JB/070/086/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/070/086/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/070/086/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/070/086/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>2)</head>
 
<p>But in printing, the case is very different: there is no room for<lb/>
interpolation by design: <note><del><gap/> they may therefore be received in the character as well of evidence as of guides</del></note> the compositor has one form for each letter<lb/>
&amp; another form equally distinguishable &amp; equally decided for each<lb/>
point: &amp; the most simple point is inserted in consequence of <add>as settled a</add> a premeditation,<lb/>
as the most complex Letter.</p>
 
<p>They may here therefore be received in the character as well of evidence<lb/>
as of guides.</p>
 
<p><del>When</del> <add>Upon</add> the whole we see, that in Manuscript, <sic>Puntuation</sic> is deficient<lb/>
only in one out of two purposes, <note>&amp; <add>even</add> for that, Impression is a cure.</note> &amp; Printing <add>is a cure for it</add> cures even in<lb/>
that.</p>
 
<p>From these considerations, (to mark it by the way) we may know <add>learn</add> what<lb/>
to think, of the Idea of the superior sanctity of the Manuscript <add>to the Printed</add><lb/>
of the distinction betwixt Public &amp; Private Acts, which requires<lb/>
those of the latter denomination to be fetched down at an unnecessary<lb/>
<sic>expence</sic> &amp; trouble to serve as evidence, <del>when of</del> <add>when, of</add> the former,<lb/>
the printed copy is admitted for the same purpose: <add>of</add> the<lb/>
clauses <add>with</add> which for the sake of remedying that and another <add>one other</add> inconvenience<lb/>
the Statute Book is <sic>incumber'd</sic> in such abundance<lb/>
for making of these Acts <hi rend='underline'>Public</hi> ones in Name which in fact<lb/>
are of a <hi rend='underline'>private</hi> nature.</p>
 
<pb/>
 
<p>1 As the characters of Letter-press are in form more determinate<lb/>
than those of the best Penman, on this account they are incomparably<lb/>
better suited to constitute the standard of authenticity <note>&amp; Penmanship among good proficients is susceptible of variation</note><lb/>
than the latter: 2<hi rend='superscript'>d</hi> as it is naturally more durable, they<lb/>
are so on another account: 3.<hi rend='superscript'>d</hi> as incapable of erasure, they<lb/>
are so in a third account: 4.<hi rend='superscript'>thly</hi> <add>as</add> they are more easily revisable,<lb/>
on a fourth account.</p>
 
<p><note>Objections or Exceptions</note><lb/> There are but two objections to the preference of Letter-press in<lb/>
any case: the one is the <sic>expence</sic> of it <add>in such</add> when the Instruments as<lb/>
are <add>designed</add> not to be multiplied, <sic>tho</sic> even this may not be decisive <del>when</del><lb/>
in such as are short or of an important nature; the other puts<lb/>
such parts of an Instrument, as are exclusively characteristic<lb/>
of a certain individual agent: <add>author +</add> <note>+ <hi rend='underline'>energizer</hi></note> I mean men's <hi rend='underline'>signatures.</hi></p>
 
<p><note>N. B Whatever care is bestowed in <add>about</add> the revising of the engrossed original it is after all not that but the printed copy from which the subject takes his direction the printed Copy therefore requires <add>demands</add> a repetition of the same care: which makes double trouble, without use.</note><lb/> A Printed Copy of an Act of Parliament, signed by the Speaker<lb/>
on each page, would answer the purpose of an original<lb/>
much better than a Manuscript.</p>
 
<p>Standing precedents, like forms of convictions prescribed in Acts<lb/>
of Parliament, with blanks to be variously filled up might be <add>required to be</add><lb/>
filled up in Letter-press: and might <add>may be</add> then be expressed always<lb/>
by figures instead of words at length. Sums &amp; Dates in</p>
 
<pb/>
 
<p>particular ought to be <add>thus</add> inserted.</p>
 
<p>In this case, marks not significant should be employed to fill<del>ing</del><lb/>
up the vacant spaces &amp; anticipate<!-- a macron --> interpolation.</p>
 
