What is Property?
What is Property?P. J. PROUDHON: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKS.PREFACE.WHAT IS PROPERTY? FIRST MEMOIR.CHAPTER I. METHOD PURSUED IN THIS WORK.—THE IDEA OF A REVOLUTION.CHAPTER II. PROPERTY CONSIDERED AS A NATURAL RIGHTCHAPTER III. LABOR AS THE EFFICIENT CAUSE OF THE DOMAIN OF PROPERTY.CHAPTER IV. THAT PROPERTY IS IMPOSSIBLE.APPENDIX TO THE FIFTH PROPOSITION.CHAPTER V. PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPOSITION OF THE IDEA OF JUSTICEPART FIRST.PART SECOND.SECOND MEMOIR.Conclusion.FOOTNOTES:Copyright
What is Property?
P. J. Proudhon
P. J. PROUDHON: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKS.
In an important work, which his habitual readers certainly
have not forgotten, although death did not allow him to finish it,
Sainte Beuve thus judges the correspondence of the great
publicist:—"The letters of Proudhon, even outside the circle of his
particular friends, will always be of value; we can always learn
something from them, and here is the proper place to determine the
general character of his correspondence."It has always been large, especially since he became so
celebrated; and, to tell the truth, I am persuaded that, in the
future, the correspondence of Proudhon will be his principal, vital
work, and that most of his books will be only accessory to and
corroborative of this. At any rate, his books can be well
understood only by the aid of his letters and the continual
explanations which he makes to those who consult him in their
doubt, and request him to define more clearly his
position."There are, among celebrated people, many methods of
correspondence. There are those to whom letter-writing is a bore,
and who, assailed with questions and compliments, reply in the
greatest haste, solely that the job may be over with, and who
return politeness for politeness, mingling it with more or less
wit. This kind of correspondence, though coming from celebrated
people, is insignificant and unworthy of collection and
classification."After those who write letters in performance of a
disagreeable duty, and almost side by side with them in point of
insignificance, I should put those who write in a manner wholly
external, wholly superficial, devoted only to flattery, lavishing
praise like gold, without counting it; and those also who weigh
every word, who reply formally and pompously, with a view to fine
phrases and effects. They exchange words only, and choose them
solely for their brilliancy and show. You think it is you,
individually, to whom they speak; but they are addressing
themselves in your person to the four corners of Europe. Such
letters are empty, and teach as nothing but theatrical execution
and the favorite pose of their writers."I will not class among the latter the more prudent and
sagacious authors who, when writing to individuals, keep one eye on
posterity. We know that many who pursue this method have written
long, finished, charming, flattering, and tolerably natural
letters. Beranger furnishes us with the best example of this
class."Proudhon, however, is a man of entirely different nature and
habits. In writing, he thinks of nothing but his idea and the
person whom he addresses: ad rem et ad hominem. A man of conviction
and doctrine, to write does not weary him; to be questioned does
not annoy him. When approached, he cares only to know that your
motive is not one of futile curiosity, but the love of truth; he
assumes you to be serious, he replies, he examines your objections,
sometimes verbally, sometimes in writing; for, as he remarks, 'if
there be some points which correspondence can never settle, but
which can be made clear by conversation in two minutes, at other
times just the opposite is the case: an objection clearly stated in
writing, a doubt well expressed, which elicits a direct and
positive reply, helps things along more than ten hours of oral
intercourse!' In writing to you he does not hesitate to treat the
subject anew; he unfolds to you the foundation and superstructure
of his thought: rarely does he confess himself defeated—it is not
his way; he holds to his position, but admits the breaks, the
variations, in short, the EVOLUTION of his mind. The history of his
mind is in his letters; there it must be sought."Proudhon, whoever addresses him, is always ready; he quits
the page of the book on which he is at work to answer you with the
same pen, and that without losing patience, without getting
confused, without sparing or complaining of his ink; he is a public
man, devoted to the propagation of his idea by all methods, and the
best method, with him, is always the present one, the latest one.
His very handwriting, bold, uniform, legible, even in the most
tiresome passages, betrays no haste, no hurry to finish. Each line
is accurate: nothing is left to chance; the punctuation, very
correct and a little emphatic and decided, indicates with precision
and delicate distinction all the links in the chain of his
argument. He is devoted entirely to you, to his business and yours,
while writing to you, and never to anything else. All the letters
of his which I have seen are serious: not one is
commonplace."But at the same time he is not at all artistic or affected;
he does not CONSTRUCT his letters, he does not revise them, he
spends no time in reading them over; we have a first draught,
excellent and clear, a jet from the fountain-head, but that is all.
The new arguments, which he discovers in support of his ideas and
which opposition suggests to him, are an agreeable surprise, and
shed a light which we should vainly search for even in his works.
His correspondence differs essentially from his books, in that it
gives you no uneasiness; it places you in the very heart of the
man, explains him to you, and leaves you with an impression of
moral esteem and almost of intellectual security. We feel his
sincerity. I know of no one to whom he can be more fitly compared
in this respect than George Sand, whose correspondence is large,
and at the same time full of sincerity. His role and his nature
correspond. If he is writing to a young man who unbosoms himself to
him in sceptical anxiety, to a young woman who asks him to decide
delicate questions of conduct for her, his letter takes the form of
a short moral essay, of a father-confessor's advice. Has he
perchance attended the theatre (a rare thing for him) to witness
one of Ponsart's comedies, or a drama of Charles Edmond's, he feels
bound to give an account of his impressions to the friend to whom
he is indebted for this pleasure, and his letter becomes a literary
and philosophical criticism, full of sense, and like no other. His
familiarity is suited to his correspondent; he affects no rudeness.
The terms of civility or affection which he employs towards his
correspondents are sober, measured, appropriate to each, and honest
in their simplicity and cordiality. When he speaks of morals and
the family, he seems at times like the patriarchs of the Bible. His
command of language is complete, and he never fails to avail
himself of it. Now and then a coarse word, a few personalities, too
bitter and quite unjust or injurious, will have to be suppressed in
printing; time, however, as it passes away, permits many things and
renders them inoffensive. Am I right in saying that Proudhon's
correspondence, always substantial, will one day be the most
accessible and attractive portion of his works?"Almost the whole of Proudhon's real biography is included in
his correspondence. Up to 1837, the date of the first letter which
we have been able to collect, his life, narrated by Sainte Beuve,
from whom we make numerous extracts, may be summed up in a few
pages.Pierre Joseph Proudhon was born on the 15th of January, 1809,
in a suburb of Besancon, called Mouillere. His father and mother
were employed in the great brewery belonging to M. Renaud. His
father, though a cousin of the jurist Proudhon, the celebrated
professor in the faculty of Dijon, was a journeyman brewer. His
mother, a genuine peasant, was a common servant. She was an orderly
person of great good sense; and, as they who knew her say, a
superior woman of HEROIC character,—to use the expression of the
venerable M. Weiss, the librarian at Besancon. She it was
especially that Proudhon resembled: she and his grandfather
Tournesi, the soldier peasant of whom his mother told him, and
whose courageous deeds he has described in his work on "Justice."
