Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER SECOND.

JUSTICE IN RESPECT TO PROPERTY.

SECTION I.

THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY.

I. DEFINITION of the right of property.

The abstract right of property is the right to use something in such manner as I choose.

But, inasmuch as this right of use is common to all men, and as one may choose to use his property in such a way as to deprive his neighbor of this or of some other right, the right to use as I choose is limited by the restriction that I do not interfere with the rights of my neighbor. The right of property, therefore, when thus restricted, is the right to use something as I choose, provided I do not so use it as to interfere with the rights of my neighbor.

Thus, we see that from the very nature of the case the right of property is exclusive; that is to say, if I have a right to any thing, this right excludes every one else from any right over that thing; and it imposes upon every one else the obligation to leave me unmolested in the use of it, within those limits to which my right extends.

II. On what the right of property is founded.

The right of property is founded on the will of God, as made known to us by natural conscience, by general consequences, and by revelation.

Ourselves, and every thing which we behold, is essentially the property of the Creator; and he has a right to confer the use of it upon whomsoever, and under what restrictions soever, he pleases. We may know in what relations he wills us to stand towards the things around us, by the principles which he has implanted within us, and by the result produced in individuals and communities by the different courses of conduct of which men are capable.

Now God signifies to us his will on this subject,

First. By the decisions of natural conscience. This is known from several circumstances.

1. All men, as soon as they begin to think, even in early youth and infancy, perceive this relation. They immediately appropriate certain things to themselves, they feel injured if their control over those things is violated, and they are conscious of guilt if they violate this right in respect to others.

2. The relation of property is expressed by the possessive pronouns. These are found in all languages. So universally is this idea diffused over the whole mass of human action and human feeling, that it would be scarcely possible for two human beings to converse for even a few minutes on any subject, or in any language, without the frequent use of the words which designate the relation of possession.

3. Not only do men feel the importance of sustaining each other in the exercise of the right of property, but they manifestly feel that he who violates it has done wrong; that is, has violated obligation, and hence deserves punishment, on

the ground, not simply of the consequences of the act, but of the guiltiness of the actor. Thus, if a man steal, other men are not satisfied when he has merely made restitution, although this may perfectly make up the loss to the injured party. It is always considered that something more is due, either from God or from man, as a punishment for the crime. Hence the Jewish law enjoined tenfold restitution, and modern law inflicts fines, imprisonment, and corporal punishment.

Second. That God wills the possession of property, is evident from the general consequences which result from the existence of this relation.

The existence and progress of society, nay, the very existence of our race, depends upon the acknowledgment of this right.

Were not every individual entitled to the results of his labor, and to the exclusive enjoyment of the benefits of these results,

1. No one would labor more than was sufficient for his own individual subsistence, because he would have no more right to the value which he had created than another person.

2. Hence, there would be no accumulation; of course, no capital, no tools, no provision for the future, no houses, and no agriculture. Each man alone would be obliged to contend with the elements, the wild beasts, and also with the rapacity of his fellow-man. The human race, under such circumstances, could not long exist.

3. Under such circumstances, the race of man must speedily perish, or its existence be prolonged, even in favorable climates, under every accumulation of wretchedness.

Progress would be out of the question; and the only change which could take place would be, that arising from the pressure of heavier and heavier penury, as the spontaneous productions of the earth became rarer, from improvident consumption, without any corresponding labor for reproduction.

4. It needs only be remarked, in addition, that just in proportion as the right of property is held inviolate, just in that proportion does civilisation advance, and the comforts and conveniences of life multiply. Hence it is that in free and well ordered governments, and specially during peace, property accumulates, all the orders of society enjoy the blessings of competence, arts flourish, science advances, and men begin to form some conception of the happiness of which the system is capable. And, on the contrary, under despotism, when law spreads its protection over neither house, land, estate, nor life, and specially during civil wars, industry ceases, capital stagnates, the arts decline, the people starve, population diminishes, and men rapidly tend to a state of barbarism.

Third. The Holy Scriptures treat of the right of property as a thing acknowledged, and direct their precepts against every act by which it is violated, and also against the tempers of mind from which such violation proceeds. The doctrine of Revelation is so clearly set forth on this subject, that I need not delay for the sake of dwelling upon it. It will be sufficient to refer to the prohibitions in the decalogue against stealing and coveting, and to the various precepts in the New Testament respecting our duty in regard to our neighbor's possessions.

I proceed, in the next place, to consider―

III. The modes in which the right of property may be

acquired. These may be divided into two classes: first, direct; second, indirect.

First. Direct.

1. By the immediate gift of God.

When God has given me a desire for any object, and has spread this object before me, and there is no rational creature to contest my claim, I may take that object, and use it as I will, subject only to the limitation of those obligations to Him, and to my fellow-creatures, which have been before specified. On this principle is founded my right to enter upon wild and unappropriated lands, to hunt wild game, to pluck wild fruit, to take fish, or any thing of this sort. This right is sufficient to exclude the right of any subsequent claimant; for, if it has been given to me, that act of gift is valid, until it can be shown by another that it has been annulled. A grant of this sort, however, applies only to an individual so long as he continues the locum tenens, and no longer. He has no right to enter upon unappropriated land, and leave it, and then claim it afterward by virtue of his first possession. Were it otherwise, any individual might acquire a title to a whole continent, and exclude from it the whole of the rest of his species.

2. By the labor of our hands.

Whatever value I have created by my own labor, or by the innocent use of the other means of happiness which God has given me, is mine. This is evident from the principle already so frequently referred to; namely, that I have a right to use, for my own happiness, whatever God has given me, provided I use it not to the injury of another. Thus, if I catch a deer, or raise an ear of corn, upon land otherwise unappropriated, that deer, or that corn, is mine. No reason can possibly be conceived, why any other being should raise

« AnteriorContinua »