JB/071/189/002: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/071/189/002: Difference between revisions

Diane Folan (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 10: Line 10:
grounds which eventually proved false <add>fallacious</add><!-- added in pencil -->, and which he had no <add>good</add> reason
grounds which eventually proved false <add>fallacious</add><!-- added in pencil -->, and which he had no <add>good</add> reason
<lb/>
<lb/>
<add>at the time</add> to trust to , but which <add>however</add> he did trust to in effect and think them
<add>at the time</add> to trust to, but which <add>however</add> he did trust to in effect and think them
<lb/>
<lb/>
probable . In this case the debt may be said to have been contracted
probable. In this case the debt may be said to have been contracted
<lb/>
<lb/>
<hi rend='underline'>rashly</hi> . In this case, <add>we see,</add> it is his understanding that was in fault.
<hi rend='underline'>rashly</hi>. In this case, <add>we see,</add> it is his understanding that was in fault.
<lb/></p>
<lb/></p>
<p>3. <note>3 &#x2014; Through Prodigality.</note>  Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
<p>3. <note>3 &#x2014; Through Prodigality.</note>  Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
Line 22: Line 22:
<p>4. <note>4 &#x2014; Through Mismanagment.</note>  Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
<p>4. <note>4 &#x2014; Through Mismanagment.</note>  Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
<lb/>
<lb/>
<hi rend='underline'>mismanagement</hi> .  In this case it was his Understanding that
<hi rend='underline'>mismanagement</hi>.  In this case it was his Understanding that
<lb/>
<lb/>
was immediately in fault.
was immediately in fault.
Line 36: Line 36:
fault of the understanding and of the Will together.
fault of the understanding and of the Will together.
<lb/></p>
<lb/></p>
<p><!-- indent -->5. <note>5 &#x2014; Litigiousness.</note>  Where he became afterwards unwilling to pay , meaning to defer <add>payment</add>
<p><!-- indent -->5. <note>5 &#x2014; Litigiousness.</note>  Where he became afterwards unwilling to pay, meaning to defer <add>payment</add>
<lb/></p>
<lb/></p>


<!-- horizontal line -->
<!-- horizontal line -->
<pb/>
 


<head>Note:</head><!-- left of centre -->
<head>Note:</head><!-- left of centre -->
<p>fraudulent Insolvlency , but Sharping . This circumstance marks out the  
<p>fraudulent Insolvlency, but Sharping. This circumstance marks out the  
<lb/>
<lb/>
limits between fraudulent Insolvency and Sharping.
limits between fraudulent Insolvency and Sharping.

Revision as of 20:51, 8 September 2011

Click Here To Edit


2. C Of Culpable Insolvency.

2. 2 — Rashness ab initio Where he represented himself as having a probable chance upon
grounds which eventually proved false fallacious, and which he had no good reason
at the time to trust to, but which however he did trust to in effect and think them
probable. In this case the debt may be said to have been contracted
rashly. In this case, we see, it is his understanding that was in fault.

3. 3 — Through Prodigality. Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
prodigality. In this case it is his Will that was in fault.

4. 4 — Through Mismanagment. Where he became afterwards unable to discharge it through
mismanagement. In this case it was his Understanding that
was immediately in fault.

The case of Mis-management may be resolved into three
others. 1. Indolence. 2. Incapacity. And 3. Rashness or Presumption.
Indolence is the fault of the Will . Incapacity is more immediately
the fault of the Understanding. Rashness or Presumption seems to be is the
fault of the understanding and of the Will together.

5. 5 — Litigiousness. Where he became afterwards unwilling to pay, meaning to defer payment


Note:

fraudulent Insolvlency, but Sharping. This circumstance marks out the
limits between fraudulent Insolvency and Sharping.



Identifier: | JB/071/189/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 71.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

not numbered

Box

071

Main Headings

penal code

Folio number

189

Info in main headings field

of culpable insolvency

Image

002

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f1 / f2 / f3 / f4

Penner

Watermarks

[[watermarks::myears [lion with crown motif]]]

Marginals

Paper Producer

caroline fox

Corrections

jeremy bentham

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

23592

Box Contents

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