JB/044/039/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/044/039/001: 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/044/039/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/044/039/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p>1823. May 30</p>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<p>If <del>there had</del> it had been in the nature of a second<lb/>
 
Chamber so constituted to be of any use the <add><del><gap/></del>passing of the</add> liberticide<lb/>
 
law of <del>the</del> 1801 would have been the occasion for making<lb/>
 
exemplification and proof of its unfitness.  But <del>this</del> <add>in this or</add><lb/>
<del>this</del> any such Aristocratical body was it in the nature<lb/>
of the case that it should have put a veto <del><gap/> <gap/></del> on<lb/>
arrangement of any such tendency?  Was it not on the<lb/>
contrary a matter of course that, avowedly or covertly<lb/>
it should have been if not the original mover at any<lb/>
rate the warmest supporter.  <add><del><gap/> <gap/></del></add> In the President of that day<lb/>
the United States <unclear>saw</unclear> the originator of it:  and the <del>judgment</del><lb/>
punishment he sustained at the hands of the Public<lb/>
Opinion Tribunal is a matter of too universal a <unclear>notoriety</unclear><lb/>
to admitt of dispute.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 13:04, 13 October 2023

Click Here To Edit

1823. May 30

If there had it had been in the nature of a second
Chamber so constituted to be of any use the passing of the liberticide
law of the 1801 would have been the occasion for making
exemplification and proof of its unfitness. But this in this or
this any such Aristocratical body was it in the nature
of the case that it should have put a veto on
arrangement of any such tendency? Was it not on the
contrary a matter of course that, avowedly or covertly
it should have been if not the original mover at any
rate the warmest supporter. In the President of that day
the United States saw the originator of it: and the judgment
punishment he sustained at the hands of the Public
Opinion Tribunal is a matter of too universal a notoriety
to admitt of dispute.


Identifier: | JB/044/039/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 44.

Date_1

1823-05-30

Marginal Summary Numbering

21

Box

044

Main Headings

constitutional code

Folio number

039

Info in main headings field

constitut. code

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

c1 / e6 / f26

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

j whatman turkey mill 1822

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

jonathan blenman

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1822

Notes public

ID Number

13824

Box Contents

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