★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<p> inducements remain the same, or whether, if so, they would<lb/> produce the same impression on Your Lordship's mind, are smaller<lb/> <add>altogether</add> out of my cognizance: but unquestionably the acceptance of any<lb/> such proposal<del>s</del> must be altogether at the option of his Grace.<lb/> Were the letter of the present Act to be pursued, the purchase<lb/> money would (by §§.8) be to be laid out in the purchase of<lb/>other land "<hi rend="underline">to the same uses</hi>" in which case cons<add>e</add>quently the<lb/> See of York, and Your Lordship as Lessee, would have the same<lb/> interests | <p> inducements remain the same, or whether, if so, they would<lb/> produce the same impression on Your Lordship's mind, are smaller<lb/> <add>altogether</add> out of my cognizance: but unquestionably the acceptance of any<lb/> such proposal<del>s</del> must be altogether at the option of his Grace.<lb/> Were the letter of the present Act to be pursued, the purchase<lb/> money would (by §§.8) be to be laid out in the purchase of<lb/>other land "<hi rend="underline">to the same uses</hi>" in which case cons<add>e</add>quently the<lb/> See of York, and Your Lordship as Lessee, would have the same<lb/> interests respectively in the land so to be purchased, as You have<lb/> now in the present land: and such accordingly is the disposition<lb/> which, were I to stand in the place of the Supervisors<lb/> I should <add>be</add> <hi rend="underline">authorised</hi>, and in order to exonerate myself<lb/> (unless authorised by a decree of the Court of Chancery to make<lb/> any other disposition) <hi rend="underline">bound</hi> to make. On the other hand, if in<lb/> consideration of the wishes or the mut<add>u</add>al interests of the parties,<lb/> the letter of that Act were to be departed from, I do not well<lb/> see how a proposal to the effect of Sir Gilbert Elliot's could be<lb/> rejected. The option therefore seems to be between those two<lb/> Modes of division: the first is that which either of the parties<lb/> <hi rend="underline">May</hi> tie the other to if he thinks fit: the latter is what one would expect<lb/> to find much the More <del><gap/></del> advantageous of the two, and that not<lb/> to one only of the parties, but to both: but this more convenient arrangement<lb/> is what no purchaser under that act could be advised,<lb/> I think, to join in without the authority of a Decree. On the new<lb/> plan, under the new act which would at all events be necessary,<lb/> that <sic>expence</sic> and delay would at any rate be saved. In case of an<lb/> agreement between the parties, Parliament <del>would adopt the agreement</del><lb/> (taking due care of future Archbishop's) <add> would adopt the agreement:</add> in case of a<lb/> <add>disagreement</add></p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | ||
inducements remain the same, or whether, if so, they would
produce the same impression on Your Lordship's mind, are smaller
altogether out of my cognizance: but unquestionably the acceptance of any
such proposals must be altogether at the option of his Grace.
Were the letter of the present Act to be pursued, the purchase
money would (by §§.8) be to be laid out in the purchase of
other land "to the same uses" in which case consequently the
See of York, and Your Lordship as Lessee, would have the same
interests respectively in the land so to be purchased, as You have
now in the present land: and such accordingly is the disposition
which, were I to stand in the place of the Supervisors
I should be authorised, and in order to exonerate myself
(unless authorised by a decree of the Court of Chancery to make
any other disposition) bound to make. On the other hand, if in
consideration of the wishes or the mutual interests of the parties,
the letter of that Act were to be departed from, I do not well
see how a proposal to the effect of Sir Gilbert Elliot's could be
rejected. The option therefore seems to be between those two
Modes of division: the first is that which either of the parties
May tie the other to if he thinks fit: the latter is what one would expect
to find much the More advantageous of the two, and that not
to one only of the parties, but to both: but this more convenient arrangement
is what no purchaser under that act could be advised,
I think, to join in without the authority of a Decree. On the new
plan, under the new act which would at all events be necessary,
that expence and delay would at any rate be saved. In case of an
agreement between the parties, Parliament would adopt the agreement
(taking due care of future Archbishop's) would adopt the agreement: in case of a
disagreement
|
Identifier: | JB/541/465/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 541. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1793-09-16 |
|||
|
541 |
|||
|
465 |
|||
|
001 |
|||
|
Correspondence/copy |
|||
|
Jeremy Bentham |
|||
