JB/119/188/003: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/119/188/003: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
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 -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>3<lb/>
 
Reasons</head>
 
<note>8<lb/>
Nor reason for expecting<lb/>
better price from a<lb/>
second Jury then then from<lb/>
the first&#x2014;</note><lb/>
<p>Were it even thought fit to force upon him the favour he<lb/>
has refused, would the expedient of a valuation <hi rend="underline">de</hi> <hi rend="underline">novo</hi> present a<lb/>
prospect of so much as answer<del>r</del>ing that purpose? So far from it,<lb/>
that if there were any room for impeaching the verdict of the Jury,<lb/>
it would rather be on the ground of having gone beyond the time's<lb/>
price than fallen short of it. £6,000 only wad all that the Supervisors,<lb/>
men as devoid of personal interest as the Jury could be,<lb/>
had looked upon themselves as warranted to consider as the full<lb/>
value. To this £6,000 that Jury made an addition of £600: no<lb/>
less than 10 per cent. What ground to suppose that the disposition<lb/>
of another Jury could be still more favourable?</p>
<note>9<lb/>
Valuation <hi rend="underline">de</hi> <hi rend="underline">novo</hi> contented<lb/>
against, only for<lb/>
the sake of propriety<lb/>
and certainty.</note><lb/>
<p>Accordingly for my own part, I know not that<lb/>
I have any thing more to fear from a valuation <hi rend="underline">de</hi> <hi rend="underline">novo</hi> than to<lb/>
hope for it. If I object to it, it is only because it does not seem<lb/>
to me to be the proper course, &amp; because I prefer certainty to cross<lb/>
&amp; pile.</p>
<p>Whether the valuation <hi rend="underline">de</hi> <hi rend="underline">novo</hi> be adopted, or<lb/>
the assessment of a supplemental price, the prompt possession<lb/>
proposed, is what the proprietors can receive no possible<lb/>
prejudice from. In addition to the £6,600, the land<lb/>
itself together with whatever money will have been laid out<lb/>
upon it is made security for the value of the land.</p>


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

Latest revision as of 14:11, 27 November 2020

Click Here To Edit

3
Reasons
8
Nor reason for expecting
better price from a
second Jury then then from
the first—

Were it even thought fit to force upon him the favour he
has refused, would the expedient of a valuation de novo present a
prospect of so much as answerring that purpose? So far from it,
that if there were any room for impeaching the verdict of the Jury,
it would rather be on the ground of having gone beyond the time's
price than fallen short of it. £6,000 only wad all that the Supervisors,
men as devoid of personal interest as the Jury could be,
had looked upon themselves as warranted to consider as the full
value. To this £6,000 that Jury made an addition of £600: no
less than 10 per cent. What ground to suppose that the disposition
of another Jury could be still more favourable?

9
Valuation de novo contented
against, only for
the sake of propriety
and certainty.

Accordingly for my own part, I know not that
I have any thing more to fear from a valuation de novo than to
hope for it. If I object to it, it is only because it does not seem
to me to be the proper course, & because I prefer certainty to cross
& pile.

Whether the valuation de novo be adopted, or
the assessment of a supplemental price, the prompt possession
proposed, is what the proprietors can receive no possible
prejudice from. In addition to the £6,600, the land
itself together with whatever money will have been laid out
upon it is made security for the value of the land.



Identifier: | JB/119/188/003"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 119.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

1-9

Box

119

Main Headings

panopticon

Folio number

188

Info in main headings field

panopticon bill

Image

003

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f1 / f2 / f3 /

Penner

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

39699

Box Contents

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