JB/039/105/001

Click Here To Edit

1824. April 13
Constitutional Code.

Note (c)

Objection 1. – Monopoly in favour of the relatively opulent – inequality
at the expence of the in respect of the exclusions put upon the relatively indigent; namely those
unable to submitt to the reduction, or to par give money for the
situation, with the pecuniary remuneration unreduced.

Answer

1. Exclusion none: none preemptive and insuperable: open to the acquisition of the purchase money, so
upon open is the door to the acquisition of the object of purchase.

2. Take even the case where mode in which the efficiency of the proposed instrument of economy
of is the greatest, namely sale by auction; the benefit accrues is to the
whole community: the burthen, and that no imperceptible one and that a scarcely a perceptible one –
is confined to the to name but a very few comparatively few: Equality the namely
the few who having otherwise a prospect of admittance cannot are precluded from
obtaining realise excluded from the chance of realising it till they have obtained the money
necessary has been obtained by them.

3. As to equality, to forego this saving would be purposely to establish
inequality: it would be to establish to establish, to the one amount
equal to that of the rejected saving, or too upon all, for the purpose of distributing the
produce amount of it to among a small number of individuals that after those few.

4. Those individuals few who are they? – they are those who would by the
rejection of the saving in the supposi supposing if the saving be rejected will
be seated in the several situations in question would be seated rejected will instead
of the proposed purchasers.

5. To those who, supposing on that same supposition would not become candidates the proposed arrangement
it the retention substitution thus made makes no difference.

6. To Those who, but for the arrangement saving reduction would have become
candidates or aspirants, but without success to these – so far from producing injuring it saves so many disappointments.

7. The class which the rejection of the saving would thus favour –
favour at the expence of all classes in respect of money, and at the expence
one class in respect of power – is the class that stands next to it this last mentioned class on the scale of
opulence: between the one class and the other there is not more than a farthing of
difference. Only to those, to whom an appropriate condition in life and
degree of instruction, afforded a chance for obtaining the situations were there no such saving would the
rejection of the saving it leave the door to the situations open: to the vast majority of
the people the benefit of the, if any from the rejection, would not be imparted.

Identifier: | JB/039/105/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 39.
Date_1	1824-04-13	Marginal Summary Numbering	not numbered
Box	039	Main Headings	constitutional code
Folio number	105	Info in main headings field	constitutional code
Image	001	Titles	note (b)
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	j whatman turkey mill 1824
Marginals	jeremy bentham	Paper Producer	jonathan blenman
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1824
Notes public		ID Number	12112
Box Contents