[152] Pr. "_Principe_" p. 67 [46].--Proudhon's teaching was not, as asserted by Diehl vol. 2 p. 116, vol. 3 pp. 166-7, and Zenker p. 61, Anarchism till 1852 and Federalism thenceforward; his Anarchism was Federalism from the start, only he later gave it the additional name of Federalism. [153] Pr. "_Propriete_" pp. XIX-XX [10-11]. [154] Pr. "_Idee_" pp. 235-6 [215-16]. [155] Pr. "_Solution_" p. 119 [87]. [156] Pr. "_Propriete_" pp. 301-2 [216]. [157] Pr. "_Confessions_" p. 65 [180-3; bracketed words a paraphrase.] [158] Pr. "_Confessions_" pp. 65-6 [183-4, except bracketed words]. [159] _Ib._ pp. 66-8 [185-9]. [160] Pr. "_Confessions_" p. 68 [191-2]. [161] Pfau pp. 227-31, Adler p. 372, Zenker pp. 26, 41, fail to see this, being influenced by the improper sense in which Proudhon uses the word "property" for a contractually guaranteed share of goods. [Eltzbacher's statement, on the other hand, is not so much drawn from Proudhon himself as deduced from a comparison of Eltzbacher's definition of property with the statement that Proudhon admits no law but the law of contract. I do not think this last statement is correct; I think Proudhon would have his voluntary contractual associations protect their members in certain definable respects--among others, in the possession of goods--against those who stood outside the contract as well as against those within. Then this would be, by Eltzbacher's definitions, both law and property.] [162] Pr. "_Contradictions_" 2. 303-4 [2. 237-8]. [163] Pr. "_Propriete_" pp. 285-90 [205-9]. [164] Pr. "_Propriete_" p. 293 [211]. [165] _Ib._ pp. 1-2 [13]. [166] _Ib._ p. 283 [204]. [167] _Ib._ p. 311 [223]. [168] _Ib._ p. 311 [223]. [169] _Ib._ p. 311 [223]. [170] _Ib._ pp. XVIII-XIX [10; consult the passage]. [171] _Ib._ pp. XIX-XX [11]. [172] Pr. "_Contradictions_" 2. 234-5 [2. 184]. [173] Pr. "_Droit_" p. 50 [230]. [174] Pr. "_Justice_" 1. 302-3 [1. 324-5]. [175] _Ib._ 303 [1. 325]. [176] Pr. "_Idee_" p. 235 [215]; "_Principe_" p. 64 [44]. [177] Pr. "_Contradictions_" 1. 51 [1. 74]. [178] _Ib._ 1. 53 [1. 75]. [179] _Ib._ 1. 55. [1. 76-7]. [180] _Ib._ 1. 68 [1. 87]. [181] _Ib._ 1. 68 [1. 87]. [182] _Ib._ 1. 83 [1. 98-9]. [183] Pr. "_Justice_" 1. 302-3 [1. 325]. [184] Pr. "_Contradictions_" 2. 528 [2. 414]. [185] Pr. "_Organisation_" p. 5 [93]. [186] Pr. "_Banque_" pp. 3-4 [260]. [187] Pr. "_Justice_" 1. 515 [2. 133]. [188] _Ib._ 1. 515 [2. 133]. [189] Pr. "_Confessions_" p. 71 [201]. [190] Pr. "_Justice_" 1, 515 [2, 133. Eltzbacher finds the sense "all will be enlightened" where I translate "everything will be cleared up." Eltzbacher's view of the sense--that to those who say "Enlightenment must come by the Revolution" Proudhon replies, "No, the Revolution must come by enlightenment"--correctly gives the thought brought out in the context]. [191] Pr. "_Justice_" 1. 466 [2. 90]. [192] _Ib._ 1. 470-71 [2. 94]. [193] _Ib._ 1. 515 [2. 133-4].