Natural Law
Lysander Spooner
[1882]
Chapter 1
The Science of Justice
Section I
The science of mine and thine---the science of justice --- is the
science of all human rights; of all a man's rights of person and
property; of all his rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
It is the science which alone can tell any man what he can, and
cannot, do; what he can, and cannot, have; what he can, and cannot,
say, without infringing the rights of any other person.
It is the science of peace; and the only science of peace; since
it is the science which alone can tell us on what conditions mankind
can live in peace, or ought to live in peace, with each other.
These conditions are simply these: viz., first, that each man
shall do, towards every other, all that justice requires him to do;
as, for example, that he shall pay his debts, that he shall return
borrowed or stolen property to its owner, and that he shall make
reparation for any injury he may have done to the person or property
of another.
The second condition is, that each man shall abstain from doing
so another, anything which justice forbids him to do; as, for
example, that he shall abstain from committing theft, robbery,
arson, murder, or any other crime against the person or property of
another.
So long as these conditions are fulfilled, men are at peace, and
ought to remain at peace, with each other. But when either of these
conditions is violated, men are at war. And they must necessarily
remain at war until justice is re-established.
Through all time, so far as history informs us, wherever mankind
have attempted to live in peace with each other, both the natural
instincts, and the collective wisdom of the human race, have
acknowledged and prescribed, as an indispensable condition,
obedience to this one only universal obligation: viz., that each
should live honestly towards every other.
The ancient maxim makes the sum of a man's legal duty to
his fellow men to be simply this: "to live honestly, to
hurt no one, to give to every one his due".
This entire maxim is really expressed in the single words, to
live honestly; since to live honestly is to hurt no one, and
give to every one his due.
Section II
Man, no doubt, owes many other moral duties to his fellow
men; such as to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, shelter the
homeless, care for the sick, protect the defenseless, assist the
weak, and enlighten the ignorant. But these are simply moral
duties, of which each man must be his own judge, in each particular
case, as to whether, and how, and how far, he can, or will, perform
them. But of his legal duty---that is, of his duty to live
honestly towards his fellow men---his fellow men not only may
judge, but, for their own protection, must judge. And, if
need be, they may rightfully compel him to perform it. They
may do this, acting singly, or in concert. They may do it on the
instant, as the necessity arises, or deliberately and
systematically, if they prefer to do so, and the exigency will admit
of it.
Section III
Although it is the right of anybody and everybody---of any one
man, or set of men, no less than another---to repel injustice, and
compel justice, for themselves, and for all who may be wronged, yet
to avoid the errors that are liable to result from haste and
passion, and that everybody, who desires it, may rest secure in the
assurance of protection, without a resort to force, it is evidently
desirable that men should associate, so far as they freely and
voluntarily can do so, for the maintenance of justice among
themselves, and for mutual protection against other wrong-doers. It
is also in the highest degree desirable that they should agree upon
some plan or system of judicial proceedings, which, in the trial of
causes, should secure caution, deliberation, thorough investigation,
and, as far as possible, freedom from every influence but the simple
desire to do justice.
Yet such associations can be rightful and desirable only in so
far as they are purely voluntary. No man can rightfully be coerced
into joining one, or supporting one, against his will. His own
interest, his own judgement, and his own conscience alone must
determine whether he will join this association, or that; or whether
he will join any. If he chooses to depend, for the protection of his
own rights, solely upon himself, and upon such voluntary assistance
as other persons may freely offer to him when the necessity for it
arises, he has a perfect right to do so. And this course would be a
reasonably safe one for him to follow, so long as he himself should
manifest the ordinary readiness of mankind, in like cases, to go to
the assistance and defence of injured persons; and should also
himself "live honestly, hurt no one, and give to every one his
due." For such a man is reasonably sure of always giving
friends and defenders enough in case of need, whether he shall have
joined any association, or not.
Certainly no man can rightfully be required to join, or support,
an association whose protection he does not desire. Nor can any man
be reasonably or rightfully expected to join, or support, any
association whose plans, or method of proceeding, he does not
approve, as likely to accomplish its professed purpose of
maintaining justice, and at the same time itself avoid doing
injustice. To join, or support, one that would, in his opinion, be
inefficient, would be absurd. To join or support one that, in his
opinion, would itself do injustice, would be criminal. He must,
therefore, be left at the same liberty to join, or not to join, an
association for this purpose, as for any other, according as his own
interest, discretion, or conscience shall dictate.
