JB/116/563/001

Click Here To Edit

Letter 3

And then now, my Lord, without any original intention on my part
your Lordship has seen, as it were by a side-glance at an earlier period than I had proposed, and
the fourth and last of the four grounds of relinquishment, of the three first of which
my first Letter presents a birds eye view. To do compleat any thing like compleat justice to it would
be too wide a digression
from the present purpose.

Instead of these four grounds of relinquishment, for
which no tolerable the only apology if they admitted of any would be can be made but that they
were never intended was to transpire, instead of all these
transparencies, would it not have been more , my Lords
and quite as safe, to have sent for some friends to
the measure, Sir Charles Bunbury, for example, and
given him at once a good practical substantial
reason, true or false, such as a gentleman could understand?—
You see, Sir Charles, this thing cant
go on, Lord Such a one is against it: we have
passed our words to him. His Agents say it would be Stewards <hi rend="underline">and so forth such people
indeed, and such people say
a very good thing for him: for his estate I mean: but, Sir,
they know nothing at all about the matter. He says they dont.
Had this been otherwise than satisfactory, could it have been
less so than the sum total of all these four ground or forty such grounds
put together? Be it every so imaginary, is it more so,
or more perfectly understood to be so, by all parties understood to be so by all parties than the
notion that it was I that would not keep to my own
terms? If after this, a gentleman could have been
unreasonable enough to ask for explanation, what could have
been more easy? As to what you have heard say about the purchase
being in hand for a whole twelvemonth, and people, looking on
and not speaking till the money was paid, al that that may be/there may be is
true enough some truth in that but there was no help for it my dear Sir Charles, what could we have done? unless the
If the land had been bought, Lord Salisbury could not have been got
accommodated the money: would you have had a disagreement
Lord Salisbury? As to what you say about whimsicalness,
if it were so, so much the better: the more whimsical
the request, the more flattering the compliance. Sir: you don't
know

Identifier: | JB/116/563/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	116	Main Headings	panopticon versus new south wales
Folio number	563	Info in main headings field	letter 3
Image	001	Titles
Category	correspondence	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f23
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year
Notes public	letter was never sent; see note 8 to letter 1747, vol. 7	ID Number	38096
Box Contents