what is property- 第55部分

　　　　　　　　　_〃Jura　neget　sibi　nata；　nihil　non　arroget　armis_；〃＇1＇　and　by　this　sentence　from　the　dying　words　of　Jacob　（Gen。　xlviii。）；　which　the　Jews　apply　to　David；　and　the　Christians　to　their　Christ：　　_Manus　ejus　contra　omnes_。　　In　our　day；　the　robberthe　warrior　of　the　ancientsis　pursued　with　the　utmost　vigor。　　His　profession；　in　the　language　of　the　code；　entails　ignominious　and　corporal　penalties；　from　imprisonment　to　the　scaffold。　　A　sad　change　in　opinions　here　below！

＇1＇　　〃My　right　is　my　lance　and　my　buckler。〃　　General　de　Brossard　said；　like　Achilles：　　〃I　get　wine；　gold；　and　women　with　my　lance　and　my　buckler。〃




We　rob；8。　By　cheating；　9。　By　swindling；　10。　By　abuse　of　trust；　11。　By　games　and　lotteries。

This　second　species　was　encouraged　by　the　laws　of　Lycurgus；　in　order　to　sharpen　the　wits　of　the　young。　　It　is　the　kind　practised　by　Ulysses；　Solon；　and　Sinon；　by　the　ancient　and　modern　Jews；　from　Jacob　down　to　Deutz；　and　by　the　Bohemians；　the　Arabs；　and　all　savage　tribes。　　Under　Louis　XIII。　and　Louis　XIV。；　it　was　not　considered　dishonorable　to　cheat　at　play。　　To　do　so　was　a　part　of　the　game；　and　many　worthy　people　did　not　scruple　to　correct　the　caprice　of　Fortune　by　dexterous　jugglery。　　To…day　even；　and　in　all　countries；　it　is　thought　a　mark　of　merit　among　peasants；　merchants；　and　shopkeepers　to　KNOW　HOW　TO　MAKE　A　BARGAIN；that　is；　to　deceive　one's　man。　　This　is　so　universally　accepted；　that　the　cheated　party　takes　no　offence。　　It　is　known　with　what　reluctance　our　government　resolved　upon　the　abolition　of　lotteries。　　It　felt　that　it　was　dealing　a　stab　thereby　at　property。　　The　pickpocket；　the　blackleg；　and　the　charlatan　make　especial　use　of　their　dexterity　of　hand；　their　subtlety　of　mind；　the　magic　power　of　their　eloquence；　and　their　great　fertility　of　invention。　　Sometimes　they　offer　bait　to　cupidity。　　Therefore　the　penal　codewhich　much　prefers　intelligence　to　muscular　vigor　has　made；　of　the　four　varieties　mentioned　above；　a　second　category；　liable　only　to　correctional；　not　to　Ignominious；　punishments。

Let　them　now　accuse　the　law　of　being　materialistic　and　atheistic。

We　rob；12。　By　usury。

This　species　of　robbery；　so　odious　and　so　severely　punished　since　the　publication　of　the　Gospel；　is　the　connecting　link　between　forbidden　and　authorized　robbery。　　Owing　to　its　ambiguous　nature；　it　has　given　rise　to　a　multitude　of　contradictions　in　the　laws　and　in　morals；contradictions　which　have　been　very　cleverly　turned　to　account　by　lawyers；　financiers；　and　merchants。　　Thus　the　usurer；　who　lends　on　mortgage　at　ten；　twelve；　and　fifteen　per　cent。；　is　heavily　fined　when　detected；　while　the　banker；　who　receives　the　same　interest　（not；　it　is　true；　upon　a　loan；　but　in　the　way　of　exchange　or　discount；that　is；　of　sale）；　is　protected　by　royal　privilege。　　But　the　distinction　between　the　banker　and　the　usurer　is　a　purely　nominal　one。　　Like　the　usurer；　who　lends　on　property；　real　or　personal；　the　banker　lends　on　business　paper；　like　the　usurer；　he　takes　his　interest　in　advance；　like　the　usurer；　he　can　recover　from　the　borrower　if　the　property　is　destroyed　（that　is；　if　the　note　is　not　redeemed）；a　circumstance　which　makes　him　a　money…lender；　not　a　money…seller。　　But　the　banker　lends　for　a　short　time　only；　while　the　usurer's　loan　may　be　for　one；　two；　three；　or　more　years。　　Now；　a　difference　in　the　duration　of　the　loan；　or　the　form　of　the　act；　does　not　alter　the　nature　of　the　transaction。　　As　for　the　capitalists　who　invest　their　money；　either　with　the　State　or　in　commercial　operations；　at　three；　four；　and　five　per　cent。；that　is；　who　lend　on　usury　at　a　little　lower　rate　than　the　bankers　and　usurers；they　are　the　flower　of　society；　the　cream　of　honesty！　　Moderation　in　robbery　is　the　height　of　virtue！＇1＇

