Since；　then；　a　nation；　like　universal　humanity；　is　a　vast　industrial　association　which　cannot　act　outside　of　itself；　it　is　clear　that　no　man　can　enrich　himself　without　impoverishing　another。　　For；　in　order　that　the　right　of　property；　the　right　of　increase；　may　be　respected　in　the　case　of　A；　it　must　be　denied　to　Z；　thus　we　see　how　equality　of　rights；　separated　from　equality　of　conditions；　may　be　a　truth。　　The　iniquity　of　political　economy　in　this　respect　is　flagrant。　　〃When　I；　a　manufacturer；　purchase　the　labor　of　a　workingman；　I　do　not　include　his　wages　in　the　net　product　of　my　business；　on　the　contrary；　I　deduct　them。　　But　the　workingman　includes　them　in　his　net　product。　。　。　。　　〃（Say：　　Political　Economy。）
  That　means　that　all　which　the　workingman　gains　is　NET　PRODUCT；　but　that　only　that　part　of　the　manufacturer's　gains　is　NET　PRODUCT；　which　remains　after　deducting　his　wages。　　But　why　is　the　right　of　profit　confined　to　the　manufacturer？　　Why　is　this　right；　which　is　at　bottom　the　right　of　property　itself；　denied　to　the　workingman？　　In　the　terms　of　economical　science；　the　workingman　is　capital。　　Now；　all　capital；　beyond　the　cost　of　its　maintenance　and　repair；　must　bear　interest。　　This　the　proprietor　takes　care　to　get；　both　for　his　capital　and　for　himself。　　Why　is　the　workingman　prohibited　from　charging　a　like　interest　for　his　capital；　which　is　himself？
  Property；　then；　is　inequality　of　rights；　for；　if　it　were　not　inequality　of　rights；　it　would　be　equality　of　goods；in　other　words；　it　would　not　exist。　　Now；　the　charter　guarantees　to　all　equality　of　rights。　　Then；　by　the　charter；　property　is　impossible。
  II。　Is　A；　the　proprietor　of　an　estate；　entitled　by　the　fact　of　his　proprietorship　to　take　possession　of　the　field　belonging　to　B。　his　neighbor？　　〃No；〃　reply　the　proprietors；　〃but　what　has　that　to　do　with　the　right　of　property？〃　　That　I　shall　show　you　by　a　series　of　similar　propositions。
  Has　C；　a　hatter；　the　right　to　force　D；　his　neighbor　and　also　a　hatter；　to　close　his　shop；　and　cease　his　business？　　Not　the　least　in　the　world。
  But　C　wishes　to　make　a　profit　of　one　franc　on　every　hat；　while　D　is　content　with　fifty　centimes。　　It　is　evident　that　D's　moderation　is　injurious　to　C's　extravagant　claims。　　Has　the　latter　a　right　to　prevent　D　from　selling？　　Certainly　not。
  Since　D　is　at　liberty　to　sell　his　hats　fifty　centimes　cheaper　than　C　if　he　chooses；　C　in　his　turn　is　free　to　reduce　his　price　one　franc。　　Now；　D　is　poor；　while　C　is　rich；　so　that　at　the　end　of　two　or　three　years　D　is　ruined　by　this　intolerable　competition；　and　C　has　complete　control　of　the　market。　　Can　the　proprietor　D　get　any　redress　from　the　proprietor　C？　　Can　he　bring　a　suit　against　him　to　recover　his　business　and　property？　　No；　for　D　could　have　done　the　same　thing；　had　he　been　the　richer　of　the　two。