Proudhon, who always felt a great veneration for his mother
Catharine, gave her name to the elder of his daughters. In 1814,
when Besancon was blockaded, Mouillere, which stood in front of the
walls of the town, was destroyed in the defence of the place; and
Proudhon's father established a cooper's shop in a suburb of
Battant, called Vignerons. Very honest, but simple-minded and
short-sighted, this cooper, the father of five children, of whom
Pierre Joseph was the eldest, passed his life in poverty. At eight
years of age, Proudhon either made himself useful in the house, or
tended the cattle out of doors. No one should fail to read that
beautiful and precious page of his work on "Justice," in which he
describes the rural sports which he enjoyed when a neatherd. At the
age of twelve, he was a cellar-boy in an inn. This, however, did
not prevent him from studying.His mother was greatly aided by M. Renaud, the former owner
of the brewery, who had at that time retired from business, and was
engaged in the education of his children.Proudhon entered school as a day-scholar in the sixth class.
He was necessarily irregular in his attendance; domestic cares and
restraints sometimes kept him from his classes. He succeeded
nevertheless in his studies; he showed great perseverance. His
family were so poor that they could not afford to furnish him with
books; he was obliged to borrow them from his comrades, and copy
the text of his lessons. He has himself told us that he was obliged
to leave his wooden shoes outside the door, that he might not
disturb the classes with his noise; and that, having no hat, he
went to school bareheaded. One day, towards the close of his
studies, on returning from the distribution of the prizes, loaded
with crowns, he found nothing to eat in the house."In his eagerness for labor and his thirst for knowledge,
Proudhon," says Sainte Beuve, "was not content with the instruction
of his teachers. From his twelfth to his fourteenth year, he was a
constant frequenter of the town library. One curiosity led to
another, and he called for book after book, sometimes eight or ten
at one sitting. The learned librarian, the friend and almost the
brother of Charles Nodier, M. Weiss, approached him one day, and
said, smiling, 'But, my little friend, what do you wish to do with
all these books?' The child raised his head, eyed his questioner,
and replied: 'What's that to you?' And the good M. Weiss remembers
it to this day."Forced to earn his living, Proudhon could not continue his
studies. He entered a printing-office in Besancon as a
proof-reader. Becoming, soon after, a compositor, he made a tour of
France in this capacity. At Toulon, where he found himself without
money and without work, he had a scene with the mayor, which he
describes in his work on "Justice."Sainte Beuve says that, after his tour of France, his service
book being filled with good certificates, Proudhon was promoted to
the position of foreman. But he does not tell us, for the reason
that he had no knowledge of a letter written by Fallot, of which we
never heard until six months since, that the printer at that time
contemplated quitting his trade in order to become a
teacher.Towards 1829, Fallot, who was a little older than Proudhon,
and who, after having obtained the Suard pension in 1832, died in
his twenty-ninth year, while filling the position of assistant
librarian at the Institute, was charged, Protestant though he was,
with the revisal of a "Life of the Saints," which was published at
Besancon. The book was in Latin, and Fallot added some notes which
also were in Latin."But," says Sainte Beuve, "it happened that some errors
escaped his attention, which Proudhon, then proof-reader in the
printing office, did not fail to point out to him. Surprised at
finding so good a Latin scholar in a workshop, he desired to make
his acquaintance; and soon there sprung up between them a most
earnest and intimate friendship: a friendship of the intellect and
of the heart."Addressed to a printer between twenty-two and twenty-three
years of age, and predicting in formal terms his future fame,
Fallot's letter seems to us so interesting that we do not hesitate
to reproduce it entire."PARIS, December 5, 1831."MY DEAR PROUDHON,—YOU have a right to be surprised at, and
even dissatisfied with, my long delay in replying to your kind
letter; I will tell you the cause of it. It became necessary to
forward an account of your ideas to M. J. de Gray; to hear his
objections, to reply to them, and to await his definitive response,
which reached me but a short time ago; for M. J. is a sort of
financial king, who takes no pains to be punctual in dealing with
poor devils like ourselves. I, too, am careless in matters of
business; I sometimes push my negligence even to disorder, and the
metaphysical musings which continually occupy my mind, added to the
amusements of Paris, render me the most incapable man in the world
for conducting a negotiation with despatch."I have M. Jobard's decision; here it is: In his judgment,
you are too learned and clever for his children; he fears that you
could not accommodate your mind and character to the childish
notions common to their age and station. In short, he is what the
world calls a good father; that is, he wants to spoil his children,
and, in order to do this easily, he thinks fit to retain his
present instructor, who is not very learned, but who takes part in
their games and joyous sports with wonderful facility, who points
out the letters of the alphabet to the little girl, who takes the
little boys to mass, and who, no less obliging than the worthy Abbe
P. of our acquaintance, would readily dance for Madame's amusement.
Such a profession would not suit you, you who have a free, proud,
and manly soul: you are refused; let us dismiss the matter from our
minds. Perhaps another time my solicitude will be less unfortunate.
I can only ask your pardon for having thought of thus disposing of
you almost without consulting you. I find my excuse in the motives
which guided me; I had in view your well-being and advancement in
the ways of this world."I see in your letter, my comrade, through its brilliant
witticisms and beneath the frank and artless gayety with which you
have sprinkled it, a tinge of sadness and despondency which pains
me. You are unhappy, my friend: your present situation does not
suit you; you cannot remain in it, it was not made for you, it is
beneath you; you ought, by all means, to leave it, before its
injurious influence begins to affect your faculties, and before you
become settled, as they say, in the ways of your profession, were
it possible that such a thing could ever happen, which I flatly
deny. You are unhappy; you have not yet entered upon the path which
Nature has marked out for you. But, faint-hearted soul, is that a
cause for despondency? Ought you to feel discouraged? Struggle,
morbleu, struggle persistently, and you will triumph. J. J.
