JB/121/470/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/121/470/001: Difference between revisions

Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
m Protected "JB/121/470/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))
Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'[{{fullurl:JB/121/470/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'[{{fullurl:JB/121/470/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil --><head>11 Apr. 1802<lb/>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
Dispensing power</head></p>
 
<p>The letter, according to your comment <add>explanation interpretation of</add> upon it<lb/>
 
went to deprive the Penitentiary House of its inhabitants<lb/>
 
altogether:  and thence, as you say <add>according to you</add>, to frustrate<lb/>
the instructions <add>designs</add> and usurp the power of Parliament.<lb/>
Yet <add>after all</add> according to your own shewing<lb/>
the practical result of this <add>very</add> same letter, is – the<lb/>
giving you no less <del>th</del> a number than 2150<lb/>
for the measure of your Penitentiary House:  a<lb/>
<del>th</del> number more than double to that which, by<lb/>
your own shewing, the Treasury stood engaged to<lb/>
give you:  and though for the sake of round<lb/>
numbers or on the considerations that number<lb/>
was indeed afterwards reduced – still on the 20<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> of Feb<hi rend="superscript">y</hi> 1800 four months after this letter it<lb/>
stood as high as 2000 – the exact double of the<lb/>
number originally asked and granted.</p>
<p>My Lord in point of fact I admit, <add>as above</add> the<lb/>
observation to be a true one:  but my answer<lb/>
<add>to it will I trust not be an unsatisfactory one</add> to it is extremely simple.  Charging <unclear>enumerately</unclear><lb/>
in the design, I do not take upon me to charge<lb/>
consistency or so much as common sense in the<lb/>
course of argument <add>or conduct</add> taken in pursuit of it.  The<lb/>
reasoning – the doctrines – the portraying are such as<lb/>
your Lordship has seen:  they are not the less so,<lb/>
for whatever <add>any thing that</add> may have been added about numbers.<lb/>
The reasoning came from one source:  the numbers<lb/>
from another.  The reasoning, was nature:  the genuine <add>pure</add><lb/>
<del>product</del> <add>offspring</add> of the cerebellum of M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> King:  the numbers were<lb/>
<add>from</add></p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Ready_For_Review}}

Revision as of 03:05, 15 October 2021

'Click Here To Edit

11 Apr. 1802
Dispensing power

The letter, according to your comment explanation interpretation of upon it
went to deprive the Penitentiary House of its inhabitants
altogether: and thence, as you say according to you, to frustrate
the instructions designs and usurp the power of Parliament.
Yet after all according to your own shewing
the practical result of this very same letter, is – the
giving you no less th a number than 2150
for the measure of your Penitentiary House: a
th number more than double to that which, by
your own shewing, the Treasury stood engaged to
give you: and though for the sake of round
numbers or on the considerations that number
was indeed afterwards reduced – still on the 20th of Feby 1800 four months after this letter it
stood as high as 2000 – the exact double of the
number originally asked and granted.

My Lord in point of fact I admit, as above the
observation to be a true one: but my answer
to it will I trust not be an unsatisfactory one to it is extremely simple. Charging enumerately
in the design, I do not take upon me to charge
consistency or so much as common sense in the
course of argument or conduct taken in pursuit of it. The
reasoning – the doctrines – the portraying are such as
your Lordship has seen: they are not the less so,
for whatever any thing that may have been added about numbers.
The reasoning came from one source: the numbers
from another. The reasoning, was nature: the genuine pure
product offspring of the cerebellum of Mr King: the numbers were
from


Identifier: | JB/121/470/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 121.

Date_1

1802-04-11

Marginal Summary Numbering

1 continued, 2

Box

121

Main Headings

Panopticon

Folio number

470

Info in main headings field

Dispensing power

Image

001

Titles

Category

Text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

Recto"Recto" is not in the list (recto, verso) of allowed values for the "Rectoverso" property.

Page Numbering

D3

Penner

Watermarks

CW 1799

Marginals

Jeremy Bentham

Paper Producer

C. Abbit Lees

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1799

Notes public

ID Number

001

Box Contents

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