vin NATURAL AND POLITICAL RIO JITS 363 



course any argument based upon it is necessarily 

 worthless. From the fact that men are unequal it 

 cannot well be concluded that they have " equal 

 rights to the use and enjoyment of nature." 



Passing from this point, we are met by the broad 

 assertion that " the exertion of labour in production 

 is the only title to exclusive possession." So far Mr. 

 George is atone with the Physiocrats, who ;ils<> 

 rest the claim to ownership on labour bestowed. 

 Let us consider the grounds upon which Mr. 

 George rests this assertion. We need not trouble 

 ourselves whether they are the same or different 

 from those set forth by his predecessors. 



The following questions and answers enlighten 

 us on this head. 



What constitutes the rightful basis of property ? What is it 

 that enables a man to say justly of a thing, " It is mine " ? Is 

 it not, primarily, the right of a man to himself, to the use of 

 his own powers, to the enjoyment of the fruits of his own exer- 

 tions ? (" Progress and Poverty," p. 236.) 



And, on the same page, we are told that the 

 title to everything produced by human exer- 

 tions "descends from the original producer, 

 in whom it is vested by natural law." Here 

 we are back again on the ground of the 

 " law of nature " and " natural rights," according 

 to which, as we have seen, a man has a right to 

 keep anything he is strong enough to keep, 

 whether he has produced it or not. But the 



