date

[129b-424] 17 April 1817 Plan
[129b-424]

17 April 1817

Plan Cat

4 o Note (b)

Introd

§ 16 Moderate Reform

II Uselessness

I. Electors

18

1

to painters[?] of samples[?] of interest of man to d o of sto[?]

In[?] her interest is waste, corruption and oppression

In […?] the expence of which waste is fostered

{Make[?] out while[?] here what can by distant no time[?] except local […?]}

Note (b)

(b) On the subject of virtual universality and practical equality of suffrage taken together, to repel the more effectually the imputation contained in the epithets theoretical, speculative, and the like, one observation which might perhaps with more advantage its been stationed in/at/ an anterior part of this enquiry remains to be made.

Maximization of the regard paid to the universal interest on the occasion of its competition with the several pocket and thence sinister particular interests included in it – and to that end in the next place to the first place, say Community, say coincidence say identity of interests as between subject many on the one part and ruling few on the other part being ends /so many objects/ of a superior order with reference to any despotism that can be made of the right of suffrage, a position that follows from this admission is that of /in so far/ those uses alone are considered which in contradistinction to the collateral uses have above been distinguished by the appellation of main or direct uses, defalcations and no inconsiderable extent might without sensible inconvenience be made from the extent respectively given to the application of these principles.

From the scheme of representation leave or strike out for example this or that article /so many articles/ in the list of counties: in this or that county leave or strike out this or that /so many/ article in the list of hundreds: in the list of towns strike out so many even though they were of the number of those that stand distinguished by their populousness.

Proportioned
Similar Items
  • Title: [[102–101] 5 Dec r 1815 Chrest]
    Description: [102–101]

    5 Dec r 1815

    Chrest. or Langaguage

    Quality—Synonyms or […?] to— Add Phraseoplerosis

    1. Manner.

    2. Form.

    3. Shape.

    4. Cast.

    5. Texture.

    6. Genus & Species.

    7. Property.

    8. Power.

    9. Relation.

    10. Nature.

    Relation—Synonyms or […?] to

    1. Reference.

    2. Regard.

    Conjugates—Terminations—the most copious species

    1. Substantive Name of an action—tion from the Latin may it not be given to every verb the root of which is Latin.

    In English no. Many classes of verbs have no such corresponding name.

    Being exists not beingment. Hence need of using the participle. But the participle has the inconvenience of superadding the consideration of time and limiting the time to present time.

    2. Substantive name of a quality—termination ity—Derived from the Latin itus.

    3. Adjective name of a quality—termination ble—Latin = bilis.

    4. Verb. Terminative ize.

    5. Adverb. Termination ly. Almost all English adverbs have this termination. Is it not (by contraction) from –like?

    Parts of speech significant in themselves are

    1. Noun Substantive.

    2. Noun Adjective. +

    3. Verb (unmodified).†

    4. Adverb.‡

    II. Not significant of themselves

    5. Proposition.

    6. Conjunction.

    7. Words indicative of mood.

    8. Words indicative of time.

    Good is as intelligible by itself as Goodness—Sole difference, Good gives intimation that the /of a/ subject to which the quality is about to be asserted to inhere /be inherent/ mention is about to be made: whereas Goodness the substantive does not.

    † What is called the Infinitive mood Present tense is the Verb unmodified. In English take away the preposition to it is a substantive. To love: take away the to, you have love—the substantive.

    ‡ This includes in it the signification of

    1. A proposition.

    2. A substantive.

    3. An adjective.

    Noun

    Case—In the singular all but the genitive are in English expressed solely by Pronouns without inflection.

    The Vocative, without. But O may be added or not. Is it not a contraction for Hear. In Latin from Audio? In English either from the or from the French Oyez which is from Audio.

    In English in the singular besides the Prepositional Genitive there is the inflectional viz. –s. But in the plural this inflectional is wanting.

    So in the singular in an adjective, no inflection no preposition: the substantive suffices.

    Gender—is not expressed at all—so much the better.

    Number—is expressed by inflection: viz. by addition of s. But only in a substantive. In an adjective no sign of the plural: the pluralization of the substantive suffices.

    Verb

    1. Person. In English expressed by pronoun substantives without inflection.

    2. Number. In English expressed by pronouns without inflection: except in the second person singular: to which d o plural is almost always substituted. By this means, at the expence of an absurdity simplicity is attained. The singular serves for the language of this […?].

    3. Mood. 1. Absolute is the simple most natural most usually employed. 2. The Conditional is expressed by adjuncts some belonging to Verbs some being conjunctions.

    The pseudo-mood termed imperative is expressed in the singular by the simple omission or non-apposition of the signs of personal relation /pronominal sign/.

    In the plural the expressed pronominal sign is inserted or not according as on the occasion in question it is or is not needed: when inserted the pronoun is put after the verb: and then the imperative is distinguished from the indicative.

    The Imperative mood is indicative viz. of an Act of volition. The Greek subjunctive is either Indicative or Potential.

    May is attributed chiefly to the acts of Nature. Can, to those fo men. This for a general list by apply it at length, by conjugation.

    In the one case, attached to the idea of potentiality or probability is that of power as existing or not in some subject: power, adequate to the production of the event.

    4. Tense.

    1. Future.

    In English the idea of act of volition on the part of some person (say the speaker) is or is not, in the character of the cause of the event the futurity of which is asserted, introduced.

    Where the purpose is to represent the will of the speaker as the cause of the future event, the word [ will] is used in some of the persons and numbers of the verb, the word shall in others.

     Here give the scheme.

    Case II. Tyrannically predictive.

    The will of the speaker meant to be presented to view in the character of the cause of the action.

