James Madison, Essay on Property
James Madison, National Gazette
March 29, 1792
This term in its particular application means
"that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things
of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.
In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage. In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandise, or money is called his property.
In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage. In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandise, or money is called his property.
In the latter sense, a man has property in his
opinions and the free communication of them.
He has a property of peculiar value in his
religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them. He has a property very dear to him in the safety
and liberty of his person.
He has an equal property in the free use of his
faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.
In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.
In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.
Where an excess of power prevails, property of no
sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his
faculties, or his possessions.
Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect
is the same, tho' from an opposite cause.
Government is instituted to protect property of
every sort; as well that which lies in various rights of individuals, as that
which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that
alone is a just government, which impartially secures
to every man, whatever is his.
According to this standard of merit, the praise
of affording a just security to property, should be sparingly bestowed on a
government which, however scrupulously guarding the possessions of individuals,
does not protect them in the enjoyment and communication of their opinions, in
which they have an equal, and in the estimation of some, a more valuable
property.
More sparingly should this praise be allowed to a
government, where a man's religious rights are violated by penalties, or
fettered by tests, or taxed by a hierarchy. Conscience is the most sacred of all property;
other property depending in part on positive law, the exercise of that, being a
natural and unalienable right.
To guard a man's house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man's conscience which is more sacred than his castle, or to withhold from it that debt of protection, for which the public faith is pledged, by the very nature and original conditions of the social pact.
To guard a man's house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man's conscience which is more sacred than his castle, or to withhold from it that debt of protection, for which the public faith is pledged, by the very nature and original conditions of the social pact.
That is not a just government, nor is property
secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and
personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens
for the service of the rest. A magistrate issuing his warrants to a press gang,
would be in his proper functions in Turkey or Hindustan, under appellations
proverbial of the most complete despotism.
That is not a just government, nor is property
secure under it, where arbitrary restrictions, exemptions, and monopolies deny
to part of its citizens that free use of their faculties, and free choice of
their occupations, which not only constitute their property in the general
sense of the word; but are the means of acquiring property strictly called.
What must be the spirit of legislation where a manufacturer of linen cloth is
forbidden to bury his own child in a linen shroud, in order to favor his
neighbor who manufactures woolen cloth; where the manufacturer and wearer of
woolen cloth is again forbidden the economical use of buttons of that
material, in favor of the manufacturer of buttons of other materials!
A just security to property is not afforded by
that government, under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and
reward another species: where arbitrary taxes invade the domestic sanctuaries
of the rich, and excessive taxes grind the faces of the poor; where the keenness
and competitions of want are deemed an insufficient spur to labor and taxes
are again applied, by an unfeeling policy, as another spur; in violation of
that sacred property, which Heaven, in decreeing man to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow, kindly reserved to him, in the small repose that could be
spared from the supply of his necessities.
If there be a government then which prides itself
in maintaining the inviolability of property; which provides that none shall be
taken directly even for public use without indemnification to
the owner, and yet directly violates the property which
individuals have in their opinions, their religion, their persons, and their
faculties; nay more, which indirectly violates their property,
in their actual possessions, in the labor that acquires their daily subsistence,
and in the hallowed remnant of time which ought to relieve their fatigues and
soothe their cares, the influence will have been anticipated, that such a
government is not a pattern for the United States.
If the United States means to obtain or deserve
the full praise due to wise and just governments, they will equally respect the
rights of property, and the property in rights: they will rival the government
that most sacredly guards the former; and by repelling its example in violating
the latter will make themselves a pattern to that and all other governments.
Comments
Post a Comment