f　the　Academy　of　Besancon；　is　simply　a　study　of　this　nature。
  The　time　has　come　for　me　to　relate　the　history　of　this　unlucky　treatise；　which　has　already　caused　me　so　much　chagrin；　and　made　me　so　unpopular；　but　which　was　on　my　part　so　involuntary　and　unpremeditated；　that　I　would　dare　to　affirm　that　there　is　not　an　economist；　not　a　philosopher；　not　a　jurist；　who　is　not　a　hundred　times　guiltier　than　I。　　There　is　something　so　singular　in　the　way　in　which　I　was　led　to　attack　property；　that　if；　on　hearing　my　sad　story；　you　persist；　sir；　in　your　blame；　I　hope　at　least　you　will　be　forced　to　pity　me。
  I　never　have　pretended　to　be　a　great　politician；　far　from　that；　I　always　have　felt　for　controversies　of　a　political　nature　the　greatest　aversion；　and　if；　in　my　〃Essay　on　Property；〃　I　have　sometimes　ridiculed　our　politicians；　believe；　sir；　that　I　was　governed　much　less　by　my　pride　in　the　little　that　I　know；　than　by　my　vivid　consciousness　of　their　ignorance　and　excessive　vanity。　　Relying　more　on　Providence　than　on　men；　not　suspecting　at　first　that　politics；　like　every　other　science；　contained　an　absolute　truth；　agreeing　equally　well　with　Bossuet　and　Jean　Jacques；I　accepted　with　resignation　my　share　of　human　misery；　and　contented　myself　with　praying　to　God　for　good　deputies；　upright　ministers；　and　an　honest　king。　　By　taste　as　well　as　by　discretion　and　lack　of　confidence　in　my　powers；　I　was　slowly　pursuing　some　commonplace　studies　in　philology；　mingled　with　a　little　metaphysics；　when　I　suddenly　fell　upon　the　greatest　problem　that　ever　has　occupied　philosophical　minds：　　I　mean　the　criterion　of　certainty。
  Those　of　my　readers　who　are　unacquainted　with　the　philosophical　terminology　will　be　glad　to　be　told　in　a　few　words　what　this　criterion　is；　which　plays　so　great　a　part　in　my　work。
  The　criterion　of　certainty；　according　to　the　philosophers；　will　be；　when　discovered；　an　infallible　method　of　establishing　the　truth　of　an　opinion；　a　judgment；　a　theory；　or　a　system；　in　nearly　the　same　way　as　gold　is　recognized　by　the　touchstone；　as　iron　approaches　the　magnet；　or；　better　still；　as　we　verify　a　mathematical　operation　by　applying　the　PROOF。　　TIME　has　hitherto　served　as　a　sort　of　criterion　for　society。　　Thus；　the　primitive　menhaving　observed　that　they　were　not　all　equal　in　strength；　beauty；　and　laborjudged；　and　rightly；　that　certain　ones　among　them　were　called　by　nature　to　the　performance　of　simple　and　common　functions；　but　they　concluded；　and　this　is　where　their　error　lay；　that　these　same　individuals　of　duller　intellect；　more　restricted　genius；　and　weaker　personality；　were　predestined　to　SERVE　the　others；　that　is；　to　labor　while　the　latter　rested；　and　to　have　no　other　will　than　theirs：　and　from　this　idea　of　a　natural　subordination　among　men　sprang　domesticity；　which；　voluntarily　accepted　at　first；　was　imperceptibly　converted　into　horrible　slavery。　　Time；　making　this　error　more　palpable；　has　brought　about　justice。　　Nations　have　learned　at　their　own　cost　that　the　subjection　of　man　to　man　is　a　false　idea；　an　erroneous　theory；　pernicious　alike　to　master　and　to　slave。　　And　yet　such　a　social　system　has　stood　several　thousand　years；　and　has　been　defended　by　celebrated　philosophers；　even　to…day；　under　somewhat　mitigated　forms；　sophists　of　every　description　uphold　and　extol　it。　　But　experience　is　bringing　it　to　an　end。
  Time；　then；　is　the　criterion　of　societies；　thus　looked　at；　history　is　the　demonstration　of　the　errors　of　humanity　by　the　argument　_reductio　ad　absurdum_。
  Now；　the　criterion　sought　for　by　metaphysicians　would　have　the　advantage　of　discriminating　at　once　between　the　true　and　the　false　in　every　opinion；　so　that　in　politics；　religion；　and　morals；　for　example；　the　true　and　the　useful　being　immediately　recognized；　we　should　no　longer　need　to　await　the　sorrowful　experience　of　time。　　Evidently　such　a　secret　would　be　death　to　the　sophists；that　cursed　brood；　who；　under　different　names；　excite　the　curiosity　of　nations；　and；　owing　to　the　difficulty　of　separating　the　truth　from　the　error　in　their　artistically　woven　theories；　lead　them　into　fatal　ventures；　disturb　their　peace；　and　fill　them　with　such　extraordinary　prejudice。
  Up　to　this　day；　the　criterion　of　certainty　remains　a　mystery；　this　is　owing　to　the　multitude　of　criteria　that　have　been　successively　proposed。　　Some　have　taken　for　an　absolute　and　definite　criterion　the　testimony　of　the　senses；　others　intuition；　these　evidence；　those　argument。　　M。　Lamennais　affirms　that　there　is　no　other　criterion　than　universal　reason。　　Before　him；　M。　de　Bonald　thought　he　had　discovered　it　in　language。　　Quite　recently；　M。　Buchez　has　proposed　morality；　and；　to　harmonize　them　all；　the　eclectics　have　said　that　it　was　absurd　to　seek　for　an　absolute　criterion；　since　there　were　as　many　criteria　as　special　orders　of　knowledge。
