Affichage de 3486 résultats

See the table of contents below. On the spine is stamped ‘The Glasse of Righteousness by H. Nichol of the family of Love. M.S.S. Anno M. D. LXXX.’

—————

Contents

f. i r: Title: ‘The Glasse of Righteousnes. (Speculum Justitiae) Through the holy Spirit of the Love of Jesus Christ and the deified Man, out of the Heavenly truth witnessed and published. To a declareing the Headsumme of the Upright Righteousnes or Kingly crowne of the Everlasting life. And is by HN perused anew and playnely or Distinctly declared. Translated out of Base-almayne. … ANNO. M. D. LXXX.’

f. 1v: Print of a symbolic representation of the Last Judgement, headed, in Low German, ‘Nu geit idt Gerichte ŏuer de Werlt: nu wert de Fŏrste desser Werlt vth-geworpen. Joan. 12.’ (John xii. 31). 1590 x 1630.
The illustration depicts, in the words of the British Museum catalogue, ‘an angel hovering above two large orbs; a devil and skeleton standing on the right orb as it is swallowed by a hell mouth [with a lamb in front]; at left the same orb upturned, crush-ing the devil, the lamb with the flag of the resurrection standing on top of the fallen skeleton’. The angel carries a label inscribed ‘Nu is idt Heil de Kraft, vnde idt Ryck vnserem Gode geworden vnde de Macht Synem Christo Apoc 12’ (Rev. xii. 10). The lambs are each labelled ‘De Wech de Waerheit vnde idt Leuen’ (‘The Way, the Truth, and the Life’); the devils are each labelled ‘Sunde’ (‘Sin’).
Cf. British Museum No. 1870,0514.311.

f. 5r: ‘The First Booke. of the Glasse of Righteousnes.’
At the foot of the page is the date 1578.

f. 77r: Print of a symbolic representation of God in Heaven, 1656.
Engraved by Richard Gaywood. The print depicts a sun with the tetragrammaton in the centre, surrounded by clouds and a heavenly host. At the head is the text ‘Ego primus et ego novissimus: alpha et omega Is. 44.48. Ap.1.21.22’, and round the sun is ‘Coronae assimilabo judicium meum. 4.Esd.5.’ This is an elaboration of the device which appears on the title-page of several of Niclaes’s books, e.g. The Prophetie of the Spirit of Love (1574).

f. 78r: ‘The Second Booke of the Glasse of Righteousnes.’

f. 201r: ‘The Third Booke of the Glasse of Righteousnes.’

f. 295r: ‘The Tree of Life | The Fourth Booke of the Glasse of Righteousnes.’

f. 403r: Print of a heart and other emblems, captioned with verses beginning ‘Our Heart is the Minde of God’, 17th c.
Two hands clasped in greeting in front of a lily, within a heart surrounded by rays of light, clouds, and winged heads. Above the hands are the words ‘Love trueth’, and amidst the clouds are the tetragrammaton and the word ‘Emmanuel’. Below the illustration are the following verses: ‘Our Heart is the Minde of God most high. Our Beeing amiable, as the sweet Lillie. Our faitfullnes Love and Trueth upright, Is Gods Light. life, and Cleernes bright.’

Label inside front cover, "a. The Philosophy of the Progressive [Sciences], Introduction, Philosophy of the Pure Sciences".

1 Eaton Square (London).—Explains why he considers the amount of international monetary reserves inadequate, and suggests remedies.

—————

Transcript

1 Eaton Square.
March 20, 1961.

Dear Pethick,

Thank you for your letter.

I am sorry my debate {1} had to be postponed until March 28, but the Government rightly wanted it taken as a separate subject.

My point is that the amount of international monetary reserves are inadequate to support the ever-growing volume of production and trade in the free world; with the result that the two great international currencies, the dollar and sterling, are under alternate but continuous pressure.

After the war it was assumed—by all except Keynes—that we could rely upon increased gold production and continued growth in holdings of dollars and pounds sterling. This has proved a false assumption. The total amount of funds capable of international movement is now very large indeed, compared to our reserves and IMF drawing rights. And it is this vulnerability that has caused us to adopt what has been described as the “Stop-and-go” policy of recent years, with disastrous effects upon our own economic growth and productivity.

