★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head><del>HIGH-WAY <add> TURNP </add> ACT</del> Double Costs</head> <head>PROCEDURE</head><lb/><p>At the time <add><gap/></add> I wrote this I know not (for who <lb/> could have imagined) that <del> according </del> <add> in the language of the </add> Law or rather <lb/> <del><gap/> <gap/></del> <add>of </add> as daring abuse which has eaten out the <lb/> heart of Law, <hi rend='underline'>double</hi> means only, <hi rend='underline'>half as much again</hi> <lb/> <hi rend='underline'>treble, half & a quarter as much again, </hi>& so on </p><note>Thus to use the illustration of the <gap/> of an ingenious title Pract. <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> <note> <add> <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> Dialogue on the Game Laws <add> Printed for </add> <unclear>Weltive</unclear> - 1771.</add></note> which first put me on the enquiry, <hi rend='superscript'>rr</hi> the Masters, Pro<gap/>notaries & other Officers who tax costs, allow, when the single costs amount to £100<add> for double </add> only £150 <del> for double </del> for treble, only £175. I have been assured by Practitioners that nominal costs thus <del> <gap/> of good <gap/> </del> trebled, frequently come short of those actually incurred. I see no reason to doubt the rectitude of this <add> whereas there were </add> who first devised what <gap/> intentions: they thought to do an act of mercy in softening a vigerous provision.</note> <lb/> <p> <del> The Laws & <unclear>Customs</unclear> of </del> <add>Little do</add> The Powers who give Laws unto this<lb/> this realm <del> little </del> concern<lb/> that while and the exercise of this <add> <del> they are occupied</del> <add> occupying <unclear>the very clues</unclear> </add> as they think </add> <add> that most exalted <lb/><del> section of humanity</del> <add> privilege </add> there sits that scribbler <lb/>at his desk who shall turn <del> all </del> <add> what </add> they have written <lb/> into Waste-paper.</p> <p> Buen would have called, this <gap/> construction </p> <p> A few examples of this flagrancy <del> are </del> <add> would be </add> sufficient <lb/> to destroy all confidence in the Law from among <lb/> <note> Weak reasons! who knows not, that better it was the arm of Law should <gap/> with <unclear>ten</unclear> -fold severity, than be loosed by their unhallowed hands </note> the people - Eyes are not to be trusted: Common <lb/>Sense is a deceiver: the most <unclear>chancentery</unclear> knowledge <lb/> of the plainest & most <sic>incontestible</sic> principles of Arithmetic <lb/> is an | <head><del>HIGH-WAY <add> TURNP </add> ACT</del> Double Costs</head> <head>PROCEDURE</head><lb/><p>At the time <add><gap/></add> I wrote this I know not (for who <lb/> could have imagined) that <del> according </del> <add> in the language of the </add> Law or rather <lb/> <del><gap/> <gap/></del> <add>of </add> as daring abuse which has eaten out the <lb/> heart of Law, <hi rend='underline'>double</hi> means only, <hi rend='underline'>half as much again</hi> <lb/> <hi rend='underline'>treble, half & a quarter as much again, </hi>& so on </p><note>Thus to use the illustration of the <gap/> of an ingenious title Pract. <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> <note> <add> <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> Dialogue on the Game Laws <add> Printed for </add> <unclear>Weltive</unclear> - 1771.</add></note> which first put me on the enquiry, <hi rend='superscript'>rr</hi> the Masters, Pro<gap/>notaries & other Officers who tax costs, allow, when the single costs amount to £100<add> for double </add> only £150 <del> for double </del> for treble, only £175. I have been assured by Practitioners that nominal costs thus <del> <gap/> of good <gap/> </del> trebled, frequently come short of those actually incurred. I see no reason to doubt the rectitude of this <add> whereas there were </add> who first devised what <gap/> intentions: they thought to do an act of mercy in softening a vigerous provision.</note> <lb/> <p> <del> The Laws & <unclear>Customs</unclear> of </del> <add>Little do</add> The Powers who give Laws unto this<lb/> this realm <del> little </del> concern<lb/> that while and the exercise of this <add> <del> they are occupied</del> <add> occupying <unclear>the very clues</unclear> </add> as they think </add> <add> that most exalted <lb/><del> section of humanity</del> <add> privilege </add> there sits that scribbler <lb/>at his desk who shall turn <del> all </del> <add> what </add> they have written <lb/> into Waste-paper.