Rousseau groped about for forty years before his genius was
revealed to him. You are not J. J Rousseau; but listen: I know not
whether I should have divined the author of "Emile" when he was
twenty years of age, supposing that I had been his contemporary,
and had enjoyed the honor of his acquaintance. But I have known
you, I have loved you, I have divined your future, if I may venture
to say so; for the first time in my life, I am going to risk a
prophecy. Keep this letter, read it again fifteen or twenty years
hence, perhaps twenty-five, and if at that time the prediction
which I am about to make has not been fulfilled, burn it as a piece
of folly out of charity and respect for my memory. This is my
prediction: you will be, Proudhon, in spite of yourself,
inevitably, by the fact of your destiny, a writer, an author; you
will be a philosopher; you will be one of the lights of the
century, and your name will occupy a place in the annals of the
nineteenth century, like those of Gassendi, Descartes, Malebranche,
and Bacon in the seventeenth, and those of Diderot, Montesquieu,
Helvetius. Locke, Hume, and Holbach in the eighteenth. Such will be
your lot! Do now what you will, set type in a printing-office,
bring up children, bury yourself in deep seclusion, seek obscure
and lonely villages, it is all one to me; you cannot escape your
destiny; you cannot divest yourself of your noblest feature, that
active, strong, and inquiring mind, with which you are endowed;
your place in the world has been appointed, and it cannot remain
empty. Go where you please, I expect you in Paris, talking
philosophy and the doctrines of Plato; you will have to come,
whether you want to or not. I, who say this to you, must feel very
sure of it in order to be willing to put it upon paper, since,
without reward for my prophetic skill,—to which, I assure you, I
make not the slightest claim,—I run the risk of passing for a
hare-brained fellow, in case I prove to be mistaken: he plays a
bold game who risks his good sense upon his cards, in return for
the very trifling and insignificant merit of having divined a young
man's future."When I say that I expect you in Paris, I use only a
proverbial phrase which you must not allow to mislead you as to my
projects and plans. To reside in Paris is disagreeable to me, very
much so; and when this fine-art fever which possesses me has left
me, I shall abandon the place without regret to seek a more
peaceful residence in a provincial town, provided always the town
shall afford me the means of living, bread, a bed, books, rest, and
solitude. How I miss, my good Proudhon, that dark, obscure, smoky
chamber in which I dwelt in Besancon, and where we spent so many
pleasant hours in the discussion of philosophy! Do you remember it?
But that is now far away. Will that happy time ever return? Shall
we one day meet again? Here my life is restless, uncertain,
precarious, and, what is worse, indolent, illiterate, and vagrant.
I do no work, I live in idleness, I ramble about; I do not read, I
no longer study; my books are forsaken; now and then I glance over
a few metaphysical works, and after a days walk through dirty,
filthy, crowded streets. I lie down with empty head and tired body,
to repeat the performance on the following day. What is the object
of these walks, you will ask. I make visits, my friend; I hold
interviews with stupid people. Then a fit of curiosity seizes me,
the least inquisitive of beings: there are museums, libraries,
assemblies, churches, palaces, gardens, and theatres to visit. I am
fond of pictures, fond of music, fond of sculpture; all these are
beautiful and good, but they cannot appease hunger, nor take the
place of my pleasant readings of Bailly, Hume, and Tennemann, which
I used to enjoy by my fireside when I was able to
read."But enough of complaints. Do not allow this letter to affect
you too much, and do not think that I give way to dejection or
despondency; no, I am a fatalist, and I believe in my star. I do
not know yet what my calling is, nor for what branch of polite
literature I am best fitted; I do not even know whether I am, or
ever shall be, fitted for any: but what matters it? I suffer, I
labor, I dream, I enjoy, I think; and, in a word, when my last hour
strikes, I shall have lived."Proudhon, I love you, I esteem you; and, believe me, these
are not mere phrases. What interest could I have in flattering and
praising a poor printer? Are you rich, that you may pay for
courtiers? Have you a sumptuous table, a dashing wife, and gold to
scatter, in order to attract them to your suite? Have you the
glory, honors, credit, which would render your acquaintance
pleasing to their vanity and pride? No; you are poor, obscure,
abandoned; but, poor, obscure, and abandoned, you have a friend,
and a friend who knows all the obligations which that word imposes
upon honorable people, when they venture to assume it. That friend
is myself: put me to the test."GUSTAVE FALLOT."It appears from this letter that if, at this period, Proudhon
had already exhibited to the eyes of a clairvoyant friend his
genius for research and investigation, it was in the direction of
philosophical, rather than of economical and social,
questions.Having become foreman in the house of Gauthier & Co., who
carried on a large printing establishment at Besancon, he corrected
the proofs of ecclesiastical writers, the Fathers of the Church. As
they were printing a Bible, a Vulgate, he was led to compare the
Latin with the original Hebrew."In this way," says Sainte Beuve, "he learned Hebrew by
himself, and, as everything was connected in his mind, he was led
to the study of comparative philology. As the house of Gauthier
published many works on Church history and theology, he came also
to acquire, through this desire of his to investigate everything,
an extensive knowledge of theology, which afterwards caused
misinformed persons to think that he had been in an ecclesiastical
seminary."Towards 1836, Proudhon left the house of Gauthier, and, in
company with an associate, established a small printing-office in
Besancon. His contribution to the partnership consisted, not so
much in capital, as in his knowledge of the trade. His partner
committing suicide in 1838, Proudhon was obliged to wind up the
business, an operation which he did not accomplish as quickly and
as easily as he hoped. He was then urged by his friends to enter
the ranks of the competitors for the Suard pension. This pension
consisted of an income of fifteen hundred francs bequeathed to the
Academy of Besancon by Madame Suard, the widow of the academician,
to be given once in three years to the young man residing in the
department of Doubs, a bachelor of letters or of science, and not
possessing a fortune, whom the Academy of Besancon SHOULD DEEM BEST
FITTED FOR A LITERARY OR SCIENTIFIC CAREER, OR FOR THE STUDY OF LAW
OR OF MEDICINE. The first to win the Suard pension was Gustave
Fallot. Mauvais, who was a distinguished astronomer in the Academy
of Sciences, was the second. Proudhon aspired to be the third. To
qualify himself, he had to be received as a bachelor of letters,
and was obliged to write a letter to the Academy of Besancon. In a
phrase of this letter, the terms of which he had to modify, though
he absolutely refused to change its spirit, Proudhon expressed his
firm resolve to labor for the amelioration of the condition of his
brothers, the working-men.The only thing which he had then published was an "Essay on
General Grammar," which appeared without the author's signature.
While reprinting, at Besancon, the "Primitive Elements of
Languages, Discovered by the Comparison of Hebrew roots with those
of the Latin and French," by the Abbe Bergier, Proudhon had
enlarged the edition of his "Essay on General
Grammar."The date of the edition, 1837, proves that he did not at that
time think of competing for the Suard pension. In this work, which
continued and completed that of the Abbe Bergier, Proudhon adopted
the same point of view, that of Moses and of Biblical tradition.
Two years later, in February, 1839, being already in possession of
the Suard pension, he addressed to the Institute, as a competitor
for the Volney prize, a memoir entitled: "Studies in Grammatical
Classification and the Derivation of some French words." It was his
first work, revised and presented in another form. Four memoirs
only were sent to the Institute, none of which gained the prize.
