JB/070/284/002: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/070/284/002: Difference between revisions

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


<head>MAINTEN: &amp; CHAMPERTY</head> <p><note> Either the Title is good, or it is<lb/> a bad one or doubtful<lb/> If good it is hard that a man<lb/> may at sell what he has a right to<lb/> If bad, he will not meet with a<lb/> purchaser &#x2014; or if he does, it is<lb/> the purchaser's own folly: when<lb/> there is <sic>advised</sic> enough to be had<lb/> if he will take it.</note></p> <p> <note>If doubtful, why should not one man<lb/> who is willing, deter the chaser, as<lb/> well as another?</note></p> <p>At present, one man has just as good <add>as</add> and not a whit better chance than another,<lb/> If a man brings  <add> forfends or pursues</add> a Title that is good for nothing, he will have his <sic>labor</sic> for his pains, &amp; the<lb/>privilege of paying the costs into the bargain &#x2014;</p> <p> If he is willing to pay costs and only wants to plague <add>by litigation</add> one who he has a pique to: <add> that</add><lb/> he may do if he pleases, without being beholden to <add> <unclear>asking</unclear> the leave of</add> any body </p> <p>If either buyer or seller make a bad bargain, it is not more than what they are liable<lb/> to with a Horse or a House or a Ship or an Annuity or any thing else</p> <p> If all that is <add>not</add> enough <hi rend="superscript">2</hi>argument  <hi rend="superscript">1</hi> for the abolition <add>of the restraint</add>, this may be <add> more</add> powerful with some &#x2014;<lb/> done every day, under Sanction of Courts of Justice: &amp; no inconvenience doth arise. #<lb/> <note>This is done by the Assignees of<lb/> Bankrupts &#x2014; the method taken <lb/> to <sic>effecticate</sic> the bargain is, for<lb/> <del>your</del> <add> the Assignees</add> to the sellers to <del> go at</del> <add> execute</add><lb/> a Letter of Attorney to the<lb/> Buyer to sue in their name.</note><lb/> Now if a Title to Money may be bought, a Title to Land or any thing else may be bought <add> too:</add><lb/> If not I should be glad to know the difference.</p> <!-- line across the page --> <p> In a Note.</p> <p> I had once occasion to see an instance of the mischief produced by these <unclear>shots</unclear> &#x2014; A<lb/> Gentleman in his youth had been <del>induced</del> <add> inveigled</add> by a server of Fraud &amp; imposters, to <gap/><lb/> in the conveyance of an <add> a very considerable</add> Estate &#x2014; <add> at a great undervalue</add> after some interval he instituted a suit and<lb/> Equity to recover it back again &#x2014; He was driven to <add> being driven to</add> great straights &#x2014; he entered <add>into</add><lb/> a Treaty with some persons for the selling them a share in it: when it was nearly<lb/> concluded the Counsel of one of them advised him it was not safe &#x2014; It therefore<lb/> broke off: and <add> the consequence was</add> the unhappy man <add> being in urgent want of money</add> with <del>the</del> the strongest assurances of success from his<lb/> Counsel, was <del>obliged</del> <add> glad</add> to <del>accept</del> <add> compound</add> with the <sic>Deft</sic> for about 1/4 of <del>what</del> the value of <del><gap/></del> <add> what</add> <lb/> would have been his share on the partition.</p> <!-- line across the page --> <p> The Laws against Maintenance and Champerty are curious evidences <add> documents</add> and the <unclear>moral</unclear> History<lb/> One cannot look for more authentic or more conclusive evidence to prove <add> of the character</add> at once <add> as well of</add> the imperfection<lb/> of the Law as <add> and</add> <del> and the lawless and violent/<gap/> spirit</del> of the People.  So violent and lawless were the<lb/> <add> <gap/></add> people, that if a number of these agreed in any thing, <del>it was</del> <add> the</add> probability was in favour of their<lb/> doing mischief.  So ill-contrived and liable to abuse <add>rough &amp; liable to be out of order</add>, was the Law <add>mechanism</add> that if two or three attempted<lb/> to set it at work together with the view of doing <add>producing</add> mischief, it was probable they would succeed.<lb/> Men had as much, or thought they had as much to apprehend from its exertion as from the <unclear>event</unclear><lb/> of it.  In <del>some <gap/></del> <add> pursuance</add> of these strange notions which seemed to have been but too justly warranted,<lb/> the spirit of union among the people was to be broken &#x2014; and all sympathisers prosecuted.<lb/> A man has a suit at Law.  Another man supplies him with money to carry it on?  It is as<lb/> that justice might be done?  was it to save <add>rescue</add> poverty from oppression?  Impossible, says the Law.<lb/> <note> Of all the possible motives,<lb/> the probable are but two</note><lb/> <del>then</del> It would be but one out of 2 motives &#x2014; <del>to <gap/></del>  The <del>Deft with the <gap/></del> <add> thing in dispute had</add> <unclear>exerted</unclear> the <gap/><lb/> of the Lender, or the <sic>Deft</sic> was his enemy.  The Deft <add>The man in the</add> was to be made the <add>an</add> the instrument either of his Avarice<lb/> or his revenge.</p> <p> <note>The <sic>Deft </sic> was to be harassed <lb/> by <gap/> or by <sic>expence</sic><lb/> into a submission</note></p> <p> MAINTEN: &amp; Champerty. [BR][1]</p>  