    I. Singular.

    1. I will strike.

    2. Thou shalt strike.

    3. He or it shall strike.

    Plural.

    4. We will strike.

    5. Ye shall strike,

    6. They shall strike.

    Case I. Simply predictive /Future/.

    The will of the speaker not meant &c.

    1. I shall strike.

    2. Thou wilt strike.

    3. He or it will strike.

    4. We shall strike.

    5. Ye will strike.

    6. They will strike.

    Voice.

    This has place in that case alone in which the verb is /being/ transitive, the proposition formed by it /of which it makes a part/ is complex.

    The Passive Voice has more of complication and refinement in it than the active. It involves the consideration and expression of causation: it brings to view an effect actually produced. It is therefore probably of later invention than the active.

    Mood—Imperative as being the expression of want and desire, is probably of an early invention.

    It is implied and involved in the use of the Vocative case of the tem. Addressed to an individual, the name being a proper one, the Vocative case imports an abstraction, as a common name does, whether the article a or the be prefixt to it.

    Quality—§§. 12. 13.

    In the established import of this word, there is nothing to exclude the idea of transitoriness—shortness of duration: and by including it the use of the word quality may be made coextensive with that of the words to predicate—Prædication.

    Prepositions

    I. Quiescent or Rest-regarding /importing/ […?]

    1. In. Within. 2. On. 3. At. 4. Near. Near to. 5. Far from? 6. With. 6. Above. 7. Under. Below. Beneath. 8. Beside. 9. Opposite to. 10. By. 11. Along.

    II. Motion-importing.

    1. To. 2. From—By? 3. Into. 4. Across—[…?] 5. Through. 6. Round? 7. Out of. Without (Adv.?) 8. Along.

    Conjunctions—1. When. When I go i.e. Development At the time at which I go.

    In its import it therefore includes that of an Adverb designative of time.

    If I go. Development. Grant that a time will exist at which I shall go.

    Of a proposition, whatsoever there is of complexity is always in the prædicate: the subject is always simple excepting that complexity which consists in plurality, where the subject is the plural number.

    Note the complexity which has place where the verb is in the conditional mood.

    Where the verb is in the first person it being a neuter or an active verb the proposition may be a simple one: but if it be in the 2 d or 3 d, the proposition is always a complex one.
  • Title: [5 Dec r 1815 Chrestom or Language]
    Description: 5 Dec r 1815

    Chrestom or Language

    I. May

    1. I may perhaps strike if I will

    2. Thou mayest if thou will

    3. He may or it may strike him if he will

    4. We may if we will

    5. Ye may if ye will

    6. They (persons or things) may

    II. Can ( Perhaps is here occasionally applicable)

    1. I can strike

    2. Thou canst strike

    3. He or it can strike

    4. We can strike

    5. Ye can strike

    6. They (persons or things) can strike

    III. MIGHT

    1. I might perhaps strike

    2. Thou mightest strike

    3. He or it might strike

    4. We might strike

    5. Ye might strike

    6. They might strike

    IV. Could

    1. I could perhaps strike

    2. Thou couldest strike

    3. He could strike

    4. We could strike

    5. Ye could strike

    6. They could strike

    V. Would

    1. I would strike

    2. Thou wouldst strike

    3. He would strike

    4. We would strike

    5. Ye would strike

    6. They would strike

    Present liberty asserting or Uncertainty asserting

    May signifies liberty and power but coupled with uncertainty as to the question whether it will be exerted or no or—applied to an event not considered as subject to human will—to the will of any person in question, uncertainty in regard to the fact of its taking place

    Present power asserting

    Hypothetical /Conditional/ liberty asserting

    Conditional or Hypothetical power assert g

    Conditional or Hypothetical volition or desire asserting

    N.B. Would—and more decidedly would not have also a categorical /[...?]/ sense When Eurybiades struck, Themistocles would not strike i.e. he chose not to strike to abstain from striking

    VI. Ought to

    1. I ought to strike

    2. Thou oughtest to strike

    3. He ought to strike

    4. We ought to strike

    5. Ye ought to strike

    6. They ought to strike

    VII. Must

    1. I must strike

    2. Thou {mustest}? strike

    3. He or it must strike

    4. We must strike

    5. Ye must strike

    6. They must strike

    VIII. Should

    1. I should strike

    2. Thou shouldest strike

    3. He should strike

    4. We should strike

    5. Ye should strike

    6. They should strike

    May not [etc etc]

    Stronger /Stricter/ moral obligation asserting—present or future absolute or conditional

    Present necessity asserting

    D o with an obscure intimation of command /imperation/

    Looser moral obligation asserting

    The use of the categorical or absolute or [...?] senses must in the order of invention have come before, and served as a basis of, the conditional. The language of brutes is throughout absolute: conditionality-embracing a prsop[ect] /survey/ taken of the future through the medium of the past and present, is an object to the surveying of which no eye inferior to the human is competent

    1. Antecedent

    If Eurybiades had killed Themistocles

    2. Consequent

    The Athenians would have killed Eurybiades
  • Title: [[copyist’s hand] 1818 August 6.]
    Description: [copyist’s hand]

    1818 August 6.

    Parl Ref Bill

    Reasons

    §.8. Election how

    Voting secret why

    New York –

    4

    Such being even in the American State in question the causes of delay, three accordingly is the number of days there alotted to the voting process. But, with the exception of the periodical and sufficient number of days allotted by religion to relief from labour, all holdings, being so many days subtracted from productive Industry and added to waste more or less in the shape of drunkenness, are nuisances: and out of 313 days to strike 2 out of 3 which otherwise would be taken from subsistence and given to waste, is no inconsiderable advantage.