Two honorable mentions were granted, one of them to memoir No. 4;
that is, to P. J. Proudhon, printer at Besancon. The judges were
MM. Amedde Jaubert, Reinaud, and Burnouf."The committee," said the report presented at the annual
meeting of the five academies on Thursday, May 2, 1839, "has paid
especial attention to manuscripts No. 1 and No. 4. Still, it does
not feel able to grant the prize to either of these works, because
they do not appear to be sufficiently elaborated. The committee,
which finds in No. 4 some ingenious analyses, particularly in
regard to the mechanism of the Hebrew language, regrets that the
author has resorted to hazardous conjectures, and has sometimes
forgotten the special recommendation of the committee to pursue the
experimental and comparative method."Proudhon remembered this. He attended the lectures of Eugene
Burnouf, and, as soon as he became acquainted with the labors and
discoveries of Bopp and his successors, he definitively abandoned
an hypothesis which had been condemned by the Academy of
Inscriptions and Belles-lettres. He then sold, for the value of the
paper, the remaining copies of the "Essay" published by him in
1837. In 1850, they were still lying in a grocer's
back-shop.A neighboring publisher then placed the edition on the
market, with the attractive name of Proudhon upon it. A lawsuit
ensued, in which the author was beaten. His enemies, and at that
time there were many of them, would have been glad to have proved
him a renegade and a recanter. Proudhon, in his work on "Justice,"
gives some interesting details of this lawsuit.In possession of the Suard pension, Proudhon took part in the
contest proposed by the Academy of Besancon on the question of the
utility of the celebration of Sunday. His memoir obtained honorable
mention, together with a medal which was awarded him, in open
session, on the 24th of August, 1839. The reporter of the
committee, the Abbe Doney, since made Bishop of Montauban, called
attention to the unquestionable superiority of his
talent."But," says Sainte Beuve, "he reproached him with having
adopted dangerous theories, and with having touched upon questions
of practical politics and social organization, where upright
intentions and zeal for the public welfare cannot justify rash
solutions."Was it policy, we mean prudence, which induced Proudhon to
screen his ideas of equality behind the Mosaic law? Sainte Beuve,
like many others, seems to think so. But we remember perfectly well
that, having asked Proudhon, in August, 1848, if he did not
consider himself indebted in some respects to his
fellow-countryman, Charles Fourier, we received from him the
following reply: "I have certainly read Fourier, and have spoken of
him more than once in my works; but, upon the whole, I do not think
that I owe anything to him. My real masters, those who have caused
fertile ideas to spring up in my mind, are three in number: first,
the Bible; next, Adam Smith; and last, Hegel."Freely confessed in the "Celebration of Sunday," the
influence of the Bible on Proudhon is no less manifest in his first
memoir on property. Proudhon undoubtedly brought to this work many
ideas of his own; but is not the very foundation of ancient Jewish
law to be found in its condemnation of usurious interest and its
denial of the right of personal appropriation of land?The first memoir on property appeared in 1840, under the
title, "What is Property? or an Inquiry into the Principle of Right
and of Government." Proudhon dedicated it, in a letter which served
as the preface, to the Academy of Besancon. The latter, finding
itself brought to trial by its pensioner, took the affair to heart,
and evoked it, says Sainte Beuve, with all possible
haste.The pension narrowly escaped being immediately withdrawn from
the bold defender of the principle of equality of conditions. M.
Vivien, then Minister of Justice, who was earnestly solicited to
prosecute the author, wished first to obtain the opinion of the
economist, Blanqui, a member of the Academy of Moral and Political
Sciences. Proudhon having presented to this academy a copy of his
book, M. Blanqui was appointed to review it. This review, though it
opposed Proudhon's views, shielded him. Treated as a savant by M.
Blanqui, the author was not prosecuted. He was always grateful to
MM. Blanqui and Vivien for their handsome conduct in the
matter.M. Blanqui's review, which was partially reproduced by "Le
Moniteur," on the 7th of September, 1840, naturally led Proudhon to
address to him, in the form of a letter, his second memoir on
property, which appeared in April, 1841. Proudhon had endeavored,
in his first memoir, to demonstrate that the pursuit of equality of
conditions is the true principle of right and of government. In the
"Letter to M. Blanqui," he passes in review the numerous and varied
methods by which this principle gradually becomes realized in all
societies, especially in modern society.In 1842, a third memoir appeared, entitled, "A Notice to
Proprietors, or a Letter to M. Victor Considerant, Editor of 'La
Phalange,' in Reply to a Defence of Property." Here the influence
of Adam Smith manifested itself, and was frankly admitted. Did not
Adam Smith find, in the principle of equality, the first of all the
laws which govern wages? There are other laws, undoubtedly; but
Proudhon considers them all as springing from the principle of
property, as he defined it in his first memoir. Thus, in humanity,
there are two principles,—one which leads us to equality, another
which separates us from it. By the former, we treat each other as
associates; by the latter, as strangers, not to say enemies. This
distinction, which is constantly met with throughout the three
memoirs, contained already, in germ, the idea which gave birth to
the "System of Economical Contradictions," which appeared in 1846,
the idea of antinomy or contre-loi.The "Notice to Proprietors" was seized by the magistrates of
Besancon; and Proudhon was summoned to appear before the assizes of
Doubs within a week. He read his written defence to the jurors in
person, and was acquitted. The jury, like M. Blanqui, viewed him
only as a philosopher, an inquirer, a savant.In 1843, Proudhon published the "Creation of Order in
Humanity," a large volume, which does not deal exclusively with
questions of social economy. Religion, philosophy, method,
certainty, logic, and dialectics are treated at considerable
length.Released from his printing-office on the 1st of March of the
same year, Proudhon had to look for a chance to earn his living.