<head>MAINTEN: &amp; CHAMPERTY</head> <p><note> Either the Title is good, or it is<lb/> a bad one or doubtful<lb/> If good it is hard that a man<lb/> may at sell what he has a right to<lb/> If bad, he will not meet with a<lb/> purchaser &#x2014; or if he does, it is<lb/> the purchaser's own folly: when<lb/> there is <sic>advised</sic> enough to be had<lb/> if he will take it.</note></p> <p> <note>If doubtful, why should not one man<lb/> who is willing, deter the chaser, as<lb/> well as another?</note></p> <p>At present, one man has just as good <add>as</add> and not a whit better chance than another,<lb/> If a man brings  <add> forfends or pursues</add> a Title that is good for nothing, he will have his <sic>labor</sic> for his pains, &amp; the<lb/>privilege of paying the costs into the bargain &#x2014;</p> <p> If he is willing to pay costs and only wants to plague <add>by litigation</add> one who he has a pique to: <add> that</add><lb/> he may do if he pleases, without being beholden to <add> <unclear>asking</unclear> the leave of</add> any body </p> <p>If either buyer or seller make a bad bargain, it is not more than what they are liable<lb/> to with a Horse or a House or a Ship or an Annuity or any thing else</p> <p> If all that is <add>not</add> enough <hi rend="superscript">2</hi>argument  <hi rend="superscript">1</hi> for the abolition <add>of the restraint</add>, this may be <add> more</add> powerful with some &#x2014;<lb/> done every day, under Sanction of Courts of Justice: &amp; no inconvenience doth arise. #<lb/> <note>This is done by the Assignees of<lb/> Bankrupts &#x2014; the method taken <lb/> to <sic>effecticate</sic> the bargain is, for<lb/> <del>your</del> <add> the Assignees</add> to the sellers to <del> go at</del> <add> execute</add><lb/> a Letter of Attorney to the<lb/> Buyer to sue in their name.</note><lb/> Now if a Title to Money may be bought, a Title to Land or any thing else may be bought <add> too:</add><lb/> If not I should be glad to know the difference.</p> <!-- line across the page --> <p> In a Note.</p> <p> I had once occasion to see an instance of the mischief produced by these <unclear>shots</unclear> &#x2014; A<lb/> Gentleman in his youth had been <del>induced</del> <add> inveigled</add> by a server of Fraud &amp; imposters, to <gap/><lb/> in the conveyance of an <add> a very considerable</add> Estate &#x2014; <add> at a great undervalue</add> after some interval he instituted a suit and<lb/> Equity to recover it back again &#x2014; He was driven to <add> being driven to</add> great straights &#x2014; he entered <add>into</add><lb/> a Treaty with some persons for the selling them a share in it: when it was nearly<lb/> concluded the Counsel of one of them advised him it was not safe &#x2014; It therefore<lb/> broke off: and <add> the consequence was</add> the unhappy man <add> being in urgent want of money</add> with <del>the</del> the strongest assurances of success from his<lb/> Counsel, was <del>obliged</del> <add> glad</add> to <del>accept</del> <add> compound</add> with the <sic>Deft</sic> for about 1/4 of <del>what</del> the value of <del><gap/></del> <add> what</add> <lb/> would have been his share on the partition.</p> <!-- line across the page --> <p> The Laws against Maintenance and Champerty are curious evidences <add> documents</add> and the <unclear>moral</unclear> History<lb/> One cannot look for more authentic or more conclusive evidence to prove <add> of the character</add> at once <add> as well of</add> the imperfection<lb/> of the Law as <add> and</add> <del> and the lawless and violent/<gap/> spirit</del> of the People.  So violent and lawless were the<lb/> <add> <gap/></add> people, that if a number of these agreed in any thing, <del>it was</del> <add> the</add> probability was in favour of their<lb/> doing mischief.  So ill-contrived and liable to abuse <add>rough &amp; liable to be out of order</add>, was the Law <add>mechanism</add> that if two or three attempted<lb/> to set it at work together with the view of doing <add>producing</add> mischief, it was probable they would succeed.<lb/> Men had as much, or thought they had as much to apprehend from its exertion as from the <unclear>event</unclear><lb/> of it.  In <del>some <gap/></del> <add> pursuance</add> of these strange notions which seemed to have been but too justly warranted,<lb/> the spirit of union among the people was to be broken &#x2014; and all sympathisers prosecuted.<lb/> A man has a suit at Law.  Another man supplies him with money to carry it on?  It is as<lb/> that justice might be done?  was it to save <add>rescue</add> poverty from oppression?  Impossible, says the Law.<lb/> <note> Of all the possible motives,<lb/> the probable are but two</note><lb/> <del>then</del> It would be but one out of 2 motives &#x2014; <del>to <gap/></del>  The <del>Deft with the <gap/></del> <add> thing in dispute had</add> <unclear>exerted</unclear> the <gap/><lb/> of the Lender, or the <sic>Deft</sic> was his enemy.  The Deft <add>The man in the</add> was to be made the <add>an</add> the instrument either of his Avarice<lb/> or his revenge.</p> <p> <note>The <sic>Deft </sic> was to be harassed <lb/> by threats or by <sic>expence</sic><lb/> into a submission</note></p> <p> MAINTEN: &amp; Champerty. [BR][1]</p>  





