★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<!-- this page has been divided into two columns, each with a margin to the left --> <head>Qualification. III</head> <!-- left hand column --> <!-- the first paragraph is heavily crossed through --> <p> A specific penalty over | <!-- this page has been divided into two columns, each with a margin to the left --> <head>Qualification. III</head> <!-- left hand column --> <!-- the first paragraph is heavily crossed through --> <p> A specific penalty over and above damages &<lb/> costs might then be given to the party grieved<lb/> by acting in <foreign>bona fide</foreign> under an order thus<lb/> <del>declared</del> <add> rendered</add> invalid.</p> <p><del> It is scarce necessary to observe, that</del></p> <p> <note>for rendering the invalidation<lb/> admissible<lb/> The contrivance here<lb/> we may perceive, is<lb/> nothing more than<lb/> substituting</note></p> <p> a fact easily in the room of one difficulty<lb/> ascertainable as the condition <foreign>sine que<add>a</add> non</foreign> of the<lb/> validity of their transactions</p> <p><del>To make the Acts of a Meeting <add>absolutely</add> void by the intrusion<lb/> of an unqualified person should be productive</del></p> <p> To make the validity of the acts of <add> transactions of every</add> meeting depend<lb/> <add> in every case</add> upon a number <add>collection</add> of facts so obscure & unascertainable<lb/> as the due qualification of <del>the</del> every<lb/> person present at it, would be productive of infinite<lb/> confusion</p> <p><note> viz. before the time<lb/> <del>when</del> for acting under<lb/> the orders &c</note></p> <p>To make the validity of the acts of <del>such</del> a<lb/> meeting at which <add> in the case of their being</add> the bare quorum necessary including<lb/> the intruder <del>is <unclear>present</unclear></del>, <add> depend upon the same condition</add> would be productive<lb/> of similar confusion <del>in a</del> <add> <sic>tho'</sic></add> less <del>degree</del> <add> frequent:</add> </p> <p><note> which some might<lb/> be apt to think is<lb/> actually done by the<lb/> Act as it is worded.</note></p><!-- line in ink across the page --> <p> To make the validity of the transactions in either case<lb/> <!-- line in ink across the page --> depend ever upon the part of the Oaths having<lb/> been taken & subscribed by every one, might be<lb/> thought [<del>rather too</del>] <add>too</add> hazardous, without <del><gap/> <add>the</add></del><lb/> <del> more certain & <add> method more certain</add> & expeditious the adoption</del><lb/> same method <del> more secure & expeditious for</del> <add> of</add> ascertaining <lb/> it, which, like that above proposed,<lb/> shall be at once expeditious & secure.</p> <p><note> By this means <lb/> they may make<lb/> certain, of least,<lb/> of all the security<lb/> the Oaths can<lb/> give</note></p> <!-- line in ink across the page --> <p> I cannot <add> must not</add> conclude <del>th</del> my <add> the</add> observations on this part<lb/> of the Act, <add> tedious as they may be,</add> without recapitulating <add>calling to mind</add> a few doubts<lb/> which seem to require <del> the solution of</del> <add> to be settled</add> the Legislature <!-- lines appear to indicate the margin note should be included here --> <note> Qualified or<lb/> capable ...O.<lb/> <del>That I may not</del> <add> to avoid entering</add> he<lb/> <gap/> note <gap/><lb/> is <gap/> [+]</note> I <del>shall</del> <add> will <del>that I may</del> </add>content myself with stating<lb/> them, without attempting their solution, either<lb/> upon the footing of the Act as it stands at present<lb/> or by proposing any additions for the purpose.</p> <p><note> Upon these words <lb/> a few doubts may<lb/> arise, the solution<lb/> to which is not so<lb/> obvious, but that it<lb/> might be of use<lb/> to give it <add> that it should be given</add> by the<lb/> Legislature</note></p> <p> 1. Whether a <del> Chattel Interest and a real subject</del> <add> Man who having once had a</add> <lb/> <del>the</del> <add> proper</add> qualification & having taken & subscribed the<lb/> Oath accordingly, <del>loses it</del> acts after he has<lb/> ceased to have it, becomes obnoxious to the <gap/>.