<p>The inconvenience resulting from this defect may be exemplified<lb/>
by the Act of the 24 G. 2. c. 40 which in <add>that</add> Division of it<lb/>
which is numbered § 16 in the unauthentic Edition directs<lb/>
that the 3 "<hi rend='underline'>Clauses</hi>" preceding shall be hung up in printed<lb/>
or writing in certain places which it mentions, <add>what is certain is</add> Now it is<lb/>
that there is no such thing as any certain definite portion<lb/>
of an Act indictable by the word <hi rend='underline'>clause</hi>: "<hi rend='underline'>Clause</hi>" meaning<lb/>
nothing more than any portion large or small: which is<lb/>
[<hi rend='underline'>clause</hi>] included in it: &amp; in this variable acceptation it<lb/>
is constantly taken <add>used</add> in <sic>practise</sic>. It is therefore only by<lb/>
conjecture &amp; not by any <sic>authoritive</sic> specification that the<lb/>
persons concerned can govern themselves in selecting the<lb/>
requisite portion of the Statute.</p>
 
<p>So likewise in 13. G. 2. 28. § 3 where no designation more<lb/>
explicit nor concise than this, <add>is found practicable to be employed</add> to wit "The several clauses<lb/>
contained in this Act relating to Bailiffs. <sic>Serjeants</sic> &amp;<lb/>
"other Officers &amp; Persons who shall be employed under them<lb/>
respectively to Execute any Writ, Process or Attachment or<lb/>
 
<pb/>
 
"who shall Arrest any person in any Action which shall be<lb/>
"entered or otherwise within their respective Sheriffwicks &amp;<lb/>
"Jurisdictions."</p>
 
<p>It is very good rule in all writings <add>written Instruments</add>  to express Numbers by words<lb/>
at length because Cyphers are not only much more obnoxious<lb/>
to <sic>falsefication</sic> as well as to being written innocently so as to<lb/>
be mistaken for each other: but in Printing, neither of these<lb/>
reasons hold: &amp; they have the advantage over words at<lb/>
length in these three particulars. The first, and which is more<lb/>
immediately applicable to the present subject in being more<lb/>
concise: The second in being themselves more easily apprehensible<lb/>
by the Eye: The third in enlivening the whole Sentence,<lb/>
<add>and</add> relieving <del>to</del> the eye, by the contrast they make to the Letter-press,<lb/>
forming a kind of break: &amp; how useful Breaks are<lb/>
[in Typography] <add>cannot to anyone be unknown.</add> must be felt by everyone.</p>


<p><note>Punctuation</note> The same reasons hold against the use of Points, in Juridical<lb/>
writings: they may be easily interpolated, easily marked, by Accident,<lb/>
&amp; where there should be none; &amp; not difficultly mistaken<lb/>
for one another: But in Printing, the same quantity of attention</p>


<head>COMPOSIT. <add>St</add> Perspicuity. Mechanical helps to. Pointing. <sic>Pr-</sic> [BR][2][ ] <sic>-int</sic> fitter for a Standard than Ms. Numberment of Divisions. Cyphers.</head> 


<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 10:03, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

2)

But in printing, the case is very different: there is no room for
interpolation by design: they may therefore be received in the character as well of evidence as of guides the compositor has one form for each letter
& another form equally distinguishable & equally decided for each
point: & the most simple point is inserted in consequence of as settled a a premeditation,
as the most complex Letter.

They may here therefore be received in the character as well of evidence
as of guides.

When Upon the whole we see, that in Manuscript, Puntuation is deficient
only in one out of two purposes, & even for that, Impression is a cure. & Printing is a cure for it cures even in
that.

From these considerations, (to mark it by the way) we may know learn what
to think, of the Idea of the superior sanctity of the Manuscript to the Printed
of the distinction betwixt Public & Private Acts, which requires
those of the latter denomination to be fetched down at an unnecessary
expence & trouble to serve as evidence, when of when, of the former,
the printed copy is admitted for the same purpose: of the
clauses with which for the sake of remedying that and another one other inconvenience
the Statute Book is incumber'd in such abundance
for making of these Acts Public ones in Name which in fact
are of a private nature.