An association for mutual protection against injustice is like an
association for mutual protection against fire or shipwreck. And
there is no more right or reason in compelling any man to
join or support one of these associations, against his will, his
judgement, or his conscience, than there is in compelling him to
join or support any other, whose benefits (if it offer any) he does
not want, or whose purposes or methods he does not approve.
Section IV
No objection can be made to these voluntary associations upon the
ground that they would lack that knowledge of justice, as a science,
which would be necessary to enable them to maintain justice, and
themselves avoid doing injustice. Honesty, justice, natural law, is
usually a very plain and simple matter, easily understood by common
minds. Those who desire to know what it is, in any particular case,
seldom have to go far to find it. It is true, it must be learned,
like any other science. But it is also true that it is very easily
learned. Although as illimitable in its applications as the infinite
relations and dealings of men with each other, it is, nevertheless,
made up of a few simple elementary principles, of the truth and
justice of which every ordinary mind has an almost intuitive
perception. And almost all men have the same perceptions of what
constitutes justice, or of what justice requires, when they
understand alike the facts from which their inferences are to be
drawn.
Men living in contact with each other, and having intercours
together, cannot avoid learning natural law, to a very great
extent, even if they would. The dealings of men with men, their
separate possessions and their individual wants, and the disposition
of every man to demand, and insist upon, whatever he believes to be
his due, and to resent and resist all invasions of what he believes
to be his rights, are continually forcing upon their minds the
questions, Is this act just? or is it unjust? Is this thing mine? or
is it his? And these are questions of natural law; questions which,
in regard to the great mass of cases, are answered alike by the
human mind everywhere.(1)
Children learn the fundamental principles of natural law at a very
early age. Thus they very early understand that one child must not,
without just cause, strike or otherwise hurt, another; that one
child must not assume any arbitrary control or domination over
another; that one child must not, either by force, deceit, or
stealth, obtain possession of anything that belongs to another; that
if one child commits any of these wrongs against another, it is not
only the right of the injured child to resist, and, if need be,
punish the wrongdoer, and compel him to make reparation, but that it
is also the right, and the moral duty, of all other children, and
all other persons, to assist the injured party in defending his
rights, and redressing his wrongs. These are fundamental principles
of natural law, which govern the most important transactions of man
with man. Yet children learn them earlier than they learn that three
and three are six, or five and five ten. Their childish plays, even,
could not be carried on without a constant regard to them; and it is
equally impossible for persons of any age to live together in peace
on any other conditions.
It would be no extravagance to say that, in most cases, if not in
all, mankind at large, young and old, learn this natural law long
before they have learned the meanings of the words by which we
describe it. In truth, it would be impossible to make them
understand the real meanings of the words, if they did not
understand the nature of the thing itself. To make them understand
the meanings of the words justice and injustice before knowing the
nature of the things themselves, would be as impossible as it would
be to make them understand the meanings of the words heat and cold,
wet and dry, light and darkness, white and black, one and two,
before knowing the nature of the things themselves. Men necessarily
must know sentiments and ideas, no less than material things, before
they can know the meanings of the words by which we describe them.
Chapter II
The Science of Justice
(continued)
Section I
If justice be not a natural principle, it is no principle at all.
If it be not a natural principle, there is no such thing as justice.
If it be not a natural principle, all that men have ever said or
written about it, from time immemorial, has been said and written
about that which had no existence. If it be not a natural principle,
all the appeals for justice that have ever been heard, and all the
struggles for justice that have ever been witnessed, have been
appeals and struggles for a mere fantasy, a vagary of the
imagination, and not for a reality.
If justice be not a natural principle, then there is no such thing
as injustice; and all the crimes of which the world has been the
scene, have been no crimes at all; but only simple events, like the
falling of the rain, or the setting of the sun; events of which the
victims had no more reason to complain than they had to complain of
the running of the streams, or the growth of vegetation.
If justice be not a natural principle, governments (so-called)
have no more right or reason to take cognizance of it, or to pretend
or profess to take cognizance of it, than they have to take
cognizance, or to pretend or profess to take cognizance, of any
other nonentity; and all their professions of establishing justice,
or of maintaining justice, or of rewarding justice, are simply the
mere gibberish of fools, or the frauds of imposters.
