JB/050/003/001

Click Here To Edit

---page break---

no more than saying, that a Servant at
least such a servant as a Butler,
having plate of him whose servant
he was under Lock and Key, and stealing, ought according to their notions,
tho' they could not tell why, suffer as
for Theft, although a person not being
such a servant and having it in like manner
under Lock and Key, and not stealing
it, ought not.

In order For the difference of in signification between
custody and possession to have served
as an intelligible reason ground for their distinction
let us see how the case ought to
have stood. the case should have stood thus.

Some assignable images there ought to have
been already annexed by usage to the word
possession. In like manner ought there to
the word custody. Between the groupe of
images in the 1st case belonging to the 1st expression, and the groupe of
images belonging to the 2d, there ought
to have been some assignable difference.
It ought in consequence to have been generally
understood, that he who has the
bare custody only of a thing is punishable as for
Theft, for stealing it, tho' he who has
the possession of it is not. Nothing of
all this was so.

I mean not to say, that a Butler
stealing his Master's plate ought
not to be punished as for Theft, but that
the reason here given for it, is a reason
but in words.

What I mean is to put the public in
guard against the artifices of Lawyers,

---page break---

Identifier: | JB/050/003/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 50.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	050	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	003	Info in main headings field	law terms not understood. possession
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	c2
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield emblem]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	15994
Box Contents