  On　the　same　ground；　the　large　proprietor　A　may　say　to　the　small　proprietor　B：　　〃Sell　me　your　field；　otherwise　you　shall　not　sell　your　wheat；〃and　that　without　doing　him　the　least　wrong；　or　giving　him　ground　for　complaint。　　So　that　A　can　devour　B　if　he　likes；　for　the　very　reason　that　A　is　stronger　than　B。　　Consequently；　it　is　not　the　right　of　property　which　enables　A　and　C　to　rob　B　and　D；　but　the　right　of　might。　　By　the　right　of　property；　neither　the　two　neighbors　A　and　B；　nor　the　two　merchants　C　and　D；　could　harm　each　other。　　They　could　neither　dispossess　nor　destroy　one　another；　nor　gain　at　one　another's　expense。　　The　power　of　invasion　lies　in　superior　strength。
  But　it　is　superior　strength　also　which　enables　the　manufacturer　to　reduce　the　wages　of　his　employees；　and　the　rich　merchant　and　well…stocked　proprietor　to　sell　their　products　for　what　they　please。　　The　manufacturer　says　to　the　laborer；　〃You　are　as　free　to　go　elsewhere　with　your　services　as　I　am　to　receive　them。　　I　offer　you　so　much。〃　　The　merchant　says　to　the　customer；　〃Take　it　or　leave　it；　you　are　master　of　your　money；　as　I　am　of　my　goods。　　I　want　so　much。〃　Who　will　yield？　　The　weaker。
  Therefore；　without　force；　property　is　powerless　against　property；　since　without　force　it　has　no　power　to　increase；　therefore；　without　force；　property　is　null　and　void。
  HISTORICAL　COMMENT。The　struggle　between　colonial　and　native　sugars　furnishes　us　a　striking　example　of　this　impossibility　of　property。　　Leave　these　two　industries　to　themselves；　and　the　native　manufacturer　will　be　ruined　by　the　colonist。　　To　maintain　the　beet…root；　the　cane　must　be　taxed：　to　protect　the　property　of　the　one；　it　is　necessary　to　injure　the　property　of　the　other。　　The　most　remarkable　feature　of　this　business　is　precisely　that　to　which　the　least　attention　is　paid；　namely；　that；　in　one　way　or　another；　property　has　to　be　violated。　　Impose　on　each　industry　a　proportional　tax；　so　as　to　preserve　a　balance　in　the　market；　and　you　create　a　MAXIMUM　PRICE；you　attack　property　in　two　ways。　　On　the　one　hand；　your　tax　interferes　with　the　liberty　of　trade；　on　the　other；　it　does　not　recognize　equality　of　proprietors。　　Indemnify　the　beet…root；　you　violate　the　property　of　the　tax…　payer。　　Cultivate　the　two　varieties　of　sugar　at　the　nation's　expense；　just　as　different　varieties　of　tobacco　are　cultivated；　you　abolish　one　species　of　property。　　This　last　course　would　be　the　simpler　and　better　one；　but；　to　induce　the　nations　to　adopt　it；　requires　such　a　co…operation　of　able　minds　and　generous　hearts　as　is　at　present　out　of　the　question。
  Competition；　sometimes　called　liberty　of　trade；in　a　word；　property　in　exchange；will　be　for　a　long　time　the　basis　of　our　commercial　legislation；　which；　from　the　economical　point　of　view；　embraces　all　civil　laws　and　all　government。　　Now；　what　is　competition？　　A　duel　in　a　closed　field；　where　arms　are　the　test　of　right。
  〃Who　is　the　liar；the　accused　or　the　accuser？〃　said　our　barbarous　ancestors。　　〃Let　them　fight　it　out；〃　replied　the　still　more　barbarous　judge；　〃the　stronger　is　right。〃
  Which　of　us　two　shall　sell　spices　to　our　neighbor？　　〃Let　each　offer　them　for　sale；〃　cries　the　economist；　〃the　sharper；　or　the　more　cunning；　is　the　more　honest　man；　and　the　better　merchant。〃
  Such　is　the　exact　spirit　of　the　Code　Napoleon。
  TENTH　PROPOSITION。