The truth is that the price paid at Bretton Woods for fixed exchanges was supposed to be adequate international monetary reserves; and, owing to the rejection of Keynes’s scheme for the creation of international money in the form of “Bancor”, the necessary reserves were not in fact provided. The monetary system of the free world is therefore obsolete.

Various remedies have been propounded, and I shall touch on some of them.

A rise in the price of gold (now pegged at a wholly artificial level) is obviously one. But it would not be permanent; and I think that at present it is politically impossible.

It is, however, not insuperably difficult to devise means of creating more international liquidity and of converting present holdings of national reserve currencies—sterling and dollars—into holdings of reserves with international backing.

The culmination of a radical revision of the international monetary system should, in my view, be the transformation of the International Monetary Fund into an international central bank, the deposits of which would be an international currency on the lines of Keynes’s “Bancor”. This could be achieved in successive stages; but would ultimately require a revision of the Bretton Woods Charter. The main objective is a reorganisation of the international financial system designed to facilitate economic growth, and to remove the constant threat to balances of payment caused by the movement of “hot” money.

I therefore intend to ask for an international economic conference to consider the whole problem. And I am encouraged by the fact that the Radcliffe Committee saw “great merit in the proposal for a transformation of the I.M.F. into an international central bank”; and that President Kennedy said in his Inaugural Address, “We must now, in co-operation with other lending countries, begin to consider ways in which the international monetary institutions—especially the International Monetary Fund—can be strengthened and more effectively utilised, both in furnishing needed increases in reserves, and in providing the flexibility required to support a healthy and growing world economy”.

I do not know how many speakers there will be. But Derick Amory, Robbins and Bob Brand are certainties. Walter Monckton will be there. And I am hoping to persuade Cyril Radcliffe to do his duty!
It should be an interesting debate on a topic which, in my belief, is of major importance—perhaps the most important of all.

Yours ever,
Bob B.

—————

Letter-head of the House of Lords. At the head have been written ‘File.’ and ‘620’.

{1} A debate on ‘International Liquidity in the Free World’. See Parliamentary Debates (Hansard): House of Lords, vol. ccxxx, pp. 51–107.

Fisher’s Hill, Woking, Surrey.—Responds to comments on women’s suffrage by Bonar Law and others, and reports on her meeting with Maud Selborne.

(In an unidentified hand.)

—————

Transcript

Bets to Mother

Copy| Extracts

Fishers Hill: Woking: Surrey. Sat Jan. 27. 1912.

… I am bitterly disappointed in Bonar Law as reported in the Times—but Gerald says he is sure he said Womanhood suffrage which would have been better {1}. I have not looked in the Standard yet. Times sentence on Belfast seems to be ludicrously inconsistent with their anti-militant attitude, but Gerald wont see it. I thought the “Votes” article on Catholic Emancipation most striking as a parallel. Do read it.

Maude† (Selborne) was quite charming to me. She is working Suffrage very hard locally & she too is on her Hampshire Education Committee—we talked that too. About Referendum she agrees with me that Grey did not mean what he is supposed to have to have meant. It was only in answer to a question—& he meant “Oh! If the H. of Commons press for a Referendum, that is a new question”—just as he might say “If the H. of Commons cease to want W.S. the situation is changed.” But G. saw in the paper yesterday that Lloyd George too is coming round to the Referendum. This in the face of his former strong statements! I cant yet believe it.

Maud says we shant get one {2} Conservative to vote against Referendum, because they are keen to get it tried, realising that the machinery once established it cant be refused for other questions. But she believes if it were to be put in the form “Are you in favour of women who pay rates & taxes having the vote?” we should win.

She told me of a row she has been having with Pole Carew (Gen[era]l Sir Reginald) on Suffrage. She really is a splendid worker on her own lines—& she says Lady Willoughby (De Broke) is first rate.

—————

{1} The reference is to Bonar Law’s address to a large political meeting at the Albert Hall the night before, as reported in the The Times. The relevant passage is as follows: ‘The first item on their [the Government’s] programme is manhood suffrage, which I venture to say was not mentioned before the election by any single member of the Government. And it is not manhood suffrage only. It may be woman suffrage as well. The Prime Minister has told us that woman suffrage would be a disaster, and in the same breath he says that he is ready to be the instrument for perpetrating that disaster. Has ever British statesmanship fallen so low?’ (The Times, 27 Jan. 1912, p. 10.)

{2} Reading uncertain.