★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/002/119/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/002/119/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<p>The Auditor <add>of the Exchequer</add>, rather than the Chancellor of that<lb/>same Court, for this reason. The portrait <del>is</del> must<lb/>be such, <add>the imitation of which</add> <del>as</del> may be <del>rendered</del | <p>The Auditor <add>of the Exchequer</add>, rather than the Chancellor of that<lb/>same Court, for this reason. The portrait <del>is</del> must<lb/>be such, <add>the imitation of which</add> <del>as</del> may be <del>rendered</del> taken for the subject-matter <add>object</add> <lb/> of a prohibition — and of a <del>propo</del> prohibition<lb/>having <del>a</del> capital punishment for its sanction,<lb/>without danger or inconvenience. The situation<lb/>of the Chancellor of <add>the</add> Exchequer is such — that<lb/>the portrait of the person who fills it may be<lb/>expected to be found <del>already</del> <add>already and</add> at all times in the <lb/>shops — in all manner of forms and sorts. Loss <lb/>as well as alarm to individuals — not to speak of<lb/>the still existing danger of underground delinquency,<lb/>would be the consequence. <add>True it is, that</add> of the Auditor of <add>the</add> Exchequer<lb/>it may also be expected that there should be<lb/>commonly a portrait or two in the shops by different | ||
<lb/>hands. But the probability <add>presumption</add> is against <del>there</del><lb/>the existence of it in any such | <lb/>hands. But the probability <add>presumption</add> is against <del>there</del><lb/>the existence of it in any such sort as it may<lb/>be requisite to mark out for the object of the<lb/>preferred prohibition:: and should the presumption<lb/>prove erroneous, the provision repealing the license<lb/><del>from this</del> <add>granted by</add> the officer in question will (besides<lb/>covering the case of family portraits and the like)<lb/><add>be sufficient to</add> prevent the prohibition from being productive of any<lb/>inconvenience.<lb/></p><p>As to the Sovereign <del>it is evident</del> the reason<lb/>above adduced in the instance of the Chancellor<lb/>of the Exchequer, applies to this still more popular<lb/>as well as exalted character with still<lb/> superior force.<lb/> </p><p>The sanction of the Sovereign, though certainly<lb/>in other respect desirable <del>is</del> <add>can</add> not in this case even on <del><add>can but</add></del> <lb/>the <del>footing</del> ground of prudence be stated as indispensable.<lb/>In Exchequer Bills this sanction <del>of the sovereign</del> does not present <lb/><note>present itself in any shape.</note></p> | ||
superscript text
The Auditor of the Exchequer, rather than the Chancellor of that
same Court, for this reason. The portrait is must
be such, the imitation of which as may be rendered taken for the subject-matter object
of a prohibition — and of a propo prohibition
having a capital punishment for its sanction,
without danger or inconvenience. The situation
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is such — that
the portrait of the person who fills it may be
expected to be found already already and at all times in the
shops — in all manner of forms and sorts. Loss
as well as alarm to individuals — not to speak of
the still existing danger of underground delinquency,
would be the consequence. True it is, that of the Auditor of the Exchequer
it may also be expected that there should be
commonly a portrait or two in the shops by different
hands. But the probability presumption is against there
the existence of it in any such sort as it may
be requisite to mark out for the object of the
preferred prohibition:: and should the presumption
prove erroneous, the provision repealing the license
from this granted by the officer in question will (besides
covering the case of family portraits and the like)
be sufficient to prevent the prohibition from being productive of any
inconvenience.
As to the Sovereign it is evident the reason
above adduced in the instance of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, applies to this still more popular
as well as exalted character with still
superior force.
The sanction of the Sovereign, though certainly
in other respect desirable is can not in this case even on can but
the footing ground of prudence be stated as indispensable.
In Exchequer Bills this sanction of the sovereign does not present
present itself in any shape.
This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet
|
Identifier: | JB/002/119/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 2. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
002 |
annuity notes |
||
|
119 |
|||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
e7 / f35 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
<…>m 1798 |
||
|
frances wright |
|||
|
1798 |
|||
|
858 |
|||
