They find that by the
laws of nature the occupant and subduer of the soil is the true
proprietor; that there is no prescription against nature; and that the
agreements (where any there are) which have been made with the
landlords, during the time of slavery, are only the effect of duress
and force; and that when the people reentered into the rights of
men, those agreements were made as void as everything else which had
been settled under the prevalence of the old feudal and aristocratic
tyranny. They will tell you that they see no difference between an
idler with a hat and a national cockade and an idler in a cowl or in a
rochet. If you ground the title to rents on succession and
prescription, they tell you from the speech of M. Camus, published
by the National Assembly for their information, that things ill
begun cannot avail themselves of prescription; that the title of these
lords was vicious in its origin; and that force is at least as bad
as fraud. As to the title by succession, they will tell you that the
succession of those who have cultivated the soil is the true
pedigree of property, and not rotten parchments and silly
substitutions; that the lords have enjoyed their usurpation too
long; and that if they allow to these lay monks any charitable
pension, they ought to be thankful to the bounty of the true
proprietor, who is so generous toward a false claimant to his goods.
Pages:
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350