★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1818 July 8<lb/> | |||
Parl. Ref. Bill</head> | |||
<note>Reasons<lb/> | |||
VIII Election Districts<lb/> | |||
Sec. 2. One Seat to a District</note> | |||
<p>1</p> | |||
<note>1<lb/> | |||
Question.<lb/> | |||
In each District, Members<lb/> | |||
why not more<lb/> | |||
than one?<lb/> | |||
<lb/> | |||
2<lb/> | |||
Answer — Attendance<lb/> | |||
supposed any greater<lb/> | |||
number could not sufficiently<lb/> | |||
be accommodated.</note> | |||
<!-- The remainder of the page has been struck through --> | |||
<p>Question 2. Number of Representatives to each District<lb/> | |||
why not more than one.</p> | |||
<p>Reasons</p> | |||
<p>Reason 1. At one to a District, the number is already<lb/> | |||
so great, that, under any system, other than of <add>that of general</add> <hi rend="underline">power<lb/> | |||
without obligation</hi> <add>non-attendance</add> as at present, <del><gap/></del> <del>[it would be productive<lb/> | |||
of sensible inconvenience.]</del> it would not be wholly<lb/> | |||
<del>unattended</del> with <add>unproductive of</add> sensible inconvenience. What if instead<lb/> | |||
<del>of 658 it were 1316?</del></p> | |||
<p>Reason 2. Suppose the numbers of districts doubled, the <add>Members the same as</add><lb/> | |||
at present, to wit 658, and, at the same time, as is mostly the<lb/> | |||
<note>case at present, two<lb/> | |||
Members allowed to<lb/> | |||
each District, the<lb/> | |||
several districts would <add>must</add><lb/> | |||
thus at an average</note><lb/> | |||
whole mass of inconvenience produced by distance, viz<lb/> | |||
<sic>expence</sic> of journey to and fro, and dis<gap/> would be</p> | |||
<p>This may be seen by adding to <add>on the outside of</add> any</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1818 July 8
Parl. Ref. Bill
Reasons
VIII Election Districts
Sec. 2. One Seat to a District
1
1
Question.
In each District, Members
why not more
than one?
2
Answer — Attendance
supposed any greater
number could not sufficiently
be accommodated.
Question 2. Number of Representatives to each District
why not more than one.
Reasons
Reason 1. At one to a District, the number is already
so great, that, under any system, other than of that of general power
without obligation non-attendance as at present, [it would be productive
of sensible inconvenience.] it would not be wholly
unattended with unproductive of sensible inconvenience. What if instead
of 658 it were 1316?
Reason 2. Suppose the numbers of districts doubled, the Members the same as
at present, to wit 658, and, at the same time, as is mostly the
case at present, two
Members allowed to
each District, the
several districts would must
thus at an average
whole mass of inconvenience produced by distance, viz
expence of journey to and fro, and dis would be
This may be seen by adding to on the outside of any
|
Identifier: | JB/104/436/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 104. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1818-07-08 |
1-2 |
||
|
104 |
fallacies |
||
|
436 |
parl. ref. bill |
||
|
002 |
question 2. number of representatives to each district, why not more than one |
||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
verso |
e1 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
half a sheet; used twice, for different subjects |
34467020 |
||
