★ 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 6: | Line 6: | ||
<head>N. S. Wales <note>Conduct</note></head><!-- right of centre and in pencil --> | <head>N. S. Wales <note>Conduct</note></head><!-- right of centre and in pencil --> | ||
<head>1 <note>III Non-<unclear>exist .<!-- abbreviation for 'existence' ? --></unclear> <sic>provd</sic></note></head><!-- all in pencil --> | <head>1 <note>III Non-<unclear>exist .<!-- abbreviation for 'existence'? --></unclear> <sic>provd</sic></note></head><!-- all in pencil --> | ||
<p><!-- indented -->The passage above quoted in | <p><!-- indented -->The passage above quoted in Calvin's case so much | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
of it as was reconcileable to common humanity and | of it as was <sic>reconcileable</sic> to common humanity and | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
common sense is the authority that appears to have | common sense is the authority that appears to have | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
been taken as the groundwork of the opinion given by | been taken as the groundwork of the opinion given by | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
these two great lawyers in 1722 : <del>taking the matter</del> <add>I mean as to one if the</add> | these two great lawyers in 1722: <del>taking the matter</del> <add>I mean as to one if the</add> | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
<del>as they</del> two proposition contained on it viz: the <del><gap/></del> <add><gap/></add> | <del>as they</del> two proposition contained on it viz: the <del><gap/></del> <add><gap/></add> | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
<del>first</del> given to the King , 'right , in the case of | <del>first</del> given to the King, 'right, in the case of | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
a Colony obtained by conquest , as Jamaica the | a Colony obtained by conquest, as Jamaica the | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
Colony in question was so far and so far only as concerned | Colony in question was so far and so far only as concerned | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
the stocks and shares : <add>as to</add> the other part , <add>[+]</add> <note><add>[+]</add> that which concerns the right of the King in Colonies not obtained by conquest</note> it had | the stocks and shares: <add>as to</add> the other part, <add>[+]</add> <note><add>[+]</add> that which concerns the right of the King in Colonies not obtained by conquest</note> it had | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
<del> | <del>forwarded</del> for its evident foundation the at that time | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
undisputed exercise of that right . | undisputed exercise of that right. | ||
<lb/></p> | <lb/></p> | ||
<p><!-- indented --><del>What wa</del> Hast this right <add>on the part</add> of the King come in | <p><!-- indented --><del>What wa</del> Hast this right <add>on the part</add> of the King come in | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
question before them in both its | question before them in both its divisions - viz: <del>no | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
will in</del> relation to all colonies of all sorts , <add>whether</add> obtained | will in</del> relation to all colonies of all sorts, <add>whether</add> obtained | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
by conquest or not obtained by conquest , what the | by conquest or not obtained by conquest, what the | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
answer of these two great lawyers would have been would | answer of these two great lawyers would have been would | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
<add>be</add> an enquiry <unclear>while</unclear> fruitless and useless . The answer | <add>be</add> an enquiry <unclear>while</unclear> fruitless and useless. The answer | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
actually given by <del>authors</del> other great lawyers speaking | actually given by <del>authors</del> other great lawyers speaking | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
judicially in the Grenada case . I mean Lord Mansfield | judicially in the Grenada case. I mean Lord Mansfield | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
and his Colleagues <del>of</del> on the King's Bench might certainly | and his Colleagues <del>of</del> on the King's Bench might certainly | ||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
what might have been the opinion of great lawyers | what might have been the opinion of great lawyers | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
at the still <add>former</add> earlier period . In 17<del>6</del>74 <gap/> | at the still <add>former</add> earlier period. In 17<del>6</del>74 <gap/> | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
field and his Colleagues had not been able to extend | field and his Colleagues had not been able to extend | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
- their <del>virtues</del> <add>views</add> further than to the case of | - their <del>virtues</del> <add>views</add> further than to the case of Calvin in the | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
beginning of the reign of James the first : these had neither looked | beginning of the reign of James the first: these had neither looked | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
further <add>backwards</add> back to the S<hi rend='superscript'>t</hi> Alban's case <add>in about 1588</add> , nor forward <add>onwards</add> to the principles | further <add>backwards</add> back to the S<hi rend='superscript'>t</hi> Alban's case <add>in about 1588</add>, nor forward <add>onwards</add> to the principles | ||
<lb/> | <lb/> | ||
established <del>by the</del> in 1688 by the Bill of Rights . Why ? <add>[+]</add> <add>Already</add><!-- addition in pencil --> | established <del>by the</del> in 1688 by the Bill of Rights. Why? <add>[+]</add> <add>Already</add><!-- addition in pencil --> | ||
<lb/></p> | <lb/></p> | ||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
24 July 1802
N. S. Wales Conduct
1 III Non-exist . provd
The passage above quoted in Calvin's case so much
of it as was reconcileable to common humanity and
common sense is the authority that appears to have
been taken as the groundwork of the opinion given by
these two great lawyers in 1722: taking the matter I mean as to one if the
as they two proposition contained on it viz: the
first given to the King, 'right, in the case of
a Colony obtained by conquest, as Jamaica the
Colony in question was so far and so far only as concerned
the stocks and shares: as to the other part, [+] [+] that which concerns the right of the King in Colonies not obtained by conquest it had
forwarded for its evident foundation the at that time
undisputed exercise of that right.
What wa Hast this right on the part of the King come in
question before them in both its divisions - viz: no
will in relation to all colonies of all sorts, whether obtained
by conquest or not obtained by conquest, what the
answer of these two great lawyers would have been would
be an enquiry while fruitless and useless. The answer
actually given by authors other great lawyers speaking
judicially in the Grenada case. I mean Lord Mansfield
and his Colleagues of on the King's Bench might certainly
afford some ground of presumption as to
what might have been the opinion of great lawyers
at the still former earlier period. In 17674
field and his Colleagues had not been able to extend
- their virtues views further than to the case of Calvin in the
beginning of the reign of James the first: these had neither looked
further backwards back to the St Alban's case in about 1588, nor forward onwards to the principles
established by the in 1688 by the Bill of Rights. Why? [+] Already
|
Identifier: | JB/116/144/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1802-07-24 |
|||
|
116 |
panopticon versus new south wales |
||
|
144 |
n. s. wales |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e1 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
37677 |
|||
