JB/009/043/004

Click Here To Edit

Supply
Note continued

If a limitations of the right of succession were a
violation of natural right, much more would
every thing of the nature of a tax or forced contribution
be so. A tax takes money from a
proprietor in possession. The limitation in question
prevents any every body but the state from acquiring
possession or so much as expecting to acquire
it. Oh but taxes a tax where imposed by your representatives
is your own gift – This is as much as to
say there is no difference. – What? the tax that
the very tax that I have been voting against? –
This is as much as to say there is no difference
between consent and opposition, between a forc
forced contribution and a voluntary one.

The law of England is full of limitations of
this sort, which are full of hardship, and injustice
because contrary to natural expectation
and which would be contrary to indefeasible natural
right, if there were any such thing. In some cases Younger
children of the wealthiest father left without any share whatever in the wealthiest a shilling:
succession: in the cases standing debarred half-brothers made
from succeeding strangers to half-brothers, and parents
from succeeding to children. Such laws as fraught
with a mischief which is in natural ⊞ ⊞ for which the amplest right of disposition by deed or will can afford no sufficient cure they are productive

Identifier: | JB/009/043/004 "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	004	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