Justice, Administration of; Law -- Philosophy; Law and socialism; Property; Socialism and liberty
How is this argument to be answered? Yes, as long as it is admitted
that the law may be diverted from its true mission, that it may violate
property instead of securing it,
{12}
everybody will be wanting to manufacture law, either to defend himself
against plunder, or to organize it for his own profit. The political
question will always be prejudicial, predominant, and absorbing; in a
word, there will be fighting around the door of the Legislative Palace.
The struggle will be no less furious within it. To be convinced of this,
it is hardly necessary to look at what passes in the Chambers in France
and in England; it is enough to know how the question stands.
Is there any need to prove that this odious perversion of law is a
perpetual source of hatred and discord, that it even tends to social
disorganization? Look at the United States. There is no country in the
world where the law is kept more within its proper domain--which is, to
secure to everyone his liberty and his property. Therefore, there is
no country in the world where social order appears to rest upon a more
solid basis. Nevertheless, even in the United States, there are two
questions, and only two, that from the beginning have endangered
political order. And what are these two questions? That of slavery and
that of tariffs; that is, precisely the only two questions in which,
contrary to the general spirit of this republic, law has taken the
character of a plunderer. Slavery is a violation, sanctioned by law, of
the rights of the person. Protection is a violation perpetrated by the
law upon the rights of property; and certainly it is very remarkable
that, in the midst of so many other debates, this double legal scourge,
the sorrowful inheritance of the Old World, should be the only one which
can, and perhaps will, cause the rupture of the Union. Indeed, a more
astounding fact, in the heart of society, cannot be conceived than this:
That law should have become an instrument of injustice. And if this fact
occasions consequences so formidable to the United
{13}
States, where there is but one exception, what must it be with us in
Europe, where it is a principle--a system?
Mr. Montalembert, adopting the thought of a famous proclamation of Mr.
Carlier, said, "We must make war against socialism." And by socialism,
according to the definition of Mr. Charles Dupin, he meant plunder. But
what plunder did he mean? For there are two sorts: extralegal and legal
plunder.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account