JB/041/151/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/041/151/001: Difference between revisions

ChrisRiley (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:
<p>1823. Oct<hi rend="superscript">r</hi>. 22.</p>
<p>1823. Oct<hi rend="superscript">r</hi>. 22.</p>
<head>Constitutional Code</head>
<head>Constitutional Code</head>
<note>1. Enactive Part.</note>
<note>1. Enactive Part.Ch.<lb/> 5.</note>
<p>In the course of the eliminative process,<lb/>one circumstance there is, the aptitude<lb/>of which to constitute an efficient cause of<lb/>title to exemption, seems incontestable, but<lb/>which lies exposed, in no slight degree, to the<lb/>difficulty and objection of which so much<lb/>has been said. This is the case of those in<lb/>whose instance indigence is at such a pitch,<lb/><del>as</del> <add>that</add> if admitted into the judicatory, their preference<lb/>might be productive of annoyance, obstructive<lb/>in a serious degree of the course of the business.<lb/>Of this difficulty no solution will be afforded<lb/>by the observation in your possibly attending<lb/>class, no individuals can have place,<lb/>but such as are in possession of the art of reading;<lb/>and with the possession of that art, indigence<lb/>such as that in question can not with propriety<lb/>be regarded as compatible. To this, there are<lb/>two answers. In the first place, introduction of<lb/>the Quasi Jury System may be possible and<lb/>thence necessary, before the time when the art<lb/>of reading has made any progress to extensive<lb/>as to afford a sufficient number of jurors after<lb/>the eliminations that are indispensable, have<lb/>been performed: on this supposition, some qualification<lb/>other than the possession of this art,<lb/>may be of necessity to be appointed.</p>
 
<p>In the course of the eliminative process,<lb/>one circumstance there is, the aptitude<lb/>of which to constitute an efficient cause of<lb/>title to exemption, seems incontestable, but<lb/>which lies exposed, in no slight degree, to the<lb/>difficulty and objection of which so much<lb/>has been said. This is the case of those in<lb/>whose instance indigence is at such a pitch,<lb/><del>as</del> <add>that</add> if admitted into the judicatory, their preference<lb/>might be productive of annoyance, obstructive<lb/>in a serious degree of the course of the business.<lb/>Of this difficulty no solution will be afforded<lb/>by the observation in your possibly attending<lb/>class, no individuals can have place,<lb/>but such as are in possession of the art of reading;<lb/>and with the possession of that art, indigence<lb/>such as that in question can not with propriety<lb/>be regarded as compatible. To this, there are<lb/>two answers. In the first place, introduction of<lb/>the Quasi Jury System may be possible and<lb/>thence necessary, before the time when the art<lb/>of reading has made any progress so extensive<lb/>as to afford a sufficient number of jurors after<lb/>the eliminations that are indispensable, have<lb/>been performed: on this supposition, some qualification<lb/>other than the possession of this art,<lb/>may be of necessity to be appointed.</p>
<p>☞ Quere. As to the propriety of this answer.<lb/><add>The</add></p>
<p>☞ Quere. As to the propriety of this answer.<lb/><add>The</add></p>


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

Revision as of 13:50, 17 December 2014

'Click Here To Edit

1823. Octr. 22.

Constitutional Code 1. Enactive Part.Ch.
5.

In the course of the eliminative process,
one circumstance there is, the aptitude
of which to constitute an efficient cause of
title to exemption, seems incontestable, but
which lies exposed, in no slight degree, to the
difficulty and objection of which so much
has been said. This is the case of those in
whose instance indigence is at such a pitch,
as that if admitted into the judicatory, their preference
might be productive of annoyance, obstructive
in a serious degree of the course of the business.
Of this difficulty no solution will be afforded
by the observation in your possibly attending
class, no individuals can have place,
but such as are in possession of the art of reading;
and with the possession of that art, indigence
such as that in question can not with propriety
be regarded as compatible. To this, there are
two answers. In the first place, introduction of
the Quasi Jury System may be possible and
thence necessary, before the time when the art
of reading has made any progress so extensive
as to afford a sufficient number of jurors after
the eliminations that are indispensable, have
been performed: on this supposition, some qualification
other than the possession of this art,
may be of necessity to be appointed.

☞ Quere. As to the propriety of this answer.
The



Identifier: | JB/041/151/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 41.

Date_1

1823-10-22

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

041

Main Headings

Constitutional Code

Folio number

151

Info in main headings field

Constitutional Code I Enactive Part

Image

001

Titles

Category

Copy/fair copy 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

C10 / D16

Penner

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

001

Box Contents

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