JB/121/170/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/121/170/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'[{{fullurl:JB/121/170/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'[{{fullurl:JB/121/170/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil -->2 March 1802<lb/>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>&sect; I.  Fake Report</head></p>
 
<p>Is it credible my Lord will <add>would</add>  either or both<lb/>
<gap/> give credit with your Lordship were<lb/>
they <del><gap/></del> to portend that this phenomenon – a<lb/>
thing <add>sight</add> till now unknown int he annals of<lb/>
office, was a matter of pure accident – or<lb/>
honest negligence? that it had any thing<lb/>
less than <del>the f</del> horror and the sense of necessity<lb/>
for its cause? – No, none.  Look at the<lb/>
whole complexion of the case from the beginning<lb/>
to end, and say my Lord whether<lb/>
it be in the nature of the case, that an<lb/>
omission like this should be the result of<lb/>
accident?</p>
<p>My Lord there was not merely<lb/>
the flagrant <add>notorious</add> falsity of the facts, there was<lb/>
not merely the conspicuous business of the<lb/>
contrivance to drive <add>repel</add> the guilty hand from<lb/>
the equivocating and shaking scrawl –<lb/>
Your Lordship has seen in a former instance<lb/>
what <gap/> <gap/> could under the<lb/>
shelter of impunity obtain an official signature<lb/>
– there was the eye of M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> Nepean<lb/>
to encounter by any one who should have<lb/>
dared to set his name to it at that time.</p>




<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}

Revision as of 00:49, 1 March 2022

'Click Here To Edit

2 March 1802
§ I. Fake Report

Is it credible my Lord will would either or both
give credit with your Lordship were
they to portend that this phenomenon – a
thing sight till now unknown int he annals of
office, was a matter of pure accident – or
honest negligence? that it had any thing
less than the f horror and the sense of necessity
for its cause? – No, none. Look at the
whole complexion of the case from the beginning
to end, and say my Lord whether
it be in the nature of the case, that an
omission like this should be the result of
accident?

My Lord there was not merely
the flagrant notorious falsity of the facts, there was
not merely the conspicuous business of the
contrivance to drive repel the guilty hand from
the equivocating and shaking scrawl –
Your Lordship has seen in a former instance
what could under the
shelter of impunity obtain an official signature
– there was the eye of Mr Nepean
to encounter by any one who should have
dared to set his name to it at that time.



Identifier: | JB/121/170/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 121.

Date_1

1802-03-02

Marginal Summary Numbering

9

Box

121

Main Headings

Panopticon

Folio number

170

Info in main headings field

False Report

Image

001

Titles

Category

Text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

Recto"Recto" is not in the list (recto, verso) of allowed values for the "Rectoverso" property.

Page Numbering

D8

Penner

Watermarks

Marginals

Jeremy Bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

001

Box Contents

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