Sir William Blackstone，1723—1780，was the son of a silk merchant，and was born in London.He studied with great success at Oxford，and was admitted to the bar in 1745.At first he could not obtain business enough in his profession to support himself，and for a time relinquished practice，and lectured at Oxford.He afterwards returned to London，and resumed his practice with great success，still continuing to lecture at Oxford.He was elected to Parliament in 1761；and in 1770 was made a justice of the Court of Common Pleas，which office he held till his death.Blackstone's fame rests upon his “Commentaries on the Laws of England，”published about 1769.He was a man of great ability，sound learning，unflagging industry，and moral integrity.His great work is still a common textbook in the study of law.

In the beginning of the world，we are informed by Holy Writ，the allbountiful Creator gave to man dominion over all the earth，and “over the fish of the sea，and over the fowl of the air，and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”This is the only true and solid foundation of man's dominion over external things，whatever airy，metaphysical notions may have been started by fanciful writers upon this subject.The earth，therefore，and all things therein，are the general property of all mankind，exclusive of other beings，from the immediate gift of the Creator.And while the earth continued bare of inhabitants，it is reasonable to suppose that all was in common among them，and that everyone took from the public stock，to his own use，such things as his immediate necessities required.

These general notions of property were then sufficient to answer all the purposes of human life；and might，perhaps，still have answered them，had it been possible for mankind to have remained in a state of primeval simplicity，in which“all things were common to him.”Not that this communion of goods seems ever to have been applicable，even in the earliest ages，to aught but the substance of the thing；nor could it be extended to the use of it.For，by the law of nature and reason，he who first began to use it，acquired therein a kind of transient property，that lasted so long as he was using it，and no longer.Or，to speak with greater precision，the right of possession continued for the same time，only，that the act of possession lasted.

Thus，the ground was in common，and no part of it was the permanent property of any man in particular；yet，whoever was in the occupation of any deter-mined spot of it，for rest，for shade，or the like，acquired for the time a sort of ownership，from which it would have been unjust and contrary to the law of nature to have driven him by force；but，the instant that he quitted the use or occupation of it，another might seize it without injustice.Thus，also，a vine or other tree might be said to be in common，as all men were equally entitled to its produce；and yet，any private individual might gain the sole property of the fruit which he had gathered for his own repast: a doctrine well illustrated by Cicero，who compares the world to a great theater，which is common to the public，and yet the place which any man has taken is，for the time，his own.

But when mankind increased in number，craft，and ambition，it became necessary to entertain conceptions of a more permanent dominion；and to appropriate to individuals not the immediate use only，but the very substance of the thing to be used.Otherwise，innumerable tumults must have arisen，and the good order of the world been continually broken and disturbed，while a variety of persons were striving who should get the first occupation of the same thing，or disputing which of them had actually gained it.As human life also grew more and more refined，abundance of conveniences were devised to render it more easy，commodious，and agreeable；as habitations for shelter and safety，and raiment for warmth and decency.But no man would be at the trouble to provide either，so long as he had only a usufructuary property in them，which was to cease the instant that he quitted possession；if，as soon as he walked out of his tent or pulled off his garment，the next stranger who came by would have a right to inhabit the one and to wear the other.

In the case of habitations，in particular，it was natural to observe that even the brute creation，to whom everything else was in common，maintained a kind of permanent property in their dwellings，especially for the protection of their young；that the birds of the air had nests，and the beasts of the fields had caverns，the invasion of which they esteemed a very flagrant injustice，and would sacrifice their lives to preserve them.Hence a property was soon established in every man's house and homestead；which seem to have been originally mere temporary huts or movable cabins，suited to the design of Providence for more speedily peopling the earth，and suited to the wandering life of their owners，before any extensive property in the soil or ground was established.

There can be no doubt but that movables of every kind became sooner appropriated than the permanent，substantial soil；partly because they were more susceptible of a long occupancy，which might be continue for months together without any sensible interruption，and at length，by usage，ripen into an established right；but，principally，because few of them could be fit for use till improved and meliorated by the bodily labor of the occupant；which bodily labor，bestowed upon any subject which before lay in common to all men，is universally allowed to give the fairest and most reasonable title to an exclusive property therein.

The article of food was a more immediate call，and therefore a more early consideration.Such as were not contented with the spontaneous product of the earth，sought for a more solid refreshment in the flesh of beasts，which they obtained by hunting.But the frequent disappointments incident to that method of provision，induced them to gather together such animals as were of a more tame and sequacious nature and to establish a permanent property in their flocks and herds，in order to sustain themselves in a less precarious manner，partly by the milk of the dams，and partly by the flesh of the young.

The support of these their cattle made the article of water also a very important point.And，therefore，the book of Genesis，（the most venerable monument of antiquity，considered merely with a view to history，）will furnish us with frequent instances of violent contentions concerning wells；the exclusive property of which appears to have been established in the first digger or occupant，even in places where the ground and herbage remained yet in common.Thus，we find Abraham，who was but a sojourner，asserting his right to a well in the country of Abimelech，and exacting an oath for his security “because he had digged that well.”And Isaac，about ninety years afterwards，reclaimed this his father's property；and，after much contention with the Philistines，was suffered to enjoy it in peace.

