THE FORERUNNERS—FICHTE AND MARZO. II 
tributed ? Must the cause be sought for in the vices of indi 
viduals, or in the imperfections of the social system ? It was 
to the elucidation of this problem that Mario dedicated fifteen 
years of his life, and the three big volumes of his unfinished 
work. It cannot be said that he was altogether successful but 
his book contains some original views. He draws a sound 
comparison between what he calls the pagan and the Christian 
principle in political economy. The pagan principle sacrifices 
the masses in order to insure the pleasures and the splendour 
of a restricted aristocracy, as in the ancient cities. The Christian 
principle knows only equals, and demands that each should 
have a share of the produce in proportion to his useful work. 
The pagan method of making a profit out of the labourer has 
taken several forms: at first slavery, then serfdom, forced 
labour, the rights of the feudal lord. To-day there are practical 
monopolies, “ cornerings,” privileges, and gambling speculations. 
The Christian principle, on the contrary, according as it per 
meates our customs and laws, will inaugurate the reign of equity 
upon earth, and will raise up the down trodden classes, sacrificed 
of old under the ancient régime. 
The theory of property laid down by Mario is remarkable. 
According to him, this right should be so established as to 
insure the most profitable working of the forces of nature, and 
at the same time to enable each individual to enjoy the fruits 
of his own labour. Property based upon slavery is, therefore 
objectionable; in the first place, because, while withholding 
from the labourer the incentive of personal interest, it offers no 
other inducement to him to extort from Nature all she can give; 
and secondly, because it does not insure to the slave the enjoy 
ment of the fruits of his labour. Large feudal estates, fettered 
by the bonds of primogeniture and entail, may in certain respects 
be favourable to the progress of agriculture, as asserted by the 
English; but they have the great defect of excluding the 
majority from all ownership in the soil, and, consequently, from 
the enjoyment of the total produce of their labour. The ancient 
collective ownership of the Germans, which was indivisible and 
inalienable, had the advantage of assuring to each the possession 
of the means of labour, but it was little favourable to produc-