JB/120/095/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/120/095/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
ChrisRiley (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>Long and Forgery</head>
 
<p>27 May 1802</p>
 
<p>what <del><gap/> it</del> would an equal degree be the result of a<lb/>
pardon from the Crown: of one of those pardons of which <add>negations upon the</add><lb/>
<add>execution of the law, the grounds of which</add> the grounds are not altogether so publicly known as it<lb/>
the grounds are not altogether so publicly known as it<lb/>
were to be wished they were. M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> Baldwin would have<lb/>
it in his power to explain this matter to Your Lordship<lb/>
by some familiar instances.</p>
<p>In M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> Long's case, the public part of the mischief<lb/>
of the offence consisted in the defeat of a great National<lb/>
Establishment that had been ordained by Parliament:<lb/>
in the too fortunate <add>effectual</add> pursuit of that criminal end <add>object</add> which<lb/>
were the object of the whole system of mal-practices of<lb/>
which the offence constituted so essential a part.</p>
<p>The <add>course of</add> proceeding to which it was the object of M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> Long's<lb/>
offence to give <add>an improper</add> a wrong conclusion, was not<lb/>
(it may be observed) a judicial one.
<del>It certainly was<lb/>
not the proceeding of a Court</del>. The Board of which<lb/>
it was the proceeding is certainly not of the number of<lb/>
those authorities which in common parlance are<lb/>
understood to come under the denomination of Courts of<lb/>
justice. It is not an authority that according to such<lb/>
<del>precedent</del> experience as I have had if it has appeared<lb/>
to consider itself bound by either the form<lb/>
or the spirit of positive&#x2014;natural&#x2014;of any thing that<lb/>
ever went by the name of justice. But in respect<lb/>
of its actual powers if it were in any respect different<lb/>
from a Court of Justice, it is by their being beyond<lb/>
comparison more ample&#x2014;more unlimited&#x2014;more<lb/>
effective. It is a Court <add>tribunal</add> of summary judicature in<lb/>
theory of everlastingly procrastinatory jurisdiction in practice <add><gap/></add><lb/>
<add>in</add></p>


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

Revision as of 15:58, 25 April 2016

Click Here To Edit

Long and Forgery

27 May 1802

what it would an equal degree be the result of a
pardon from the Crown: of one of those pardons of which negations upon the
execution of the law, the grounds of which the grounds are not altogether so publicly known as it
the grounds are not altogether so publicly known as it
were to be wished they were. Mr Baldwin would have
it in his power to explain this matter to Your Lordship
by some familiar instances.

In Mr Long's case, the public part of the mischief
of the offence consisted in the defeat of a great National
Establishment that had been ordained by Parliament:
in the too fortunate effectual pursuit of that criminal end object which
were the object of the whole system of mal-practices of
which the offence constituted so essential a part.

The course of proceeding to which it was the object of Mr Long's
offence to give an improper a wrong conclusion, was not
(it may be observed) a judicial one. It certainly was
not the proceeding of a Court
. The Board of which
it was the proceeding is certainly not of the number of
those authorities which in common parlance are
understood to come under the denomination of Courts of
justice. It is not an authority that according to such
precedent experience as I have had if it has appeared
to consider itself bound by either the form
or the spirit of positive—natural—of any thing that
ever went by the name of justice. But in respect
of its actual powers if it were in any respect different
from a Court of Justice, it is by their being beyond
comparison more ample—more unlimited—more
effective. It is a Court tribunal of summary judicature in
theory of everlastingly procrastinatory jurisdiction in practice
in



Identifier: | JB/120/095/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 120.

Date_1

1802-05-27

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

120

Main Headings

panopticon versus new south wales

Folio number

095

Info in main headings field

long and forgery

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e2 / f7

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

1800

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1800

Notes public

ID Number

39921

Box Contents

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