All this while，the soil and pasture of the earth remained still in common as before，and open to every occupant；except，perhaps，in the neighborhood of towns，where the necessity of a sale and exclusive property in lands，（for the sake of agriculture，）was earlier felt，and therefore more readily complied with.Otherwise，when the multitude of men and cattle had consumed every convenience on one spot of ground，it was deemed a natural right to seize upon and occupy such other lands as would more easily supply their necessities.

We have a striking example of this in the history of Abraham and his nephew Lot.When their joint substance became so great that pasture and other conveniences grew scarce，the natural consequence was that a strife arose between their servants；so that it was no longer practicable to dwell together.This contention，Abraham thus endeavored to compose： “Let there be no strife，I pray thee，between me and thee.Is not the whole land before thee？Separate thyself，I pray thee，from me.If thou wilt take the left hand，then I will go to the right；or if thou depart to the right hand，then I will go to the left.”This plainly implies an acknowledged right in either to occupy whatever ground he pleased that was not preoccupied by other tribes.“And Lot lifted up his eyes，and beheld all the plain of Jordan，that it was well watered everywhere，even as the garden of the Lord.Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan，and journeyed east；and Abraham dwelt in the land of Canaan.”

As the world by degrees grew more populous，it daily became more difficult to find out new spots to inhabit，without encroaching upon former occupants；and，by constantly occupying the same individual spot，the fruits of the earth were consumed，and its spontaneous products destroyed without any provision for future supply or succession.It，therefore，became necessary to pursue some regular method of providing a constant subsistence；and this necessity produced，or at least promoted and encouraged the art of agriculture.And the art of agriculture，by a regular connection and consequence，introduced and established the idea of a more permanent property in the soil than had hitherto been received and adopted.

It was clear that the earth would not produce her fruits in sufficient quantities without the assistance of tillage；but who would be at the pains of tilling it，if another might watch an opportunity to seize upon and enjoy the product of his industry，art and labor？Had not，therefore，a separate property in lands，as well as movables，been vested in some individuals，the world must have continued a forest，and men have been mere animals of prey.Whereas，now，（so graciously has Providence interwoven our duty and our happiness together，）the result of this very necessity has been the ennobling of the human species，by giving it opportunities of improving its rational，as well as of exerting its natural faculties.

Necessity begat property；and，in order to insure that property，recourse was had to civil society，which brought along with it a long train of inseparable concomitants: states，government，laws，punishments，and the public exercise of religious duties.Thus connected together，it was found that a part only of society was sufficient to provide，by their manual labor，for the necessary subsistence of all；and leisure was given to others to cultivate the human mind，to invent useful arts，and to lay the foundations of science.

譯文　TRANSLATION

威廉·布萊克斯通爵士（1723—1780），英國著名律師、法學(xué)家，曾負(fù)笈牛津。他的代表作是1769年出版的《論英國法律》。威廉·布萊克斯通干練、淵博、勤勉、正直。

創(chuàng)世之初，《圣經(jīng)》告訴我們，全能的造物者賜予人類統(tǒng)轄大地之權(quán)，統(tǒng)轄“海中的游魚，空中的飛禽和大地上走動(dòng)的每個(gè)生靈”。不管想象豐富的作家在這個(gè)題材上創(chuàng)立過多么空靈、多么富于玄想的觀念，這卻是人類統(tǒng)轄外物的唯一真實(shí)、堅(jiān)固的基礎(chǔ)。大地與萬物也因此成為人類而不是其他生物的共有財(cái)產(chǎn)，它們是上帝直接賜予人類的禮物。雖然大地沒有人類仍繼續(xù)存在，卻有理由設(shè)想萬物是人類共有的，每個(gè)人都可以從這份公共財(cái)產(chǎn)中獲取最急需的東西為己所用。

關(guān)于財(cái)產(chǎn)的這些基本觀念足以并且或許業(yè)已回應(yīng)了人類的所有目的，如果人類仍保持原初的純樸狀態(tài)，即“萬物為他所有”的狀態(tài)。但即使在最古老的年代，物品共有似乎也應(yīng)用于事物的意義上，而沒有擴(kuò)展到物品的使用權(quán)。因?yàn)橐勒兆匀环ê屠硇苑?，第一個(gè)使用某物的人因之獲有一種過渡性的物權(quán)，這一權(quán)利在其使用該物時(shí)一直擁有，直至他不再使用?；蛘?，更準(zhǔn)確地說，所有權(quán)與行使所有權(quán)的行為持續(xù)至始終。

因此，大地是人類共有的，沒有哪一部分是為某人所專有的永恒財(cái)產(chǎn)。然而，無論誰擁有了設(shè)定的某一部分，他就暫時(shí)得到了所有權(quán)，若用暴力將其趕走則是不公平也是有違自然法的。但是，一旦他不再使用或擁有那設(shè)定的部分，其他人將獲有該項(xiàng)權(quán)利而這并不有違公平。如是，一根藤或者別的樹或許可以說是共有的，因?yàn)樗腥擞邢碛盟麑?shí)的平等權(quán)利。然而，任何個(gè)人都可擁有那個(gè)果實(shí)的獨(dú)占權(quán)，如果他已將其先行采摘以作自己享受之用——對(duì)這一原則，西塞羅有很好的闡述，他將世界比作大劇院，劇院為公眾共有，但任何人的座位卻都為他獨(dú)有。

