★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
<head>23 July 1802 <lb/>N. S. Wales <lb/> 5</head> | <head>23 July 1802 <lb/>N. S. Wales <lb/> 5</head> | ||
<p>Of the non-existence of any adjudication bearing <lb/>directly upon the <del>pers</del> <add>question of the supposed</add> legislative power of the Crown over<lb/> Colonies, there can not be a more convincing <add>a more perfectly convincing <add>conclusive</add> proof <del>t</del> could not be wished for,</add> proof than <lb/>what is afforded by the use made <del>of</del> in <add>all</add> the argument <lb/>of Laterus' case, and the pains taken to extract <del>the</del> one <lb/>of the few drops of sense out of the ocean <add><gap/></add> of absurdity and | <p>Of the non-existence of any adjudication bearing <lb/>directly upon the <del>pers</del> <add>question of the supposed</add> legislative power of the Crown over<lb/> Colonies, there can not be a more convincing <add>a more perfectly convincing <add>conclusive</add> proof <del>t</del> could not be wished for,</add> proof than <lb/>what is afforded by the use made <del>of</del> in <add>all</add> the argument <lb/>of Laterus' case, and the pains taken to extract <del>the</del> one <lb/>of the few drops of sense out of the ocean <add><gap/></add> of absurdity and unreason re<lb/> of which Lord Coke's Report of that case is composed. <lb/>This was from the 7<hi rend='superscript'>th</hi> Volume <!-- space --> the term the <!-- space --> of James <lb/>1<hi rend='superscript'>st</hi>. Going back <del>to</del> <add>no</add> further than <del>the 8<hi rend='superscript'>th</hi></del> <add>two</add> Volumes <del>of the<lb/> same</del> and <!-- blank --> years, they might have found <hi rend='underline'>Clarks</hi> <add>the "Alban's</add><lb/> case above mentioned a case which though it certainly<lb/> does not apply so directly to Colonies obtained by conquest<lb/> as to Colonies obtained without conquest, might <lb/>have <del>for</del> afforded matter <add>not</add> unworthy <add>of</add> consideration with reference<lb/> to any sort of Colonies.</p> | ||
<p>It is after informing us that all infidels are the<lb/> Devil's subjects and as such <del>perpetu</del> enemies of ours, and<lb/> those perpetual ones between whom and us peace <add>there can be no peace</add> is not<lb/> possible; and that a Pagan can not <add>have or</add> maintain any action<lb/> "at all" it is "<hi rend='underline'>upon this</hi>" very "<hi rend='underline'>ground</hi>" that he builds <lb/>the "<hi rend='underline'>divinity</hi>" which he tells us then is "between a conquest<lb/> "of a Kingdom of a Christian King, and the conquest of a<lb/> "Kingdom of an infidel: for, if a King came to a Christian <lb/>"Kingdom by conquest, <hi rend='underline'>seeing that he hath <foreign>vita et unis <lb/> "potestatem</foreign></hi> he may at his pleasure alter and change<lb/> "the laws of that kingdom; but <sic>untill</sic> he doth make an <lb/>"alteration of their laws, the antient laws of that kingdom <lb/>"remain.. But if a Christian King should conquer<lb/> "a Kingdom of an infidel .. then <foreign>ipso facto</foreign> the laws of <add>the</add> | |||
</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
23 July 1802
N. S. Wales
5
Of the non-existence of any adjudication bearing
directly upon the pers question of the supposed legislative power of the Crown over
Colonies, there can not be a more convincing a more perfectly convincing <add>conclusive proof t could not be wished for,</add> proof than
what is afforded by the use made of in all the argument
of Laterus' case, and the pains taken to extract the one
of the few drops of sense out of the ocean of absurdity and unreason re
of which Lord Coke's Report of that case is composed.
This was from the 7th Volume the term the of James
1st. Going back to no further than the 8th two Volumes of the
same and years, they might have found Clarks the "Alban's
case above mentioned a case which though it certainly
does not apply so directly to Colonies obtained by conquest
as to Colonies obtained without conquest, might
have for afforded matter not unworthy of consideration with reference
to any sort of Colonies.
It is after informing us that all infidels are the
Devil's subjects and as such perpetu enemies of ours, and
those perpetual ones between whom and us peace there can be no peace is not
possible; and that a Pagan can not have or maintain any action
"at all" it is "upon this" very "ground" that he builds
the "divinity" which he tells us then is "between a conquest
"of a Kingdom of a Christian King, and the conquest of a
"Kingdom of an infidel: for, if a King came to a Christian
"Kingdom by conquest, seeing that he hath vita et unis
"potestatem he may at his pleasure alter and change
"the laws of that kingdom; but untill he doth make an
"alteration of their laws, the antient laws of that kingdom
"remain.. But if a Christian King should conquer
"a Kingdom of an infidel .. then ipso facto the laws of the
|
Identifier: | JB/116/139/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1802-07-24 |
1-3 |
||
|
116 |
panopticon versus new south wales |
||
|
139 |
n. s. wales |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e5 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
37672 |
|||
