1
results found in
101 ms
Page 1
of 1
1819 Jan. y 12
Parl. Reform Bill
Preliminary View
Evils & Remedies
Remedies
Miselection
Electors
Qualifications
3 Scholarship
10
51
Anti Reformist. Ah now – here are you running riot again. You have forgot your list
of qualifications. Are you come to the end of them?
Refromist. Not quite: there remains one more. With your leave to save words, I will
call it in one word Scholarship.
Anti-Reformist. Scholarship, quotha? and so your voters are to be all Scholars: and
none but such as are Scholars are to have votes. Well – one comfort is – that the
multitude which I confess I have always been so much afraid of will be somewhat
thinned.
Reformist. Not so much as you seem to imagine. All the scholarship I require is
contained in a man’s being able to read the bible in his mother tongue, and to trace
out in any legible manner the small number of characters of which his name is
composed.
Anti-Reformist. And of those who do not /would not otherwise/ possess it how many do
you expect and in your expectation put themselves in possession of this qualification
/it/. How many are there that would find means? how many are there that would find
motives?
Reformist. As for what regards means, the point /matter/ has been pretty well
settled already: settled by an experiment made in a scale of such extent, and under
such disadvantages, as suffices already to throw the /all/ idea of difficulty out of
the case.
Anti-Reformist. What is this you are talking of ? /have in view?/ {you are so
sanguine about? What new and curious invention have you got here?}
Similar Items
-
Title: [1819 Jan y 16 Parl. Reform Bill]Description: 1819 Jan y 16 Parl. Reform Bill Dialogue Preliminary View Evils & Remedies II Remedies Miselection Election Qualification 3 Scholarship 12 Anti-Reformist. Well – to be sure /Doubtless/, Scholarship – I mean in the same degree of it which you have in view is a very /mighty/ good thing: it is what on all sides of the question we are all so anxious to give the utmost possible extension to. But are you aware how you are thus departing from your principles thus adding exclusion to exclusion? Is there no inconsistency in thus shutting the door not only against so many Non-Adults to whom it might have been left /thrown/ open, but even to Adults in countless numbers? Among your professed[?] principles has been that of excluding as far as possible, all sensible evil – if not all discontent, that being impossible, all discontent founded on just cause. Will not discontent and according to you just /well grounded/ discontent be let in, by shutting out Adults, and in such vast /incalculable/ numbers. Reformist. No inconsistency – no well-grounded discontent – if I do not greatly miscalculate, if I do not greatly deceive myself in misjudgement of the men I have to deal with, no discontent well or ill grounded. Consider how plain[?] it can not but be to every one of these, how sincerely not only the general good /benefit/ but his own individual benefit is aimed at by the condition thus imposed: how surely and compleatly it will be in his power to fulfill it, and with no more trouble than so many thousands have already submitted to take upon themselves, and without any such then unthought of reward as is now for the first time offered to his hands: Long
-
Title: [1818 Dece r 25. Dialogue Evils]Description: 1818 Dece r 25. Dialogue Evils & Remedies Evils 43 24 Anti-Reformist. By me it shall not. Well now, if you have found logic, have not I found patience? Reformist. Indeed have you, and beyond all expectation. Anti-Reformist. Good: but now is the time for the virtue to have its reward. If I endured your evils, it was in hope of coming to the remedies. Reformist. These you shall have I shall not grudge them to you. But this same logic: /which/ you have swallowed it indeed most /so/ heroically: let us see whether you have digested it. Anti Reformist. Pah! pah! You are too hard upon me. This is more than you bargained for: patience, yes: hard labour, not. Reformist. Nay but it will not be labour in vain. You are impatient for my remedies. These remedies – in what other order can they be presented to you, so proper as that of the evils? the correspondent evils?
-
Title: [1819 Jan y 5 Parl. Reform Bill]Description: 1819 Jan y 5 Parl. Reform Bill Dialogue Preliminary View Evil & Remedies Remedies Miselection Electors Qualifications 1 30 25 Anti-Reformist But, were it only for […?] sake, for the sake of humouring /humouring/ people in their opinions in those opinions which you call prejudices – would it not be better to require on the part of the Electors either[?] one or more of those endowments which have been customarily which hitherto have every where been required under the name of qualifications? Reformist. By humouring you mean – I will take for granted unless you disavow me /correct me/ - avoiding to displease – to produce pain or uneasiness of mind. Uneasiness of mind is an evil – a sensible evil – or there is no such thing in human nature. Yes – to be sure, I would humour every body /man/, as far as the evil here in question can be prevented without the introduction of a greater evil. Where I could not humour every body, I would humour as many as I could, and accordingly where one set of men could not be humoured without the adoption of a proposed measure /arrangement/ nor another set of men without the rejection of it, I would so far as humour could be warrantably consulted /taken for the guide/ as above, the greater number is the number that I would on every occasion I would humour, not the lesser. Will this satisfy you? Anti-reformist. So far as mere humour I see not at present any thing presumptory[?] to object to it: I mean so long as the humour lasts. For whether it is likely to last, and if yes, how long it is likely to last this is a point on every occasion to be considered Reformist. Unquestionably it is.
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1