But if justice be a natural principle, then it is necessarily an
immutable one; and can no more be changed---by any power inferior to
that which established it---than can the law of gravitation, the
laws of light, the principles of mathematics, or any other natural
law or principle whatever; and all attempts or assumptions, on the
part of any man or body of men---whether calling themselves
governments, or by any other name---to set up their own commands,
wills, pleasure, or discretion, in the place of justice, as a rule
of conduct for any human being, are as much an absurdity, an
usurpation, and a tyranny, as would be their attempts to set up
their own commands, wills, pleasure, or discretion in the place of
any and all the physical, mental, and moral laws of the universe.
Section II
If there be any such principle as justice, it is, of necessity, a
natural principle; and, as such, it is a matter of science, to be
learned and applied like any other science. And to talk of either
adding to, or taking from, it, by legislation, is just as false,
absurd, and ridiculous as it would be to talk of adding to, or
taking from, mathematics, chemistry, or any other science, by
legislation.
Section III
If there be in nature such a principle as justice, nothing can be
added to, or taken from, its supreme authority by all the
legislation of which the entire human race united are capable. And
all the attempts of the human race, or of any portion of it, to add
to, or take from, the supreme authority of justice, in any case
whatever, is of no more obligation upon any single human being than
is the idle wind.
Section IV
If there be such a principle as justice, or natural law, it is
the principle, or law, that tells us what rights were given to every
human being at his birth; what rights are, therefore, inherent in
him as a human being, necessarily remain with him during life; and,
however capable of being trampled upon, are incapable of being
blotted out, extinguished, annihilated, or separated or eliminated
from his nature as a human being, or deprived of their inherent
authority or obligation.
On the other hand, if there be no such principle as justice, or
natural law, then every human being came into the world utterly
destitute of rights; and coming into the world destitute of rights,
he must necessarily forever remain so. For if no one brings any
rights with him into the world, clearly no one can ever have any
rights of his own, or give any to another. And the consequence would
be that mankind could never have any rights; and for them to talk of
any such things as their rights, would be to talk of things that
never had, never will have, and never can have any existence.
Section V
If there be such a natural principle as justice, it is
necessarily the highest, and consequently the only and universal,
law for all those matters to which it is naturally applicable. And,
consequently, all human legislation is simply and always an
assumption of authority and dominion, where no right of authority or
dominion exists. It is, therefore, simply and always an intrusion,
an absurdity, an usurpation, and a crime.
On the other hand, if there be no such natural principle as
justice, there can be no such thing as dishonesty; and no possible
act of either force or fraud, committed by one man against the
person or property of another, can be said to be unjust or
dishonest; or be complained of, or prohibited, or punished as such.
In short, if there be no such principle as justice, there can be no
such acts as crimes; and all the professions of governments, so
called, that they exist, either in whole or in part, for the
punishment or prevention of crimes, are professions that they exist
for the punishment or prevention of what never existed, nor ever can
exist. Such professions are therefore confessions that, so far as
crimes are concerned, governments have no occasion to exist; that
there is nothing for them to do, and that there is nothing that they
can do. They are confessions that the governments exist for the
punishment and prevention of acts that are, in their nature, simple
impossibilities.
Section VI
If there be in nature such a principle as justice, such a
principle as honesty, such principles as we describe by the words
mine and thine, such principles as men's natural rights of person
and property, then we have an immutable and universal law; a law
that we can learn, as we learn any other science; a law that tells
us what is just and what is unjust, what is honest and what is
dishonest, what things are mine and what things are thine, what are
my rights of person and property and what are your rights of person
and property, and where is the boundary between each and all of my
rights of person and property and each and all of your rights of
person and property. And this law is the paramount law, and the same
law, over all the world, at all times, and for all peoples; and will
be the same paramount and only law, at all times, and for all
peoples, so long as man shall live upon the earth.
But if, on the other hand, there be in nature no such principle as
justice, no such principle as honesty, no such principle as men's
natural rights of person or property, then all such words as justice
and injustice, honesty and dishonesty, all such words as mine and
thine, all words that signify that one thing is one man's property
and that another thing is another man's property, all words that are
used to describe men's natural rights of person or property, all
such words as are used to describe injuries and crimes, should be
struck out of all human languages as having no meanings; and it
should be declared, at once and forever, that the greatest force and
the greatest frauds, for the time being, are the supreme and only
laws for governing the relations of men with each other; and that,
from henceforth, all persons and combinations of persons---those
that call themselves governments, as well as all others---are to be
left free to practice upon each other all the force, and all the
fraud, of which they are capable.
