66 ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



to English lawyers as limited to an estate for life; or it may with equal 

 propriety be said to be coupled with a trust to transmit the inheritance 

 to those who succeed in at least as good a condition as it was found, 

 reasonable use only excepted. That one generation may not only con- 

 sume or destroy the annual increase of the products of the earth, but the 

 stock also, thus leaving an inadequate provision for the multitude of 

 successors which it brings into life, is a notion so repugnant to reason 

 as scarcely to need formal refutation. The great writers upon the law 

 of nature and nations properly content themselves with simply affirm- 

 ing, without laboring to establish, these self-evident truths. 



The obligation not to invade the stock of the provision made by 

 nature for the support of human life is in an especial manner imposed 

 upon civilized societies; for the danger proceeds almost wholly from 

 them. It is commerce, the fruit of civilization, and which at the same 

 time extends and advances it, that subjects the production of each 

 part of the globe to the demands of every other part, and thus threat- 

 ens, unless the tendency is counteracted by efficient husbandry, to 

 encroach upon the sources of supply. The barbaric mau with sparse 

 numbers scattered over the face of the earth, with few wants, and not 

 engaged in commerce, makes but a small demand upon the natural in- 

 crease. He never endangers the existence of the stock, and neither 

 has, nor needs, the intelligent foresight to make provision for the future. 

 But with the advance of civUization, the increase in population, and the 

 multiplication of wants, a peril of overconsumption arises, and along 

 with it a development of that prudential wisdom which seeks to avert 

 the danger. 



The great and principal instrumentality designed to counteract this 

 threatening tendency is the institution of private individual property, 

 which, by holding out to every man the promise that he shall have the 

 exclusive possession and enjoyment of any increase in the products of 

 nature which he may effect by his care, labor, and abstinence, brings 

 into play the powerful motive of self-interest, stimulates the exertion 

 in every direction of all his faculties, both of mind and body, and thus 



To which I answer: Not so. The same law of nature that does hy this means give 

 ns property, does also hound that property too. " Go I has given us all things richly," 

 (1 Tim. vi, 17,) is the voice of reason confirmed by inspiration. But how far has he 

 given it to us? To'enjoy. As much as auy one can make use to any advantage of life 

 before it spoils, so much he may hy his labor fix a property in. Whatever is hey ond 

 this is more than his share, and belongs to others. Nothing was made hy God for 

 mau to spoil or destroy. (S. Martin Leaks, Jurid. Soc. Papers, Vol. 1, p. o'o'J.) 



