JB/122/127/001

'Click Here To Edit

18 July 1808 + Charge 6
Charge 6
4. Query 1st
Requisition 3

(2) 6
At the very time therefore of putting this question, Mr Chief
Inspector had before him, or without his own wilful default
or culpable negligence would have had, a document
an answer, from a source and that in terms it
printed, and from a source so decisive, as to render
the said question altogether superfluous and useless, and the requisition
contained in it vexatious.

But as already observed, viz. in the first of these
charges + Mr Chief Inspector had at the same time + p of these papers
also lying before him the Account by which itself: in and by which Account together
with the vouchers sent with it, as well as from which tenor of the Accountants' said Examination [ as aforesaid clearly appeared, that of the which £2,000
4
3 - by the Account
in which that money
and more is stated
as disbursed
£0 in 1796
of Government money in question, the which, together
with a great deal it more of the Accountant's own money
had been disbursed (supposing any due to the Accountant, when speaking of
facts at that time of the utmost notoriety, had been disbursed.

But, the question before the Board, and, the by
authority of from the Board before this Officer, the said Mr
5
The case in which
this requisition could
not have been irrelevant
a possibility that this part
of the money remained
undisturbedChief Inspector, was is - The £2,000 Government
money, impressed into the Accountants hand by King's Warrant dated <add> 14 June 34th George the 3d (1794)</add> for the purpose
"of making preparations for the custody and care of the Convicts
"prepared to be confined in the Penitentiary Houses intended
(at that time) "to be erected was it bona fide had it (i.e. had a sum equal to this <add>it) been disbursed
at the in <add> that behalf stated in the said Account and stated [+][+] viz. before the end of
the year 1796, been
expended said bona fide applied to that said purpose?. But to this
question, as any other supposition than the so often unsuccessful
negatived groundless and completely disproved and supposition, that
the
of the case being
before his eyes, the
requisition was irrelevant
and vexatious
before the said expenditure was completed, the Accountant
had received from the said Lords Commissioners of the Treasury,
notice to the same, the any intention of
the said Lord Commissioners at any time, especially any
intimation of on their part subsequently the compleat
expenditure of the said £2,000, viz. the end of the year 1796 was not only useless
foreign and inapplicable: and
but irrelevant and :

and, in  therefore  that respect<lb/< the  said Mr Chief Inspectors  requisition
 calling    for a  communication of such intentions, was not superfluous,    but irrelevant, and in that account vexatious.

Identifier: | JB/122/127/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 122.
Date_1	1808-07-18	Marginal Summary Numbering	4-6
Box	122	Main Headings	Panopticon
Folio number	127	Info in main headings field	Charge 6
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	E2
Penner		Watermarks
Marginals	Jeremy Bentham	Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public	See note 3 to letter 1986, vol. 7	ID Number	001
Box Contents