ings is not easily ascertained. As they have sometimes been accused of being land monopolists, it is curious to see that even at the highest amount I have given they would own only about thirty-six acres per head; which is, for this country, a comparatively small holding of land. It is probably a low estimate of the wealth of the seventy-two communes to place it at twelve millions of dollars. It is not an exaggeration to say that almost the whole of this wealth has been created by the patient industry and strict economy and honesty of its owners, without a positive or eager desire on their part to accumulate riches, and without painful toil. Moreover-and this is another important consideration-I am satisfied that during its accumulation the communists enjoyed a greater amount of comfort, and vastly greater security against want and demoralization, than were attained by their neighbours or the surrounding population, with better schools and opportunities of training for their children, and far less exposure for the women and the aged and infirm.”

SECTION IV.

EQUALITY.

CHAPTER XV.-TRACING THE CAUSES OF INEQUALITY AND LAYING THE BASES OF EQUALITY.

"The establishment of a Democratic Government, which proposes to recognise the universal brotherhood of mankind by an equal distribution of property, is as definite a scheme as it is possible to imagine."—FITZJAMES STEPHEN.

CABET says:-"The radical cause of the bad organization of

society, is inequality." This axiom leads to the question, Whence does inequality proceed from, and what are its causes? The communists, as well as their opponents, have stated a variety of causes to which the origin of inequality may be traced. Robert Owen attributes the existence of inequality to ignorance proceeding from unequal and insufficient education, saying: "Ignorance is not merely an evil from the superstitions it tends to foster, but it is also the leading cause of inequality among men. It will, therefore, be a part of the new system to give to all precisely the same education. Not alone this, for in the communities of the future all will be educated together; for so long as inequalities are permitted to exist between child and child, so long will they contrive to exist between man and man. But when all the members of the community have been subjected from infancy to the same influences, and brought up in constant association with one another, the differences of rank, tastes, and habits, that now introduce so much division and discord, will entirely cease. From whence do the existing bodily and mental differences

proceed? Are they inherent in our nature, or do they arise from the respective soils on which we are born? Evidently from neither. They are wholly and solely the effects of that education which I have described. Man becomes a wild ferocious savage, a cannibal, or a highly civilized and benevolent being, according to the circumstances in which he may be placed from his birth."

Babeuf maintains that inequality of intellect and character arises from the inequality of conditions, saying:-" The everquickening cause of the slavery of nations lies entirely in the inequality of conditions, and that, so long as such inequality remains, the exercise of political rights will be little more than illusory."

Helvetius says::- -"All men born with a sound body are born with nearly the same intellectual and perceptive qualities, and it is owing to education, custom, laws, and circumstances that a greater inequality arises than the original and natural difference indicated."

Mr. Fitzjames Stephen, the implacable opponent of the doctrine of equality, maintains that inequality proceeds from mental superiority and eminence of character which some men possess in a higher degree than others, saying:-" Men, by mere lapse of time, and by following the promptings of passion, acquire over others a position of superiority and of inequality which all nations and ages have done their best to surround with every association of awe and reverence."

Mr. Sargant, another opponent of the principle of equality, maintains, however, the contrary, and thinks that "the existing inequality with respect to mental capacity and moral worth is much exaggerated. Does not the coarsest rustic apply, in the direction of his works, and in the discussion of his interests, as much intellectual acuteness as the banker in his monetary and financial transactions?"

The contradictory views of these two writers is however more amusing than serious; for the enlightened communist sees a pleasant germ of truth in the statement of both, but finds the arguments adduced from them in support of inequality applied.

Mr. Stephen could not have found a more striking illustration to his theory of the origin of inequality than the fame

and renown of General Garibaldi, which arose from the two causes, (1) mental superiority as a military genius; (2) the laudable promptings of the passion of patriotism, and of the defence of the sacred principle of freedom. Yet Garibaldi not only declines all public and private honours and rewards from his countrymen, but lives the life of a poor goatsherd * on a barren island; thus vindicating that sacred principle which caused him to risk his very life with every one of the noble patriots who went with him to Sicily, or who fought with him at Mentana, where he was wounded. The disinterestedness of Garibaldi, and his refusal to fare better than his companions during and after the acquisition of fame, are the true indications of the distinctions which eminent men will enjoy in the communistic state. They will be honoured and revered, but will not, for all that, eat more and sleep longer than other people.

Mr. Sargant's argument that mental inequality is much. exaggerated, is an able contradiction to Mr. Stephen's views that it merits reverence and awe; for if Mr. Sargant is right, Garibaldi's ingenuity in warfare is not worth more than that of the common labourer applied to his every-day work; and the communists can but be grateful for this contribution to the arguments in favour of equality.

Mably sees in the existing inequality of property the sole obstacle of the realization of equality; consequently he says:"Establish first the community of goods, and nothing will subsequently be easier than to establish the equality of fortunes and conditions, and to prove the possibility of securing happiness to all."

Robert Owen thinks that the attainment of equality must be facilitated by the principle of training and education. He says:-"So far as there may be any original difference of temperament between men, it will also be reduced when breeding proceeds upon scientific principles. Equality necessitates the assimilation of character."

Many writers find the basis of equality to be traced in a widely spread and felt sentiment by which men regard each

* In the words of a British Minister's despatch, the condition in which Garibaldi lives at Caprera is described as only one degree above that of a common peasant."

other as equals. Buonarotti says:-" All systems and all passions apart, where is the human being that does not in his heart recognise an equal in an individual of his own species, whatever he may be?" Cabet says: "There is one great impulse in human nature more powerful than all the passions of egotism, ambition, and emulation. It is the tendency of mutual help and association for the common welfare of all."

Babeuf says:-"Families have been the first models of societies, and are the most striking proofs of the natural sentiment and consequent rights of equality. Equality in families is the pledge of tenderness on the part of parents, of union and happiness on that of the children."

Mr. Mill calls equality a virtue, saying:-" The true virtue of human beings is fitness to live together as equals, doing nothing for themselves but what they as freely concede to everyone else." He also maintains that the abolition of serfdom, slavery, and class distinction are steps towards the realization of more equality amongst men, saying:-"The joint influence of Roman civilisation and of Christianity obliterated the distinction between free male citizens, slaves, women, and unfranchised residents, and declared the claims of the human being to be paramount to those of sex, class, or social position."

Babeuf thinks that when men, quitting their natural state of equality, entered into the first conventions of fixed settlements and social intercourse, natural equality was strictly continued in the new mode of life; saying:-"The most strict equality must have been consecrated by the first conventions; for what could have induced persons hitherto the enemies of all distinction, to consent to privations and inferiority?" As an illustration to Babeuf's view can be cited the Brehon law in Ireland, the clanship in Scotland, and the use of common lands in England, where, not long ago, whole counties were unenclosed.

Buonarotti calls the friends of equality the friends of justice; indicating thereby that the basis of equality is justice.

Mr. Mill refers to an argument often used by Communists in support of the principle of justice in equality, saying:-" Some communists consider it unjust that the produce of the labour of the community should be shared on any other principle