Revision as of 14:19, 12 August 2018

Click Here To Edit

MAINTEN: & CHAMPERTY

Either the Title is good, or it is
a bad one or doubtful
If good it is hard that a man
may at sell what he has a right to
If bad, he will not meet with a
purchaser — or if he does, it is
the purchaser's own folly: when
there is advised enough to be had
if he will take it.

If doubtful, why should not one man
who is willing, deter the chaser, as
well as another?

At present, one man has just as good as and not a whit better chance than another,
If a man brings forfends or pursues a Title that is good for nothing, he will have his labor for his pains, & the
privilege of paying the costs into the bargain —

If he is willing to pay costs and only wants to plague by litigation one who he has a pique to: that
he may do if he pleases, without being beholden to asking the leave of any body

If either buyer or seller make a bad bargain, it is not more than what they are liable
to with a Horse or a House or a Ship or an Annuity or any thing else

If all that is not enough 2argument 1 for the abolition of the restraint, this may be more powerful with some —
done every day, under Sanction of Courts of Justice: & no inconvenience doth arise. #
This is done by the Assignees of
Bankrupts — the method taken
to effecticate the bargain is, for
your the Assignees to the sellers to go at execute
a Letter of Attorney to the
Buyer to sue in their name.

Now if a Title to Money may be bought, a Title to Land or any thing else may be bought too:
If not I should be glad to know the difference.

In a Note.

I had once occasion to see an instance of the mischief produced by these shots — A
Gentleman in his youth had been induced inveigled by a server of Fraud & imposters, to
in the conveyance of an a very considerable Estate — at a great undervalue after some interval he instituted a suit and
Equity to recover it back again — He was driven to being driven to great straights — he entered into
a Treaty with some persons for the selling them a share in it: when it was nearly
concluded the Counsel of one of them advised him it was not safe — It therefore
broke off: and the consequence was the unhappy man being in urgent want of money with the the strongest assurances of success from his
Counsel, was obliged glad to accept compound with the Deft for about 1/4 of what the value of what
would have been his share on the partition.

The Laws against Maintenance and Champerty are curious evidences documents and the moral History
One cannot look for more authentic or more conclusive evidence to prove of the character at once as well of the imperfection
of the Law as and and the lawless and violent/ spirit of the People. So violent and lawless were the
people, that if a number of these agreed in any thing, it was the probability was in favour of their
doing mischief. So ill-contrived and liable to abuse rough & liable to be out of order, was the Law mechanism that if two or three attempted
to set it at work together with the view of doing producing mischief, it was probable they would succeed.
Men had as much, or thought they had as much to apprehend from its exertion as from the event
of it. In some pursuance of these strange notions which seemed to have been but too justly warranted,
the spirit of union among the people was to be broken — and all sympathisers prosecuted.
A man has a suit at Law. Another man supplies him with money to carry it on? It is as
that justice might be done? was it to save rescue poverty from oppression? Impossible, says the Law.
Of all the possible motives,
the probable are but two

then It would be but one out of 2 motives — to The Deft with the thing in dispute had exerted the
of the Lender, or the Deft was his enemy. The Deft The man in the was to be made the an the instrument either of his Avarice
or his revenge.

The Deft was to be harassed
by threats or by expence
into a submission

MAINTEN: & Champerty. [BR][1]




Identifier: | JB/070/284/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 70.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

070

Main Headings

of laws in general

Folio number

284

Info in main headings field

mainten: & champerty

Image

002

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

23399

Box Contents

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