★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
Auto upload |
No edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
' | <head>1826 <sic>Aug</sic> 20<lb/>Review of Humphreys</head> <!-- some in pencil --> <p>2 <note>Agenda at length<lb/>§ Corrigenda<lb/><del>§ <gap/> of the Code itself</del> <add><gap/> on Humphreys</add></note><lb/>(1) (2 <note>2. Code itself<lb/>Lengthiness — diminution of</note></p> <!-- note in pencil --> <p><note><gap/> of the<lb/>Code itself —<lb/>its amount <gap/><lb/>from the <gap/></note></p> <p>The agreement of It. with B being thus <gap/> and<lb/>incapable of being <gap/> we ensure <sic>M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi></sic> H no longer to declare the transfer<lb/>which in point of <gap/> of foundation<lb/>is <gap/> desire <gap/> is<lb/>continuously <gap/> reform to <sic>M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi></sic> B's principles.</p> <p>☞ From the <gap/> <add>confounded</add> exemplification</p> <p>This same <add>comparative degree of</add> convolution or say involvedness, of which<lb/>the <add>the three</add> exemplifications have just been given may be seen exhibited<lb/>throughout the whole texture of <sic>M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi></sic> Humphreys Code. We<lb/>have already brought to view as a general rule — that of the maximum<lb/>of distinctiveness, and thence of apprehensibility be<lb/> <gap/> at and determined on, <!-- brackets in pencil --> [the maximum of] brevity <add>consciousness</add><lb/><gap/> to a certain degree sacrificed to it. Of the sacrifice<lb/>necessary what would be the amount we can not <sic>antecedently</sic><lb/> to trial taken upon us to <gap/>. But for the exemplificati0on<lb/>already given, it may be anticipated with to <del>say</del> a degree<lb/>of exactness sufficient for <gap/> and we will venture to say<lb/>that the addition would not <del>amount</del> to so much as <del>the <add>d</add> same<lb/>as the</del> double it.</p> <p>On this occasion a necessary distinction is — that<lb/>between the quantity of <add>addition to the</add> letter press added and the quantity<lb/>of the addition to the paper employed. This addition to the quantity<lb/>of paper employed <del>operates</del> applies to the <sic>expence</sic> and that<lb/>only: <gap/> and it is strange if by the addition made to the<lb/>apprehensibility of the whole, it does not pay for the <sic>expence</sic></p> <p>Of the involvedness of the <gap/> might in a grand<lb/>degree asserted by <del><gap/></del> reference to and <gap/> of Bonaparte's<lb/>Codes: or in short the statute laws of almost any<lb/>country except our own. But only to <add>in</add> <sic>M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi></sic> Benthams<lb/>are <add>will</add> any <add>formulæ and correspondent</add> rules for the avoidance of imperfection in this shape<lb/>to be found.</p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}} |
1826 Aug 20
Review of Humphreys
2 Agenda at length
§ Corrigenda
§ of the Code itself on Humphreys
(1) (2 2. Code itself
Lengthiness — diminution of
of the
Code itself —
its amount
from the
The agreement of It. with B being thus and
incapable of being we ensure Mr H no longer to declare the transfer
which in point of of foundation
is desire is
continuously reform to Mr B's principles.
☞ From the confounded exemplification
This same comparative degree of convolution or say involvedness, of which
the the three exemplifications have just been given may be seen exhibited
throughout the whole texture of Mr Humphreys Code. We
have already brought to view as a general rule — that of the maximum
of distinctiveness, and thence of apprehensibility be
at and determined on, [the maximum of] brevity consciousness
to a certain degree sacrificed to it. Of the sacrifice
necessary what would be the amount we can not antecedently
to trial taken upon us to . But for the exemplificati0on
already given, it may be anticipated with to say a degree
of exactness sufficient for and we will venture to say
that the addition would not amount to so much as the d same
as the double it.
On this occasion a necessary distinction is — that
between the quantity of addition to the letter press added and the quantity
of the addition to the paper employed. This addition to the quantity
of paper employed operates applies to the expence and that
only: and it is strange if by the addition made to the
apprehensibility of the whole, it does not pay for the expence
Of the involvedness of the might in a grand
degree asserted by reference to and of Bonaparte's
Codes: or in short the statute laws of almost any
country except our own. But only to in Mr Benthams
are will any formulæ and correspondent rules for the avoidance of imperfection in this shape
to be found.
Identifier: | JB/078/173/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 78. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1826-08-20 |
Not numbered |
||
078 |
Review of Humphreys |
||
173 |
Review of Humphreys |
||
001 |
|||
Text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
C1 / D2 / E2 |
||
J WHATMAN TURKEY MILL 1824 |
|||
Jonathan Blenman |
|||
1824 |
|||
25264 |
|||