</p> <p> Buen would have called, this <gap/> construction </p> <p> A few examples of this flagrancy <del> are </del> <add> would be </add> sufficient <lb/> to destroy all confidence in the Law from among <lb/> <note> Weak reasons! who knows not, that better it was the arm of Law should <gap/> with <unclear>ten</unclear> -fold severity, than be loosed by their unhallowed hands </note> the people - Eyes are not to be trusted: Common <lb/>Sense is a deceiver: the most <unclear>chancentery</unclear> knowledge <lb/> of the plainest & most <sic>incontestible</sic> principles of Arithmetic <lb/> is an incumbrance <!-- symbol --> </p><p> <add><!-- symbol --> Whoever from <del>the</del> knowledge of <add> knowing of ... this deficiency </add> <del> the inadequacy</del> <lb/><del> of the <sic>recompence</sic> </del> <add> <del><gap/></del> </add> desists from a prosecution, is <lb/> an evidence of <del>the</del> <add> a </add> mischief <del> done to the </del> <add> <sic>suffer'd</sic> by </add> Public. <lb/> <note> in the good faith of the Law <unclear>engager</unclear> </note>Whoever engages <del> in one </del> <add> from </add> not knowing if it engages <lb/>in one, is an individual <del><gap/></del><add> injured</add> <add> <gap/> </add> & abused. </add></p><pb/><p> <del>I must own it would be a spectacle </del> <add> A spectacle it would be to me, I must acknowledge </add> not unpleasing <lb/> because <add><gap/> </add> I think it would be an useful one, to see some <lb/> of these [Gentle]men who are wiser than the Laws <lb/> [brought] on their knees before an <unclear>insulted</unclear> Legislation <lb/> to own their folly - What <del> I may </del> <add> is here <sic>complain'd</sic> of </add> has no <lb/> application to these Gentlemen, <add> unless they are the first Authors </add> who <del> one </del> new <del> <gap/> </del> <lb/> <del>profession of </del> <add> occupy </add> these departments - Custom <add> with the <gap/> of their <gap/> </add> is to <lb/> them a sole & warrantable guide: & this custom <lb/> is inveterate. </p> <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | ||
HIGH-WAY TURNP ACT Double Costs PROCEDURE
At the time I wrote this I know not (for who
could have imagined) that according in the language of the Law or rather
of as daring abuse which has eaten out the
heart of Law, double means only, half as much again
treble, half & a quarter as much again, & so on
Thus to use the illustration of the of an ingenious title Pract. + <note> + Dialogue on the Game Laws <add> Printed for Weltive - 1771.</add> which first put me on the enquiry, rr the Masters, Pronotaries & other Officers who tax costs, allow, when the single costs amount to £100 for double only £150 for double for treble, only £175. I have been assured by Practitioners that nominal costs thus of good trebled, frequently come short of those actually incurred. I see no reason to doubt the rectitude of this whereas there were who first devised what intentions: they thought to do an act of mercy in softening a vigerous provision.</note>
The Laws & Customs of Little do The Powers who give Laws unto this
this realm little concern
that while and the exercise of this they are occupied <add> occupying the very clues as they think </add> that most exalted
section of humanity <add> privilege there sits that scribbler
at his desk who shall turn all what they have written
into Waste-paper.
Buen would have called, this construction
A few examples of this flagrancy are would be sufficient
to destroy all confidence in the Law from among
Weak reasons! who knows not, that better it was the arm of Law should with ten -fold severity, than be loosed by their unhallowed hands the people - Eyes are not to be trusted: Common
Sense is a deceiver: the most chancentery knowledge
of the plainest & most incontestible principles of Arithmetic
is an incumbrance
Whoever from the knowledge of <add> knowing of ... this deficiency the inadequacy
of the recompence desists from a prosecution, is
an evidence of the a mischief done to the suffer'd by Public.
in the good faith of the Law engager Whoever engages in one from not knowing if it engages
in one, is an individual injured & abused. </add>
---page break---
I must own it would be a spectacle A spectacle it would be to me, I must acknowledge not unpleasing
because I think it would be an useful one, to see some
of these [Gentle]men who are wiser than the Laws
[brought] on their knees before an insulted Legislation
to own their folly - What I may is here complain'd of has no
application to these Gentlemen, unless they are the first Authors who one new
profession of occupy these departments - Custom with the of their is to
them a sole & warrantable guide: & this custom
is inveterate.
|
Identifier: | JB/095/084/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 95. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
095 |
|||
|
084 |
procedure turnp. double costs |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
|||
|
jeremy bentham |
l v g |
||
|
caroline vernon |
|||
|
30970 |
|||
