Excluded from the Government， the aristocracy is about to retire into private life. Let us follow them to their estates： Feudal rights instituted for a barbarous State are certainly a great draw-back in a modern State. If appropriate in an epoch when property and sovereignty were fused together， when the Government was local， when life was militant， they form an incongruity at a time when sovereignty and property are separated， when the Government is centralized， when the regime is a pacific one. The bondage which， in the tenth century， was necessary to re-established security and agriculture， is， in the eighteenth century， purposeless thralldom which impoverishes the soil and fetters the peasant. But， because these ancient claims are liable to abuse and injurious at the present day， it does not follow that they never were useful and legitimate， nor that it is allowable to abolish them without indemnity On the contrary， for many centuries， and， on the whole， so long as the lord of the manor resided on his estates this primitive contract was advantageous to both parties， and to such an extent that it has led to the modern contract. Thanks to the pressure of this tight bandage， the broken fragments of the community can be again united， and society once more recover its solidity， force， and activity. -- In any event， that the institution， like all human institutions， took its rise in violence and was corrupted by abuses is of little consequence； the State， for eight hundred years， recognized these feudal claims， and， with its own consent and the concurrence of its Courts， they were transmitted， bequeathed， sold， mortgaged， and exchanged， like any other species of property. Only two or three hundred， at most， now remained in the families of the original proprietors. "The largest portion of the titled estates，"says a contemporary，[18] "have become the property of capitalists， merchants， and their descendants； the fiefs， for the most part， being in the hands of the bourgeois of the towns." All the fiefs which， during two centuries past， have been bought by new men， now represent the economy and labor of their purchasers. -- Moreover；whoever the actual holders may be， whether old or whether new men， the State is under obligation to them， not only by general right --and because， from the beginning， it is in its nature the guardian of all property， -- but also by a special right， because it has itself sanctioned this particular species of property. The buyers of yesterday paid their money only under its guarantee； its signature is affixed to the contract， and it has bound itself to secure to them the enjoyment of it. If it prevents them from doing so， let it make them compensation； in default of the thing promised to them， it owes them the value of it. Such is the law in cases of expropriation for public utility； in 1834， for instance， the English， for the legal abolition of slavery， paid to their planters the sum of ā20，000，000. -- - But that is not sufficient： when， in the suppression of feudal rights， the legislator's thoughts are taken up with the creditors， he has only half performed his task；there are two sides to the question， and he must likewise think of the debtors. If he is not merely a lover of abstractions and of fine phrases， if that which interests him is men and not words， if he is bent upon the effective enfranchisement of the cultivator of the soil， he will not rest content with proclaiming a principle， with permitting the redemption of rents， with fixing the rate of redemption， and， in case of dispute， with sending parties before the tribunals. He will reflect that the peasantry， jointly responsible for the same debt will find difficulty in agreeing among themselves；that they are afraid of litigation； that， being ignorant， they will not know how to set about it； that， being poor， they will be unable to pay； and that， under the weight of discord， distrust， indigence， and inertia， the new law will remain a dead letter， and only exasperate their cupidity or kindle their resentment. In anticipation of this disorder the legislator will come to their assistance ； he will interpose commissions of arbitration between them and the lord of the manor； he will substitute a scale of annuities for a full and immediate redemption； he will lend them the capital which they cannot borrow elsewhere； he will establish a bank， rights， and a mode of procedure， -- in short， as in Savoy in 1771， in England in 1845，[19] and in Russia in 1861， he will relieve the poor without despoiling the rich； he will establish liberty without violating the rights of property； he will conciliate interests and classes； he will not let loose a brutal peasant revolt (Jacquerie) to enforce unjust confiscation； and he will terminate the social conflict not with strife but with peace.
