JB/023/053/001

Click Here To Edit

1830 Sept 18
J.B. to France against Peers
Letter II against Peers

+ 23. Confounded is and ought
Confounded moreover
was the what is, and the
what ought to be – till
t'other day.

+ 24. Confounded is and ought Why?
Cause, nothing to be got
by pointing out the
distinction.

+ 25. Confounded is and ought Why?
By no giver of good gifts
would only reward
have been given for
it.

+ 26. Confounded is and ought
Of the power possessed
by them, disapproval
would not have
been acceptable to
them.

+ 27. Confounded is and ought Why?
Nor approval: for
that implied scrutiny.

+ 28. Confounded is and ought Why?
Witness the Venetian
thanks – Hold your
tongue, or off with
you!

+ 29. Confounded is & ought Why?
Scrutiny unavoidable;
acceptable problem
this – to demonstrate
that the existing is the
best possible term.
Mode of solution showing
as to each ingredient
how it contributes
to the effect.

+ 30. Confounded is & ought
For any indication of improvement
prudence under
absolutism would suggest
a cover: Say every
government gives its
portion of felicity –
then point out that
which has most and
state of the causes
of it.

---page break---

+ 31. Confounded is & ought Why
Thus under Louis 15 – Montesquieu
– with his fear,
honor & virtue: obscurely
intimating that a mixt
is better than a pure
Monarchy – a limited
than an unlimited.

+ 32. Confounded is & ought Why.
Hence, on every part of
the field of law the is
& the ought to be confounded.
Thus, by Grotius,
Puffendorff, Vattel
Blackstone &c.

+ 33. Confounded is & ought Why.
Cause of the confusion,
disagreeable to ruling
One and Few wd have
been the distinction.

+ 33. Confounded is & ought Why
Much pleasanter
the position You
never can do wrong.
Whatever you do is
right, because it is
you that do it.

+32(a)
Hume the first indicator
of this confusion.

+ 34 Needless
Sole good expectable
from such a Second
Chamber, security
against evil from
precipitation.

+ 35. Needless.
Producible this by
other means – power power
from evil.

+ 36 Needless Inconsistency
Inconsistent the supposition
of a Second Chamber
better composed than the
first – inconsistent with
the supposition that the
constitution of the first
was in the best adapted
to the purpose of connecting
the interest of the functionaries
with that of constituents.

---page break---

+ 37 Useless against Precipitation
Against precipitation
no Security given by
Second Chamber. By
Single Chamber supply
adjusted to need exactly.
With Two, not.

38. Useless against Precipitation
Objection. Yes: by decree
of urgency. Answer 1.
But for this you depend
on the will of a
body with a different
interest from Single
Chamber.

39 Useless against Precipitation. Urgency Decree
2. By this decree all
you get is the momentary
inefficiency
of the generally preventive
power: nor,
as above, is that entire.
Dilemma –
either pernicious
this or useless.

40. Useless against Precipitation. Urgency Decree.
Objection. Use of the
decree of urgency
drawing the eye of
Public Opinion to the
conduct of the Second
Chamber on this
occasion. Answer – good
perhaps some but
little.

+ 41. People not Locators.
Chamber, so universally
acknowledged
to be necessary that
no one proposes the
abolition of it.
Deputies Chamber.
Chosen are these by
the people: whether
by a sufficient
number is another question.

+ 42. People not Locators
In the choice of the Peers
no choice part have the people.

Identifier: | JB/023/053/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 23.
Date_1	1830-09-18	Marginal Summary Numbering	23-42
Box	023	Main Headings	lord brougham displayed
Folio number	053a "a" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 53.	Info in main headings field	jb to france against peers
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f2
Penner		Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	7924
Box Contents