JB/011/181/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/011/181/001: Difference between revisions

JMagnus (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/011/181/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/011/181/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><head>1826. March<lb/>
<head>1826. March</head>
J.B. to Sec<hi rend="superscript">y.</hi> Peel for subjects for dissection</head></p>
<head>J.B. to Sec. Peel for subjects for dissection</head>
<p>3. To obviate all apprehension that the applications<lb/>
<pb/>
will be treated with neglect, <del>insert</del> a clause,<lb/>
<p>3. To obviate all apprehension that the applications will be treated with neglect, <del><gap/></del> a clause, obliging the <del><unclear>Director</unclear></del> the proper functionary of the Hospital to keep a <add>Regular</add> Book, <del><unclear>registering</unclear></del> <add><gap/> <gap/> I <gap/>)</add> every such application, with the alleged names, abades and occupations of the applicants, and the day, <add>when made</add> <del><gap/></del>. And of his own accord, to give the applicants a certificate, containing a literal copy of the corresponding article in the register.
obliging the <del>Director</del> the proper functionary of the<lb/>
4. Some public print perhaps there may be in which notification should be given of every such death, <add>with an <gap/> <gap/> that <unclear>after</unclear> another <unclear>day</unclear> <gap/> number), no</add> <del>and of the day <gap/> which it happened, to the <gap/> that another day might be added, after which no</del> such application <del>should</del> <add>will</add> be received. 5. In another clause, <add>might be added,</add> recommendation or even injunction, not to perform such a <unclear>commination</unclear> on any patient in relation to whom any such application had been made, at a time when there was any other in whose instance no such application had been made. 6.<unclear>He</unclear> would be still better, and it is hoped would obviate all objection, if the permission could be confined <add>limited</add> altogether to the case when no such application shall have been made. but as to the probability that the number would, under that limitation be sufficient, the members of the Faculty would of course be to be consulted.</p>
Hospital to keep a <add>Regular</add> Book, <del>registering</del> <add>wherein shall be registered</add> every such<lb/>
 
application, with the alleged names, abodes and<lb/>
 
occupations of the applicants, and the day, <del>of application</del><add> when made</add>.<lb/>
 
And of his own accord, to give the applicants<lb/>
a certificate, containing a literal copy<lb/>
of the corresponding article in the register.</p>
<p>4. Some public print perhaps there may be in which<lb/>
notification should be given of every such death<lb/>
<del>and of the day on which it happened, to the intent</del> <add>with an instruction that after another day therefrom mentioned, no</add><lb/>
<del>that another day might be added, after which no</del><lb/>
such application <del>should</del> <add>will</add> be received.</p>
<p>5. In another <lb/>
clause, <add>might be added,</add> recommendation or even injunction, not<lb/>
to perform such examination on any patient<lb/>
in relation to whom any such application had<lb/>
been made, at a time when there was any other<lb/>
in whose instance no such application had been<lb/>
made.</p>
<p>6.  It would be still better, and it is hoped would<lb/>
obviate all objection, if the permission could be<lb/>
confined <add>limited</add> altogether to the case when no such<lb/>
application shall have been made. but as to the probability that the number would, under<lb/>
that limitation be sufficient, the members of<lb/>
the Faculty would of course be to be consulted.</p>
<p><add>Now as to <del>individual purpose</del> the feelings of relatives:</add>  Even at present the most sensitive sentimentalists<lb/>
do not object to the opening of the body of their relative<lb/>
for the purpose of investigating the cause of the<lb/>
disease.  Hence, <del>the</del> <add>might be taken a</add> distinction <del>might be taken</del>, and<lb/>
an examination completely public and pervading<lb/>
the whole body might be limited to the case of those<lb/>
<del>to whom</del> <add>in whose instance</add> no such application <del>sh<hi rend="superscript">d</hi></del> <add>shall</add> have been made.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 10:58, 23 July 2021

Click Here To Edit

1826. March
J.B. to Secy. Peel for subjects for dissection

3. To obviate all apprehension that the applications
will be treated with neglect, insert a clause,
obliging the Director the proper functionary of the
Hospital to keep a Regular Book, registering wherein shall be registered every such
application, with the alleged names, abodes and
occupations of the applicants, and the day, of application when made.
And of his own accord, to give the applicants
a certificate, containing a literal copy
of the corresponding article in the register.

4. Some public print perhaps there may be in which
notification should be given of every such death
and of the day on which it happened, to the intent with an instruction that after another day therefrom mentioned, no
that another day might be added, after which no
such application should will be received.

5. In another
clause, might be added, recommendation or even injunction, not
to perform such examination on any patient
in relation to whom any such application had
been made, at a time when there was any other
in whose instance no such application had been
made.

6. It would be still better, and it is hoped would
obviate all objection, if the permission could be
confined limited altogether to the case when no such
application shall have been made. but as to the probability that the number would, under
that limitation be sufficient, the members of
the Faculty would of course be to be consulted.

Now as to individual purpose the feelings of relatives: Even at present the most sensitive sentimentalists
do not object to the opening of the body of their relative
for the purpose of investigating the cause of the
disease. Hence, the might be taken a distinction might be taken, and
an examination completely public and pervading
the whole body might be limited to the case of those
to whom in whose instance no such application shd shall have been made.


Identifier: | JB/011/181/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 11.

Date_1

1826-03

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

011

Main Headings

law amendment

Folio number

181

Info in main headings field

jb to secy peel for subjects for dissection

Image

001

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

d2 / e2

Penner

john flowerdew colls

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

jeremy bentham

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

3878

Box Contents

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