---page break---

1 As the characters of Letter-press are in form more determinate
than those of the best Penman, on this account they are incomparably
better suited to constitute the standard of authenticity & Penmanship among good proficients is susceptible of variation
than the latter: 2d as it is naturally more durable, they
are so on another account: 3.d as incapable of erasure, they
are so in a third account: 4.thly as they are more easily revisable,
on a fourth account.

Objections or Exceptions
There are but two objections to the preference of Letter-press in
any case: the one is the expence of it in such when the Instruments as
are designed not to be multiplied, tho even this may not be decisive when
in such as are short or of an important nature; the other puts
such parts of an Instrument, as are exclusively characteristic
of a certain individual agent: author + + energizer I mean men's signatures.

N. B Whatever care is bestowed in about the revising of the engrossed original it is after all not that but the printed copy from which the subject takes his direction the printed Copy therefore requires demands a repetition of the same care: which makes double trouble, without use.
A Printed Copy of an Act of Parliament, signed by the Speaker
on each page, would answer the purpose of an original
much better than a Manuscript.

Standing precedents, like forms of convictions prescribed in Acts
of Parliament, with blanks to be variously filled up might be required to be
filled up in Letter-press: and might may be then be expressed always
by figures instead of words at length. Sums & Dates in


---page break---

particular ought to be thus inserted.

In this case, marks not significant should be employed to filling
up the vacant spaces & anticipate interpolation.

The inconvenience resulting from this defect may be exemplified
by the Act of the 24 G. 2. c. 40 which in that Division of it
which is numbered § 16 in the unauthentic Edition directs
that the 3 "Clauses" preceding shall be hung up in printed
or writing in certain places which it mentions, what is certain is Now it is
that there is no such thing as any certain definite portion
of an Act indictable by the word clause: "Clause" meaning
nothing more than any portion large or small: which is
[clause] included in it: & in this variable acceptation it
is constantly taken used in practise. It is therefore only by
conjecture & not by any authoritive specification that the
persons concerned can govern themselves in selecting the
requisite portion of the Statute.

So likewise in 13. G. 2. 28. § 3 where no designation more
explicit nor concise than this, is found practicable to be employed to wit "The several clauses
contained in this Act relating to Bailiffs. Serjeants &
"other Officers & Persons who shall be employed under them
respectively to Execute any Writ, Process or Attachment or

---page break---
"who shall Arrest any person in any Action which shall be
"entered or otherwise within their respective Sheriffwicks &
"Jurisdictions."

It is very good rule in all writings written Instruments to express Numbers by words
at length because Cyphers are not only much more obnoxious
to falsefication as well as to being written innocently so as to
be mistaken for each other: but in Printing, neither of these
reasons hold: & they have the advantage over words at
length in these three particulars. The first, and which is more
immediately applicable to the present subject in being more
concise: The second in being themselves more easily apprehensible
by the Eye: The third in enlivening the whole Sentence,
and relieving to the eye, by the contrast they make to the Letter-press,
forming a kind of break: & how useful Breaks are
[in Typography] cannot to anyone be unknown. must be felt by everyone.

Punctuation The same reasons hold against the use of Points, in Juridical
writings: they may be easily interpolated, easily marked, by Accident,
& where there should be none; & not difficultly mistaken
for one another: But in Printing, the same quantity of attention

COMPOSIT. St Perspicuity. Mechanical helps to. Pointing. Pr- [BR][2][ ] -int fitter for a Standard than Ms. Numberment of Divisions. Cyphers.



Identifier: | JB/070/086/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 70.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

070

Main Headings

of laws in general

Folio number

086

Info in main headings field

composit. st. perspicuity. mechanical helps to. pointing printing fitter for a standard than ms. numberment of divisions. cyphers

Image

001

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

a2

Penner

Watermarks

[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

23201

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in