★ 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
optional clause, now standing part of the act, and above referred
to, was insert before the bringing in of the Bill, inserted
consequently by, or by order of, gentlemen in Administration,
and that too at the suggestion of gentlemen whose
declared wish it was that the option might be made use
of for some other choice. Admitting the facts, your Memorialist
begs to leave utterly to deny the inference. Had any
such engagement been entered into how would the Act have
stood? Every thing that related to the spot in question
would have been struck out. Instead of that, how does it
stand? What relates to the spot in question retains the
foremost place in the Act and occupies the greatest part of
it: even a copy of the verdict of the jury, introduced for
the purpose of ascertaining the parcels, keeps its place in the
preamble. Meaning to preclude your Lordships from
fixing upon this spot, would Administration have offered it
in the name of Parliament to your Lordships choice?—
made it the standard of comparison?— offered it with distinction
& with marks of preference? Would the public
have been told, would your Memorialist have been told,
upon the faith of Parliament, that your Lordships were
left at liberty to adhere to the choice, when in fact your
hands had been tied. A transaction of this sort would have
been a fraud upon Parliament, a fraud upon your
Memorialist, and to what purpose?
On the other hand, does the construction your Memorialist
humbly contends for, render the option negatory?
— By no means. It would not only have had its operation,
|
Identifier: | JB/118/120/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 118.
|
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
29-32 |
|||
|
118 |
panopticon |
||
|
120 |
|||
|
002 |
|||
|
copy/fair copy sheet |
4 |
||
|
recto |
d29 / d30 / d31 / d32 |
||
|
see note to letter 988, vol. 5 |
39174 |
||