JB/109/170/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/109/170/001: Difference between revisions

RyanGilkes (talk | contribs)
m Protected "JB/109/170/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))
RyanGilkes (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 45: Line 45:


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

Revision as of 12:58, 14 February 2021

Click Here To Edit

(9)

same exertion had been made in the county of
Galway, as in the counties of Clare and Mayo by
the resident Gentry, the disorders would have
been checked in the first instance. In support of
that opinion and of the necessity for such exertion,
the Right Hon. Gentlemen quoted at considerable
length, the charge of Judge Bailey, who
went to try the Ribbon—men in Galway, and who
strongly reprobated the conduct of those who conceived
that they should save their lives and
property by a supineness to and a leaning to
the mob. From this censure it was, but just
utterly to exempt the Hon. Mover of the proposition
before the House, as well as several other
Hon. Gentlemen. To the charge therefore of being
careless as to the future tranquillity of
Ireland he could not plead guilty. He had an
unfeigned respect for many of those who differed
from him in opinion on the subject, but he
must put it to their good sense and feeling seriously
to consider on what principle the Government
of Ireland ought to be conducted.
Was it not important to ask when the. system
which had so long prevailed was to end? Was
it not important to determine what should
be the limit to the system of extraordinary
measures? If a modified Insurrection Act were
adopted to—day, why might not a complete Insurrection
Act be adopted a year hence? Why
might it not be proposed to abolish the habeas
corpus? He appeared to those who were conversant
with the history of Ireland, whether
they did not in their conscience believe that
the greater part of evils under which Ireland
now laboured were attributable to the system
which had been pursued for two centuries?

The case of Ireland had always been considered
as an excepted case. Thais had been the
unvaried



Identifier: | JB/109/170/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 109.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

109

Main Headings

Parliamentary Reform

Folio number

170

Info in main headings field

Image

001

Titles

Category

Collectanea

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

C9

Penner

Watermarks

C WILMOTT 1819

Marginals

Paper Producer

Andreas Louriottis

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1819

Notes public

ID Number

35825

Box Contents

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