★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
m Protected "JB/091/033/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)) |
Auto approved |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/091/033/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/091/033/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<p><!-- pencil -->31 July 1806<lb/> | |||
<!-- pencil --><head>Scotch Reform</head></p> | |||
<p>But my Lord in proportion as justice and prudence concur<lb/> | |||
in prescribing the bestowing to them in the character of parties<lb/> | |||
<add>and counsel</add> <hi rend="underline">par <unclear>intereste</unclear> <gap/></hi> <del>precedence</del> <add>parties speaking</add> both concurr in forbidding<lb/> | |||
the bestowing to them in the character of Counsellors or<lb/> | |||
Judges. This won't do. I am decidedly against it: it<lb/> | |||
will produce more mischiefs than it is possible to foresee –<lb/> | |||
it won't <unclear>quadrate</unclear> with the rest of the <unclear>pleas</unclear> – it is unprecedented<lb/> | |||
theoretical, speculative – wild visionary romantic – impractical<lb/> | |||
<add>specious but too good for practice</add> these generalities never thrown out but in default of particulars:<lb/> | |||
by what rule should they be interpreted, if at all worth be<lb/> | |||
having to? By the rule of contraries. In this way indeed<lb/> | |||
they may be of use, and no small use, for of two<lb/> | |||
things they are good <add>these common place objections may be set down as conclusive tolerably pretty conclusive</add> evidence: the wish <add>and the inability</add> to find appropriate<lb/> | |||
<del>and</del> substantial objections, objections that ought to weigh<lb/> | |||
anything against the measure.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
31 July 1806
Scotch Reform
But my Lord in proportion as justice and prudence concur
in prescribing the bestowing to them in the character of parties
and counsel par intereste precedence parties speaking both concurr in forbidding
the bestowing to them in the character of Counsellors or
Judges. This won't do. I am decidedly against it: it
will produce more mischiefs than it is possible to foresee –
it won't quadrate with the rest of the pleas – it is unprecedented
theoretical, speculative – wild visionary romantic – impractical
specious but too good for practice these generalities never thrown out but in default of particulars:
by what rule should they be interpreted, if at all worth be
having to? By the rule of contraries. In this way indeed
they may be of use, and no small use, for of two
things they are good these common place objections may be set down as conclusive tolerably pretty conclusive evidence: the wish and the inability to find appropriate
and substantial objections, objections that ought to weigh
anything against the measure.
Identifier: | JB/091/033/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 91. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1806-07-31 |
|||
091 |
scotch reform |
||
033 |
scotch reform |
||
001 |
|||
text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
c3 |
||
jeremy bentham |
iping 1804 |
||
bernardino rivadavia |
|||
1804 |
|||
29029 |
|||