★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/079/084/002|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/079/084/002|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head><hi rend='superscript'>(10</hi>Observations</head><lb/>the last preceding time of licensing had been refused. In all these<lb/>cases it may be very proper they should be able to produce<lb/>the certificate required; <del>a</del> <add>that is, a</add> certificate <del>in</del> <add>from</add> "the Parish<lb/>[to use the words of the Act] where the Alehouse is to be":<lb/>for in all these cases that Parish is the Parish where<lb/>for a certain time they have lived. But suppose<lb/>the man applying for a license to be a <hi rend='underline'>new-comer:</hi><lb/>A man who had never lived in the Parish, nor perhaps<lb/>in the Hundred, nor perhaps in the County before.<lb/>A man who at the time of his applying for the license<lb/>has never set his foot in the Parish <del>but</del> <add>except</add> just to take<lb/>a view of the House? a case surely not uncommon.<lb/>Is a man so circumstanced never to <del><gap/><gap/> Public</del> get a license<lb/><del>House</del> unless he procures a certificate of his good fame & <lb/>sober life & conversation from a Parish to which he is<lb/>utterly unknown? If a person is rejected anywhere<lb/><add>merely</add> for want of such a certificate his case surely is a<lb/>very hard one. If he is accepted without producing it<lb/>those who accept him disobey the Law and testify a falsehood<lb/>upon record. If he is accepted <add>by</add> having obtained<lb/>such a certificate, it shews that certificates are signed<lb/>with so little scruple that to require them is of no use.<lb/>In any of these three cases there is mischief. <note>The plain and obvious use of a certificate, is to inform those of a man's character to whom he is a stranger. The Act, <del><gap/> <gap/></del> <add>as it stands at present</add>, requires a certificate to be produced not by strangers coming into the Parish, but only to those who are already known in it. To <del>remedy</del> <add>rectify</add> this <del><gap/> </del> impropriety, as it seems to me, is the design of the <add>new</add> clause I have invoked.</note><lb/>Whatever <del>use there</del> may be <add>the use of</add> <del>in</del> a certificate, I cannot comprehend<lb/>why it should be dispensed with (according to<lb/>/.16) <add>Cities & Towns corporate that is,</add> in large towns. With respect <add>indeed</add> to new-comers, the <del>absurdity</del> <add>impropriety</add>< | |||
<head><hi rend='superscript'>(10</hi>Observations</head><lb/> | |||
<p>the last preceding time of licensing had been refused. In all these<lb/>cases it may be very proper they should be able to produce<lb/>the certificate required; <del>a</del> <add>that is, a</add> certificate <del>in</del> <add>from</add> "the Parish<lb/>[to use the words of the Act] where the Alehouse is to be":<lb/>for in all these cases that Parish is the Parish where<lb/>for a certain time they have lived. But suppose<lb/>the man applying for a license to be a <hi rend='underline'>new-comer:</hi><lb/>A man who had never lived in the Parish, nor perhaps<lb/>in the Hundred, nor perhaps in the County before.<lb/>A man who at the time of his applying for the license<lb/>has never set his foot in the Parish <del>but</del> <add>except</add> just to take<lb/>a view of the House? a case surely not uncommon.<lb/>Is a man so circumstanced never to <del><gap/><gap/> Public</del> get a license<lb/><del>House</del> unless he procures a certificate of his good fame & <lb/>sober life & conversation from a Parish to which he is<lb/>utterly unknown? If a person is rejected anywhere<lb/><add>merely</add> for want of such a certificate his case surely is a<lb/>very hard one. If he is accepted without producing it<lb/>those who accept him disobey the Law and testify a falsehood<lb/>upon record. If he is accepted <add>by</add> having obtained<lb/>such a certificate, it shews that certificates are signed<lb/>with so little scruple that to require them is of no use.<lb/>In any of these three cases there is mischief. <note>The plain and obvious use of a certificate, is to inform those of a man's character to whom he is a stranger. The Act, <del><gap/> <gap/></del> <add>as it stands at present</add>, requires a certificate to be produced not by strangers coming into the Parish, but only to those who are already known in it. To <del>remedy</del> <add>rectify</add> this <del><gap/> </del> impropriety, as it seems to me, is the design of the <add>new</add> clause I have invoked.</note><lb/>Whatever <del>use there</del> may be <add>the use of</add> <del>in</del> a certificate, I cannot comprehend<lb/>why it should be dispensed with (according to<lb/>/.16) <add>Cities & Towns corporate that is,</add> in large towns. With respect <add>indeed</add> to new-comers, the <del>absurdity</del> <add>impropriety</add></p> | |||
| Line 7: | Line 9: | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
(10Observations
the last preceding time of licensing had been refused. In all these
cases it may be very proper they should be able to produce
the certificate required; a that is, a certificate in from "the Parish
[to use the words of the Act] where the Alehouse is to be":
for in all these cases that Parish is the Parish where
for a certain time they have lived. But suppose
the man applying for a license to be a new-comer:
A man who had never lived in the Parish, nor perhaps
in the Hundred, nor perhaps in the County before.
A man who at the time of his applying for the license
has never set his foot in the Parish but except just to take
a view of the House? a case surely not uncommon.
Is a man so circumstanced never to Public get a license
House unless he procures a certificate of his good fame &
sober life & conversation from a Parish to which he is
utterly unknown? If a person is rejected anywhere
merely for want of such a certificate his case surely is a
very hard one. If he is accepted without producing it
those who accept him disobey the Law and testify a falsehood
upon record. If he is accepted by having obtained
such a certificate, it shews that certificates are signed
with so little scruple that to require them is of no use.
In any of these three cases there is mischief. The plain and obvious use of a certificate, is to inform those of a man's character to whom he is a stranger. The Act, as it stands at present, requires a certificate to be produced not by strangers coming into the Parish, but only to those who are already known in it. To remedy rectify this impropriety, as it seems to me, is the design of the new clause I have invoked.
Whatever use there may be the use of in a certificate, I cannot comprehend
why it should be dispensed with (according to
/.16) Cities & Towns corporate that is, in large towns. With respect indeed to new-comers, the absurdity impropriety
|
Identifier: | JB/079/084/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 79. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
079 |
|||
|
084 |
observations |
||
|
002 |
|||
|
text sheet |
4 |
||
|
recto |
e9 / e10 / b11 e11 / e12 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with crown motif]]] |
||
|
25526 |
|||
