X LIMITATION OF STATE FUNCTIONS 165 



position, unless they are so well-known as to render 

 it certain that they will make a proper use of it. In 

 such a case some relative or personal friend will ad- 

 vance the money at his own risk, and the recipient 

 will consider it a debt of honour, to be repaid at the first 

 opportunity. 



There would thus be only two modes of borrowing money 

 or goods — either from some personal friend vdio could 

 trust to the character of the borrower to repay him ; or by 

 giving in pledge some portable article of value to be 

 returned when the money was repaid, and in neither of 

 these cases would the law be called upon to interfere. In 

 all departments of genuine business between persons of 

 known integrity, bills and promissory notes would pass as 

 at present, the only difference being that they would 

 represent debts of honour only with which the law would 

 have nothing whatever to do. 



So far as I can see, the interference of the law in all 

 money relations of individuals with each other is wholly 

 unnecessary and produces nothing but evil. In an endless 

 variety of wa3^s it offers a premium on dishonesty, while 

 through all the ramifications of business it is the honest 

 buyers who pay ready money or punctually discharge their 

 obligations, that really have to pay the loss caused by the 

 great army of defaulters and swindlers, which the law itself, 

 under pretence of enforcing the execution of contracts and 

 the payment of debts, has really brought into existence. 

 Our law of property and of debtor and creditor is the 

 actual cause of almost all fraud and dishonesty, a very 

 small portion of the evils due to which it can ever succeed 

 in remedying; while by affording endless scope for the 

 rogues to satisfy their wants at the expense of the honest 

 men it is perhaps the greatest corrupter of morals that 

 now exists. 



I am quite aware that in raising my voice against the 

 abuses of governmental action here touched upon, I am 

 one of a very small minority. Yet I feel sure that, short 

 of a complete reorganization of society either on socialistic 

 lines or on those of true individualism as indicated in the 

 last chapter of this volume, no more beneficial reforms 



