★ 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 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/537/336/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/537/336/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<p> actually a very good one, if practicable. It is that you should be put<lb/> to work, not detached from all gangs, nor yet as one to make <lb/>up the complement of a Gang, but as a <hi rend="underline">supernumerary</hi>.</p> <p>The advantages are | <p> actually a very good one, if practicable. It is that you should be put<lb/> to work, not detached from all gangs, nor yet as one to make <lb/>up the complement of a Gang, but as a <hi rend="underline">supernumerary</hi>.</p> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | <p>The advantages are — 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> The men will be pleased, as whatever little <lb/>work you may chance to do will be clear gain to them - there will <lb/> be no murmurs from that quarter. 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> On that account they will probably<lb/> be ready to lend you any little assistances that may be wanting<lb/>to put you in a method. 3<hi rend="superscript">dly</hi> By shifting from Gang to Gang, <lb/>if that can be done, you will be in the way to engage in all <lb/>the varieties of work. 4. You may make it more easy to you in <lb/>this way, than if you were put to any task on which you stood<lb/>alone, and where consequently <del> you</del> the <del> <gap/> <gap/> </del> <add> slowness</add> of your progress<lb/>would be distinguishable.</p> | ||
<p> My Father after dinner, Madam out of the room, Far and Charles<lb/>present, was arguing very philosophically (from ideas furnished him <lb/>by her the day before) against indulgences (such as that in question <lb/>of your being exempted from working) : <add> amongst other topics</add> what <gap/> they excited <gap/> <gap/> <lb/>persons in the same situation as the party indulged: that <gap/> <!-- section of paper torn away over 3 lines) --> <lb/> <gap/> in your favour that disposed me to view the <gap/> <lb/>property of applying for them in a less favourable light<lb/>than what it merited. I admitted that <del>the</del> <add> a</add> natural effect of indulgence<lb/>to me, was jealousy in others. But observed that this did <lb/>not hinder people's pushing for indulgences when they had it in <lb/>their power; and <add> (without any appearance of jealousy, but merely as an example pertinent to my purpose)</add> I instanced the case of <hi rend="underline">Charles</hi>. It was at that time <lb/>a conversation rather than a debate: the old gentleman by no means in <lb/>an ill humour. At the mention of the word Charles, I saw <del>that</del> the <lb/>inconsistency of Madam's conduct in the two cases stare him in <lb/>the face. I did not press him upon it so as to incommode him <lb/>by letting him see I considered it in that light. But I saw it made<lb/>a deep impression; at least it struck him forcibly for the time. Soon<lb/>after <add> he happened to say</add> something <del> <gap/> </del> about the going to France. "that is" concluded he <lb/>"if we do go:" "For I will <hi rend="underline">not</hi>" (and he seemed to lay an emphasis<lb/>upon the <hi rend="underline">not</hi>) "For I will not go without <hi rend="underline">him</hi>" (meaning you. By this <lb/>I imagine, he either saw or thought he saw an aversion in Madam to <lb/>your going, and <del>or</del> a disposition to raise obstacles. </p><!-- text written at right angles in the left hand margin --> <p> Elmsly can't find your order: and knows not what books you <sic>order'd</sic> of him. No more do I! so you <lb/>must send me word. I have <sic>order'd</sic> from him Ainsworth and <unclear>Harn</unclear> "<unclear>Conia Scetions at a venture"</unclear>. They were <lb/> to have come to night: but have not. On this account, write by return of post; that is if you think it worth your while<lb/> on your own account.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | |||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | |||
actually a very good one, if practicable. It is that you should be put
to work, not detached from all gangs, nor yet as one to make
up the complement of a Gang, but as a supernumerary.
The advantages are — 1st The men will be pleased, as whatever little
work you may chance to do will be clear gain to them - there will
be no murmurs from that quarter. 2d On that account they will probably
be ready to lend you any little assistances that may be wanting
to put you in a method. 3dly By shifting from Gang to Gang,
if that can be done, you will be in the way to engage in all
the varieties of work. 4. You may make it more easy to you in
this way, than if you were put to any task on which you stood
alone, and where consequently you the slowness of your progress
would be distinguishable.
My Father after dinner, Madam out of the room, Far and Charles
present, was arguing very philosophically (from ideas furnished him
by her the day before) against indulgences (such as that in question
of your being exempted from working) : amongst other topics what they excited
persons in the same situation as the party indulged: that
in your favour that disposed me to view the
property of applying for them in a less favourable light
than what it merited. I admitted that the a natural effect of indulgence
to me, was jealousy in others. But observed that this did
not hinder people's pushing for indulgences when they had it in
their power; and (without any appearance of jealousy, but merely as an example pertinent to my purpose) I instanced the case of Charles. It was at that time
a conversation rather than a debate: the old gentleman by no means in
an ill humour. At the mention of the word Charles, I saw that the
inconsistency of Madam's conduct in the two cases stare him in
the face. I did not press him upon it so as to incommode him
by letting him see I considered it in that light. But I saw it made
a deep impression; at least it struck him forcibly for the time. Soon
after he happened to say something about the going to France. "that is" concluded he
"if we do go:" "For I will not" (and he seemed to lay an emphasis
upon the not) "For I will not go without him" (meaning you. By this
I imagine, he either saw or thought he saw an aversion in Madam to
your going, and or a disposition to raise obstacles.
Elmsly can't find your order: and knows not what books you order'd of him. No more do I! so you
must send me word. I have order'd from him Ainsworth and Harn "Conia Scetions at a venture". They were
to have come to night: but have not. On this account, write by return of post; that is if you think it worth your while
on your own account.
|
Identifier: | JB/537/336/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 537. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1775-04-14 |
|||
|
537 |
|||
|
336 |
|||
|
001 |
|||
|
Correspondence |
|||
|
Jeremy Bentham |
|||