  Of　all　these　hypotheses　it　may　be　observed；　That　the　testimony　of　the　senses　is　not　a　criterion；　because　the　senses；　relating　us　only　to　phenomena；　furnish　us　with　no　ideas；　that　intuition　needs　external　confirmation　or　objective　certainty；　that　evidence　requires　proof；　and　argument　verification；　that　universal　reason　has　been　wrong　many　a　time；　that　language　serves　equally　well　to　express　the　true　or　the　false；　that　morality；　like　all　the　rest；　needs　demonstration　and　rule；　and　finally；　that　the　eclectic　idea　is　the　least　reasonable　of　all；　since　it　is　of　no　use　to　say　that　there　are　several　criteria　if　we　cannot　point　out　one。　　I　very　much　fear　that　it　will　be　with　the　criterion　as　with　the　philosopher's　stone；　that　it　will　finally　be　abandoned；　not　only　as　insolvable；　but　as　chimerical。　　Consequently；　I　entertain　no　hopes　of　having　found　it；　nevertheless；　I　am　not　sure　that　some　one　more　skilful　will　not　discover　it。
  Be　it　as　it　may　with　regard　to　a　criterion　or　criteria；　there　are　methods　of　demonstration　which；　when　applied　to　certain　subjects；　may　lead　to　the　discovery　of　unknown　truths；　bring　to　light　relations　hitherto　unsuspected；　and　lift　a　paradox　to　the　highest　degree　of　certainty。　　In　such　a　case；　it　is　not　by　its　novelty；　nor　even　by　its　content；　that　a　system　should　be　judged；　but　by　its　method。　　The　critic；　then；　should　follow　the　example　of　the　Supreme　Court；　which；　in　the　cases　which　come　before　it；　never　examines　the　facts；　but　only　the　form　of　procedure。　　Now；　what　is　the　form　of　procedure？　　A　method。
  I　then　looked　to　see　what　philosophy；　in　the　absence　of　a　criterion；　had　accomplished　by　the　aid　of　special　methods；　and　I　must　say　that　I　could　not　discoverin　spite　of　the　loudly…　proclaimed　pretensions　of　somethat　it　had　produced　any　thing　of　real　value；　and；　at　last；　wearied　with　the　philosophical　twaddle；　I　resolved　to　make　a　new　search　for　the　criterion。　　I　confess　it；　to　my　shame；　this　folly　lasted　for　two　years；　and　I　am　not　yet　entirely　rid　of　it。　　It　was　like　seeking　a　needle　in　a　haystack。　　I　might　have　learned　Chinese　or　Arabic　in　the　time　that　I　have　lost　in　considering　and　reconsidering　syllogisms；　in　rising　to　the　summit　of　an　induction　as　to　the　top　of　a　ladder；　in　inserting　a　proposition　between　the　horns　of　a　dilemma；　in　decomposing；　distinguishing；　separating；　denying；　affirming；　admitting；　as　if　I　could　pass　abstractions　through　a　sieve。
  I　selected　justice　as　the　subject…matter　of　my　experiments。　　Finally；　after　a　thousand　decompositions；　recompositions；　and　double　compositions；　I　found　at　the　bottom　of　my　analytical　crucible；　not　the　criterion　of　certainty；　but　a　metaphysico…　economico…political　treatise；　whose　conclusions　were　such　that　I　did　not　care　to　present　them　in　a　more　artistic　or；　if　you　will；　more　intelligible　form。　　The　effect　which　this　work　produced　upon　all　classes　of　minds　gave　me　an　idea　of　the　spirit　of　our　age；　and　did　not　cause　me　to　regret　the　prudent　and　scientific　obscurity　of　my　style。　　How　happens　it　that　to…day　I　am　obliged　to　defend　my　intentions；　when　my　conduct　bears　the　evident　impress　of　such　lofty　morality？
  You　have　read　my　work；　sir；　and　you　know　the　gist　of　my　tedious　and　scholastic　lucubrations。　　Considering　the　revolutions　of　humanity；　the　vicissitudes　of　empires；　the　transformations　of　property；　and　the　innumerable　forms　of　justice　and　of　right；　I　asked；　〃Are　the　evils　which　afflict　us　inherent　in　our　condition　as　men；　or　do　they　arise　only　from　an　error？　　This　inequality　of　fortunes　which　all　admit　to　be　the　cause　of　society's　embarrassments；　is　it；　as　some　assert；　the　effect　of　Nature；　or；　in　the　division　of　the　products　of　labor　and　the　soil；　may　there　not　have　been　some　error　in　calculation？　　Does　each　laborer　receive　all　that　is　due　him；　and　only　that　which　is　due　him？　　In　short；　in　the　present　conditions　of　labor；　wages；　and　exchange；　is　no　one　wronged？are　the　accounts　well　kept？is　the　social　balance　accurate？〃
  Then　I　commenced　a　most　laborious　investigation。　　It　was　necessary　to　arrange　informal　notes；　to　discuss　contradictory　titles；　to　reply　to　captious　allegations；　to　refute　absurd　pretensions；　and　to　describe　fictitious　debts；　dishonest　transactions；　and　fraudulent　accounts。　　In　order　to　triumph　over　quibblers；　I　had　to　deny　the　authority　of　custom；　to　examine　the　arguments　of　legislators；　and　to　oppose　science　with　science　itself。　　Finally；　all　these　operations　completed；　I　had　to　give　a　judicial　dec