JB/141/134/003: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/141/134/003: Difference between revisions

Keithompson (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/141/134/003|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/141/134/003|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
B6:Ch4<lb/>
 
Sec 3<lb/>
<head>Punishment - whether defeasible by Death</head>
<head>Punishment - whether defeasible by Death</head>


Line 11: Line 10:
in view, this being taken away punishment has<lb/>
in view, this being taken away punishment has<lb/>
of course dropped along with it. But in these<lb/>
of course dropped along with it. But in these<lb/>
cases as I hope soon to make appear , however<lb/>
cases as I hope soon to make appear , howsoever<lb/>
it may stand<add><del>by</del></add> with compensation, the demand for <lb/>
it may stand<add><del>be</del></add> with compensation, the demand for <lb/>
punishment has <add><del>been</del></add> not <add>been</add> lessened by either of the events<lb/>
punishment has <add><del>been</del></add> not <add>been</add> lessen'd by either of the events<lb/>
in question.</p>
in question.</p>
<p>These are 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> the Death of the injurer: 2<hi rend="superscript">dly</hi><lb/>
<p>These are 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> the Death of the injurer: 2<hi rend="superscript">dly</hi><lb/>
the death of the party injured.</p>
the death of the party injured.</p>
<p>1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> The Death of the <del>party</del> injurer has been deemed <note>1. <add>bt</add> The death of the damnifier</note> <lb/>
<p>1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> The Death of the <del>party</del> injurer has been deemed <note>1. <add>by</add> The death<lb/> of the damnifier</note> <lb/>
to take away the occasion <add><del>ground</del></add> for indeminification. The<lb/>
to take away the occasion <add><del>ground</del></add> for indeminification. The<lb/>
reason <add>that occurs</add> is that there is nobody to <add>give it</add><del>indemnify. [Where</del><lb/>
reason <add>that occurs</add> is that there is nobody to <del>indemnify</del> <add>give it</add> <del>[Where</del><lb/>
<add>Had he continues where he ought to<add>have</add></add><add>given it, doubtless. But as</add>he is gone who ought then? Why one person rather<lb/>
Had he continued where he ought to<add>have</add> given it, doubtless. But as<lb/> he is gone who ought then? Why one person rather<lb/>
than another?</p>
than another?</p>
<p><del>One may answer certainly, nobody in the case</del><lb/>
<p><del>One may answer certainly, nobody in the case</del><lb/>
<del>where the offence produced<add>in such as produces  not any</add> &amp; are <hi rend="underline">transferable</hi></del> profit</p>
<del>where the offence produced<add>in such as produces  not any</add> &amp; are <hi rend="underline">transferable</hi> profit</del> </p>
<p>To answer these questions at large we must make<add><del>take</del></add> <note>But this it ought not to be - 1<lb/>
<p>To answer these questions at large we must make<add><del>take</del></add> <note>But this it ought<lb/> not to be - 1<lb/>
1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> Where the profit of the offence is pecuniary &amp; and descends <del>upon</del><add>to</add> his representatives.</note><lb/>
1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> Where the profit<lb/> of the offence is<lb/> pecuniary &amp; descends<lb/> <del>upon</del><add>to</add> his<lb/> representatives.</note><lb/>
a distiction according to<add><del>in</del></add> the nature <sic>off</sic> the offence.<lb/>
a distinction according to <add><del>in</del></add> the nature <sic>off</sic> the offence.<lb/>
<del>When The</del> offence is <add>either</add> attended with a<add><del>no</del></add> <hi rend="underline">transferable</hi><lb/>
<del>When The</del> offence is <add>either</add> attended with a<add><del>no</del></add> <hi rend="underline">transferable</hi><lb/>
profit, a <add><gap/></add> fruit transmissible to the <add>representatives</add> <del>successors</del> of<lb/>
profit, a <add><del>no</del></add> fruit transmissible to the <del>successor</del> <add>representatives</add> of<lb/>
the offender or not. <del>When<add>On</add> An offence of the first</del>
the offender or not. <del>When<add>On</add> An offence of the first</del><lb/>
<del><gap/> sort, the representative ought clearly</del><add> In the first case</add> obligation of<lb/>
<del><gap/> sort, the representative ought clearly</del><add> In the first case the</add> obligation of<lb/>
making compensation ought clearly to devolve on the <add>representative</add></p><pb/>
making compensation ought clearly to devolve on the <add>representative</add></p><pb/>


Line 37: Line 38:


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

Latest revision as of 10:39, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

Punishment - whether defeasible by Death

events, inunder most Laws and particularly inunder our own
the obligation of making compensation has been cancelled.
At the same time compensation being the only object
in view, this being taken away punishment has
of course dropped along with it. But in these
cases as I hope soon to make appear , howsoever
it may standbe with compensation, the demand for
punishment has been not been lessen'd by either of the events
in question.

These are 1st the Death of the injurer: 2dly
the death of the party injured.

1st The Death of the party injurer has been deemed 1. by The death
of the damnifier

to take away the occasion ground for indeminification. The
reason that occurs is that there is nobody to indemnify give it [Where
Had he continued where he ought tohave given it, doubtless. But as
he is gone who ought then? Why one person rather
than another?


One may answer certainly, nobody in the case
where the offence producedin such as produces not any & are transferable profit

To answer these questions at large we must maketake But this it ought
not to be - 1
1st Where the profit
of the offence is
pecuniary & descends
uponto his
representatives.

a distinction according to in the nature off the offence.
When The offence is either attended with ano transferable
profit, a no fruit transmissible to the successor representatives of
the offender or not. WhenOn An offence of the first
sort, the representative ought clearly In the first case the obligation of
making compensation ought clearly to devolve on the representative


---page break---




Identifier: | JB/141/134/003"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 141.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

not numbered

Box

141

Main Headings

rationale of punishment

Folio number

134

Info in main headings field

b. 6 ch. 4 section 3 defeazance of punishment punishment - whether defeasible by death

Image

003

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f1 / f2 / f3 / f4

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::l v g propatria [britannia motif]]]

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

caroline vernon

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

48351

Box Contents

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