★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1819 <sic>Dec.</sic> 15<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> +<lb/>Radicalism not</head> <!-- marginal notes in pencil --> <p>1 §.3. <note><sic>ult<hi rend="superscript">o</hi></sic><lb/>1 Nature of the case</note><lb/>(4 <note>§.4. Plan of Defence</note></p> <p>§.3 — <sic>Radicalists</sic> defence. 1. Destruction of property not aimed at<lb/>2. P</p> <p><note>16 or 1<lb/>Defence What no<lb/>man can yet be, no man<lb/>will join in. See whether<lb/><del>both <gap/> <gap/></del><lb/>17 or 2<lb/>by subversion of the rights<lb/>of property any man will<lb/>get any thing</note></p><!-- top half of the page crossed through in pencil --> <p>That which Such being the accusation, now for the defence<lb/><del>can give it <add> into</add> . Aiming at the</del> <add>What nobody/no man can suppose <del>they</del> he can get any thing by, nobody <del>will</del> can/no man will join in.</add> Of the phrase — aiming at the<lb/><hi rend="underline">Subversion of the rights of property</hi> <del>being nonsense,</del> the<lb/>meaning of it has any being ambiguous <del>the supposed nearest</del> at once<lb/><del>but that can be done is to find that sense which seem</del><lb/><add>obscure and ambiguous, let us give to it the only two senses it can<lb/>have. These are destruction of property, and new partition of the right</add><lb/><del>it seems to <gap/> nearest to:</del><lb/><add>of property. The subversion effected, the subject matter will either have <!-- continues into margin --> perished, and thus not<lb/>remain in any<lb/>hands at all, or it<lb/>will have passed into<lb/>other hands. In the<lb/>first case the subversion <lb/>is destruction, in the<lb/>other case new division<lb/>is partition.</add></p> <p><note>18 or 3<lb/>1. destruction, no man<lb/>will get by: particular<lb/>points, in a moment of irritation,<lb/>yes: that may<lb/>be the object; but not<lb/>permanent and general.</note></p> | |||
<p><note>As</note> <del>Now</del> <add>First as to</add> Destruction <del>of property <add>destruction</add> without transfer</del> — <add>This is what</add> <del>men</del> in a<lb/>state of irritation, <add>men</add> may indeed for the moment aim at — aim<lb/>at in a state of momentary irritation — aim at in<lb/>relation to this or that mass of property which lies immediately<lb/>at their power. <del>but</del> <add>But this is not what is meant.</add> the aim here imputed is<lb/>a general one and a general destruction of property no<lb/>man in <del>or out of</del> his senses ever did or ever will aim<lb/>at.</p> <p><note> 19 or 4<lb/> 2. New division is<lb/>partition. Yes, possible<lb/>threat in this, for the<lb/>moment some men<lb/>may see advantage for<lb/>themselves: Let us<lb/><unclear>whether</unclear> long enough<lb/>for the formation of any<lb/><del>design</del> promising design<lb/>new enough to make<lb/>any advance towards<lb/>accomplishment should<lb/>entertain any such<lb/>design</note></p> <!-- remaining text crossed through in ink --> <p><del><add>By subversion of the rights of property</add> A new partition of property must therefore have been<lb/>the thing meant: the <hi rend="underline">rights</hi> remaining — must the <unclear>new</unclear><lb/>but the <hi rend="underline"><gap/></hi> on which they are lodged different.</del></p> <p><add>Remains for the object of the aim a new division or partition of property in general.</add><lb/>In a partition of this sort, it is possible that some<lb/>men <del>will</del> should, <add>for the moment, or <sic>till</sic> they hear better,</add> think they see an advantage for themselves.<lb/>Let us see whether, <del>it be possible that for a time</del> for any<lb/>time long enough for the forming of a design affording any<lb/><add>the least</add> provision of success, it be <add>in the nature of the case</add> <del>possible</del> that <add>by</add> a number of men<lb/>capable of making any advantage towards the accomplishment<lb/>of it, <add>any</add> <del><gap/> <gap/> it be <add>morally</add> possible — while it be<lb/>consistent with any observation or experience that any</del><lb/>such design should be entertained.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1819 Dec. 15th +
Radicalism not
1 §.3. ulto
1 Nature of the case
(4 §.4. Plan of Defence
§.3 — Radicalists defence. 1. Destruction of property not aimed at
2. P
16 or 1
Defence What no
man can yet be, no man
will join in. See whether
both
17 or 2
by subversion of the rights
of property any man will
get any thing
That which Such being the accusation, now for the defence
can give it into . Aiming at the What nobody/no man can suppose they he can get any thing by, nobody will can/no man will join in. Of the phrase — aiming at the
Subversion of the rights of property being nonsense, the
meaning of it has any being ambiguous the supposed nearest at once
but that can be done is to find that sense which seem
obscure and ambiguous, let us give to it the only two senses it can
have. These are destruction of property, and new partition of the right
it seems to nearest to:
of property. The subversion effected, the subject matter will either have perished, and thus not
remain in any
hands at all, or it
will have passed into
other hands. In the
first case the subversion
is destruction, in the
other case new division
is partition.
18 or 3
1. destruction, no man
will get by: particular
points, in a moment of irritation,
yes: that may
be the object; but not
permanent and general.
As Now First as to Destruction of property destruction without transfer — This is what men in a
state of irritation, men may indeed for the moment aim at — aim
at in a state of momentary irritation — aim at in
relation to this or that mass of property which lies immediately
at their power. but But this is not what is meant. the aim here imputed is
a general one and a general destruction of property no
man in or out of his senses ever did or ever will aim
at.
19 or 4
2. New division is
partition. Yes, possible
threat in this, for the
moment some men
may see advantage for
themselves: Let us
whether long enough
for the formation of any
design promising design
new enough to make
any advance towards
accomplishment should
entertain any such
design
By subversion of the rights of property A new partition of property must therefore have been
the thing meant: the rights remaining — must the new
but the on which they are lodged different.
Remains for the object of the aim a new division or partition of property in general.
In a partition of this sort, it is possible that some
men will should, for the moment, or till they hear better, think they see an advantage for themselves.
Let us see whether, it be possible that for a time for any
time long enough for the forming of a design affording any
the least provision of success, it be in the nature of the case possible that by a number of men
capable of making any advantage towards the accomplishment
of it, any it be morally possible — while it be
consistent with any observation or experience that any
such design should be entertained.
|
Identifier: | JB/137/224/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 137. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1819-12-15 |
17 or 2 - 19 or 4 |
||
|
137 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
|
224 |
radicalism not |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e4 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
46941 |
|||
