what is property-第15部分

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！


　and　its　approaching　death；　we　shall　definitively　establish　its　identity　with　robbery。　　And；　after　having　shown　that　these　three　prejudicesTHE　SOVEREIGNTY　OF　MAN；　THE　INEQUALITY　OF　CONDITIONS；　AND　PROPERTYare　one　and　the　same；　that　they　may　be　taken　for　each　other；　and　are　reciprocally　convertible；we　shall　have　no　trouble　in　inferring　therefrom；　by　the　principle　of　contradiction；　the　basis　of　government　and　right。　　There　our　investigations　will　end；　reserving　the　right　to　continue　them　in　future　works。

The　importance　of　the　subject　which　engages　our　attention　is　recognized　by　all　minds。


〃Property；〃　says　M。　Hennequin；　〃is　the　creative　and　conservative　principle　of　civil　society。　　Property　is　one　of　those　basic　institutions；　new　theories　concerning　which　cannot　be　presented　too　soon；　for　it　must　not　be　forgotten；　and　the　publicist　and　statesman　must　know；　that　on　the　answer　to　the　question　whether　property　is　the　principle　or　the　result　of　social　order；　whether　it　is　to　be　considered　as　a　cause　or　an　effect；　depends　all　morality；　and；　consequently；　all　the　authority　of　human　institutions。〃


These　words　are　a　challenge　to　all　men　of　hope　and　faith；　but；　although　the　cause　of　equality　is　a　noble　one；　no　one　has　yet　picked　up　the　gauntlet　thrown　down　by　the　advocates　of　property；　no　one　has　been　courageous　enough　to　enter　upon　the　struggle。　　The　spurious　learning　of　haughty　jurisprudence；　and　the　absurd　aphorisms　of　a　political　economy　controlled　by　property　have　puzzled　the　most　generous　minds；　it　is　a　sort　of　password　among　the　most　influential　friends　of　liberty　and　the　interests　of　the　people　that　EQUALITY　IS　A　CHIMERA！　　So　many　false　theories　and　meaningless　analogies　influence　minds　otherwise　keen；　but　which　are　unconsciously　controlled　by　popular　prejudice。　　Equality　advances　every　dayfit　aequalitas。　　Soldiers　of　liberty；　shall　we　desert　our　flag　in　the　hour　of　triumph？

A　defender　of　equality；　I　shall　speak　without　bitterness　and　without　anger；　with　the　independence　becoming　a　philosopher；　with　the　courage　and　firmness　of　a　free　man。　　May　I；　in　this　momentous　struggle；　carry　into　all　hearts　the　light　with　which　I　am　filled；　and　show；　by　the　success　of　my　argument；　that　equality　failed　to　conquer　by　the　sword　only　that　it　might　conquer　by　the　pen！



CHAPTER　II。　PROPERTY　CONSIDERED　AS　A　NATURAL　RIGHT。OCCUPATION　AND　CIVIL　LAW　AS　EFFICIENT　BASES　OF　PROPERTY。　DEFINITIONS。

The　Roman　law　defined　property　as　the　right　to　use　and　abuse　one's　own　within　the　limits　of　the　lawjus　utendi　et　abutendi　re　sua；　guatenus　juris　ratio　patitur。　　A　justification　of　the　word　ABUSE　has　been　attempted；　on　the　ground　that　it　signifies；　not　senseless　and　immoral　abuse；　but　only　absolute　domain。　　Vain　distinction！　invented　as　an　excuse　for　property；　and　powerless　against　the　frenzy　of　possession；　which　it　neither　prevents　nor　represses。　　The　proprietor　may；　if　he　chooses；　allow　his　crops　to　rot　under　foot；　sow　his　field　with　salt；　milk　his　cows　on　the　sand；　change　his　vineyard　into　a　desert；　and　use　his　vegetable…　garden　as　a　park：　do　these　things　constitute　abuse；　or　not？　　In　the　matter　of　property；　use　and　abuse　are　necessarily　indistinguishable。

According　to　the　Declaration　of　Rights；　published　as　a　preface　to　the　Constitution　of　'93；　property　is　〃the　right　to　enjoy　and　dispose　at　will　of　one's　goods；　one's　income；　and　the　fruit　of　one's　labor　and　industry。〃

