JB/116/191/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/116/191/001: Difference between revisions

Lea Stern (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
<head>27 June 1802  10 17</head>
<head>27 June 1802  10 17</head>


<p><note>6 Convict <lb/>1 The Legislator <lb/>3 Causes <lb/>10 <lb/>The act of doing <lb/>illegal things to <lb/>save trouble was <lb/> <sic>learnt</sic> by Pitt of his <lb/>father &amp; <gap/> <lb/>in the case of the <gap/> <lb/>power over the Corn Laws in 1766</note> The <del>principal</del> principle of action was not a new<lb/> one to the headstrong Minister who was acting upon<lb/> it. <del>A politician and an Orator</del> <add>Trained up to politics and oratory</add> from his cradle,<lb/> he had been bred <del>up</del> in a School which taught mere <lb/>to <unclear>kick</unclear>-down constitutions to save trouble: &#x2014; to kick them<lb/> down, <add>say</add> my Lord: not merely to kick them aside, as here.</p>
<p><note>6 Convict <lb/>1 The Legislator <lb/>3 Causes <lb/>10 <lb/>The act of doing <lb/>illegal things to <lb/>save trouble was <lb/> <sic>learnt</sic> by Pitt of his <lb/>father &amp; <gap/> <lb/>in the use of the Suspending <lb/> power over the Corn Laws in 1766</note> The <del>principal</del> principle of action was not a new<lb/> one to the headstrong Minister who was acting upon<lb/> it. <del>A politician and an Orator</del> <add>Trained up to politics and oratory</add> from his cradle,<lb/> he had been bred <del>up</del> in a School which taught mere <lb/>to kick-down constitutions to save trouble: &#x2014; to kick them<lb/> down, <add>say</add> my Lord: not merely to kick them aside, as here.</p>


<p>The same versatile and fluent lawyer who, <lb/>to foment <del>rebellion</del> <add>insurrection</add> which ended in <del><unclear>emancipation,</unclear></del> <add>separation</add> <del>had</del><lb/> discovered <add>afterwards</add> that taxation laws are not laws <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi><lb/> <note><hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> and that the <del><gap/></del> <lb/>on which the subjects <lb/>money is given by <lb/>the <add><unclear>noxious</unclear></add> <gap/> Houses to <gap/> notion no command on anybody <lb/>to pay it &#x2014; this same <lb/>ingenious person</note> but discovered <lb/>in 1766 that <add>there is in every year a time during which</add> the Bill of Rights is waste <lb/>paper; and that whenever Parliament is not sitting, the advisers of the Crown have a <add>legal</add> right to exercise <add>supersede</add> <lb/>a suspending power <add>the laws of Parliament</add> on condition of making use of <lb/>the word <hi rend="underline">necessity</hi>, <del>where they</del> <add>should they ever have need</add> come to speak of it. That <lb/>in that case <hi rend="superscript">(4.)</hi> there was a real necessity for suspending <lb/><note>[5]</note> <lb/> a law of Parliament was admitted on all hands. That <lb/><del>they made</del> the necessity was of their making was charged <lb/>[upon them <del>by</del> on the other side] by their opponents, <lb/>though &#x2014; such was <del>their candour</del> <add>the candour on that side</add> (<del>the candour of their <lb/>opponents</del> &#x2014; the mission to <gap/> a meeting of Parliament <lb/>while the necessity was growing before <add>under</add> their eyes <lb/> was ascribed &#x2014; not to design but <add>nothing worse than</add> negligence. The indemnity <lb/>which they affected to disdain and fight against, <lb/><note>In this <add> <gap/></add> adventure <lb/>as afterward in the <gap/> <lb/><del>on to the other the </del> <lb/><add>the</add> the first Earl <gap/> <lb/>and the first Earl <lb/>Chatham <del>went hand <lb/>in hand</del> were co-partners. <lb/>Taught by this <lb/> <gap/> &#x2014; emboldened by <lb/>this precedent &#x2014; seeing <lb/>how much more might <lb/>be <del>done</del> attempted</note> <lb/>they got notwithstanding, though without deserving it. They <lb/>were Ministers first in power, and concern for <lb/>creating the necessity might <add>would</add> have been liable to be misinterpreted <lb/>into concern for asking under it when created. <lb/><del>Seeing then what may be done</del> by a Minister <add><del>since it was done by his <gap/></del></add> with impunity <lb/> Thus it was that from the example of <del>Pitt</del> the <lb/>first Pitt and his <gap/> friend, Pitt the second <add>the hereditary minister, in the <add><unclear>new</unclear></add> family state</add> learnt to <lb/><add> <gap/> not to</add> kick the constitution aside to save trouble.</p>
<p>The same versatile and fluent lawyer who, <lb/>to foment <del>rebellion</del> <add>insurrection</add> which ended in <del>emancipation,</del> <add>separation</add> <del>had</del><lb/> discovered <add>afterwards</add> that taxation laws are not laws <hi rend='superscript'>[+]</hi> had discovered <lb/> <note><hi rend='superscript'>[+]</hi> and that the <del><gap/></del> <lb/>on which the subjects <lb/>money is given by <lb/>the two <add><unclear>noxious </unclear></add> Houses to <gap/> contain no command on any body <lb/>to pay it &#x2014; this same <lb/>ingenious person</note> <lb/>in 1766 that <add>there is in every year a time during which</add> the Bill of Rights is waste <lb/>paper; and that whenever Parliament is not sitting, the advisers of the Crown have a <add>legal</add> right to exercise <add>supersede</add> <lb/>a suspending power <add>the laws of Parliament</add> on condition of making use of <lb/>the word <hi rend="underline">necessity</hi>, <del>where they</del> <add>should they ever have need</add> come to speak of it. That <lb/>in that case <hi rend="superscript"><unclear>(+)</unclear></hi> there was a real necessity for suspending <lb/><note><unclear>[+]</unclear></note> <lb/> a law of Parliament was admitted on all hands. That <lb/><del>they made</del> the necessity was of their making was charged <lb/>[upon them <del>by</del> on the other side] by their opponents, <lb/>though &#x2014; such was <del>their candour</del> <add>the candour on that side</add> (<del>the candour of their <lb/>opponents</del> &#x2014; the mission to <gap/> a meeting of Parliament <lb/>while the necessity was growing before <add>under</add> their eyes <lb/> was ascribed &#x2014; not to design but <add>nothing worse than</add> negligence. The indemnity <lb/>which they affected to disdain and fight against, <lb/><note>In this <add> <gap/></add> adventure <lb/>as afterward in the <gap/> <lb/><del>on to the other the </del> <lb/><add>the</add> the first Earl Camden <lb/>and the first Earl <lb/>Chatham <del>went hand <lb/>in hand</del> were co-partners. <lb/>Taught by this <lb/> lesson &#x2014; emboldened by <lb/>this precedent &#x2014; seeing <lb/>how much more might <lb/>be <del>done</del> attempted</note> <lb/>they got notwithstanding, though without deserving it. They <lb/>were Ministers fresh in power, and censure for <lb/>creating the necessity might <add>would</add> have been liable to be misinterpreted <lb/>into censure for acting under it when created. <lb/><del>Seeing then what may be done</del> by a Minister <add><del>since it was done by his <gap/></del></add> with impunity <lb/> Thus it was that from the example of <del>Pitt</del> the <lb/>first Pitt and his true friend, Pitt the second <add>the hereditary minister, in the <add><unclear>new</unclear></add> family stile</add> learnt to <lb/><add> scrupled not to</add> kick the constitution aside to save trouble.</p>
   
