★ Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
1st Difference
Laws Substantive, beg taking away the specific
quantity and quality of the Sanction might be would stand
turning into good as maxims of morality applicable to
the state of a society living without Law —
this is not the case of It is not so with Laws Adjective.
Provisions of the Substantive kind, tho' supposing
them not compleated into Laws, might still
be intelligible and operate as Directions
Laws Adjective mediate to the execution
of Laws Substantive —
Of Laws Substantive may be conceived to exist
may exist without Laws Adjective.
Laws Adjective Subservient cannot be concerned to
exist, cannot exist without Laws Substantive
Radical are
Ls of Nature.
Another character of whereby to distinguish Laws radical from
Laws Subservient
Tis among the Radical only, that men
seek for the pretended Laws [+] [+] that is for Municipal
Laws confirmature
of the pretended
Laws of
nature. of Nature.
Propose to them any of the Subservient kind
& they will acknowledge them immediately
not to be of that class
Subservient
Superfluous and
- or a Theocracy
Note
Another character [+] said a friend
of mine, you have
omitted. — Imagine a perfect a miraculous Revolution
Theocracy — I mean a perfect one not
such an one as the Mosaic is represented, but
such an one on which punishment should
be the individually instrumentality of the Deity
follow instantly upon transgression —
The Laws that subsisted of the Radical kind (supposing
them fitting) would remain. The Laws
of the Subservient kind would vanish —
There would be no more occasions for open
Judges, Counsel, Attornies, Bum-bailiffs
Informers Thief-catchers or Informers executioners would
fly with the Courts into the Red Sea. There
would be no more occasion for [any of these
denominations] than upon earth, than there is in
hell, which notwithstanding [according
to Quesido] or so well peopled with them
if we may believe Quevido who was there.
Note.
The distinction of Radical and Servile, is
a distinction well known in Grammar.
The word Servile [I have changed into Subservient.
The reason will be easily imagined
— Under the word servile it applied
to a matter of Jurisprudence the
idea of Slavery, an idea totally disparate,
would have been apt to have
obtruded itself in the place of that designed. This would have made
confusion] would have sounded harsh &
equivocal as applied to a topic in Jurisprudence —
It therefore seemed proper on
that account to substitute the word
"subservient".
Laws Subservient to Notoriety
Laws Subservient to Execution
By some or other all of these characteristics
the reader will I suppo if I have expressed myself clearly be able to distinguish
them; to perceive in the case
of any Law he happens to cast his an eye
upon whether it comes under the one
denomination or the other —
Let him therefore open to the Synopsis
of the Laws of England prefixed to
Dr Blackstone's Analysis of the Laws
of England. He will sees in it + + it divided transferred out into
Titles comes a number of
Titles — some of these titles are composed
wholly of the one sort and some wholly
of the other. I will mention which.
Another characteristic, The precepts of
Religion that we have, & the maxims
of morality that we might have, if as
far as they without a specific Sanction are be Laws or would be
Laws, at any rate they would be Directions
of the Radical kind alone.
INTROD. LAWS Radical x Subservient
INTRODUCT.
Laws Substative
x Adjective
[BR][4][5]
|
Identifier: | JB/063/047/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 63.
|
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
not numbered |
|||
|
063 |
law in general |
||
|
047 |
introd. law radical & subservient |
||
|
002 |
laws substantive & adjective |
||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
c4 / c5 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with vryheyt motif]]] |
||
|
20236 |
|||