Messrs. Gauthier Bros., carriers by water between Mulhouse and
Lyons, the eldest of whom was Proudhon's companion in childhood,
conceived the happy thought of employing him, of utilizing his
ability in their business, and in settling the numerous points of
difficulty which daily arose. Besides the large number of accounts
which his new duties required him to make out, and which retarded
the publication of the "System of Economical Contradictions," until
October, 1846, we ought to mention a work, which, before it
appeared in pamphlet form, was published in the "Revue des
Economistes,"—"Competition between Railroads and Navigable
Ways.""Le Miserere, or the Repentance of a King," which he
published in March, 1845, in the "Revue Independante," during that
Lenten season when Lacordaire was preaching in Lyons, proves that,
though devoting himself with ardor to the study of economical
problems, Proudhon had not lost his interest in questions of
religious history. Among his writings on these questions, which he
was unfortunately obliged to leave unfinished, we may mention a
nearly completed history of the early Christian heresies, and of
the struggle of Christianity against Caesarism.We have said that, in 1848, Proudhon recognized three
masters. Having no knowledge of the German language, he could not
have read the works of Hegel, which at that time had not been
translated into French. It was Charles Grun, a German, who had come
to France to study the various philosophical and socialistic
systems, who gave him the substance of the Hegelian ideas. During
the winter of 1844-45, Charles Grun had some long conversations
with Proudhon, which determined, very decisively, not the ideas,
which belonged exclusively to the bisontin thinker, but the form of
the important work on which he labored after 1843, and which was
published in 1846 by Guillaumin.Hegel's great idea, which Proudhon appropriated, and which he
demonstrates with wonderful ability in the "System of Economical
Contradictions," is as follows: Antinomy, that is, the existence of
two laws or tendencies which are opposed to each other, is
possible, not only with two different things, but with one and the
same thing. Considered in their thesis, that is, in the law or
tendency which created them, all the economical categories are
rational,—competition, monopoly, the balance of trade, and
property, as well as the division of labor, machinery, taxation,
and credit. But, like communism and population, all these
categories are antinomical; all are opposed, not only to each
other, but to themselves. All is opposition, and disorder is born
of this system of opposition. Hence, the sub-title of the
work,—"Philosophy of Misery." No category can be suppressed; the
opposition, antinomy, or contre-tendance, which exists in each of
them, cannot be suppressed.Where, then, lies the solution of the social problem?
Influenced by the Hegelian ideas, Proudhon began to look for it in
a superior synthesis, which should reconcile the thesis and
antithesis. Afterwards, while at work upon his book on "Justice,"
he saw that the antinomical terms do not cancel each other, any
more than the opposite poles of an electric pile destroy each
other; that they are the procreative cause of motion, life, and
progress; that the problem is to discover, not their fusion, which
would be death, but their equilibrium,—an equilibrium for ever
unstable, varying with the development of society.On the cover of the "System of Economical Contradictions,"
Proudhon announced, as soon to appear, his "Solution of the Social
Problem." This work, upon which he was engaged when the Revolution
of 1848 broke out, had to be cut up into pamphlets and newspaper
articles. The two pamphlets, which he published in March, 1848,
before he became editor of "Le Representant du Peuple," bear the
same title,—"Solution of the Social Problem." The first, which is
mainly a criticism of the early acts of the provisional government,
is notable from the fact that in it Proudhon, in advance of all
others, energetically opposed the establishment of national
workshops. The second, "Organization of Credit and Circulation,"
sums up in a few pages his idea of economical progress: a gradual
reduction of interest, profit, rent, taxes, and wages. All progress
hitherto has been made in this manner; in this manner it must
continue to be made. Those workingmen who favor a nominal increase
of wages are, unconsciously following a back-track, opposed to all
their interests.After having published in "Le Representant du Peuple," the
statutes of the Bank of Exchange,—a bank which was to make no
profits, since it was to have no stockholders, and which,
consequently, was to discount commercial paper with out interest,
charging only a commission sufficient to defray its running
expenses,—Proudhon endeavored, in a number of articles, to explain
its mechanism and necessity. These articles have been collected in
one volume, under the double title, "Resume of the Social Question;
Bank of Exchange." His other articles, those which up to December,
1848, were inspired by the progress of events, have been collected
in another volume,—"Revolutionary Ideas."Almost unknown in March, 1848, and struck off in April from
the list of candidates for the Constituent Assembly by the
delegation of workingmen which sat at the Luxembourg, Proudhon had
but a very small number of votes at the general elections of April.
At the complementary elections, which were held in the early days
of June, he was elected in Paris by seventy-seven thousand
votes.After the fatal days of June, he published an article on le
terme, which caused the first suspension of "Le Representant du
Peuple." It was at that time that he introduced a bill into the
Assembly, which, being referred to the Committee on the Finances,
drew forth, first, the report of M. Thiers, and then the speech
which Proudhon delivered, on the 31st of July, in reply to this
report. "Le Representant du Peuple," reappearing a few days later,
he wrote, a propos of the law requiring journals to give bonds, his
famous article on "The Malthusians" (August 10, 1848).Ten days afterwards, "Le Representant du Peuple," again
suspended, definitively ceased to appear. "Le Peuple," of which he
was the editor-in-chief, and the first number of which was issued
in the early part of September, appeared weekly at first, for want
of sufficient bonds; it afterwards appeared daily, with a double
number once a week. Before "Le Peuple" had obtained its first bond,
Proudhon published a remarkable pamphlet on the "Right to Labor,"—a
right which he denied in the form in which it was then affirmed. It
was during the same period that he proposed, at the Poissonniere
banquet, his Toast to the Revolution.Proudhon, who had been asked to preside at the banquet,
refused, and proposed in his stead, first, Ledru-Rollin, and then,
in view of the reluctance of the organizers of the banquet, the
illustrious president of the party of the Mountain, Lamennais. It
was evidently his intention to induce the representatives of the
Extreme Left to proclaim at last with him the Democratic and Social
Republic. Lamennais being accepted by the organizers, the Mountain
promised to be present at the banquet. The night before, all seemed
right, when General Cavaignac replaced Minister Senart by Minister
Dufaure-Vivien. The Mountain, questioning the government, proposed
a vote of confidence in the old minister, and, tacitly, of want of
confidence in the new. Proudhon abstained from voting on this
proposition. The Mountain declared that it would not attend the
banquet, if Proudhon was to be present. Five Montagnards, Mathieu
of Drome at their head, went to the temporary office of "Le Peuple"
to notify him of this. "Citizen Proudhon," said they to the
organizers in his presence, "in abstaining from voting to-day on
the proposition of the Mountain, has betrayed the Republican
cause." Proudhon, vehemently questioned, began his defence by
recalling, on the one hand, the treatment which he had received
from the dismissed minister; and, on the other, the impartial
conduct displayed towards him in 1840 by M. Vivien, the new
minister. He then attacked the Mountain by telling its delegates
that it sought only a pretext, and that really, in spite of its
professions of Socialism in private conversation, whether with him
or with the organizers of the banquet, it had not the courage to
publicly declare itself Socialist.On the following day, in his Toast to the Revolution, a toast
which was filled with allusions to the exciting scene of the night
before, Proudhon commenced his struggle against the Mountain. His
duel with Felix Pyat was one of the episodes of this struggle,
which became less bitter on Proudhon's side after the Mountain
finally decided to publicly proclaim the Democratic and Social
Republic. The campaign for the election of a President of the
Republic had just begun. Proudhon made a very sharp attack on the
candidacy of Louis Bonaparte in a pamphlet which is regarded as one
of his literary chefs-d'oeuvre: the "Pamphlet on the Presidency."