  Property　is　impossible；　because　it　is　the　Negation　of　equality。
  The　development　of　this　proposition　will　be　the　resume　of　the　preceding　ones。
  1。　It　is　a　principle　of　economical　justice；　that　PRODUCTS　ARE　BOUGHT　ONLY　BY　PRODUCTS。　　Property；　being　capable　of　defence　only　on　the　ground　that　it　produces　utility；　is；　since　it　produces　nothing；　for　ever　condemned。
  2。　It　is　an　economical　law；　that　LABOR　MUST　BE　BALANCED　BY　PRODUCT。　　It　is　a　fact　that；　with　property；　production　costs　more　than　it　is　worth。
  3。　Another　economical　law：　　THE　CAPITAL　BEING　GIVEN；　PRODUCTION　IS　MEASURED；　NOT　BY　THE　AMOUNT　OF　CAPITAL；　BUT　BY　PRODUCTIVE　CAPACITY。　　Property；　requiring　income　to　be　always　proportional　to　capital　without　regard　to　labor；　does　not　recognize　this　relation　of　equality　between　effect　and　cause。
  4　and　5。　Like　the　insect　which　spins　its　silk；　the　laborer　never　produces　for　himself　alone。　　Property；　demanding　a　double　product　and　unable　to　obtain　it；　robs　the　laborer；　and　kills　him。
  6。　Nature　has　given　to　every　man　but　one　mind；　one　heart；　one　will。　　Property；　granting　to　one　individual　a　plurality　of　votes；　supposes　him　to　have　a　plurality　of　minds。
  7。　All　consumption　which　is　not　reproductive　of　utility　is　destruction。　　Property；　whether　it　consumes　or　hoards　or　capitalizes；　is　productive　of　INUTILITY；the　cause　of　sterility　and　death。
  8。　The　satisfaction　of　a　natural　right　always　gives　rise　to　an　equation；　in　other　words；　the　right　to　a　thing　is　necessarily　balanced　by　the　possession　of　the　thing。　　Thus；　between　the　right　to　liberty　and　the　condition　of　a　free　man　there　is　a　balance；　an　equation；　between　the　right　to　be　a　father　and　paternity；　an　equation；　between　the　right　to　security　and　the　social　guarantee；　an　equation。　　But　between　the　right　of　increase　and　the　receipt　of　this　increase　there　is　never　an　equation；　for　every　new　increase　carries　with　it　the　right　to　another；　the　latter　to　a　third；　and　so　on　for　ever。　　Property；　never　being　able　to　accomplish　its　object；　is　a　right　against　Nature　and　against　reason。
  9。　Finally；　property　is　not　self…existent。　　An　extraneous　cause　either　FORCE　or　FRAUDis　necessary　to　its　life　and　action。　　In　other　words；　property　is　not　equal　to　property：　it　is　a　negationa　delusionNOTHING。
  CHAPTER　V。
  PSYCHOLOGICAL　EXPOSITION　OF　THE　IDEA　OF　JUSTICE　AND　INJUSTICE；　AND　A　DETERMINATION　OF　THE　PRINCIPLE　OF　GOVERNMENT　AND　OF　RIGHT。
  Property　is　impossible；　equality　does　not　exist。　　We　hate　the　former；　and　yet　wish　to　possess　it；　the　latter　rules　all　our　thoughts；　yet　we　know　not　how　to　reach　it。　　Who　will　explain　this　profound　antagonism　between　our　conscience　and　our　will？　　Who　will　point　out　the　causes　of　this　pernicious　error；　which　has　become　the　most　sacred　principle　of　justice　and　society？
  I　am　bold　enough　to　undertake　the　task；　and　I　hope　to　succeed。
  But　before　explaining　why　man　has　violated　justice；　it　is　necessary　to　determine　what　justice　is。
  PART　FIRST。
  ％　1。Of　the　Moral　Sense　in　Man　and　the　Animals。
  The　philosophers　have　endeavored　often　to　locate　the　line　which　separates　man's　intelligence　f