318 ON THE NATURAL INEQUALITY OF MEN MI 



that gets the better seizes more or less of the other's 

 territory and demands it as the price of p< 

 In the latter case, in fact, we have a contract, a 

 price paid for an article to wit peace delivered, 

 and certain lands taken in exchange ; and there 

 can be no question that the buyer's title is based 

 on contract. Even in the former alternative, I see 

 little difference. When they declared war, the 

 parties knew very well that they referred their case 

 to the arbitrament of force ; and if contracts are 

 eternally valid, they are fully bound to abide by 

 the decision of the arbitrator whom they have 

 elected to obey. Therefore, even on Hobbes's or 

 Rousseau's principles, it is not by any means 

 clear to my mind that force, or rather the state of 

 express or tacit contract which follows upon force, 

 successfully applied, may not be plausibly con- 

 sidered to confer ownership. 



But if the question is argued, as I think it 

 ought to be, on empirical grounds if the real 

 question is not one of imagined d priori principle, 

 but of practical expediency of the conduct which 

 conduces most to human welfare then it appears 

 to me that there is much to be said for the 

 opinion that force effectually and thoroughly used, 

 so as to render further opposition hopeless, 

 establishes an ownership 1 which should be r 



1 Submission to the Revolution of 1688 by Jacobites could be 

 advocated ethically on no other ground, though all . 

 pretexts were invented to disguise the t';v -t. 



