★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
' | <p>5 Nov 1802</p> | ||
<head>Letter 2</head> | |||
<note>Note to p.27<lb/>Incendiarism</note> | |||
<p>Note</p> | |||
<p>Such as our ideas <add>conceptions</add> are, such <del>are</del> is our language:<lb/>such as our language is, such as our laws.<add>+</add> Imperfect conceptions<lb/>give birth to imperfect language, and that to imperfect<lb/>laws. The words employed to <del>impress</del> <add>denote</add> this crime<lb/><del>are expressive</del> <add>are indicative of nothing beyond the nature</add> of the instrument employed by it; <add><del>and</del> together with the corresponding</add><lb/>nature of the subject to which it is applied: fire applied to a<lb/> <del>But the mischief depends not merely on the instrumental but on the nature and<lb/>local circum</del> body susceptible of being damaged or destroy'd by fire. But<lb/>the <del>real merit</del> degree of its mischievousness depends <add><del>is regulated/is governed by</del></add> on<lb/>neither of those circumstances: <add>it depends on</add> <del>but on</del> the nature combined<lb/>with the vicinity of the circumjacent bodies. Take a truss<lb/>of hay lying by itself on the <del>middle of a</del> damp ground in<lb/> the middle of an enclosure, <del>a man who destroys it by</del> <add>the crime of him who has</add><lb/>employd fire <del>to in</del> the destruction of it is in point of mischief<lb/>no greater than of the hand <gap/> in cattle to consume it.<lb/> Let the herbage be tinder, as in New South Wales, and<lb/>habitations contiguous and numerous, and the inhabitants<lb/>disarmed of <del>their</del> vigilance by ship, the <del><gap/></del> act from<lb/>an inconsiderable trespass swells into <add>one of</add> the most horrible of<lb/> <add>all</add> <del>vulgar</del> crimes.<add>+</add> While <del>the treatment fate attached to offences</del> <add>the fate attached <del>to crimes or supposed</del> by government to</add><lb/> <del>the conduct of subjects, crimes</del> to acts numbered among crimes<lb/> is governed by the caprice of language and not by the<lb/><add>degree or</add> nature of the mischief and while definition, confined to<lb/>the logical and physical branches of science <del>it</del> remains<lb/>the object of <del>contempt or</del> antipathy to judges<add>+</add> and legislators,<add>II</add><lb/> destruction must <add>but for</add> often <del>every now</del> be the lot of<lb/>the innocent or next to innocent, impunity still <gap/><lb/>that of the most atrocious guilt. How many crimes of<lb/>imaginary mischief still load the calendar! how many<lb/>men from whom society had nothing to <add>fear</add> <del>apprehend</del> have<lb/>suffered as for murder! how many acts tantamount<lb/>to theft, <del>foregone</del> <add>malicious mischief</add> the higher modifications of fraud and so on<lb/>without end remain, even now, without punishment, because<lb/>without a name!<add>+</add></p> | |||
<note><add>+</add>See Condillac, Langue<lb/> des calculs. Paris<lb/>An 6.</note> | |||
<note><add>II</add> In old law <del>Latin</del> French<lb/><hi rend="underline">arson</hi>: in modern<lb/>English <hi rend="underline">incendiarism</hi>.</note> | |||
<note><add>+</add> In a well modernized<lb/>code, arson<lb/>incendiarism would <add>therefore</add><lb/>hardly constitute a <hi rend="underline">genus</hi><lb/>of itself, it would stand<lb/>as a specific modification,<lb/>and in some cases<lb/>an aggravation of those<lb/>other crimes <add>such as</add>—<hi rend="underline">criminal<lb/>destruction</hi> <add>or</add> criminal homicide<lb/>—according as it were, life, person, or property that were the subject matter<lb/> of the offence.</note> | |||
<note><add>+</add> To this day are<lb/>not men weak enough<lb/>to measure the severity<lb/>of the penal code by<lb/>the numbers of the<lb/>laws employed to compose<lb/>it: Babies and sucklings!<lb/><add>have ye not<lb/>read</add> that in Draco's system<lb/>there was but one? Linnaeus alone would not <del>be</del> furnish you matter for a code, containing a hundred thousand laws, and yet still more imperfect than your own!</note> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | ||
5 Nov 1802
Letter 2
Note to p.27
Incendiarism
Note
Such as our ideas conceptions are, such are is our language:
such as our language is, such as our laws.+ Imperfect conceptions
give birth to imperfect language, and that to imperfect
laws. The words employed to impress denote this crime
are expressive are indicative of nothing beyond the nature of the instrument employed by it; and together with the corresponding
nature of the subject to which it is applied: fire applied to a
But the mischief depends not merely on the instrumental but on the nature and
local circum body susceptible of being damaged or destroy'd by fire. But
the real merit degree of its mischievousness depends is regulated/is governed by on
neither of those circumstances: it depends on but on the nature combined
with the vicinity of the circumjacent bodies. Take a truss
of hay lying by itself on the middle of a damp ground in
the middle of an enclosure, a man who destroys it by the crime of him who has
employd fire to in the destruction of it is in point of mischief
no greater than of the hand in cattle to consume it.
Let the herbage be tinder, as in New South Wales, and
habitations contiguous and numerous, and the inhabitants
disarmed of their vigilance by ship, the act from
an inconsiderable trespass swells into one of the most horrible of
all vulgar crimes.+ While the treatment fate attached to offences the fate attached to crimes or supposed by government to
the conduct of subjects, crimes to acts numbered among crimes
is governed by the caprice of language and not by the
degree or nature of the mischief and while definition, confined to
the logical and physical branches of science it remains
the object of contempt or antipathy to judges+ and legislators,II
destruction must but for often every now be the lot of
the innocent or next to innocent, impunity still
that of the most atrocious guilt. How many crimes of
imaginary mischief still load the calendar! how many
men from whom society had nothing to fear apprehend have
suffered as for murder! how many acts tantamount
to theft, foregone malicious mischief the higher modifications of fraud and so on
without end remain, even now, without punishment, because
without a name!+
+See Condillac, Langue
des calculs. Paris
An 6.
II In old law Latin French
arson: in modern
English incendiarism.
+ In a well modernized
code, arson
incendiarism would therefore
hardly constitute a genus
of itself, it would stand
as a specific modification,
and in some cases
an aggravation of those
other crimes such as—criminal
destruction or criminal homicide
—according as it were, life, person, or property that were the subject matter
of the offence.
+ To this day are
not men weak enough
to measure the severity
of the penal code by
the numbers of the
laws employed to compose
it: Babies and sucklings!
have ye not
read that in Draco's system
there was but one? Linnaeus alone would not be furnish you matter for a code, containing a hundred thousand laws, and yet still more imperfect than your own!
|
Identifier: | JB/116/268/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1802-11-05 |
|||
|
116 |
panopticon versus new south wales |
||
|
268 |
letter 2 |
||
|
001 |
note |
||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
f27** |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
37801 |
|||
