按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Enlightened to…day by the triumphal march of science； taught by the most glorious successes to question our own opinions； we receive with favor and applause the observer of Nature； who； by a thousand experiments based upon the most profound analysis； pursues a new principle； a law hitherto undiscovered。 We take care to repel no idea； no fact； under the pretext that abler men than ourselves lived in former days； who did not notice the same phenomena； nor grasp the same analogies。 Why do we not preserve a like attitude towards political and philosophical questions？ Why this ridiculous mania for affirming that every thing has been said； which means that we know all about mental and moral science？ Why is the proverb； THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN； applied exclusively to metaphysical investigations？
Because we still study philosophy with the imagination； instead of by observation and method； because fancy and will are universally regarded as judges； in the place of arguments and facts；it has been impossible to this day to distinguish the charlatan from the philosopher； the savant from the impostor。 Since the days of Solomon and Pythagoras； imagination has been exhausted in guessing out social and psychological laws； all systems have been proposed。 Looked at in this light； it is probably true that EVERY THING HAS BEEN SAID； but it is no less true that EVERY THING REMAINS TO BE PROVED。 In politics （to take only this branch of philosophy）； in politics every one is governed in his choice of party by his passion and his interests； the mind is submitted to the impositions of the will；there is no knowledge； there is not even a shadow of certainty。 In this way； general ignorance produces general tyranny； and while liberty of thought is written in the charter； slavery of thought； under the name of MAJORITY RULE； is decreed by the charter。
In order to confine myself to the civil prescription of which the Code speaks； I shall refrain from beginning a discussion upon this worn…out objection brought forward by proprietors； it would be too tiresome and declamatory。 Everybody knows that there are rights which cannot be prescribed； and； as for those things which can be gained through the lapse of time； no one is ignorant of the fact that prescription requires certain conditions； the omission of one of which renders it null。 If it is true； for example； that the proprietor's possession has been CIVIL； PUBLIC； PEACEABLE； and UNINTERRUPTED； it is none the less true that it is not based on a just title； since the only titles which it can showoccupation and laborprove as much for the proletaire who demands； as for the proprietor who defends。 Further； this possession is DISHONEST； since it is founded on a violation of right； which prevents prescription； according to the saying of St。 Paul_Nunquam in usucapionibus juris error possessori prodest_。 The violation of right lies either in the fact that the holder possesses as proprietor； while he should possess only as usufructuary； or in the fact that he has purchased a thing which no one had a right to transfer or sell。
Another reason why prescription cannot be adduced in favor of property （a reason borrowed from jurisprudence） is that the right to possess real estate is a part of a universal right which has never been totally destroyed even at the most critical periods； and the proletaire； in order to regain the power to exercise it fully； has only to prove that he has always exercised it in part。
He； for example； who has the universal right to possess； give； exchange； loan； let； sell； transform； or destroy a thing； preserves the integrity of this right by the sole act of loaning； though he has never shown his authority in any other manner。 Likewise we shall see that EQUALITY OF POSSESSIONS； EQUALITY OF RIGHTS； LIBERTY； WILL； PERSONALITY； are so many identical expressions of one and the same idea；the RIGHT OF PRESERVATION and DEVELOPMENT； in a word； the right of life； against which there can be no prescription until the human race has vanished from the face of the earth。
Finally； as to the time required for prescription； it would be superfluous to show that the right of property in general cannot be acquired by simple possession for ten； twenty； a hundred； a thousand； or one hundred thousand years； and that； so long as there exists a human head capable of understanding and combating the right of property； this right will never be prescribed。 For principles of jurisprudence and axioms of reason are different from accidental and contingent facts。 One man's possession can prescribe against another man's possession； but just as the possessor cannot prescribe against himself； so reason has always the faculty of change and reformation。 Past error is not binding on the future。 Reason is always the same eternal force。 The institution of property； the work of ignorant reason； may be abrogated by a more enlightened reason。 Consequently； property cannot be established by prescription。 This is so certain and so true； that on it rests the maxim that in the matter of prescription a violation of right goes for nothing。
But I should be recreant to my method； and the reader would have the right to accuse me of charlatanism and bad faith； if I had nothing further to advance concerning prescription。 I showed； in the first place； that appropriation of land is illegal； and that； supposing it to be legal； it must be accompanied by equality of property。 I have shown； in the second place； that universal consent proves nothing in favor of property； and that； if it proves any thing； it proves equality of property。 I have yet to show that prescription； if admissible at all； presupposes equality of property。
This demonstration will be neither long nor difficult。 I need only to call attention to the reasons why prescription was introduced。
〃Prescription；〃 says Dunod； 〃seems repugnant to natural equity； which permits no one either to deprive another of his possessions without his knowledge and consent； or to enrich himself at another's expense。 But as it might often happen； in the absence of prescription； that one who had honestly earned would be ousted after long possession； and even that he who had received a thing from its rightful owner； or who had been legitimately relieved from all obligations； would； on losing his title； be liable to be dispossessed or subjected again；the public welfare demanded that a term should be fixed； after the expiration of which no one should be allowed to disturb actual possessors； or reassert rights too long neglected。 。 。 。 The civil law； in regulating prescription； has aimed； then； only to perfect natural law； and to supplement the law of nations； and as it is founded on the public good； which should always be considered before individual welfare；_bono publico usucapio introducta est_；it should be regarded with favor； provided the conditions required by the law are fulfilled。〃
Toullier； in his 〃Civil Law；〃 says： 〃In order that the question of proprietorship may not remain too long unsettled； and thereby injure the public welfare； disturbing the peace of families and the stability of social transactions； the law has fixed a time when all claims shall be cancelled； and possession shall regain its ancient prerogative through its transformation into property。〃
Cassiodorus said of property； that it was the only safe harbor in which to seek shelter from the tempests of chicanery and the gales of avarice_Hic unus inter humanas pro cellas portus； quem si homines fervida voluntate praeterierint； in undosis semper jurgiis errabunt_。
Thus； in the opinion of the authors； prescription is a means of preserving public order； a restoration in certain cases of the original mode of acquiring property； a fiction of the civil law which derives all its force from the necessity of settling differences which otherwise would never end。 For； as Grotius says； time has no power to produce effects； all things happen in time； but nothing is done by time。 Prescription； or the right of acquisition through the lapse of time； is； therefore； a fiction of the law； conventionally adopted。
But all property necessarily originated in prescription； or； as the Latins say； in