＇1＇　It　would　be　interesting　and　profitable　to　review　the　authors　who　have　written　on　usury；　or；　to　use　the　gentler　expression　which　some　prefer；　lendingat　interest。　　The　theologians　always　have　opposed　usury；　but；　since　they　have　admitted　always　the　legitimacy　of　rent；　and　since　rent　is　evidently　identical　with　interest；　they　have　lost　themselves　in　a　labyrinth　of　subtle　distinctions；　and　have　finally　reached　a　pass　where　they　do　not　know　what　to　think　of　usury。　　The　Churchthe　teacher　of　morality；　so　jealous　and　so　proud　of　the　purity　of　her　doctrine　has　always　been　ignorant　of　the　real　nature　of　property　and　usury。　　She　even　has　proclaimed　through　her　pontiffs　the　most　deplorable　errors。　　_Non　potest　mutuum_；　said　Benedict　XIV。；　_locationi　ullo　pacto　comparari_。　　〃Rent；〃　says　Bossuet；　〃is　as　far　from　usury　as　heaven　is　from　the　earth。〃　　How；　on｛sic｝　such　a　doctrine；　condemn　lending　at　interest？　how　justify　the　Gospel；　which　expressly　forbids　usury？　　The　difficulty　of　theologians　is　a　very　serious　one。　　Unable　to　refute　the　economical　demonstrations；　which　rightly　assimilate　interest　to　rent；　they　no　longer　dare　to　condemn　interest；　and　they　can　say　only　that　there　must　be　such　a　thing　as　usury；　since　the　Gospel　forbids　it。

But　what；　then；　is　usury？　　Nothing　is　more　amusing　than　to　see　these　INSTRUCTORS　OF　NATIONS　hesitate　between　the　authority　of　the　Gospel；　which；　they　say；　NEVER　CAN　HAVE　SPOKEN　IN　VAIN；　and　the　authority　of　economical　demonstrations。　　Nothing；　to　my　mind；　is　more　creditable　to　the　Gospel　than　this　old　infidelity　of　its　pretended　teachers。　　Salmasius；　having　assimilated　interest　to　rent；　was　REFUTED　by　Grotius；　Pufendorf；　Burlamaqui；　Wolf；　and　Heineccius；　and；　what　is　more　curious　still；　Salmasius　ADMITTED　HIS　ERROR。　　Instead　of　inferring　from　this　doctrine　of　Salmasius　that　all　increase　is　illegitimate；　and　proceeding　straight　on　to　the　demonstration　of　Gospel　equality；　they　arrived　at　just　the　opposite　conclusion；　namely；　that　since　everybody　acknowledges　that　rent　is　permissible；　if　we　allow　that　interest　does　not　differ　from　rent；　there　is　nothing　left　which　can　be　called　usury。　　and；　consequently；　that　the　commandment　of　Jesus　Christ　is　an　ILLUSION；　and　amounts　to　NOTHING；　which　is　an　impious　conclusion。

If　this　memoir　had　appeared　in　the　time　of　Bossuet；　that　great　theologian　would　have　PROVED　by　scripture；　the　fathers；　traditions；　councils；　and　popes；　that　property　exists　by　Divine　right；　while　usury　is　an　invention　of　the　devil；　and　the　heretical　work　would　have　been　burned；　and　the　author　imprisoned。




