date

6 July 1811 30 V. ad Juperbriam Fallacies
6 July 1811 30 V. ad Juperbriam

Fallacies Ch. 1

23 or 17 or 4

| | Demand plausible whether

2. Grant of privilege

2. Grant of privilege from the sovereignty to a portion of the community in the character of subjects.

If by /in/ the grant here in question the affect foreseen at the time was the making any clear defalcation from the aggregate happiness of the community as above, it ought not at that time to have been made.

On the other hand /Nor on the other hand /in the contrary case// as little ought an

And /Moreover/ on the other hand as to any proposed change unless from or on occasion of it a clear addition in some shape or other to the /that/ aggregate mass be the sufficiently probable result the change itself, consisting in the abolition of the contract or some alteration made in the effect of it, ought not to have been made. And by the supposition that portion of the community which had been a party to the contract being as much a portion, and the as large a portion of the community as any other composed of equal numbers, the advantage supposed to accrue to the whole community taken in the aggregate could not accrue to it but by the further supposition that for any disadvantage resulting to such contracting portion adequate compensation has been made.

Under this head are included all those more particular cases which exhibit the sovereignty in the act of contracting with this or that individual or assemblage of individuals, for money or money's worth to be supplied or service in this or that other shape rendered, on the other.
Similar Items
  • Title: [6 July 1811 29 V ad Juperbriam Fallacies]
    Description: 6 July 1811 29 V ad Juperbriam

    Fallacies Ch. | | Posterity Chainers

    22 or 10 or 3

    | | Due and plausible, when

    1 Contract

    Note that in this case a further observation is that at all times whatsoever privileges or advantages (be the name employed what it may) the whole community is understood to be capable of receiving without prejudice to its own happiness /itself/ at the hands of the governing part of it those it ought at all times it ought to be /have/ in possession of. In this case therefore, if of the proposed change the effect be suppose to be that of giving increase the utmost practicable increase to the aggregate happiness of the community as above, compensation is thereby made nor is there either need of a room for compensation in any other Shape
  • Title: [July 1811 July 4 + + E 10 V ad Juperbriam]
    Description: July 1811 July 4 + + E

    10 V ad Juperbriam

    Fallacies Fallacies Ch

    5 1

    5

    ' 5 Duration of laws - possible erroneous arrangements in relation to it.

    In respect of duration, in all these cases there is one and the same sort of arrangement presents itself as being, so far as it is in the nature of the case practicable, the only one that is conformable not only to the dictates of general utility as presented by reason and experience as well as /but also/ to the most generally /extensively/ prevalent usage, to little less than uninterrupted usage.

    This arrangement is that which has place where the duration of the law in question is understood to be perpetual, /continue in force so long and so far only/ except in so far as by the sovereignty in question no abrogation of it or alteration in it by place

    Defeasible perpetuity is the name by which in two words or in one word this most ordinary and natural mode of duration may be characterised. [...?] the sort of arrangement presented by the principle of defeasible perpetuity.

    In each of the four first of these six cases this arrangement is in the nature of the case a practicable one: in each of those cases the perpetuity is in the nature of the case defeasible.

    In the fifth and sixth alone, it is not in the nature of the case practicable: in neither of those cases is the perpetuity in the nature of the case defeasible

    In the /The/ case of an incorporative Union between two sovereignties /sovereignties is that of a contract, in virtue of which/ the two contracting parties, thew two original sovereignties are both of them extinct and gine.[?] Unless in so far as in and by the act of incorporation special provision is made for the purpose there exist no person, no party, by whom any such operation as that of dissolving the union and replacing /restoring/ the two Guardian[?] /re-instating/ sovereignties in /into/ their original state is capable of being performed. There exists no person /not person or persons/ other than the aggregate body of the whole community expected, by whom any such restitutive can be so much as called for /demanded/ and claimed. /demanded./
  • Title: [4 July 1811 14 V. ad Juperbriam Fallacies]
    Description: 4 July 1811 14 V. ad Juperbriam

    Fallacies 9 or 6 Ch.

    As to the impossibility of the supposed results, and thence the absurdity of the enterprize, the considerations by which it is rendered it should seem sufficiently evident are as follows.

    The impossibility of perpetuity in the physical /strict sense/ is not worth insisting on - He /of him/ who on behalf of any proposed law would be more desirous of persuading himself that it will be, and /as well as/ others that it ought to be perpetual, the expectations at least howsoever it may be with his wishes will scarcely extend themselves to the extreme end of time. So long as the community continues a community and the sovereignty a sovereignty acting as such over that same community beyond the extent of time marked out by these expression he will hardly insist upon carrying his view.