JB/091/160/001: 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/091/160/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/091/160/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/091/160/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil -->Jan<hi rend="superscript">y</hi> 1806</p>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<p>In proportion as the people have crept from under the<lb/>
 
oppressions <add>thus</add> destined for them and heaped upon them by the jurisprudential<lb/>
 
partnership, it has been under favour of a division<lb/>
 
in the partnership itself:  The interest of the partnership<lb/>
is opposite to the interest of the people:  individuals in the<lb/>
partnership saw, or thought they saw, an interest in their own<lb/>
opposite to that of the firm.  The interest of the <add>Scotch <unclear>forensic</unclear></add> partnership,<lb/>
like that of the antient Roman, was that the rule of action<lb/>
should be kept buried in utter darkness:  The Scotch partnership<lb/>
contained <gap/>'s, who saw a <del>real on i</del><lb/>
an interest <add>an advantage</add>, real or imaginary, in bringing parts of it into <add>throwing upon parts of it a<lb/>
a sort of</add> light.  Histories of decisions pronounced in the Court of<lb/>
Sessions had from time to time been published <add>at Edinburgh</add> by different individuals.<lb/>
In a commercial view the speculation had or had<lb/>
not answered <add>succeeded</add> to the publishers.  Whether to the suitors this<lb/>
sort of publicity <add>publication</add>, had or had not been beneficial in any degree<lb/>
in the character of a substitute to the rule of action, and measure<lb/>
of obedience, to the professional lawyers of different ranks, especially<lb/>
to the faculty of Advocates, they <add>it</add> had been productive of<lb/>
no detriment, and of some convenience.  Here was matter to<lb/>
talk and write about:  here was <del><gap/></del> ammunition for the<lb/>
use of both sides.  <add>To the publishers</add> The notion spread, <del><gap/> that</del> and considering<lb/>
the narrowness of the market, not unlikely, when considered<lb/>
at our distance, to be true, true that it had not answered.  Hence<lb/>
a Salary to be offered out of some public fund, <del>found either</del><lb/>
payable of course to such <add>chosen</add> persons as by competent authority should<lb/>
be found <add>deemed</add> competent, found either <add>perhaps</add> a pretence, or <add>more probably</add> a just cause.<lb/>
Publication made in the name of the faculty of AdvocatesL  the Minute-taker selected by the<lb/>
faculty of Advocates:</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 14:49, 3 March 2023

Click Here To Edit

Jany 1806

In proportion as the people have crept from under the
oppressions thus destined for them and heaped upon them by the jurisprudential
partnership, it has been under favour of a division
in the partnership itself: The interest of the partnership
is opposite to the interest of the people: individuals in the
partnership saw, or thought they saw, an interest in their own
opposite to that of the firm. The interest of the Scotch forensic partnership,
like that of the antient Roman, was that the rule of action
should be kept buried in utter darkness: The Scotch partnership
contained 's, who saw a real on i
an interest an advantage, real or imaginary, in bringing parts of it into throwing upon parts of it a
a sort of
light. Histories of decisions pronounced in the Court of
Sessions had from time to time been published at Edinburgh by different individuals.
In a commercial view the speculation had or had
not answered succeeded to the publishers. Whether to the suitors this
sort of publicity publication, had or had not been beneficial in any degree
in the character of a substitute to the rule of action, and measure
of obedience, to the professional lawyers of different ranks, especially
to the faculty of Advocates, they it had been productive of
no detriment, and of some convenience. Here was matter to
talk and write about: here was ammunition for the
use of both sides. To the publishers The notion spread, that and considering
the narrowness of the market, not unlikely, when considered
at our distance, to be true, true that it had not answered. Hence
a Salary to be offered out of some public fund, found either
payable of course to such chosen persons as by competent authority should
be found deemed competent, found either perhaps a pretence, or more probably a just cause.
Publication made in the name of the faculty of AdvocatesL the Minute-taker selected by the
faculty of Advocates:


Identifier: | JB/091/160/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 91.

Date_1

1807-01

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

091

Main Headings

scotch reform

Folio number

160

Info in main headings field

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

c7

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

iping 1804

Marginals

Paper Producer

bernardino rivadavia

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1804

Notes public

ID Number

29156

Box Contents

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