★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>30 Jan<hi rend="superscript">y</hi> 1809</head> | |||
<head>Peines<head> | |||
<p>Two other objects which on this same occasion appear<lb/> | |||
to have been <add>stood</add> confounded in his mind are the same<lb/> | |||
two objects which at the outset <del>he</del> it had been necessary<lb/> | |||
for him to distinguish and which at that period he<lb/> | |||
accordingly did not distinguish <del>.viz</del>. the two parts of <add>antagonizing parts (I mean)</add><lb/> | |||
which his <del><gap/></del> considered his supposed system of "<hi rend="underline">policy</hi>"<lb/> | |||
as composed, viz. the "<unclear>Laws</unclear>" themselves viz. | |||
the <hi rend="underline">statutes</hi><lb/> | |||
themselves, and the mode in which they were administered:<lb/> <add>administered</add> i.e. in nine instances out of ten, defeated<lb/> | |||
by those when provision, <add>according to the constitution</add> it was and is to execute<lb/> | |||
them. Here these two<add>Here in <add>the</add> <add>conclusion</add> two objects at first so carefully<lb/> | |||
distinguished, become confounded: the quality of <hi rend="underline">"lenity"</hi> <lb/> | |||
which if ascribable to <del><gap/></del> either part of the system<lb/> | |||
will<add>is</add> be ascribable to the administration, i.e. to<lb/> | |||
the <hi rend="underline">non-execution</hi> of these "<hi rend="underline">sanguinary</hi>" laws, is ascribed<lb/> | |||
by him to these sanguinary laws themselves:<lb/> | |||
and lenity being in his conception or at least in<lb/> | |||
his expression a quality indisputably inherent<lb/> | |||
in these sanguinary law viz. in virtue of their<lb/> sanguinariness, what he has to do with <add>all that running for him </add> it is to<lb/> | |||
"<hi rend="underline">vindicate</hi>" it: i.e. vindicate it from the charge of<lb/> | |||
being excessive.</p> | |||
<p>But in fact (what by this time he had forgotten <add>it escaped him</add>) <lb/> | |||
the charge which by which he sued at the outset<add>the statement<add>supposition</add> <add>made by him</add> he stood<lb/> | |||
engaged to prove in relation to "the <hi rend="underline">laws</hi>' in question, was<add>is</add><lb/> | |||
the charge of "<hi rend="underline">cruelty</hi>': and this charge, after a momentary)<lb/> | |||
nod, during which he was dreaming that "<hi rend="underline">Comity</hi>", not "cruelty"-)<lb/> | |||
was the charge he had to vindicate them against, he <gap/>once <note>once more, as soon as he is awake and by the argument which he had <unclear>chalked</unclear> out to himself undertakes to vindicate against it, if not the laws themselves<add>when taken in the abstract, what is to pay practical result comes to the same thing,</add> the supposed system of <unclear>voting</unclear> of which they are a supposed part.</note></p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
30 Jany 1809
<head>Peines<head>
Two other objects which on this same occasion appear
to have been stood confounded in his mind are the same
two objects which at the outset he it had been necessary
for him to distinguish and which at that period he
accordingly did not distinguish .viz. the two parts of antagonizing parts (I mean)
which his considered his supposed system of "policy"
as composed, viz. the "Laws" themselves viz.
the statutes
themselves, and the mode in which they were administered:
administered i.e. in nine instances out of ten, defeated
by those when provision, according to the constitution it was and is to execute
them. Here these twoHere in <add>the conclusion two objects at first so carefully
distinguished, become confounded: the quality of "lenity"
which if ascribable to either part of the system
willis be ascribable to the administration, i.e. to
the non-execution of these "sanguinary" laws, is ascribed
by him to these sanguinary laws themselves:
and lenity being in his conception or at least in
his expression a quality indisputably inherent
in these sanguinary law viz. in virtue of their
sanguinariness, what he has to do with all that running for him it is to
"vindicate" it: i.e. vindicate it from the charge of
being excessive.
But in fact (what by this time he had forgotten it escaped him)
the charge which by which he sued at the outsetthe statement<add>supposition made by him he stood
engaged to prove in relation to "the laws' in question, wasis
the charge of "cruelty': and this charge, after a momentary)
nod, during which he was dreaming that "Comity", not "cruelty"-)
was the charge he had to vindicate them against, he once once more, as soon as he is awake and by the argument which he had chalked out to himself undertakes to vindicate against it, if not the laws themselveswhen taken in the abstract, what is to pay practical result comes to the same thing, the supposed system of voting of which they are a supposed part.
|
Identifier: | JB/107/233/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 107. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1809-01-30 |
|||
|
107 |
law versus arbitrary power (a hatchet for dr paley's net) |
||
|
233 |
peines |
||
|
001 |
note (a) ? |
||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e32 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
"quere whether to insert this sheet?" |
35224 |
||
