★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
<head>1819 <sic>Oct.</sic> + | <head>1819 <sic>Oct.</sic> 3 +</head> <!-- sub heading, note and marginal notes in pencil --> <p><note>1<hi rend="superscript">o</hi></note><lb/> Radicalism not dangerous <note>Beginning</note><lb/>1</p> <p>This of little use superseded<lb/> by <unclear>Positive</unclear> Explanation</p> <p>Every man figures to himself a <hi rend="underline">Cacotopia</hi>: lest exploring this<lb/>Abuse bestowed on all Stockholders, to warrant plundering them is as well<lb/>beloved as in all of the house of Brown or Smith. Highway men pick a<lb/><del><gap/></del> quarrel with the passengers, to <unclear>stimulate</unclear> themselves</p> <p>21. <sic>Oct.</sic> 1819 In <sic>Morn Chron</sic>, by <sic>Secr.<hi rend="superscript">y</hi></sic> Thistlewood disclosures of designs<lb/>against property.</p> <p>Radicalism not dangerous: <del>is</del><lb/>Despotism dangerous.</p> <p><del>The <sic>Undangerousness</sic> of Radical Reform <sic>shewn</sic> from<lb/>theory and experience</del></p> <p><note>1<lb/><add>Current</add> Arguments against<lb/>radical reform are<lb/>1. Vague vilification<lb/>2 Assumption of the<lb/>dangerousness — destruction<lb/>of property the<lb/>probable consequence,<lb/>destruction, viz. by<lb/>new division</note></p> <p>When radical reform is spoken of by its adversaries<lb/>what is said against it seems referable to one<lb/>or other of these two causes <add>forms</add> : 1. Vague vilification;<lb/>2. Assumption that <del>the ca</del> in some way or other the<lb/>destruction of society would be the consequence. When<lb/>this latter is the course either the assumption rests<lb/>there — rich in words as general as these — or if<lb/>it <del>goes</del> descends any further into particulars — the<lb/>destruction of property namely by <add>a new</add> division of the<lb/>aggregate mass of the subject matters of property<lb/>amongst a new set of proprietors — thence the <unclear>speculation</unclear><lb/>of the existing set of proprietors is the result brought<lb/>to view.</p> <p><note>2<lb/>This examined<lb/>with only tangible<lb/>argument</note></p> <p>This lastmentioned assumption — the assumption <add>indication</add><lb/>of evil in this shape in the character of a consequence<lb/>which in the event in question would <del>natur</del> necessarily<lb/>or at the least probably ensue — this lastmentioned<lb/>argument — as being the only objection that has ever<lb/>been presented in the shape of a tangible one, I<lb/>rejoice to <del>l</del> meet with. With this <add>should it be a</add> ground to go upon [+] <note>[+] should I succeed in<lb/>my endeavours to do<lb/>justice to the argument</note> I <add>cannot but</add> flatter<lb/>myself with the hope of affording satisfaction to anti reformists <add><unclear>reversing</unclear> the only act as to reform in the <unclear>ages</unclear></add><lb/><add>in</add><lb/><!-- continues in margin --> in great numbers<lb/>and in a word of<lb/><unclear>at the hand in</unclear></p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1819 Oct. 3 +
1o
Radicalism not dangerous Beginning
1
This of little use superseded
by Positive Explanation
Every man figures to himself a Cacotopia: lest exploring this
Abuse bestowed on all Stockholders, to warrant plundering them is as well
beloved as in all of the house of Brown or Smith. Highway men pick a
quarrel with the passengers, to stimulate themselves
21. Oct. 1819 In Morn Chron, by Secr.y Thistlewood disclosures of designs
against property.
Radicalism not dangerous: is
Despotism dangerous.
The Undangerousness of Radical Reform shewn from
theory and experience
1
Current Arguments against
radical reform are
1. Vague vilification
2 Assumption of the
dangerousness — destruction
of property the
probable consequence,
destruction, viz. by
new division
When radical reform is spoken of by its adversaries
what is said against it seems referable to one
or other of these two causes forms : 1. Vague vilification;
2. Assumption that the ca in some way or other the
destruction of society would be the consequence. When
this latter is the course either the assumption rests
there — rich in words as general as these — or if
it goes descends any further into particulars — the
destruction of property namely by a new division of the
aggregate mass of the subject matters of property
amongst a new set of proprietors — thence the speculation
of the existing set of proprietors is the result brought
to view.
2
This examined
with only tangible
argument
This lastmentioned assumption — the assumption indication
of evil in this shape in the character of a consequence
which in the event in question would natur necessarily
or at the least probably ensue — this lastmentioned
argument — as being the only objection that has ever
been presented in the shape of a tangible one, I
rejoice to l meet with. With this should it be a ground to go upon [+] [+] should I succeed in
my endeavours to do
justice to the argument I cannot but flatter
myself with the hope of affording satisfaction to anti reformists reversing the only act as to reform in the ages
in
in great numbers
and in a word of
at the hand in
|
Identifier: | JB/137/219/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 137. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1819-10-03 |
1-2 |
||
|
137 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
|
219 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
|
001 |
radicalism not dangerous: or / despotism dangerous |
||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e1 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
[[notes_public::"this of little use. superseded by […?] explanation" [note in bentham's hand]]] |
46936 |
||