An opponent of this institution, against which he had voted in the
Constituent Assembly, he at first decided to take no part in the
campaign. But soon seeing that he was thus increasing the chances
of Louis Bonaparte, and that if, as was not at all probable, the
latter should not obtain an absolute majority of the votes, the
Assembly would not fail to elect General Cavaignac, he espoused,
for the sake of form, the candidacy of Raspail, who was supported
by his friends in the Socialist Committee. Charles Delescluze, the
editor-in-chief of "La Revolution Democratique et Sociale," who
could not forgive him for having preferred Raspail to Ledru-Rollin,
the candidate of the Mountain, attacked him on the day after the
election with a violence which overstepped all bounds. At first,
Proudhon had the wisdom to refrain from answering him. At length,
driven to an extremity, he became aggressive himself, and
Delescluze sent him his seconds. This time, Proudhon positively
refused to fight; he would not have fought with Felix Pyat, had not
his courage been called in question.On the 25th of January, 1849, Proudhon, rising from a sick
bed, saw that the existence of the Constituent Assembly was
endangered by the coalition of the monarchical parties with Louis
Bonaparte, who was already planning his coup d'Etat. He did not
hesitate to openly attack the man who had just received five
millions of votes. He wanted to break the idol; he succeeded only
in getting prosecuted and condemned himself. The prosecution
demanded against him was authorized by a majority of the
Constituent Assembly, in spite of the speech which he delivered on
that occasion. Declared guilty by the jury, he was sentenced, in
March, 1849, to three years' imprisonment and the payment of a fine
of ten thousand francs.Proudhon had not abandoned for a single moment his project of
a Bank of Exchange, which was to operate without capital with a
sufficient number of merchants and manufacturers for adherents.
This bank, which he then called the Bank of the People, and around
which he wished to gather the numerous working-people's
associations which had been formed since the 24th of February,
1848, had already obtained a certain number of subscribers and
adherents, the latter to the number of thirty-seven thousand. It
was about to commence operations, when Proudhon's sentence forced
him to choose between imprisonment and exile. He did not hesitate
to abandon his project and return the money to the subscribers. He
explained the motives which led him to this decision in an article
in "Le Peuple."Having fled to Belgium, he remained there but a few days,
going thence to Paris, under an assumed name, to conceal himself in
a house in the Rue de Chabrol. From his hiding-place he sent
articles almost every day, signed and unsigned, to "Le Peuple." In
the evening, dressed in a blouse, he went to some secluded spot to
take the air. Soon, emboldened by habit, he risked an evening
promenade upon the Boulevards, and afterwards carried his
imprudence so far as to take a stroll by daylight in the
neighborhood of the Gare du Nord. It was not long before he was
recognized by the police, who arrested him on the 6th of June,
1849, in the Rue du Faubourg-Poissonniere.Taken to the office of the prefect of police, then to
Sainte-Pelagie, he was in the Conciergerie on the day of the 13th
of June, 1849, which ended with the violent suppression of "Le
Peuple." He then began to write the "Confessions of a
Revolutionist," published towards the end of the year. He had been
again transferred to Sainte-Pelagie, when he married, in December,
1849, Mlle. Euphrasie Piegard, a young working girl whose hand he
had requested in 1847. Madame Proudhon bore him four daughters, of
whom but two, Catherine and Stephanie, survived their father.
Stephanie died in 1873.In October, 1849, "Le Peuple" was replaced by a new journal,
"La Voix du Peuple," which Proudhon edited from his prison cell. In
it were published his discussions with Pierre Leroux and
Bastiat.The political articles which he sent to "La Voix du Peuple"
so displeased the government finally, that it transferred him to
Doullens, where he was secretly confined for some time. Afterwards
taken back to Paris, to appear before the assizes of the Seine in
reference to an article in "La Voix du Peuple," he was defended by
M. Cremieux and acquitted. From the Conciergerie he went again to
Sainte-Pelagie, where he ended his three years in prison on the 6th
of June, 1852."La Voix du Peuple," suppressed before the promulgation of
the law of the 31st of May, had been replaced by a weekly sheet,
"Le Peuple" of 1850. Established by the aid of the principal
members of the Mountain, this journal soon met with the fate of its
predecessors.In 1851, several months before the coup d'Etat, Proudhon
published the "General Idea of the Revolution of the Nineteenth
Century," in which, after having shown the logical series of
unitary governments,—from monarchy, which is the first term, to the
direct government of the people, which is the last,—he opposes the
ideal of an-archy or self-government to the communistic or
governmental ideal.At this period, the Socialist party, discouraged by the
elections of 1849, which resulted in a greater conservative triumph
than those of 1848, and justly angry with the national
representative body which had just passed the law of the 31st of
May, 1850, demanded direct legislation and direct government.
Proudhon, who did not want, at any price, the plebiscitary system
which he had good reason to regard as destructive of liberty, did
not hesitate to point out, to those of his friends who expected
every thing from direct legislation, one of the antinomies of
universal suffrage. In so far as it is an institution intended to
achieve, for the benefit of the greatest number, the social reforms
to which landed suffrage is opposed, universal suffrage is
powerless; especially if it pretends to legislate or govern
directly. For, until the social reforms are accomplished, the
greatest number is of necessity the least enlightened, and
consequently the least capable of understanding and effecting
reforms. In regard to the antinomy, pointed out by him, of liberty
and government,—whether the latter be monarchic, aristocratic, or
democratic in form,—Proudhon, whose chief desire was to preserve
liberty, naturally sought the solution in the free contract. But
though the free contract may be a practical solution of purely
economical questions, it cannot be made use of in politics.
Proudhon recognized this ten years later, when his beautiful study
on "War and Peace" led him to find in the FEDERATIVE PRINCIPLE the
exact equilibrium of liberty and government."The Social Revolution Demonstrated by the Coup d' Etat"
appeared in 1852, a few months after his release from prison. At
that time, terror prevailed to such an extent that no one was
willing to publish his book without express permission from the
government. He succeeded in obtaining this permission by writing to
Louis Bonaparte a letter which he published at the same time with
the work. The latter being offered for sale, Proudhon was warned
that he would not be allowed to publish any more books of the same
character. At that time he entertained the idea of writing a
universal history entitled "Chronos." This project was never
fulfilled.Already the father of two children, and about to be presented
with a third, Proudhon was obliged to devise some immediate means
of gaining a living; he resumed his labors, and published, at first
anonymously, the "Manual of a Speculator in the Stock-Exchange."
Later, in 1857, after having completed the work, he did not
hesitate to sign it, acknowledging in the preface his indebtedness
to his collaborator, G. Duchene.Meantime, he vainly sought permission to establish a journal,
or review. This permission was steadily refused him. The imperial
government always suspected him after the publication of the
"Social Revolution Demonstrated by the Coup d'Etat."Towards the end of 1853, Proudhon issued in Belgium a
pamphlet entitled "The Philosophy of Progress." Entirely
inoffensive as it was, this pamphlet, which he endeavored to send
into France, was seized on the frontier. Proudhon's complaints were
of no avail.The empire gave grants after grants to large companies. A
financial society, having asked for the grant of a railroad in the
east of France, employed Proudhon to write several memoirs in
support of this demand. The grant was given to another company. The
author was offered an indemnity as compensation, to be paid (as was
customary in such cases) by the company which received the grant.
