JB/096/333/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:55, 1 January 2011

DISSENT BR9 CONFLICTUS LEGUM. 1 Comm. 90.

One of the most redoubtable arguments in a paper
circulated among the members of the House of Lords against
the Bill for the Relief of the Dissenters, [v. Publ. Ads. for
Saturday [23o 2] of May 1772 is that it would be contrary to several Acts of Parliament. It is then applied indeed
only to the matter of expediency, & not of right: tho' in questionable reading
is its questionable reading the questionable reading

Luckily Cicero has spoken treated of this conceit, as
Author of the Commentaries observes, with the contempt it
merits deserves: And Cicero was an eloquent Orator, a Roman, &
lived 1800 years ago.— Those arguments which will weigh with

Identifier: \| JB/096/333/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	096	Main Headings	legislation
Folio number	333	Info in main headings field	dissenters penal laws
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f4
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::<…>onig [partial motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer	cc1
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	31337
Box Contents

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
-<p>DISSENT BR9 CONFLICTUS LEGUM. 1 Comm. 90.</p>
+<p>DISSENT <add>BR9</add> <del>CONFLICTUS LEGUM.</del> 1 Comm. 90.</p>
-One of the most redoubtable arguments in a paper<lb/>circulated among the members of the House of Lords against<lb/>the Bill for the Relief of the Dissenters, [v. Publ. Ads. for<lb/>Saturday [23<hi rend='superscript'>o</hi> 2] of May 1772 is that it would be contrary to several Acts of Parliament. It is <add>then</add> applied indeed<lb/>only to the matter of expediency, &amp; not of right.,: tho' in <unclear>questionable reading</unclear><lb/>
+One of the most redoubtable arguments in a paper<lb/>circulated among the members of the House of Lords against<lb/>the Bill for the Relief of the Dissenters, [v. Publ. Ads. for<lb/>Saturday [23<hi rend='superscript'>o</hi> 2] of May 1772 is that it would be contrary to several Acts of Parliament. It is <add>then</add> applied indeed<lb/>only to the matter of <hi rend='underline'>expediency</hi>, &amp; not of <hi rend='underline'>right:</hi> tho' in <unclear>questionable reading</unclear><lb/>is its <unclear>questionable reading</unclear> the <unclear>questionable reading</unclear>
+Luckily Cicero has <del>spoken</del> <add>treated</add> of this conceit, as<lb/>Author of the Commentaries observes, with the contempt it<lb/> merits <add>deserves:</add> And Cicero was an eloquent Orator, a Roman, &amp;<lb/>
+lived 1800 years ago.&#x2014; Those arguments which will weigh with
 <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
 {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}

Views

JB/096/333/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:55, 1 January 2011

Navigation

Search