★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>Letter 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi></head> | |||
<p>10 Dec<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> 1802</p> | |||
<note>XVI. Improved prisons</note> | |||
<p>me?—Let any man of common sense and common<lb/> | |||
honesty answer—whether the foulness of the <sic>falshood</sic><lb/> | |||
<del>is at all <gap/> by the equivocation</del><lb/> | |||
me. Oh but say Honourable Gentlemen | |||
<hi rend="underline">we did not<lb/> | |||
say you insisted on any encrease of terms—all we<lb/> | |||
said was that you proposed it</hi>. True: but to<lb/> | |||
what purpose did you speak of a <hi rend="underline">proposal made</hi>,<lb/> | |||
if you had not made sure that Parliament would<lb/> | |||
take for granted it had been insisted upon? From<lb/> | |||
a proposal made only and not insisted upon, could<lb/> | |||
you have deserved so much as the shadow of a pretence?<lb/> | |||
Let any man of common sense and common<lb/> | |||
honesty give the answer—is the foulness of the <sic>falshood</sic><lb/> | |||
in the least degree claimed by the equivocation thus<lb/> | |||
employed to cover it? It was not enough that<lb/> | |||
the property of an unoffending <add>man</add> subject of his Majesty<lb/> | |||
should be <sic>destroyd</sic>, but his character was to be degraded,<lb/> | |||
and the eye of sympathy diverted <add>reflected</add> from his<lb/> | |||
case by representing him as a man who had<lb/> | |||
deserved his fate by refusing to stand to his engagements.</p><note>Understanding these<lb/>practices, which are <add>altogether</add><lb/>but a link in a long<lb/>chain of similar<lb/>practices.<lb/><del>Understanding these</del><lb/><del>things</del> Your Lordship<lb/>will moreover be the less<lb/>surprized that a correspondence<lb/>that would<lb/>have brought the claim<lb/>to light should have<lb/>been supported as<lb/>long as possible.</note> | |||
<p>The practice being of this kind Your Lordship<lb/>will <add>be</add> the less surprized at the marks of conscious guilt<lb/>that went along with it. When <add>it was <gap/> that the <unclear>insinuation</unclear></add> the communication was<lb/><del>deigned</del> <add>should</add> to meet the eye of Parliament, Gentlemen <add>no names are put</add><lb/><add>to it</add> ashamed to put their names to it: and when names<lb/>are put to it, it is <add>in</add> a correspondence destined to eternal<lb/>night—a correspondence <del>the</del> anxiously concealed from<lb/>the party whose fate was disposed of by it—and which<lb/>never would have been brought to light but for <add>subsequent recordation</add> accident <lb/>altogether unlooked for at the time then <add>unthought of.</add></p><note>Parliament has<lb/>thus for the first time<lb/>and let us hope any<lb/>Lord for the last<lb/>suffered itself to be<lb/>consulted by an anonymous<lb/><add>report</add> libel suitor<lb/>as <gap/> forbids<lb/>my supposing would<lb/>have their long engaged concern otherwise than by engaging observations.</note> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | ||
Letter 3d
10 Decr 1802
XVI. Improved prisons
me?—Let any man of common sense and common
honesty answer—whether the foulness of the falshood
is at all by the equivocation
me. Oh but say Honourable Gentlemen
we did not
say you insisted on any encrease of terms—all we
said was that you proposed it. True: but to
what purpose did you speak of a proposal made,
if you had not made sure that Parliament would
take for granted it had been insisted upon? From
a proposal made only and not insisted upon, could
you have deserved so much as the shadow of a pretence?
Let any man of common sense and common
honesty give the answer—is the foulness of the falshood
in the least degree claimed by the equivocation thus
employed to cover it? It was not enough that
the property of an unoffending man subject of his Majesty
should be destroyd, but his character was to be degraded,
and the eye of sympathy diverted reflected from his
case by representing him as a man who had
deserved his fate by refusing to stand to his engagements.
Understanding these
practices, which are altogether
but a link in a long
chain of similar
practices.
Understanding these
things Your Lordship
will moreover be the less
surprized that a correspondence
that would
have brought the claim
to light should have
been supported as
long as possible.
The practice being of this kind Your Lordship
will be the less surprized at the marks of conscious guilt
that went along with it. When it was that the insinuation the communication was
deigned should to meet the eye of Parliament, Gentlemen no names are put
to it ashamed to put their names to it: and when names
are put to it, it is in a correspondence destined to eternal
night—a correspondence the anxiously concealed from
the party whose fate was disposed of by it—and which
never would have been brought to light but for subsequent recordation accident
altogether unlooked for at the time then unthought of.
Parliament has
thus for the first time
and let us hope any
Lord for the last
suffered itself to be
consulted by an anonymous
report libel suitor
as forbids
my supposing would
have their long engaged concern otherwise than by engaging observations.
|
Identifier: | JB/116/491/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1802-12-10 |
|||
|
116 |
panopticon versus new south wales |
||
|
491 |
letter 3d |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e3 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
1800 |
||
|
1800 |
|||
|
38024 |
|||
