of the fruits of his industry, is the most splendid achievement of legislative wisdom-the noblest triumph of which humanity has to boast."-Traité de Legislation, ii. p. 37.

CHAP. VIII.

INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE.

THE civil institution next in importance to that of private property, is the contract of marriage. Writers who have disputed the policy of propertyrights have naturally also disputed the policy of matrimonial rights, and have considered the appropriation of women, like the appropriation of land, an infringement of the common inmunities of mankind. The analogy between marriage and property is striking, and the chief arguments which vindicate the utility of one, are applicable to the other.

1. Marriage is favourable to an increase in the number, and improvement in the character of females.

If an increase of women, like an increase of the produce of the earth, be conducive to the happiness of men-which no one will deny-whatever tends to multiply the number must be esteemed advantageous.

But for obvious reasons the irregularities of promiscuous intercourse are unfavourable to the multiplication of the species; even in countries where polygamy prevails it is known to operate as a check on the population; and such must be its natural tendency, for this reason, that as the two sexes are nearly equal in number, if one man has more wives than one, another must have less, so that the effect is similar, though in a less degree, to women being held in common.

Not only would the number be fewer, but they would be rendered less valuable. A woman in common would be like a field in common, or a child with many parents; there would be no concentration of care upon any particular female; all those ties and obligations which unite parties in marriage, and give them a mutual interest, would be dissolved. The effect of this would be a general depreciation of women in society; they would be treated with less attention and consideration; they would be like the air we breathe, necessary to life, but not being appropriated, they would have no exchangeable price. But as they lost their value the same pains would not be bestowed on their cultivation; their education and bringing up would be neglected: all the graces and accomplishments which add as much to the value of females as the arts of the horticulturist add to the products of the conservatory, would be abandoned, as an useless expenditure on a commodity so ordinary as women would then become.

2. Marriage preserves women to maturity. Without marriage the same reasons would not exist for interdicting sexual intercourse till females attain to womanhood. The chastity of the bride is her most valuable portion; in a community of women there would be no such future contingency for which the harvest need be husbanded. Females would be similarly situated to the cherry-tree in a hedge row, or nuts in a wood without owner, and which has been alluded to in the case of property; they would be of no advantage to any one, because people would not wait for the proper season of gathering them; each would be fearful of being anticipated by his neighbour, and the young be prematurely defloured.

3. It prevents contests.

The value of women differs as much as any of the goods of life, arising from diversity of personal attractions, temper, and accomplishments. Were they not appropriated by marriage, the contests that would ensue for the possession of the most estimable would be furious and unceasing. The desire of gain frequently calls into action the furious passions of men, but the conflicts from lust would be far more dreadful. Nations have gone to war for one woman, but if the whole sex were open to contention the world would be in arms; and not unfrequently the object of contest be sacrificed in the struggle. In place of such calamities how superior is the existing arrangement! The lists are marked out, the fair are open to the competition of all-no monopoly,

every one is at liberty to make proposals, and the most worthy, or most favoured, wins the prize. When two parties have agreed, the unsuccessful candidates are precluded from further interference ; and thus, by an admirable civil contrivance, is a division of the most precious of earth's products effected without violence, tumult, or disorder.

4. It improves the conveniency of living.

This it does two ways. Viewed as a common partnership, marriage tends to facilitate and lessen the duties of each; having a common interest it also tends to their mutual improvement and advantage. It likewise improves living by promoting independence; each family constitutes a separate community in the state, united by a sort of federative union, and only amenable to the general laws of society in such matters as affect the general interests: we thus enjoy the advantages of natural liberty, combined with the advantages of social organization.

Having shown the analogy subsisting between marriage and property, I might advert to reasons peculiar to the former, and which do not apply to the latter such as the example of other orders of the creation, and the necessity of the nuptial tie for the well-educating and nurture of children; but these are topics familiar to every mind which has bestowed the slightest attention on the subject.

I shall conclude with inserting some extravagances published on the subject of marriage upwards of forty years ago by a distinguished living writer. In the introductory chapter to this Part I endea

voured to show that philosophers are often as mad in their way as the empirical enthusiast, and that the judicious application and limitation of general principles to their legitimate issues, are quite as important as their discovery. Hear what an apostle of the new light propounded on the subject we have been considering :

"Add to this that marriage as now understood is a monopoly, and the worst of monopolies. So long as two human beings are forbidden by positive institutions to follow the dictates of their own mind, prejudice will ever be alive and vigorous. So long as I seek, by despotic and artificial means, to engross a woman to myself, and to prohibit my NEIGHBOUR from proving his superior claim, I am guilty of the most odious selfishness. Over this imaginary prize men watch with perpetual jealousy; and one man finds his desire and his capacity to circumvent as much excited, as the other is excited to traverse his projects and frustrate his hopes. As long as this state of society continues, philanthropy will be crossed and checked in a thousand ways, and the still augmenting stream of abuse will continue to flow.”— Enquiry concerning Political Justice, v. ii. p. 499. Edit. 1796.

"In a state of equality it will be a question of no importance to know who is the parent of each individual child. It is aristocracy, self-love, and family pride, that teach us to set a value upon it at present. I ought to prefer no human being to another, because that being is my father, my wife, or my son, but because for reasons which equally appeal to all understandings, that being is entitled to preference. One among the measures which will successively be dictated by the spirit of democracy, and that probably at no great distance, is the abolition of surnames."Ibid, p. 503.

This must assuredly be the ne plus ultra of Utopianism. The commencement of the French Revo