</p> <p> 2. Whether <del>the Cor</del> Trustees have any power to<lb/> exclude those of their number who refuse to take<lb/> & subscribe the Oath. If not what is the force of the<lb/> word capable ?</p> <!-- start of right hand column hand column --> <p> 3. If they have, whether they may do it by an<lb/> Order once for all, or only <foreign>toties quoties</foreign> ?</p> <p> 4. Whether Acts & orders are void<lb/>for which there has not been a sufficient Quorum<lb/> without reckoning an intruder: & this in the <lb/> <add>2</add> several cases of his <add>not</add> having not been objected to,<lb/> & of his having been excluded.</p> <p><note><add>Let</add> The Trustees concurring<lb/> in an act<lb/> or order <hi rend="superscript">+</hi> <add> + except adjournment</add> thus rendered<lb/> illegal <del>should</del> <lb/> be <del>made</del> <add> declared</add> responsible<lb/> for the consequences<lb/> exclusively of all<lb/> persons acting <foreign>bona <lb/> fide</foreign> under it.</note></p> <!-- line across the page in ink --> <p><note>Personal Estate</note></p> <p><note>a Chattel Interest<lb/> in a Real subject</note> </p><!-- all of this section has been crossed through, margin notes are not crossed through unless marked as such --> <p><del>I</del> <add> <gap/> could wish</add> should be glad to know whether it was the meaning<lb/> of the composer of this clause, that Chattels real<lb/> (Estates for years <add> in Lands</add> for example) should <gap/><lb/> into Personal Estates? if it was not then his<lb/> intent would certainly be frustrated, because the<lb/> Term in question being at least equally susceptible<lb/> of that sense which includes <add>such Estates <del>there</del> as of —</add> <del>those with</del> that<lb/> which does not, in a penal Law like this the former <add> construction</add> <lb/> as being the most favourable would be adopted.<lb/> if <del>not</del> <add>it was</add> a qualification thus composed being as much<lb/> a <sic>mixt</sic> one as any other <add> that can</add> <del>could</del> be imagined<lb/> it is plain the omitting to allow of mixtures <add> carry the mixture as</add> <lb/> <add>far as the ingredients would afford</add> throughout was by oversight & not design.<lb/><!-- line across the column in ink --> allowing of as many mixed qualifications as <del><gap/></del> could be composed<lb/> all of the simple ones admitted of</p> <p><note> nothing indeed<lb/> can be more &c<lb/> [nor can any thing]<lb/> be more inconsistent<lb/> than that the Law should<lb/> <sic>admitt</sic> of an annual<lb/> income <del>to make up</del> <add> arising out</add><lb/> of a short Lease to<lb/> make up the <hi rend="underline">capital</hi><lb/> required while <del><gap/></del><lb/> <add>perpetual</add> income to the same<lb/> amount stands excluded.</note></p> <!-- line across the page in ink --> <p><del>The word established in the New Draught</del><lb/> Zounds, <unclear>Tithes</unclear> Offices & Franchises are all the sorts<lb/> of Hereditaments which can produce an <add>annual</add> income: the<lb/>expression is nearly as short of Lands, Tenements & Hereditaments <add> which is in the original</add> <lb/> & would be quite so, if the word [<hi rend="underline">Franchises</hi>] (as<lb/> perhaps it might be without inconvenience, were omitted</p> <!-- line across the page in ink --> <p><note>Annuities excepted<lb/> which <del> <gap/> <gap/> </del> <add> differing <gap/></add><lb/> <del>to be intended</del><lb/> much in point of<lb/> their security and<lb/> notoriety, seem<lb/> hardly to have been<lb/>intended to be<lb/> <gap/> with<lb/> these</note></p> <p> When nothing to be gained in point of brevity,<lb/> it is to no purpose to have recourse to general expressions,<lb/> which always the more general they are<lb/> that is the more abstract are the less familiar,<lb/> <note>more obscure</note> & therefore the less <add><del><gap/></del></add> intelligible.