It is needless to say that Proudhon would accept nothing. Then,
wishing to explain to the public, as well as to the government, the
end which he had in view, he published the work entitled "Reforms
to be Effected in the Management of Railroads."Towards the end of 1854, Proudhon had already begun his book
on "Justice," when he had a violent attack of cholera, from which
he recovered with great difficulty. Ever afterwards his health was
delicate.At last, on the 22d of April, 1858, he published, in three
large volumes, the important work upon which he had labored since
1854. This work had two titles: the first, "Justice in the
Revolution and in the Church;" the second, "New Principles of
Practical Philosophy, addressed to His Highness Monseigneur
Mathieu, Cardinal-Archbishop of Besancon." On the 27th of April,
when there had scarcely been time to read the work, an order was
issued by the magistrate for its seizure; on the 28th the seizure
was effected. To this first act of the magistracy, the author of
the incriminated book replied on the 11th of May in a
strongly-motived petition, demanding a revision of the concordat of
1802; or, in other words, a new adjustment of the relations between
Church and State. At bottom, this petition was but the logical
consequence of the work itself. An edition of a thousand copies
being published on the 17th of May, the "Petition to the Senate"
was regarded by the public prosecutor as an aggravation of the
offence or offences discovered in the body of the work to which it
was an appendix, and was seized in its turn on the 23d. On the
first of June, the author appealed to the Senate in a second
"Petition," which was deposited with the first in the office of the
Secretary of the Assembly, the guardian and guarantee, according to
the constitution of 1852, of the principles of '89. On the 2d of
June, the two processes being united, Proudhon appeared at the bar
with his publisher, the printer of the book, and the printer of the
petition, to receive the sentence of the police magistrate, which
condemned him to three years' imprisonment, a fine of four thousand
francs, and the suppression of his work. It is needless to say that
the publisher and printers were also condemned by the sixth
chamber.Proudhon lodged an appeal; he wrote a memoir which the law of
1819, in the absence of which he would have been liable to a new
prosecution, gave him the power to publish previous to the hearing.
Having decided to make use of the means which the law permitted, he
urged in vain the printers who were prosecuted with him to lend him
their aid. He then demanded of Attorney-General Chaix d'Est Ange a
statement to the effect that the twenty-third article of the law of
the 17th of May, 1819, allows a written defence, and that a printer
runs no risk in printing it. The attorney-general flatly refused.
Proudhon then started for Belgium, where he printed his defence,
which could not, of course, cross the French frontier. This memoir
is entitled to rank with the best of Beaumarchais's; it is
entitled: "Justice prosecuted by the Church; An Appeal from the
Sentence passed upon P. J. Proudhon by the Police Magistrate of the
Seine, on the 2d of June, 1858." A very close discussion of the
grounds of the judgment of the sixth chamber, it was at the same
time an excellent resume of his great work.Once in Belgium, Proudhon did not fail to remain there. In
1859, after the general amnesty which followed the Italian war, he
at first thought himself included in it. But the imperial
government, consulted by his friends, notified him that, in its
opinion, and in spite of the contrary advice of M. Faustin Helie,
his condemnation was not of a political character. Proudhon, thus
classed by the government with the authors of immoral works,
thought it beneath his dignity to protest, and waited patiently for
the advent of 1863 to allow him to return to France.In Belgium, where he was not slow in forming new friendships,
he published in 1859-60, in separate parts, a new edition of his
great work on "Justice." Each number contained, in addition to the
original text carefully reviewed and corrected, numerous
explanatory notes and some "Tidings of the Revolution." In these
tidings, which form a sort of review of the progress of ideas in
Europe, Proudhon sorrowfully asserts that, after having for a long
time marched at the head of the progressive nations, France has
become, without appearing to suspect it, the most retrogressive of
nations; and he considers her more than once as seriously
threatened with moral death.The Italian war led him to write a new work, which he
published in 1861, entitled "War and Peace." This work, in which,
running counter to a multitude of ideas accepted until then without
examination, he pronounced for the first time against the
restoration of an aristocratic and priestly Poland, and against the
establishment of a unitary government in Italy, created for him a
multitude of enemies. Most of his friends, disconcerted by his
categorical affirmation of a right of force, notified him that they
decidedly disapproved of his new publication. "You see,"
triumphantly cried those whom he had always combated, "this man is
only a sophist."Led by his previous studies to test every thing by the
question of right, Proudhon asks, in his "War and Peace," whether
there is a real right of which war is the vindication, and victory
the demonstration. This right, which he roughly calls the right of
the strongest or the right of force, and which is, after all, only
the right of the most worthy to the preference in certain definite
cases, exists, says Proudhon, independently of war. It cannot be
legitimately vindicated except where necessity clearly demands the
subordination of one will to another, and within the limits in
which it exists; that is, without ever involving the enslavement of
one by the other. Among nations, the right of the majority, which
is only a corollary of the right of force, is as unacceptable as
universal monarchy. Hence, until equilibrium is established and
recognized between States or national forces, there must be war.
War, says Proudhon, is not always necessary to determine which side
is the strongest; and he has no trouble in proving this by examples
drawn from the family, the workshop, and elsewhere. Passing then to
the study of war, he proves that it by no means corresponds in
practice to that which it ought to be according to his theory of
the right of force. The systematic horrors of war naturally lead
him to seek a cause for it other than the vindication of this
right; and then only does the economist take it upon himself to
denounce this cause to those who, like himself, want peace. The
necessity of finding abroad a compensation for the misery resulting
in every nation from the absence of economical equilibrium, is,
according to Proudhon, the ever real, though ever concealed, cause
of war. The pages devoted to this demonstration and to his theory
of poverty, which he clearly distinguishes from misery and
pauperism, shed entirely new light upon the philosophy of history.
