176 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 



And from Caiiltield Herroii, an Eiij^lish writer, in his "Introduction 

 to the History of Jurisprudence," Bk. I. ch. IV, p. 71: 



Property is the right of using. The right of property is founded upon its sub- 

 serviency to the subsistence and well-being of mankind. The institution of prop- 

 erty is necessary for social order. The exclusive appropriation of things is essential 

 for the full enjoyment of them. . . It is the principal foundation of social improve- 

 ment; it leads to the cultivation of the earth, the institution of government, the 

 establishment of .justice. In the right of property Beutham includes four things: 

 1. The right of occupation; 2. The right of excluding others; 3. The right of dis- 

 position; 4. The riglit of transmission. 



The Arbitrators will perceive that these authorities fully support 

 what I have been endeavoring to lay down. 



I now read from De Rayueval, a French writer, in his work " On the 

 Law of Nature and Nations," Section 2, page 96 : 



Property did not exist in the primitive state of the world, and it is no more 

 inherent in human nature than heredity. Originally men did not possess more than 

 the animals possess to-day. The earth was common to all and belonged to no one. 

 When agriculture became necessary for the sustenance of man, each was partial 

 naturally to the earth which he had cleared by the sweat of his brow, and which 

 offered liim the fruit and the recompense of his labor; whence the tirst idea of pres- 

 ervation and property ; whence also, the quarrels which the exclusive right must 

 have caused upon the ground that it was invoked for the first time. These quarrels 

 must have tinally led to compromises; these compromises introduced the right to 

 enjoy exclusively the earth which each had cleared and cultivated, and this is the 

 most reasonable origin of property. It has then been introduced for the maintenance 

 of peace among men. It has then been the principle of their union and social order. 



From John Penford Thomas, an English writer, in his "Treatise on 

 Universal Jurisprudence," ch. II, p. 25 : 



All things belonged originally to mankind in common. The benign Giver of all 

 gifts did not distribute them to some to the exclusion of the rest of the species. In 

 the state of a community of things the first bodily occupancy and use of so much 

 only as human wants from time to time required supplied the place of property. In 

 the primitive state every man had a right not to be hindered from using whatever 

 land or produce he had appropriated to himself and he immediately wanted for 

 rational use, and the bestowment of bodily labour on a thing was the only mode 

 of acquiring a positive title to it. Agriculture could not flourish, nor its fruits be 

 improved or ripened into maturity. Ingenuity was not sufficiently rewarded, dis- 

 putes continually arose; the ingenuity and industry of man were checked. Pre- 

 occupation by slow degrees communicated with the consent of man either express 

 or implied a right of appropriation; and the introduction of money has greatly 

 extended it. The increased wants, improved agriculture, and valuable elegancies 

 of incipient civilization gave birth to the distinctions of property. 



[The Tribunal thereupon adjourned until Thursday, April 20, 1893, 

 at 11.30 o'clock a. ra.l 



