JB/071/189/002

Click Here To Edit

2. C Of Culpable Insolvency.

2. 2 — Rashness ab initio Where he represented himself as having a probable chance upon
grounds which eventually proved false fallacious, and which he had no good reason
at the time to trust to, but which however he did trust to in effect and think them
probable. In this case the debt may be said to have been contracted
rashly. In this case, we see, it is his understanding that was in fault.

3. 3 — Through Prodigality. Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
prodigality. In this case it is his Will that was in fault.

4. 4 — Through Mismanagment. Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
mismanagement. In this case it was his Understanding that
was immediately in fault.

The case of Mis-management may be resolved into three
others. 1. Indolence. 2. Incapacity. And 3. Rashness or Presumption.
Indolence is the fault of the Will . Incapacity is more immediately
the fault of the Understanding. Rashness or Presumption seems to be is the
fault of the understanding and of the Will together.

5. 5 — Litigiousness. Where he became afterwards unwilling to pay, meaning to defer payment

Note:

fraudulent Insolvlency, but Sharping. This circumstance marks out the
limits between fraudulent Insolvency and Sharping.

Identifier: | JB/071/189/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 71.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering	not numbered
Box	071	Main Headings	penal code
Folio number	189	Info in main headings field	of culpable insolvency
Image	002	Titles
Category	copy/fair copy sheet	Number of Pages	4
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f1 / f2 / f3 / f4
Penner		Watermarks	[[watermarks::myears [lion with crown motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer	caroline fox
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	23592
Box Contents