

Click Here To Edit

Appropriation
Note continued

has in no two countries ever been ever the same.

Then who would maintain the natural indefeasibleness
of the right of success as against the
state, would not perhaps dispute its capacity of
being defeated by will. It Yet the same persons
perhaps would not deny, but ⊞ ⊞ for it is what nobody seems to deny, that the right of
disposing by will is a mere creature of positive
law. A disposition by will is as much an act
of the sovereign power of the state as any other.
The testator proposes the law, but it is the sovereign
who by his adoption, confers on it all its binding
force.

No one I believe has ever yet maintained that
life-estates as created by deed or disposition of law, are contrary to natural right: that
right subsisted, when thus limited by the terms
of their creation. Yet in this case I even children
do not come in in any proportions one or for any
share. What then should leader make it a violation
of natural right for the law to do that by a general
rule which it does without any such violation in
as many separate instances as it pleases? And
if it be no nat if even children may without violation of natural right to debated children have in it but a children such remote be thus debarred, why not
relation as ? relations so much more
remote?

Identifier: | JB/009/043/003 "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	003	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