JB/116/235/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/116/235/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
Lea Stern (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/116/235/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/116/235/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>24 Mar. 1802 <lb/>N. S. Wales 4</head>
 
<p>of the legislator that [a transportation to this intended <lb/>Erebus <add>Tartarus,</add>]  a banishment intended <add>and hoped</add> to be for life is authorized <lb/>under a sentence which in words suppose it<lb/> to be for only three years.<lb/> <hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> <note><hi rend='superscript'>+</hi> not so for the Art 1779 does not number Botany Bay. Power is given to choose the place of transportation but that should not be so construed as to amount to an extension of the punishment. By the place of necessity they obtained from the Legislature power to <gap/> the place: and by abuse of their <gap/> they have confounded proportions, and changed just punishment into infinite.</note> </p>
<p>It is <add>certainly</add> not contrary to law for a <del>man to</del> <lb/>Secretary of State to send a man to this intended<lb/> Tartarus under a sentence which speaks but of three <lb/>year. <del>What</del> Is it or is not contrary to law, <del>for</del> <lb/>in the case where the three years want but a few <lb/>days of having expired?</p>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





Revision as of 23:39, 20 March 2013

Click Here To Edit

24 Mar. 1802
N. S. Wales 4

of the legislator that [a transportation to this intended
Erebus Tartarus,] a banishment intended and hoped to be for life is authorized
under a sentence which in words suppose it
to be for only three years.
+ + not so for the Art 1779 does not number Botany Bay. Power is given to choose the place of transportation but that should not be so construed as to amount to an extension of the punishment. By the place of necessity they obtained from the Legislature power to the place: and by abuse of their they have confounded proportions, and changed just punishment into infinite.

It is certainly not contrary to law for a man to
Secretary of State to send a man to this intended
Tartarus under a sentence which speaks but of three
year. What Is it or is not contrary to law, for
in the case where the three years want but a few
days of having expired?





























































































Identifier: | JB/116/235/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 116.

Date_1

1802-03-24

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

116

Main Headings

panopticon versus new south wales

Folio number

235

Info in main headings field

n. s. wales

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e4

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

jeremy bentham

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

37768

Box Contents

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