JB/124/022/002: 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/124/022/002: Difference between revisions

Ohsoldgirl (talk | contribs)
m Protected "JB/124/022/002": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:


<!-- header in pencil -->
<!-- header in pencil -->
<p>8 10 + <lb/><note><sic>Introd.</sic> Observations</note></p> <p><del>any further than he finds a convenience in making <add>it is found to be of use</add> </del><lb/><del>by any body which <gap/></del> <add>any farther than people</add> find a convenience in employing it.<lb/><del>use of the subdivision.</del></p> <p>Howsoever it may be <del>to the reader</del> with regard to<lb/>the Reader, the <del>utility</del> <add>convenience</add> of this double division to the<lb/>draughtsman is very considerable indeed.  The shorter,<lb/>and thence the more numerous the separate clauses, the<lb/>greater will be this convenience.</p> <!-- next section of text crossed though in ink --> <p>In the present <sic>Draught</sic>,<lb/><add>for instance</add> the total number of <del>Articles</del> clauses called Articles is<lb/>about 260, <del>which</del> tied up in 15 <add>Divisions called</add> Sections, including<lb/>the General Preamble. If each of these articles is<lb/><add>upon an average</add> of about 1/4 the length of what <del>at present in other</del><lb/>in general is called a Section, which I suppose may be<lb/>about the case, this will make the 260 <del>Sect</del> Articles<lb/>equivalent in bulk to <del>abou</del> between 60 &amp; 60 &amp; 70 of the ordinary<lb/>Sections which is about the number <del>of</del> in the existing<lb/>Penitentiary Act.</p><!-- end of crossed out section --> <p>In the <del>progress of the</del> <add>instance of the present</add> <sic>draught</sic> the<lb/>changes <del>which I have seen occasion to make in the</del><lb/><del>number <add>and order of the divisions</add> of the Articles</del> have been so <del>numerous</del> <add> frequent</add>,  <hi rend="superscript">ǂ</hi> <!-- at the bottom of the page -->that<lb/><del>without the</del> but for this expedient for <del>reducing discriminating</del> <add>reducing</add><lb/>the mechanical part of the labour, I don't know<lb/>when it would have been at and end.</p> <p>When the last hand has been put to the Bill, the double <hi rend="superscript">[+]</hi><lb/><note>division will in so<lb/>far have done its office,<lb/>and may then either<lb/>be allowed to stand, or<lb/> <del>be</del> if disallowed, the<lb/>Articles <del>may</del> <add>will be to</add> be <sic>stiled</sic><lb/>Sections, the present <del>Section</del><lb/>division into Sections<lb/>being expunged.</note></p> <!-- remaining text crossed through in ink --> <p>Number of the Articles<lb/>Articles about 260, Sections 15 | <del>Each</del> <add>Four <del>of each</del></add> articles <add>say</add> equal in bulk <del>say to 4 of an a</del> <add>to one <gap/> upon</add><lb/><del>ordinary portion</del> the ordinary plan: the 260 Articles equal<lb/>to <del>at</del> between 60 and 70 such Sections, which is about the<lb/>number in the present Penitentiary Act.</p> <p>|| Articles | Section|<lb/>|260 |15|</p><!-- end of crossed out section, line in ink across the page -->   
<p>8 10 + <lb/><note><sic>Introd.</sic> Observations</note></p> <p><del>any further than he finds a convenience in making <add>it is found to be of use</add> </del><lb/><del>by any body which <gap/></del> <add>any farther than people</add> find a convenience in employing it.<lb/><del>use of the subdivision.</del></p> <p>Howsoever it may be <del>to the Reader</del> with regard to<lb/>the Reader, the <del>utility</del> <add>convenience</add> of this double division to the<lb/>draughtsman is very considerable indeed.  The shorter,<lb/>and thence the more numerous the separate clauses, the<lb/>greater will be this convenience.</p> <!-- next section of text crossed though in ink --> <p>In the present <sic>Draught</sic>,<lb/><add>for instance</add> the total number of <del>Articles</del> clauses called Articles is<lb/>about 260, <del>which</del> tied up in 15 <add>Divisions called</add> Sections, including<lb/>the General Preamble. If each of these Articles is<lb/><add>upon an average</add> of about 1/4 the length of what <del>at present in other</del><lb/>in general is called a Section, which I suppose may be<lb/>about the case, this will make the 260 <del>Sect</del> Articles<lb/>equivalent in bulk to <del>about</del> between 60 &amp; 70 of the ordinary<lb/>Sections which is about the number <del>of</del> in the existing<lb/>Penitentiary Act.</p><!-- end of crossed out section --> <p>In the <del>progress of the</del> <add>instance of the present</add> <sic>draught</sic> the<lb/>changes <del>which I have seen occasion to make in the</del> <add>made in respect of the number and order of the divisions</add><lb/><del>number <add>and order of the divisions</add> of the Articles</del> have been so <del>numerous</del> <add> frequent</add>,  <hi rend="superscript">ǂ</hi> <!-- at the bottom of the page -->that<lb/><del>without the</del> but for this expedient for <del>reducing <unclear>discriminating</unclear></del> <add>reducing</add><lb/>the mechanical part of the labour, I don't know<lb/>when it would have been at an end.</p> <p>When the last hand has been put to the Bill, the double <hi rend="superscript">[+]</hi><lb/><note>[+] division will in so<lb/>far have done its office,<lb/>and may then either<lb/>be allowed to stand, or<lb/> <del>be</del> if disallowed, the<lb/>Articles <del>may</del> <add>will be to</add> be <sic>stiled</sic><lb/>Sections, the present <del>Section</del><lb/>division into Sections<lb/>being expunged.</note></p> <!-- remaining text crossed through in ink --> <p>Number of the Articles<lb/>Articles about 260, Sections 15 | <del>Each</del> <add>Four <del>of each</del></add> articles <add>(say)</add> equal in bulk <del>say to 1/4 of an a</del> <add>to one Section upon</add><lb/><del>ordinary portion</del> the ordinary plan: the 260 Articles equal<lb/>to <del>at</del> between 60 and 70 such Sections, which is about the<lb/>number in the present Penitentiary Act.</p> <p>|| Articles | Section|<lb/>|260 |15|</p><!-- end of crossed out section, line in ink across the page -->   
<p>Note><lb/>ǂ Sections 15:<del>distributed</del> <add>divided </add> into Articles, 260.<lb/><del>Where the Act</del</p>
<p>Note<lb/>ǂ Sections 15:<del>distributed</del> <add>divided </add> into Articles, 260.<lb/><del>Where the Act</del></p>