</p> <p> It is curious enough to observe that <add>One may have observed <del>that</del> how </add> when <add>as <gap/><lb/>whenever</add> Hereditaments<lb/> come in question <add> never just to say in the</add> the words Lands Tenements<lb/> <add> the meaning of which is already included in the other</add> into the <gap/>. And not <add> included</add> <del> they do by</del> <lb/> <del><gap/></del> <add> <gap/> in the force</add> without reason as <gap/> <add> <gap/></add> that without<lb/> the <del>word Lands the word Hereditament </del> <add> last word of the string, the 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi></add> would be<lb/> absolutely unintelligible — that there is not one <add>more</add> in<lb/> ten, who knows an Hereditament from a Salamander:<lb/> nor one in a thousand even among<lb/> persons of education who has an adequate idea<lb/> of it: <sic>tis</sic> therefore <add>on this account</add> that the others are in a manner<lb/> <gap/> to put men upon the <unclear>scale</unclear> of its<lb/> <add>qualification</add> <sic>Tis</sic> for this reason, I conclude, that one word Hereditaments<lb/> is scarce any where <add>to be sure</add> visible but in<lb/> company.</p> <!-- the next four marginal notes have been heavily crossed through --> <p><note>the <unclear>points</unclear> of compilers<lb/> in the language of<lb/> all Parliamentary<lb/> scribes, the words <gap/> <lb/> are <gap/> in a<lb/> string like is <gap/><lb/>Then the <gap/>itself others<lb/> the <gap/> <gap/><lb/> <add>of the phrases as no others</add> within them as<lb/>without them.</note></p> <p><note> possesses the full<lb/> <gap/><lb/> any <gap/><lb/> the other two</note></p> <p><note> without company<lb/> The common notion<lb/> of a Tenement is<lb/> that it means a<lb/> building</note></p> <p><note> put one <unclear>afore</unclear><lb/> the <unclear>secret</unclear> if it's<lb/> meaning</note></p><!-- line in ink across the margin --> <!-- remaining text has been crossed through --><p><note><del> Perhaps <gap/></del></note></p> <p> [What a man in obliged to swear to it is fit he<lb/> should <add> be able to</add> understand<lb/> It is observable enough]</p> <p>[One may have observed, that] in the language of all<lb/> Parliamentary scribes these 5 terms are continually<lb/> brought out in a string, like <gap/> & <gap/> <lb/> in the force.</p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
Qualification. III
A specific penalty over and above damages &
costs might then be given to the party grieved
by acting in bona fide under an order thus
declared rendered invalid.
It is scarce necessary to observe, that
for rendering the invalidation
admissible
The contrivance here
we may perceive, is
nothing more than
substituting
a fact easily in the room of one difficulty
ascertainable as the condition sine quea non of the
validity of their transactions
To make the Acts of a Meeting absolutely void by the intrusion
of an unqualified person should be productive
To make the validity of the acts of transactions of every meeting depend
in every case upon a number collection of facts so obscure & unascertainable
as the due qualification of the every
person present at it, would be productive of infinite
confusion
viz. before the time
when for acting under
the orders &c
To make the validity of the acts of such a
meeting at which in the case of their being the bare quorum necessary including
the intruder is present, depend upon the same condition would be productive
of similar confusion in a tho' less degree frequent:
which some might
be apt to think is
actually done by the
Act as it is worded.
To make the validity of the transactions in either case
depend ever upon the part of the Oaths having
been taken & subscribed by every one, might be
thought [rather too] too hazardous, without the
more certain & method more certain & expeditious the adoption
same method more secure & expeditious for of ascertaining
it, which, like that above proposed,
shall be at once expeditious & secure.
By this means
they may make
certain, of least,
of all the security
the Oaths can
give
I cannot must not conclude th my the observations on this part
of the Act, tedious as they may be, without recapitulating calling to mind a few doubts
which seem to require the solution of to be settled the Legislature Qualified or
capable ...O.
