★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/137/094/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/137/094/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
Line 7: | Line 6: | ||
<note>1. <gap/> &c<lb/> | <note>1. <gap/> &c<lb/> | ||
§.2. Speeches < | §.2. Speeches July/Nov<sic>r</sic> 1819<lb/> | ||
11 or 1<lb/> | 11 or 1<lb/> | ||
Cher<gap/> <gap/><lb/> | Cher<gap/> <gap/><lb/> | ||
1. In July Speech<lb/> | 1. In July Speech<lb/> | ||
subversion of the <gap/><lb/> | |||
2. In November Speech<lb/> | 2. In November Speech<lb/> | ||
subversion of rights<lb/> | subversion of rights<lb/> | ||
of property.<lb/> | of property.<lb/> | ||
</note><lb/> | </note> | ||
<p>Taking the two speeches together, here then are two<lb/> | |||
<del>ends</del> evil designs <add><del>intentions</del></add> charged: charged in the same class of person,<lb/> | |||
<add>namely <del>the</del>/all</add> <add>reformists: meaning or at the least including all radical reformists. </add></p> | |||
<p>In the July Speech the design is the <hi rend="underline">subversion of the</hi> <lb/> | |||
<hi rend="underline">"Constitution: that</hi> design and no other.</p> | |||
<p>In the November Speech it is the subversion of <lb/> | |||
"the rights of property."</p> | |||
<note>12 or 2<lb/> | <note>12 or 2<lb/> | ||
Subversion of the | Subversion of the<lb/> | ||
Constitution has no<lb/> | Constitution has no<lb/> | ||
precise meaning:<lb/> | precise meaning:<lb/> | ||
Line 27: | Line 36: | ||
speeches</note><lb/> | speeches</note><lb/> | ||
<p>Of The design first charged the description given<lb/> | |||
has no determinate meaning. Accordingly no mention<lb/> | |||
would have law been made of it, but for the <add>intimate</add> connection<lb/> | |||
between the <add><del><gap/></del></add> speech by which this accusation is conveyed<lb/> | |||
and the <add>other</add> speech by which the other accusation is conveyed.</p> | |||
<note>13 or 3<lb/> | <note>13 or 3<lb/> | ||
Line 33: | Line 47: | ||
to subversive of<lb/> | to subversive of<lb/> | ||
rights of property<lb/> | rights of property<lb/> | ||
denial of <add>preponderant</add> evil in<lb/> | |||
every shape | every shape — defence<lb/> | ||
otherwise insufficient</note> | otherwise insufficient</note> | ||
<p>In defending the design <add>in question</add> the radicalists against<lb/> | |||
the accusations<add>imputation</add> that have <add>they</add> been cast upon it, it <add>was</add> seemed<lb/> | |||
not sufficient to defend it against the imputation of a<lb/> | |||
<del><gap/></del> tendency to produce evil in <del>that</del> the particular shape<lb/> | |||
designated by the words "the subversion of the rights of property.<lb/> | |||
For supposing that, although it <gap/> clear of<lb/> | |||
that imputation, it <gap/> not done if the imputation of<lb/> | |||
producing preponderant evil in some other shape or<lb/> | |||
shapes, in this supposition it would still remain indefensible.</p> | |||
<p><del>It therefore seems</del> To the denial of its tendency<lb/> | |||
to produce evil in that particular shape it therefore<lb/> | |||
seemed necessary to prefer a denial of its tendency to<lb/> | |||
produce <hi rend="underline">preponderant</hi> evil in <hi rend="underline">any</hi> shape.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
1819 Dec. 21 Radicalism not dangerous
1. &c
§.2. Speeches July/Novr 1819
11 or 1
Cher
1. In July Speech
subversion of the
2. In November Speech
subversion of rights
of property.
Taking the two speeches together, here then are two
ends evil designs intentions charged: charged in the same class of person,
namely the/all reformists: meaning or at the least including all radical reformists.
In the July Speech the design is the subversion of the
"Constitution: that design and no other.
In the November Speech it is the subversion of
"the rights of property."
12 or 2
Subversion of the
Constitution has no
precise meaning:
would not have been
mentioned but for
the identity of the persons
designated in the two
speeches
Of The design first charged the description given
has no determinate meaning. Accordingly no mention
would have law been made of it, but for the intimate connection
between the speech by which this accusation is conveyed
and the other speech by which the other accusation is conveyed.
13 or 3
In the defence found
necessary to add
to subversive of
rights of property
denial of preponderant evil in
every shape — defence
otherwise insufficient
In defending the design in question the radicalists against
the accusationsimputation that have they been cast upon it, it was seemed
not sufficient to defend it against the imputation of a
tendency to produce evil in that the particular shape
designated by the words "the subversion of the rights of property.
For supposing that, although it clear of
that imputation, it not done if the imputation of
producing preponderant evil in some other shape or
shapes, in this supposition it would still remain indefensible.
It therefore seems To the denial of its tendency
to produce evil in that particular shape it therefore
seemed necessary to prefer a denial of its tendency to
produce preponderant evil in any shape.
Identifier: | JB/137/094/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 137. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1819-12-21 |
11 or 1 - 13 or 3 |
||
137 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
094 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
001 |
|||
text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
c1 / e4 |
||
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::[prince of wales feathers] i&m 1818]] |
||
arthur wellesley, duke of wellington |
|||
1818 |
|||
46811 |
|||