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

Latest revision as of 12:05, 30 April 2021

Click Here To Edit

8 10 +
Introd. Observations

any further than he finds a convenience in making it is found to be of use
by any body which any farther than people find a convenience in employing it.
use of the subdivision.

Howsoever it may be to the Reader with regard to
the Reader, the utility convenience of this double division to the
draughtsman is very considerable indeed. The shorter,
and thence the more numerous the separate clauses, the
greater will be this convenience.

In the present Draught,
for instance the total number of Articles clauses called Articles is
about 260, which tied up in 15 Divisions called Sections, including
the General Preamble. If each of these Articles is
upon an average of about 1/4 the length of what at present in other
in general is called a Section, which I suppose may be
about the case, this will make the 260 Sect Articles
equivalent in bulk to about between 60 & 70 of the ordinary
Sections which is about the number of in the existing
Penitentiary Act.

In the progress of the instance of the present draught the
changes which I have seen occasion to make in the made in respect of the number and order of the divisions
number and order of the divisions of the Articles have been so numerous frequent, ǂ that
without the but for this expedient for reducing discriminating reducing
the mechanical part of the labour, I don't know
when it would have been at an end.

When the last hand has been put to the Bill, the double [+]
[+] division will in so
far have done its office,
and may then either
be allowed to stand, or
be if disallowed, the
Articles may will be to be stiled
Sections, the present Section
division into Sections
being expunged.

Number of the Articles
Articles about 260, Sections 15 | Each Four of each articles (say) equal in bulk say to 1/4 of an a to one Section upon
ordinary portion the ordinary plan: the 260 Articles equal
to at between 60 and 70 such Sections, which is about the
number in the present Penitentiary Act.

|| Articles | Section|
|260 |15|

Note
ǂ Sections 15:distributed divided into Articles, 260.
Where the Act



Identifier: | JB/124/022/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 124.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

124

Main Headings

panopticon

Folio number

022

Info in main headings field

Image

002

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

2

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

d9 / d10

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

41711

Box Contents

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