★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1820 <sic>Feb.</sic> 23 <del>1</del><lb/>Radicalism not dangerous</head> <!-- marginal notes in pencil --> <p>XXVI §.6 <note><sic>ult<hi rend="superscript">o</hi></sic><lb/>III. Experience<lb/>II. Ireland</note><lb/>1 <note>§.6. Coincidence with Radicalism</note></p> <p>§.6. <del><gap/> or</del> Coincidence of its characters with those of radicalism</p> <p><note>1<lb/>Coincidence of Irish<lb/>Association with Radicalism.</note></p> <p><note><foreign><hi rend="underline">Perbatium</hi></foreign> <del><gap/></del> <add>Democratic</add><lb/><del><gap/></del> <add>ascendency</add> dangerous<lb/><foreign><hi rend="underline">Probandium</hi></foreign> none<lb/>Irish association was<lb/>Radicalism.</note></p> <p><note>Proposition has been<lb/>made in Radical<lb/>Reform Bill.</note></p> <p>The thing <add>practice</add> to be proved — and proved by <Add>from</add> the example here in question —<lb/>is <del>that</del> <!-- underline in pencil --><hi rend="underline">Radicalism is not dangerous</hi> What has been <sic>shewn</sic><lb/>already is that Democratic ascendency has nothing dangerous in it.<lb/><add>remains</add> the thing now to be <sic>shewn</sic> the virtual coincidence between democratic<lb/>ascendency as in that case established, and the state of <add>in respect of government</add><lb/>things that would be established, if <del>radica</del> a free and genuine<lb/>representation of the people in the Commons House were established<lb/>upon the principles of radical reform were established.</p> <p>In this there will be no <add>little</add> difficulty: preparation for it has<lb/>been already made in the view given of the elements of radicalism<lb/>in the parliamentary explanation to the Draught of a<lb/>Bill <add>for that purpose</add> so lately published. Let us take a view of them <del>in</del> <add>by</add> the<lb/><del>order</del> name and in the order in which they are there presented</p> <p><note>2<lb/>All the identity<lb/>reasonably to be looked<lb/>for is that behind<lb/>the leading features.<lb/>Between a state of<lb/>things exemplified<lb/>and as <sic>d<hi rend="superscript">o</hi></sic> <add>only</add> proposed<lb/>that exemplified being<lb/>without authority, that<lb/>proposed, by authority,<lb/><add>certain and</add> exact coincidence<lb/>can not be expected.</note></p> <p>Impossibilities must not here be looked for . . Between a<lb/>state of things one actually in existence, and a state of things<lb/><add>existing</add> only in imagination and proposed — between a state of<lb/>things established without authority <add>laws/legal reputation</add> — by other than the constituted<lb/>authorities, and a state of things as proposed to be<lb/>established by legal regulations. the creation of the constituted<lb/>authorities — <del>the</del> a coincidence in terms can not rationally<lb/>be expected. All that can reasonably be required <add>looked for</add> is that<lb/>between the elementary <add>essence/substance of</add> arrangements or leading features on the<lb/>one part and those of the others the coincidence shall <add>should</add><lb/>be found to have place.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1820 Feb. 23 1
Radicalism not dangerous
XXVI §.6 ulto
III. Experience
II. Ireland
1 §.6. Coincidence with Radicalism
§.6. or Coincidence of its characters with those of radicalism
1
Coincidence of Irish
Association with Radicalism.
Perbatium Democratic
ascendency dangerous
Probandium none
Irish association was
Radicalism.
Proposition has been
made in Radical
Reform Bill.
The thing practice to be proved — and proved by from the example here in question —
is that Radicalism is not dangerous What has been shewn
already is that Democratic ascendency has nothing dangerous in it.
remains the thing now to be shewn the virtual coincidence between democratic
ascendency as in that case established, and the state of in respect of government
things that would be established, if radica a free and genuine
representation of the people in the Commons House were established
upon the principles of radical reform were established.
In this there will be no little difficulty: preparation for it has
been already made in the view given of the elements of radicalism
in the parliamentary explanation to the Draught of a
Bill for that purpose so lately published. Let us take a view of them in by the
order name and in the order in which they are there presented
2
All the identity
reasonably to be looked
for is that behind
the leading features.
Between a state of
things exemplified
and as do only proposed
that exemplified being
without authority, that
proposed, by authority,
certain and exact coincidence
can not be expected.
Impossibilities must not here be looked for . . Between a
state of things one actually in existence, and a state of things
existing only in imagination and proposed — between a state of
things established without authority laws/legal reputation — by other than the constituted
authorities, and a state of things as proposed to be
established by legal regulations. the creation of the constituted
authorities — the a coincidence in terms can not rationally
be expected. All that can reasonably be required looked for is that
between the elementary essence/substance of arrangements or leading features on the
one part and those of the others the coincidence shall should
be found to have place.
|
Identifier: | JB/137/177/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 137. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1820-02-23 |
1-2 |
||
|
137 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
|
177 |
radicalism not dangerous |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e1 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
46894 |
|||
