THE  FORERUNNERS—FICHTE  AND  MARZO.  II
tributed  ?  Must  the  cause  be  sought  for  in  the  vices  of  individuals, ­
  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  permeates ­
  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  enjoyment ­
  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-