Section VII
If there be no such science as justice, there can be no science
of government; and all the rapacity and violence, by which, in all
ages and nations, a few confederated villains have obtained the
mastery over the rest of mankind, reduced them to poverty and
slavery, and established what they called governments to keep them
in subjection, have been as legitimate examples of government as any
that the world is ever to see.
Section VIII
If there be in nature such a principle as justice, it is
necessarily the only political principle there ever was, or
ever will be. All the other so-called political principles, which
men are in the habit of inventing, are not principles at all. They
are either the mere conceits of simpletons, who imagine they have
discovered something better than truth, and justice, and universal
law; or they are mere devices and pretences, to which selfish and
knavish men resort as means to get fame, and power, and money.
Chapter III
Natural Law Contrasted With Legislation
Section I
Natural law, natural justice, being a principle that is naturally
applicable and adequate to the rightful settlement of every possible
controversy that can arise among men; being too, the only standard
by which any controversy whatever, between man and man, can be
rightfully settled; being a principle whose protection every man
demands for himself, whether he is willing to accord it to others,
or not; being also an immutable principle, one that is always and
everywhere the same, in all ages and nations; being self-evidently
necessary in all times and places; being so entirely impartial and
equitable towards all; so indispensable to the peace of mankind
everywhere; so vital to the safety and welfare of every human being;
being, too, so easily learned, so generally known, and so easily
maintained by such voluntary associations as all honest men can
readily and rightully form for that purpose---being such a principle
as this, these questions arise, viz.: Why is it that it does not
universally, or well nigh universally, prevail? Why is it that it
has not, ages ago, been established throughout the world as the one
only law that any man, or all men, could rightfully be compelled to
obey? Why is it that any human being ever conceived that anything so
self-evidently superfluous, false, absurd, and atrocious as all
legislation necessarily must be, could be of any use to mankind, or
have any place in human affairs?
Section II
The answer is, that through all historic times, wherever any
people have advanced beyond the savage state, and have learned to
increase their means of sub-sistence by the cultivation of soil, a
greater or less number of them have associated and organized
themselves as robbers, to plunder and enslave all others, who had
either accumulated any property that could be seized, or had shown,
by their labor, that they could be made to contribute to the support
or pleasure of those who should enslave them.
These bands of robbers, small in number at fist, have increased
their power by uniting with each other, inventing warlike weapons,
disciplining themselves, and perfecting their organizations as
military forces, and dividing their plunder (including their
captives) among themselves, either in such proportions as have been
previously agreed on, or in such as their leaders (always desirous
to increase the number of their followers) should prescribe.
The success of these bands of robbers was an easy thing, for the
reason that those whom they plundered and ensalved were
comparatively defenceless; being scattered thinly over the country;
engaged wholly in trying, by rude implements and heavy labor, to
extort a subsistence from the soil; having no weapons of war, other
than sticks and stones; having no military discipline or
organization, and no means of concentrating their forces, or acting
in concert, when suddenly attacked. Under these circumstances, the
only alternative left them for saving even their lives, or the lives
of their families, was to yield up not only the crops they had
gathered, and the lands they had cultivated, but themselves and
their families also as slaves.
Thenceforth their fate was, as slaves, to cultivate for others the
lands they had before cultivated for themselves. Being driven
constantly to their labor, wealth slowly increased; but all went
into the hands of their tyrants.
These tyrants, living solely on plunder, and on the labor of
their slaves, and applying all their energies to the seizure of
still more plunder, and the enslavement of still other defenceless
persons; increasing, too, their numbers, perfecting their
organizations, and multiplying their weapons of war, they extend
their conquests until, in order to hold what they have already got,
it becomes necessary for them to act systematically, and cooperate
with each other in holding their slaves in subjection.
But all this they can do only by establishing what they call a
government, and making what they call laws.
All the great governments of the world---those now existing, as
well as those that have passed away---have been of this character.
They have been mere bands of robbers, who have associated for
purposes of plunder, conquest, and the enslavement of their fellow
men. And their laws, as they have called them, have been only such
agreements as they have found it necessary to enter into, in order
to maintain their organizations, and act together in plundering and
enslaving others, and in securing to each his agreed share of the
spoils.
All these laws have had no more real obligation than have the
agreements which brigands, bandits, and pirates find it necessary to
enter into with each other, for the more successful accomplishment
of their crimes, and the more peaceable division of their spoils.
