★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/116/269/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/116/269/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
''This | <head>The TRUE BASTILE: shewing the <hi rend='underline'>outrages</hi> <hi rend='superscript'>(a)</hi> offered to Law, Justice <!-- torn page, missing words --> by M<hi rend='superscript'>r</hi> Pitt and his Associates in the foundation and management of the<lb/> | ||
penal colony of NEW SOUTH WALES: by Jeremy Bentham of Lincoln's Inn Esquire Barrister at Law <hi rend='superscript'>(b)</hi>, Marginal <add>contents</add> in two Sheets. Sheet 1. </head> | |||
<del>III. Non-existence proved</del> | |||
<p><head>43</head> | |||
3. The sort of affirmance<lb/> | |||
it gives in the case<lb/> | |||
of conquered colonies,<lb/> | |||
applies not to New<lb/> | |||
South Wales. </p> | |||
<head>44</head> | |||
<p>Proof of the above<lb/> | |||
propositions.<lb/> | |||
1. L<hi rend='superscript'>d</hi> Coke's <hi rend='underline'>dictum</hi><lb/> | |||
in Calvin's case <add>A<hi rend='superscript'>o</hi></add> 1608.<lb/> | |||
2. Yorke & Wearge opinion<lb/> | |||
on the Jamaica case<lb/> | |||
in 1722.</p> | |||
<head>45</head> | |||
<p>The <hi rend='underline'>dictum</hi> in Calvin's<lb/> | |||
case, as cleaned of<lb/> | |||
<add>its absurdities</add> by L<hi rend='superscript'>d</hi> Mansfield.</p> | |||
<head>46</head> | |||
<p>Opinion of Yorke and<lb/> | |||
Wearge as cited by him.</p> | |||
<head>47.</head> | |||
<p>It <hi rend='underline'>negatives</hi> the right<lb/> | |||
of the King alone in<lb/> | |||
any but a Colony<lb/> | |||
obtained by <hi rend='underline'>conquest</hi>.</p> | |||
<head>48.</head> | |||
<p>Upon the whole the<lb/> | |||
King's right to legislate<lb/> | |||
without Parliament<lb/> | |||
is negatived as<lb/> | |||
to Colonies <hi rend='underline'>not</hi> acquired<lb/> | |||
by conquest, by the<lb/> | |||
S<hi rend='superscript'><hi rend='underline'>t</hi></hi> Albans case: <add>(<unclear>supra</unclear> 10)</add> as<lb/> | |||
to <hi rend='underline'>conquered</hi> Colonies<lb/> | |||
by that and by the<lb/> | |||
<hi rend='underline'>Bill of Rights</hi> art.<lb/> | |||
4 & 6.</p> | |||
<head>49.</head> | |||
<p>Similar opinion maintained<lb/> | |||
by George Grenville,<lb/> | |||
according to<lb/> | |||
Edmund Burke.</p> | |||
<head>50</head> | |||
<p>Had the <add>proper</add> Colonization<lb/> | |||
powers been granted<lb/> | |||
from the first by<lb/> | |||
Parliament, the<lb/> | |||
American war<lb/> | |||
would probably have<lb/> | |||
been saved.</p> | |||
<head>51</head> | |||
<p>The S<hi rend='superscript'>t</hi> Albans case,<lb/> | |||
saying nothing of<lb/> | |||
Colonies <add>by name</add> was never<lb/> | |||
applied to them<lb/> | |||
by lawyers.<lb/> | |||
[This was an attempt<lb/> | |||
of the Crown, with the consent<lb/> | |||
of <unclear>certain</unclear> inhabitants<lb/> | |||
of S<hi rend='superscript'>t</hi> Alban's, to<lb/> | |||
legislate without Parliament<lb/> | |||
over S<hi rend='superscript'>t</hi> Alban's.]</p><pb/> | |||
The TRUE BASTILE: shewing the outrages (a) offered to Law, Justice by Mr Pitt and his Associates in the foundation and management of the
penal colony of NEW SOUTH WALES: by Jeremy Bentham of Lincoln's Inn Esquire Barrister at Law (b), Marginal contents in two Sheets. Sheet 1.
III. Non-existence proved
43
3. The sort of affirmance
it gives in the case
of conquered colonies,
applies not to New
South Wales.
44
Proof of the above
propositions.
1. Ld Coke's dictum
in Calvin's case Ao 1608.
2. Yorke & Wearge opinion
on the Jamaica case
in 1722.
45
The dictum in Calvin's
case, as cleaned of
its absurdities by Ld Mansfield.
46
Opinion of Yorke and
Wearge as cited by him.
47.
It negatives the right
of the King alone in
any but a Colony
obtained by conquest.
48.
Upon the whole the
King's right to legislate
without Parliament
is negatived as
to Colonies not acquired
by conquest, by the
S<hi rend='underline'>t</hi> Albans case: (supra 10) as
to conquered Colonies
by that and by the
Bill of Rights art.
4 & 6.
49.
Similar opinion maintained
by George Grenville,
according to
Edmund Burke.
50
Had the proper Colonization
powers been granted
from the first by
Parliament, the
American war
would probably have
been saved.
51
The St Albans case,
saying nothing of
Colonies by name was never
applied to them
by lawyers.
[This was an attempt
of the Crown, with the consent
of certain inhabitants
of St Alban's, to
legislate without Parliament
over St Alban's.]
---page break---
|
Identifier: | JB/116/269/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
43-54, 52a, 55, 1-13, 1-9, 9a, 10-30, 30a, 31-33 |
|||
|
116 |
panopticon versus new south wales |
||
|
269 |
the true bastile: shewing the outrages offered to law, justice, and humanity by mr pitt and his associates in the foundation and management of the penal colony of new south wales |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
marginal summary sheet |
2 |
||
|
recto |
|||
|
john herbert koe |
1798 am |
||
|
frances wright |
|||
|
1798 |
|||
|
37802 |
|||