We　rob；13。　By　farm…rent；　house…rent；　and　leases　of　all　kinds。

The　author　of　the　〃Provincial　Letters〃　entertained　the　honest　Christians　of　the　seventeenth　century　at　the　expense　of　Escobar；　the　Jesuit；　and　the　contract　Mohatra。〃　　The　contract　Mohatra；〃　said　Escobar；　〃is　a　contract　by　which　goods　are　bought；　at　a　high　price　and　on　credit；　to　be　again　sold　at　the　same　moment　to　the　same　person；　cash　down；　and　at　a　lower　price。〃　　Escobar　found　a　way　to　justify　this　kind　of　usury。　　Pascal　and　all　the　Jansenists　laughed　at　him。　　But　what　would　the　satirical　Pascal；　the　learned　Nicole；　and　the　invincible　Arnaud　have　said；　if　Father　Antoine　Escobar　de　Valladolid　had　answered　them　thus：　　〃A　lease　is　a　contract　by　which　real　estate　is　bought；　at　a　high　price　and　on　credit；　to　be　again　sold；　at　the　expiration　of　a　certain　time；　to　the　same　person；　at　a　lower　price；　only；　to　simplify　the　transaction；　the　buyer　is　content　to　pay　the　difference　between　the　first　sale　and　the　second。　　Either　deny　the　identity　of　the　lease　and　the　contract　Mohatra；　and　then　I　will　annihilate　you　in　a　moment；　or；　if　you　admit　the　similarity；　admit　also　the　soundness　of　my　doctrine：　　otherwise　you　proscribe　both　interest　and　rent　at　one　blow〃？

In　reply　to　this　overwhelming　argument　of　the　Jesuit；　the　sire　of　Montalte　would　have　sounded　the　tocsin；　and　would　have　shouted　that　society　was　in　peril；that　the　Jesuits　were　sapping　its　very　foundations。

We　rob；14。　By　commerce；　when　the　profit　of　the　merchant　exceeds　his　legitimate　salary。

Everybody　knows　the　definition　of　commerceTHE　ART　OF　BUYING　FOR　THREE　FRANCS　THAT　WHICH　IS　WORTH　SIX；　AND　OF　SELLING　FOR　SIX　THAT　WHICH　IS　WORTH　THREE。　　Between　commerce　thus　defined　and　_vol　a　l'americaine_；　the　only　difference　is　in　the　relative　proportion　of　the　values　exchanged；in　short；　in　the　amount　of　the　profit。

We　rob；15。　By　making　profit　on　our　product；　by　accepting　sinecures；　and　by　exacting　exorbitant　wages。

The　farmer；　who　sells　a　certain　amount　of　corn　to　the　consumer；　and　who　during　the　measurement　thrusts　his　hand　into　the　bushel　and　takes　out　a　handful　of　grains；　robs；　the　professor；　whose　lectures　are　paid　for　by　the　State；　and　who　through　the　intervention　of　a　bookseller　sells　them　to　the　public　a　second　time；　robs；　the　sinecurist；　who　receives　an　enormous　product　in　exchange　for　his　vanity；　robs；　the　functionary；　the　laborer；　whatever　he　may　be；　who　produces　only　one　and　gets　paid　four；　one　hundred；　or　one　thousand；　robs；　the　publisher　of　this　book；　and　I；　its　author；we　rob；　by　charging　for　it　twice　as　much　as　it　is　worth。

In　recapitulation：

Justice；　after　passing　through　the　state　of　negative　communism；　called　by　the　ancient　poets　the　AGE　OF　GOLD；　commences　as　the　right　of　the　strongest。　　In　a　society　which　is　trying　to　organize　itself；　inequality　of　faculties　calls　up　the　idea　of　merit；　equite　suggests　the　plan　of　proportioning　not　only　esteem；　but　also　material　comforts；　to　personal　merit；　and　since　the　highest　and　almost　the　only　merit　then　recognized　is　physical　strength；　the　strongest；　｛GREEK　‘　　eg　　｝；　and　consequently　the　best；　｛GREEK　‘　　eg　　｝；　is　entitled　to　the　largest　share；　and　if　it　is　refused　him；　he　very　naturally　takes　it　by　force。　　From　this　to　the　assumption　of　the　right　of　property　in　all　things；　it　is　but　one　step。

Such　was　justice　in　the　heroic　age；　preserved；　at　least　by　tradition；　among　the　Greeks　and　Romans　down　to　the　last　days　of　their　republics。　　Plato；　in　the　〃Gorgias；〃　introduces　a　character　named　Callicles；　who　spiritedly　defends　the　right　of　the　strongest；　which　Socrates；　the　advocate　of　equality；　｛GREEK　g　　　　e　　｝；　seriously　refutes。　　It　is　related　of　the　great　Pompey；　that　he　blushed　easily；　and；　nevertheless；　these　words　once　escaped　his　lips：　　〃Why　should　I　respect　the　laws；　when　I　have　arms　in　my　hand？〃　　This　shows　him　to　have　been　a　man　in　whom　the　moral　sense　and　ambition　were　struggling　for　the　mastery；　and　who　sought　to　justify　his　viole