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！
ed。
But all property necessarily originated in prescription； or； as the Latins say； in _usucapion；_ that is； in continued possession。
I ask； then； in the first place； how possession can become property by the lapse of time？ Continue possession as long as you wish； continue it for years and for centuries； you never can give durationwhich of itself creates nothing； changes nothing； modifies nothingthe power to change the usufructuary into a proprietor。 Let the civil law secure against chance… comers the honest possessor who has held his position for many years；that only confirms a right already respected； and prescription； applied in this way； simply means that possession which has continued for twenty； thirty； or a hundred years shall be retained by the occupant。 But when the law declares that the lapse of time changes possessor into proprietor； it supposes that a right can be created without a producing cause； it unwarrantably alters the character of the subject； it legislates on a matter not open to legislation； it exceeds its own powers。 Public order and private security ask only that possession shall be protected。 Why has the law created property？ Prescription was simply security for the future； why has the law made it a matter of privilege？
Thus the origin of prescription is identical with that of property itself； and since the latter can legitimate itself only when accompanied by equality； prescription is but another of the thousand forms which the necessity of maintaining this precious equality has taken。 And this is no vain induction； no far… fetched inference。 The proof is written in all the codes。
And； indeed； if all nations； through their instinct of justice and their conservative nature； have recognized the utility and the necessity of prescription； and if their design has been to guard thereby the interests of the possessor；could they not do something for the absent citizen； separated from his family and his country by commerce； war； or captivity； and in no position to exercise his right of possession？ No。 Also； at the same time that prescription was introduced into the laws； it was admitted that property is preserved by intent alone；_nudo animo_。 Now； if property is preserved by intent alone； if it can be lost only by the action of the proprietor； what can be the use of prescription？ How does the law dare to presume that the proprietor； who preserves by intent alone； intended to abandon that which he has allowed to be prescribed？ What lapse of time can warrant such a conjecture； and by what right does the law punish the absence of the proprietor by depriving him of his goods？ What then！ we found but a moment since that prescription and property were identical； and now we find that they are mutually destructive！
Grotius； who perceived this difficulty； replied so singularly that his words deserve to be quoted： _ Bene sperandum de hominibus； ac propterea non putandum eos hoc esse animo ut； rei caducae causa； hominem alterum velint in perpetuo peccato versari； quo d evitari saepe non poterit sine tali derelictione_。
〃Where is the man；〃 he says； 〃with so unchristian a soul that； for a trifle； he would perpetuate the trespass of a possessor； which would inevitably be the result if he did not consent to abandon his right？〃 By the Eternal！ I am that man。 Though a million proprietors should burn for it in hell； I lay the blame on them for depriving me of my portion of this world's goods。 To this powerful consideration Grotius rejoins； that it is better to abandon a disputed right than to go to law； disturb the peace of nations； and stir up the flames of civil war。 I accept； if you wish it； this argument； provided you indemnify me。 But if this indemnity is refused me； what do I； a proletaire； care for the tranquillity and security of the rich？ I care as little for PUBLIC ORDER as for the proprietor's safety。 I ask to live a laborer； otherwise I will die a warrior。
Whichever way we turn； we shall come to the conclusion that prescription is a contradiction of property； or rather that prescription and property are two forms of the same principle； but two forms which serve to correct each other； and ancient and modern jurisprudence did not make the least of its blunders in pretending to reconcile them。 Indeed； if we see in the institution of property only a desire to secure to each individual his share of the soil and his right to labor； in the distinction between naked property and possession only an asylum for absentees； orphans； and all who do not know； or cannot maintain； their rights； in prescription only a means； either of defence against unjust pretensions and encroachments； or of settlement of the differences caused by the removal of possessors；we shall recognize in these various forms of human justice the spontaneous efforts of the mind to come to the aid of the social instinct； we shall see in this protection of all rights the sentiment of equality； a constant levelling tendency。 And； looking deeper； we shall find in the very exaggeration of these principles the confirmation of our doctrine； because； if equality of conditions and universal association are not soon realized； it will be owing to the obstacle thrown for the time in the way of the common sense of the people by the stupidity of legislators and judges； and also to the fact that； while society in its original state was illuminated with a flash of truth； the early speculations of its leaders could bring forth nothing but darkness。
After the first covenants； after the first draughts of laws and constitutions； which were the expression of man's primary needs； the legislator's duty was to reform the errors of legislation； to complete that which was defective； to harmonize； by superior definitions； those things which seemed to conflict。 Instead of that； they halted at the literal meaning of the laws； content to play the subordinate part of commentators and scholiasts。 Taking the inspirations of the human mind； at that time necessarily weak and faulty； for axioms of eternal and unquestionable truth；influenced by public opinion； enslaved by the popular religion；they have invariably started with the principle （following in this respect the example of the theologians） that that is infallibly true which has been admitted by all persons； in all places； and at all times_quod ab omnibus； quod ubique； quod semper；_ as if a general but spontaneous opinion was any thing more than an indication of the truth。 Let us not be deceived： the opinion of all nations may serve to authenticate the perception of a fact； the vague sentiment of a law； it can teach us nothing about either fact or law。 The consent of mankind is an indication of Nature； not； as Cicero says； a law of Nature。 Under the indication is hidden the truth； which faith can believe； but only thought can know。 Such has been the constant progress of the human mind in regard to physical phenomena and the creations of genius： how can it be otherwise with the facts of conscience and the rules of human conduct？
％ 4。LaborThat Labor Has No Inherent Power to Appropriate Natural Wealth。
We shall show by the maxims of political economy and law； that is； by the authorities recognized by property；
1。 That labor has no inherent power to appropriate natural wealth。
2。 That； if we admit that labor has this power； we are led directly to equality of property；whatever the kind of labor； however scarce the product； or unequal the ability of the laborers。
3。 That； in the order of justice； labor DESTROYS property。
Following the example of our opponents； and that we may leave no obstacles in the path； let us examine the question in the strongest possible light。
M。 Ch。 Comte says； in his 〃Treatise on Property：〃
〃France； considered as a nation； has a territory which is her own。〃
France； as an individuality； possesses a territory which she cultivates； it is not her property。 Nations are related to each other as individuals are： they are commoners and workers； it is an abuse of language to call them proprietors。 The right of use and abuse belongs no more to nations than to men； and the time will come when a war waged for the purpose of checking a nation in its abu