Thus substantially all the legislation of the world has had its
origin in the desires of one class---of persons to plunder and
enslave others, and hold them as property.
Section III
In process of time, the robber, or slaveholding, class---who had
seized all the lands, and held all the means of creating
wealth---began to discover that the easiest mode of managing their
slaves, and making them profitable, was not for each
slaveholder to hold his specified number of slaves, as he had done
before, and as he would hold so many cattle, but to give them so
much liberty as would throw upon themselves (the slaves) the
responsibility of their own subsistence, and yet compel them to sell
their labor to the land-hodling class---their former owners---for
just what the latter might choose to give them.
Of course, these liberated slaves, as some have erroneously
called them, having no lands, or other property, and no means of
obtaining an independent subsistence, had no alternative---to save
themselves from starvation---but to sell their labor to the
landholders, in exchange only for the coarsest necessaries of life;
not always for so much even as that.
These liberated slaves, as they were called, were now scarcely
less slaves than they were before. Their means of subsistence were
perhaps even more precarious than when each had his own owner, who
had an interest to preserve his life. They were liable, at the
caprice or interest of the landholders, to be thrown out of home,
employment, and the opportunity of even earning a subsistence by
their labor. They were, therefore, in large numbers, driven to the
necessity of begging, stealing, or starving; and became, of course,
dangerous to the property and quiet of their late masters.
The consequence was, that these late owners found it necessary,
for their own safety and the safety of their property, to organize
themselves more perfectly as a government and make laws for
keeping these dangerous people in subjection; that is, laws
fixing the prices at which they should be compelled to labor, and
also prescribing fearful punishments, even death itself, for such
thefts and tresspasses as they were driven to commit, as their only
means of saving them-selves from starvation.
These laws have continued in force for hundreds, and, in some
countries, for thousands of years; and are in force to-day, in
greater or less everity, in nearly all the countries on the globe.
The purpose and effect of these laws have been to maintain, in
the hands of the robber, or slave holding class, a monopoly of all
lands, and, as far as possible, of all other means of creating
wealth; and thus to keep the great body of laborers in such a state
of poverty and dependence, as would compel them to sell their labor
to their tyrants for the lowest prices at which life could be
sustained.
The result of all this is, that the little wealth there is in the
world is all in the hands of a few---that is, in the hands of the
law-making, slave-holding class; who are now as much slaveholders in
spirit as they ever were, but who accomplish their purposes by means
of the laws they make for keeping the laborers in subjection
and dependence, instead of each one's owning his individual slaves
as so many chattels.
Thus the whole business of legislation, which has now grown to
such gigantic proportions, had its origin in the conspiracies, which
have always existed among the few, for the purpose of holding the
many in subjection, and extorting from them their labor, and all the
profits of their labor.
And the real motives and spirit which lie at the foundation of
all legislation---notwithstanding all the pretences and disguises by
which they attempt to hide themselves---are the same to-day as they
always have been. They whole purpose of this legislation is simply
to keep one class of men in subordination and servitude to another.
Section IV
What, then, is legislation? It is an assumption by one man, or body
of men, of absolute, irresponsible dominion over all other men whom
they call subject to their power. It is the assumption by one man, or
body of men, of a right to subject all other men to their will and
their service. It is the assumption by one man, or body of men, of a
right to abolish outright all the natural rights, all the natural
liberty of all other men; to make all other men their slaves; to
arbitrarily dictate to all other men what they may, and may not, do;
what they may, and may not, have; what they may, and may not, be. It
is, in short, the assumption of a right to banish the principle of
human rights, the principle of justice itself, from off the earth, and
set up their own personal will, pleasure, and interest in its place.
All this, and nothing less, is involved in the very idea that there
can be any such thing as human legislation that is obligatory upon
those upon whom it is imposed.
Notes
- Sir William Jones, an English
judge in India, and one of the most learned judges that ever
lived, learned in Asiatic as well as European law, says: "It
is pleasing to remark the similarity, or, rather, the idenity, of
those conclusions which pure, unbiased reason, to all ages and
nations, seldom fails to draw, in such juridical inquiries as
are not fettered and manacled by positive institutions."---jones
on bailments, 133.
...He means here to say that, when
no law has been made in violation of justice, judicial tribunals,
"in all ages and nations, " have "seldom"
failed to agree as to what justice is.