As for the author's conclusion, it is a very simple one. Since the
treaty of Westphalia, and especially since the treaties of 1815,
equilibrium has been the international law of Europe. It remains
now, not to destroy it, but, while maintaining it, to labor
peacefully, in every nation protected by it, for the equilibrium of
economical forces. The last line of the book, evidently written to
check imperial ambition, is: "Humanity wants no more
war."In 1861, after Garibaldi's expedition and the battle of
Castelfidardo, Proudhon immediately saw that the establishment of
Italian unity would be a severe blow to European equilibrium. It
was chiefly in order to maintain this equilibrium that he
pronounced so energetically in favor of Italian federation, even
though it should be at first only a federation of monarchs. In vain
was it objected that, in being established by France, Italian unity
would break European equilibrium in our favor. Proudhon, appealing
to history, showed that every State which breaks the equilibrium in
its own favor only causes the other States to combine against it,
and thereby diminishes its influence and power. He added that,
nations being essentially selfish, Italy would not fail, when
opportunity offered, to place her interest above her
gratitude.To maintain European equilibrium by diminishing great States
and multiplying small ones; to unite the latter in organized
federations, not for attack, but for defence; and with these
federations, which, if they were not republican already, would
quickly become so, to hold in check the great military
monarchies,—such, in the beginning of 1861, was the political
programme of Proudhon.The object of the federations, he said, will be to guarantee,
as far as possible, the beneficent reign of peace; and they will
have the further effect of securing in every nation the triumph of
liberty over despotism. Where the largest unitary State is, there
liberty is in the greatest danger; further, if this State be
democratic, despotism without the counterpoise of majorities is to
be feared. With the federation, it is not so. The universal
suffrage of the federal State is checked by the universal suffrage
of the federated States; and the latter is offset in its turn by
PROPERTY, the stronghold of liberty, which it tends, not to
destroy, but to balance with the institutions of
MUTUALISM.All these ideas, and many others which were only hinted at in
his work on "War and Peace," were developed by Proudhon in his
subsequent publications, one of which has for its motto, "Reforms
always, Utopias never." The thinker had evidently finished his
evolution.The Council of State of the canton of Vaud having offered
prizes for essays on the question of taxation, previously discussed
at a congress held at Lausanne, Proudhon entered the ranks and
carried off the first prize. His memoir was published in 1861 under
the title of "The Theory of Taxation."About the same time, he wrote at Brussels, in "L'Office de
Publicite," some remarkable articles on the question of literary
property, which was discussed at a congress held in Belgium, These
articles must not be confounded with "Literary Majorats," a more
complete work on the same subject, which was published in 1863,
soon after his return to France.Arbitrarily excepted from the amnesty in 1859, Proudhon was
pardoned two years later by a special act. He did not wish to take
advantage of this favor, and seemed resolved to remain in Belgium
until the 2d of June, 1863, the time when he was to acquire the
privilege of prescription, when an absurd and ridiculous riot,
excited in Brussels by an article published by him on federation
and unity in Italy, induced him to hasten his return to France.
Stones were thrown against the house in which he lived, in the
Faubourg d'Ixelles. After having placed his wife and daughters in
safety among his friends at Brussels, he arrived in Paris in
September, 1862, and published there, "Federation and Italian
Unity," a pamphlet which naturally commences with the article which
served as a pretext for the rioters in Brussels.Among the works begun by Proudhon while in Belgium, which
death did not allow him to finish, we ought to mention a "History
of Poland," which will be published later; and, "The Theory of
Property," which appeared in 1865, before "The Gospels Annotated,"
and after the volume entitled "The Principle of Art and its Social
Destiny."The publications of Proudhon, in 1863, were: 1. "Literary
Majorats: An Examination of a Bill having for its object the
Creation of a Perpetual Monopoly for the Benefit of Authors,
Inventors, and Artists;" 2. "The Federative Principle and the
Necessity of Re-establishing the Revolutionary party;" 3. "The
Sworn Democrats and the Refractories;" 4. "Whether the Treaties of
1815 have ceased to exist? Acts of the Future
Congress."The disease which was destined to kill him grew worse and
worse; but Proudhon labored constantly!... A series of articles,
published in 1864 in "Le Messager de Paris," have been collected in
a pamphlet under the title of "New Observations on Italian Unity."
He hoped to publish during the same year his work on "The Political
Capacity of the Working Classes," but was unable to write the last
chapter.... He grew weaker continually. His doctor prescribed rest.
In the month of August he went to Franche-Comte, where he spent a
month. Having returned to Paris, he resumed his labor with
difficulty.... From the month of December onwards, the heart
disease made rapid progress; the oppression became insupportable,
his legs were swollen, and he could not sleep....On the 19th of January, 1865, he died, towards two o'clock in
the morning, in the arms of his wife, his sister-in-law, and the
friend who writes these lines....The publication of his correspondence, to which his daughter
Catherine is faithfully devoted, will tend, no doubt, to increase
his reputation as a thinker, as a writer, and as an honest
man.J. A. LANGLOIS.
PREFACE.
The following letter served as a preface to the first edition
of this memoir:—"To the Members of the Academy of Besancon"PARIS, June 30, 1840."GENTLEMEN,—In the course of your debate of the 9th of May,
1833, in regard to the triennial pension established by Madame
Suard, you expressed the following wish:—"'The Academy requests the titulary to present it annually,
during the first fortnight in July, with a succinct and logical
statement of the various studies which he has pursued during the
year which has just expired.'"I now propose, gentlemen, to discharge this
duty."When I solicited your votes, I boldly avowed my intention to
bend my efforts to the discovery of some means of AMELIORATING THE
PHYSICAL, MORAL, AND INTELLECTUAL CONDITION OF THE MERE NUMEROUS
AND POORER CLASSES. This idea, foreign as it may have seemed to the
object of my candidacy, you received favorably; and, by the
precious distinction with which it has been your pleasure to honor
me, you changed this formal offer into an inviolable and sacred
obligation. Thenceforth I understood with how worthy and honorable
a society I had to deal: my regard for its enlightenment, my
recognition of its benefits, my enthusiasm for its glory, were
unbounded."Convinced at once that, in order to break loose from the
beaten paths of opinions and systems, it was necessary to proceed
in my study of man and society by scientific methods, and in a
rigorous manner, I devoted one year to philology and grammar;
linguistics, or the natural history of speech, being, of all the
sciences, that which was best suited to the character of my mind,
seemed to bear the closest relation to the researches which I was
about to commence. A treatise, written at this period upon one of
the most interesting questions of comparative grammar,2if it did not reveal the astonishing success,
at least bore witness to the thoroughness, of my
labors."Since that time, metaphysics and moral science have been my
only studies; my perception of the fact that these sciences, though
badly defined as to their object and not confined to their sphere,
are, like the natural sciences, susceptible of demonstration and
certainty, has already rewarded my efforts."But, gentlemen, of all the masters whom I have followed, to
none do I owe so much as to you. Your co-operation, your
programmes, your instructions, in agreement with my secret wishes
and most cherished hopes, have at no time failed to enlighten me
and to point out my road; this memoir on property is the child of
your thought."In 1838, the Academy of Besancon proposed the following
question: TO WHAT CAUSES MUST WE ATTRIBUTE THE CONTINUALLY
INCREASING NUMBER OF SUICIDES, AND WHAT ARE THE PROPER MEANS FOR
ARRESTING THE EFFECTS OF THIS MORAL CONTAGION?