JB/137/076/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:05, 5 August 2019

1820 Jany 16

Radicalism not

III Experience
III or IV French Revolution

End days of ruling few
all adherent: of subject
many incongruity: and
for
for
the contrary distinction
proved by inference, experience

Between the case conduct of the ruling few on the one hand and that
of the subject many on the other hand there is on the occasion
a curious enough defence. On the point of the ruling few all
that is bad is the result of sad and recent an experience: on the
part of the subject many the radicals — it is the product of
near conjunction: for as to feel it is not merely libel on
this side matter but as highly as possible — directly opposite.
Under the French Revolution the before subject may even the
slayers the ruling for the slayed: here the case is reversed. By
the subject may no slaughter are the slayed, the ruling few
by under the orders of the ruling are the slayers. What they are punish
and shackled for is not any than they have done but a
something which without any the smallest paid it is as they
would do. As the part of the ruling few all is : the
part if he surprised may all is long-suffering, all is
passive obedience and non resistance

Identifier: \| JB/137/076/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 137.
Date_1	1820-01-16	Marginal Summary Numbering	not numbered
Box	137	Main Headings	radicalism not dangerous
Folio number	076	Info in main headings field	radicalism not
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	c1
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks
Marginals	jeremy bentham	Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	46793
Box Contents

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 III or IV French Revolution </note>
-<note>End days of rules for<lb/>
+<note>End days of ruling few<lb/>
 all adherent: of subject<lb/>
-under enquiry: and<lb/>
+many incongruity: and<lb/>
-for <gap/>: and<lb/>
 for <gap/> <gap/><lb/>
-the certain destructive<lb/>
+for <gap/> <gap/><lb/>
-<gap/> by <gap/> experience</note>
+the contrary distinction<lb/>
+proved by inference, experience</note>
-<p>Between the case <add>conduct</add> of the ruling for on the one hand and that <lb/>
+<p>Between the case <add>conduct</add> of the ruling few on the one hand and that <lb/>
 of the subject many on the other hand there is on the occasion<lb/>
-a curious enough defence.  On the point of the ruling for all<lb/>
+a curious enough defence.  On the point of the ruling few all<lb/>
 that is bad is the result of sad and recent <add>an  <gap/></add> experience: on the<lb/>
-part of the subject many the radicals.  it is the product of<lb/>
+part of the subject many the radicals &#x2014; it is the product of<lb/>
 near conjunction: for as to feel it is not merely libel on<lb/>
-this side<add>matters</add>  but as highly as possible. directly opposite.<lb/>
+this side <add>matter</add> but as highly as possible &#x2014; directly opposite.<lb/>
 Under the French Revolution the before subject may even the<lb/>
-slayers the ruling for the slayed: here the case is reversed.  <del>By</del><lb/>
+slayers the ruling for the slayed: here the case is reversed. <del>By</del><lb/>
 the subject may <del>no slaughter</del> are the slayed, the ruling few<lb/>
-by <add>under</add> the orders of the ruling are the slayers.  What they are punish<lb/>
+by <add>under</add> the orders of the ruling are the slayers. What they are punish<lb/>
 and shackled for is not any than they have done but a<lb/>
 something which without any the smallest paid it is as they<lb/>
 would do.  As the part of the ruling few all is <gap/>: <gap/> the<lb/>
-part if he surprised <gap/> may all is by-<gap/>, all is<lb/>
+part if he surprised <gap/> may all is long-suffering, all is<lb/>
 passive obedience and non resistance</p>

Views

JB/137/076/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:05, 5 August 2019

Navigation

Search