   
 
<p>>The <del>endeavour</del> <add>attempt</add> had been to govern against law. Following him <lb/><del>in <gap/> <gap/></del> but for this time but at a distance, the son attempted to govern <lb/>without law and succeeded. In <del>anoth</del> a future address I shall have occasion <add>[+]</add> <lb/><note><hi rend="superscript">[+]</hi> to exhibit a third attempt <lb/>equal in success <lb/>to the second, in audacity <lb/>to the first.</note> </p>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




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

Latest revision as of 10:22, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

27 June 1802 10 17

6 Convict
1 The Legislator
3 Causes
10
The act of doing
illegal things to
save trouble was
learnt by Pitt of his
father &
in the use of the Suspending
power over the Corn Laws in 1766
The principal principle of action was not a new
one to the headstrong Minister who was acting upon
it. A politician and an Orator Trained up to politics and oratory from his cradle,
he had been bred up in a School which taught mere
to kick-down constitutions to save trouble: — to kick them
down, say my Lord: not merely to kick them aside, as here.

The same versatile and fluent lawyer who,
to foment rebellion insurrection which ended in emancipation, separation had
discovered afterwards that taxation laws are not laws [+] had discovered
[+] and that the
on which the subjects
money is given by
the two noxious Houses to contain no command on any body
to pay it — this same
ingenious person

in 1766 that there is in every year a time during which the Bill of Rights is waste
paper; and that whenever Parliament is not sitting, the advisers of the Crown have a legal right to exercise supersede
a suspending power the laws of Parliament on condition of making use of
the word necessity, where they should they ever have need come to speak of it. That
in that case (+) there was a real necessity for suspending
[+]
a law of Parliament was admitted on all hands. That
they made the necessity was of their making was charged
[upon them by on the other side] by their opponents,
though — such was their candour the candour on that side (the candour of their
opponents
— the mission to a meeting of Parliament
while the necessity was growing before under their eyes
was ascribed — not to design but nothing worse than negligence. The indemnity
which they affected to disdain and fight against,
In this adventure
as afterward in the
on to the other the
the the first Earl Camden
and the first Earl
Chatham went hand
in hand
were co-partners.
Taught by this
lesson — emboldened by
this precedent — seeing
how much more might
be done attempted

they got notwithstanding, though without deserving it. They
were Ministers fresh in power, and censure for
creating the necessity might would have been liable to be misinterpreted
into censure for acting under it when created.
Seeing then what may be done by a Minister since it was done by his with impunity
Thus it was that from the example of Pitt the
first Pitt and his true friend, Pitt the second the hereditary minister, in the <add>new family stile</add> learnt to
scrupled not to kick the constitution aside to save trouble.

>The endeavour attempt had been to govern against law. Following him
in but for this time but at a distance, the son attempted to govern
without law and succeeded. In anoth a future address I shall have occasion [+]
[+] to exhibit a third attempt
equal in success
to the second, in audacity
to the first.



Identifier: | JB/116/191/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116.

Date_1

1802-06-27

Marginal Summary Numbering

10

Box

116

Main Headings

panopticon versus new south wales

Folio number

191

Info in main headings field

n. s. wales

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

d10 / f47

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::[monogram] 1800]]

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1800

Notes public

ID Number

37724

Box Contents

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