That I may not to avoid entering he
note
is [+] I shall will that I may content myself with stating
them, without attempting their solution, either
upon the footing of the Act as it stands at present
or by proposing any additions for the purpose.
Upon these words
a few doubts may
arise, the solution
to which is not so
obvious, but that it
might be of use
to give it that it should be given by the
Legislature
1. Whether a Chattel Interest and a real subject Man who having once had a
the proper qualification & having taken & subscribed the
Oath accordingly, loses it acts after he has
ceased to have it, becomes obnoxious to the .
2. Whether the Cor Trustees have any power to
exclude those of their number who refuse to take
& subscribe the Oath. If not what is the force of the
word capable ?
3. If they have, whether they may do it by an
Order once for all, or only toties quoties ?
4. Whether Acts & orders are void
for which there has not been a sufficient Quorum
without reckoning an intruder: & this in the
2 several cases of his not having not been objected to,
& of his having been excluded.
Let The Trustees concurring
in an act
or order + + except adjournment thus rendered
illegal should
be made declared responsible
for the consequences
exclusively of all
persons acting bona
fide under it.
Personal Estate
a Chattel Interest
in a Real subject
I could wish should be glad to know whether it was the meaning
of the composer of this clause, that Chattels real
(Estates for years in Lands for example) should
into Personal Estates? if it was not then his
intent would certainly be frustrated, because the
Term in question being at least equally susceptible
of that sense which includes such Estates there as of — those with that
which does not, in a penal Law like this the former construction
as being the most favourable would be adopted.
if not it was a qualification thus composed being as much
a mixt one as any other that can could be imagined
it is plain the omitting to allow of mixtures carry the mixture as
far as the ingredients would afford throughout was by oversight & not design.
allowing of as many mixed qualifications as could be composed
all of the simple ones admitted of
nothing indeed
can be more &c
[nor can any thing]
be more inconsistent
than that the Law should
admitt of an annual
income to make up arising out
of a short Lease to
make up the capital
required while
perpetual income to the same
amount stands excluded.
The word established in the New Draught
Zounds, Tithes Offices & Franchises are all the sorts
of Hereditaments which can produce an annual income: the
expression is nearly as short of Lands, Tenements & Hereditaments which is in the original
& would be quite so, if the word [Franchises] (as
perhaps it might be without inconvenience, were omitted
Annuities excepted
which differing
to be intended
much in point of
their security and
notoriety, seem
hardly to have been
intended to be
with
these
When nothing to be gained in point of brevity,
it is to no purpose to have recourse to general expressions,
which always the more general they are
that is the more abstract are the less familiar,
more obscure & therefore the less intelligible.
It is curious enough to observe that One may have observed that how when as
whenever Hereditaments
come in question never just to say in the the words Lands Tenements
the meaning of which is already included in the other into the . And not included they do by
in the force without reason as that without
the word Lands the word Hereditament last word of the string, the 1st would be
absolutely unintelligible — that there is not one more in
ten, who knows an Hereditament from a Salamander:
nor one in a thousand even among
persons of education who has an adequate idea
of it: tis therefore on this account that the others are in a manner
to put men upon the scale of its
qualification Tis for this reason, I conclude, that one word Hereditaments
is scarce any where to be sure visible but in
company.
the points of compilers
in the language of
all Parliamentary
scribes, the words
are in a
string like is
Then the itself others
the
of the phrases as no others within them as
without them.
possesses the full
any
the other two
without company
The common notion
of a Tenement is
that it means a
building
put one afore
the secret if it's
meaning
Perhaps
[What a man in obliged to swear to it is fit he
should be able to understand
It is observable enough]
[One may have observed, that] in the language of all
Parliamentary scribes these 5 terms are continually
brought out in a string, like &
in the force.
Identifier: | JB/095/079/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 95. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
not numbered |
|||
095 |
|||
079 |
qualification iii |
||
002 |
|||
text sheet |
2 |
||
recto |
|||
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with vryheyt motif]]] |
||
30965 |
|||