Code　Napoleon；　article　544：　　〃Property　is　the　right　to　enjoy　and　dispose　of　things　in　the　most　absolute　manner；　provided　we　do　not　overstep　the　limits　prescribed　by　the　laws　and　regulations。〃

These　two　definitions　do　not　differ　from　that　of　the　Roman　law：　all　give　the　proprietor　an　absolute　right　over　a　thing；　and　as　for　the　restriction　imposed　by　the　code；PROVIDED　WE　DO　NOT　OVERSTEP　THE　LIMITS　PRESCRIBED　BY　THE　LAWS　AND　REGULATIONS；its　object　is　not　to　limit　property；　but　to　prevent　the　domain　of　one　proprietor　from　interfering　with　that　of　another。　　That　is　a　confirmation　of　the　principle；　not　a　limitation　of　it。

There　are　different　kinds　of　property：　　1。　Property　pure　and　simple；　the　dominant　and　seigniorial　power　over　a　thing；　or；　as　they　term　it；　NAKED　PROPERTY。　　2。　POSSESSION。　　〃Possession；〃　says　Duranton；　〃is　a　matter　of　fact；　not　of　right。〃　　Toullier：　　〃Property　is　a　right；　a　legal　power；　possession　is　a　fact。〃　　The　tenant；　the　farmer；　the　commandite'；　the　usufructuary；　are　possessors；　the　owner　who　lets　and　lends　for　use；　the　heir　who　is　to　come　into　possession　on　the　death　of　a　usufructuary；　are　proprietors。　　If　I　may　venture　the　comparison：　a　lover　is　a　possessor；　a　husband　is　a　proprietor。

This　double　definition　of　propertydomain　and　possession　is　of　the　highest　importance；　and　it　must　be　clearly　understood；　in　order　to　comprehend　what　is　to　follow。

From　the　distinction　between　possession　and　property　arise　two　sorts　of　rights：　the　jus　in　re；　the　right　in　a　thing；　the　right　by　which　I　may　reclaim　the　property　which　I　have　acquired；　in　whatever　hands　I　find　it；　and　the　jus　ad　rem；　the　right　TO　a　thing；　which　gives　me　a　claim　to　become　a　proprietor。　　Thus　the　right　of　the　partners　to　a　marriage　over　each　other's　person　is　the　jus　in　re；　that　of　two　who　are　betrothed　is　only　the　jus　ad　rem。　　In　the　first；　possession　and　property　are　united；　the　second　includes　only　naked　property。　　With　me　who；　as　a　laborer；　have　a　right　to　the　possession　of　the　products　of　Nature　and　my　own　industry；and　who；　as　a　proletaire；　enjoy　none　of　them；it　is　by　virtue　of　the　jus　ad　rem　that　I　demand　admittance　to　the　jus　in　re。

This　distinction　between　the　jus　in　re　and　the　jus　ad　rem　is　the　basis　of　the　famous　distinction　between　possessoire　and　petitoire；actual　categories　of　jurisprudence；　the　whole　of　which　is　included　within　their　vast　boundaries。　　Petitoire　refers　to　every　thing　relating　to　property；　possessoire　to　that　relating　to　possession。　　In　writing　this　memoir　against　property；　I　bring　against　universal　society　an　action　petitoire：　　I　prove　that　those　who　do　not　possess　to…day　are　proprietors　by　the　same　title　as　those　who　do　possess；　but；　instead　of　inferring　therefrom　that　property　should　be　shared　by　all；　I　demand；　in　the　name　of　general　security；　its　entire　abolition。　　If　I　fail　to　win　my　case；　there　is　nothing　left　for　us　（the　proletarian　class　and　myself）　but　to　cut　our　throats：　we　can　ask　nothing　more　from　the　justice　of　nations；　for；　as　the　code　of　procedure　（art　26）　tells　us　in　its　energetic　style；　THE　PLAINTIFF　WHO　HAS　BEEN　NON…SUITED　IN　AN　ACTION　PETITOIRE；　IS　DEBARRED　THEREBY　FROM　BRINGING　AN　ACTION　POSSESSOIRE。　　If；　on　the　contrary；　I　gain　the　case；　we　must　then　commence　an　action　possessoire；　that　we　may　be　reinstated　in　the　enjoyment　of　the　wealth　of　which　we　are　deprived　by　property。　　I　hope　that　we　shall　not　be　forced　to　that　extremity；　but　these　two　actions　cannot　be　prosecuted　at　once；　such　a　course　being　prohibited　by　the　same　code　of　procedure。

Before　going　to　the　heart　of　the　question；　it　will　not　be　useless　to　offer　a　few　preliminary　remarks。

％　1。Property　as　a　Natural　Right。

The　Declaration　of　Rights　has　placed　property　in　its　list　of　the　natural　and　inalienable　rights　of　man；　four　in　all：　LIBERTY；　EQUALITY；　PROPERTY；　SECURITY。　　What　rule　did　the　legislators　of　'93　follow　in　compiling　this　list？　　None。　　They　laid　down　principles；　just　as　they　discussed　sovereignty　and　the　laws；　from　a　general　point　of　view；　and　according　to　their　own　opinion。　　They　did　every　thing　in　their　own　blind　way。

If　we　can　believe　Toullier：　　〃The　absolute　rights　can　be　reduced　to　three：　SECURITY；　LIBERTY；　PROPERTY。〃　　Equality　is　eliminated　by　the　Rennes　professor；　why？　　Is　it　because　LIBERTY　implies　it；　or　because　property　prohibits　it？　　On　this　point　the　author　of　〃Droit　Civil　Explique〃　is　silent：　it　has　not　even　occurred　to　him　that　the　matter　is　under　discussion。

Nevertheless；　if　we　compare　these　three　or　four　rights　with　each　other；　we　find　that　property　bears　no　resemblance　whatever　to　the　others；　that　for　the　majority　of　citizens　it　exists　only　potentially；　and　as　a　dormant　faculty　without　exercise；　that　for　the　others；　who　do　enjoy　it；　it　is　susceptible　of　certain　transactions　and　modifications　which　do　not　harmonize　with　the　idea　of　a　natural　right；　that；　in　practice；　governments；　tribunals；　and　laws　do　not　respect　it；　and　finally　that　everybody；　spontaneously　and　with　one　voice；　regards　it　as　chimerical。

Liberty　is　inviolable。　　I　can　neither　sell　nor　alienate　my　liberty；　every　contract；　every　condition　of　a　contract；　which　has　in　view　the　alienation　or　suspension　of　liberty；　is　null：　the　slave；　when　he　plants　his　foot　upon　the　soil　of　liberty；　at　that　moment　becomes　a　free　man。　　When　society　seizes　a　malefactor　and　deprives　him　of　his　liberty；　it　is　a　case　of　legitimate　defence：　whoever　violates　the　social　compact　by　the　commission　of　a　crime　declares　himself　a　public　enemy；　in　attacking　the　liberty　of　others；　he　compels　them　to　take　away　his　own。　　Liberty　is　the　original　condition　of　man；　to　renounce　liberty　is　to　renounce　the　nature　of　man：　after　that；　how　could　we　perform　the　acts　of　man？

Likewise；　equality　before　the　law　suffers　neither　restriction　nor　exception。　　All　Frenchmen　are　equally　eligible　to　office：　consequently；　in　the　presence　of　this　equality；　condition　and　family　have；　in　many　cases；　no　influence　upon　choice。　　The　poorest　citizen　can　obtain　judgment　in　the　courts　against　one　occupying　the　most　exalted　station。　　Let　the　millionaire；　Ahab；　build　a　chateau　upon　the　vineyard　of　Naboth：　the　court　will　have　the　power；　according　to　the　circumstances；　to　order　the　destruction　of　the　chateau；　though　it　has　cost　millions；　and　to　force　the　trespasser　to　restore　the　vineyard　to　its　original　state；　and　pay　the　damages。　　The　law　wishes　all　property；　that　has　been　legitimately　acquired；　to　be　kept　inviolate　without　regard　to　value；　and　without　respect　for　persons。

The　charter　demands；　it　is　true；　for　the　exercise　of　certain　political　rights；　certain　conditions　of　fortune　and　capacity；　but　all　publicists　know　that　the　legislator's　intention　was　not　to　establish　a　privilege；　but　to　take　security。　　Provided　the　conditions　fixed　by　law　are　complied　with；　every　citizen　may　be　an　elector；　and　every　elector　eligible。　　The　right；　once　acquired；　is