但是，隨著人的數(shù)量越來越多，技藝越來越高，志向越來越大，獲取更長(zhǎng)久的統(tǒng)轄權(quán)這些觀念應(yīng)運(yùn)而生；對(duì)個(gè)體而言，要調(diào)配的不僅有事物的目前使用權(quán)而且包括該事物的使用性質(zhì)。不然，當(dāng)初，人們?cè)跔?zhēng)執(zhí)誰該第一個(gè)占有某事物或辯論哪個(gè)人已真正贏得了該事物時(shí)，勢(shì)必會(huì)產(chǎn)生無盡的喧囂。人類生活越來越精致，大量便捷設(shè)施得以發(fā)明，令生活愈發(fā)悠閑、舒適、宜人；居所用于遮蔽風(fēng)雨、保障安全，服裝則用于保暖與修飾。假如人對(duì)于居所與服飾只有用益權(quán)，那么就沒有人愿意不辭辛勞地提供它們，因?yàn)橛靡鏅?quán)將隨著擁有權(quán)的喪失而終止；即：如果一個(gè)人走出帳篷或脫下衣服，經(jīng)過的陌生人就有權(quán)住進(jìn)帳篷里面或穿上衣服。

就居所而言，則尤其如此。我們可以自然地注意到，盡管其他事對(duì)那些野蠻的造物來說都是共有的，但它們卻把居所視作永久性財(cái)產(chǎn)，特別用以保護(hù)它們的幼崽?？罩械娘w鳥有巢，莽原的走獸有穴，它們將對(duì)自己巢穴的侵犯視作公然的不義，寧愿拼卻性命來保護(hù)其完整無缺。因此，在對(duì)土地的任何衍生權(quán)利尚未建立前，每個(gè)人就對(duì)其家園都確立了某種所有權(quán)，雖然這些家宅最初似乎只是臨時(shí)的棚屋或流動(dòng)的小木屋，雖然最初建造它們只是為滿足上帝讓人類遍居大地的心愿及適應(yīng)人類流浪的生活。

毋庸置疑，據(jù)有動(dòng)產(chǎn)比擁有永久性的實(shí)質(zhì)性的土地更快；部分原因在于長(zhǎng)期持有行為對(duì)動(dòng)產(chǎn)影響更大，如果連續(xù)數(shù)月持有某項(xiàng)動(dòng)產(chǎn)，并在這一期間內(nèi)沒有明顯的中斷，則這一使用權(quán)最終會(huì)變?yōu)橐环N既定的權(quán)利。但是，更主要原因在于動(dòng)產(chǎn)幾乎都要經(jīng)過持有者付出辛勞來提升和改良才能使用，而將辛勞施與公眾先前所共有的事物，進(jìn)而將其變?yōu)楠?dú)有權(quán)益，這被廣泛認(rèn)可為最公平合理的方式。

食物是更直接的需求，因此也得到了優(yōu)先的考慮。那些不滿足于蔬菜糧食的人會(huì)獵捕野獸來打牙祭。但是，這種方式屢遭失敗，所以他們把那些生性更為馴良的動(dòng)物聚在一起，把它們馴化為禽畜，這樣他們就能用更安全穩(wěn)定的方式來供養(yǎng)自己，諸如成年牲畜的奶和幼崽的肉。

飼養(yǎng)牲畜使得水成為關(guān)鍵。因此，《創(chuàng)世紀(jì)》（僅從歷史而言，該書亦是最令人敬重的古代紀(jì)念碑）中連篇累牘地記敘由井所引發(fā)的械斗。井被第一個(gè)挖井人或第一個(gè)所有者獨(dú)占，這在一些土地、牧草公有的地方亦然。由此，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，雖僅是位寄居者，亞伯拉罕卻宣稱自己對(duì)亞比米勒的一口井擁有所有權(quán)，為鞏固自己的權(quán)利，他發(fā)誓稱那口井是他挖的。大約九十年后，以撒重申他父親的權(quán)利，并在與非利士人多番爭(zhēng)斗后，和平地享用了那口井。

在以上過程中，土地和牧場(chǎng)仍像從前一樣為每個(gè)使用者共有；也許城鎮(zhèn)周邊除外，在那里，因?yàn)檗r(nóng)業(yè)發(fā)達(dá)，人們更早感受到出售農(nóng)產(chǎn)品和土地私有的必要性，并且更愿意順應(yīng)這一訴求。而另一方面，人們帶領(lǐng)畜群耗盡某處地利之后，他們會(huì)去爭(zhēng)奪另一處能夠更好地滿足他們需求的土地，這被視為天經(jīng)地義。

亞伯拉罕和侄子羅德的經(jīng)歷就是這方面的范例。他們?cè)?lián)合在一起，但人多勢(shì)眾卻使牧場(chǎng)和其他設(shè)施供不應(yīng)求，自然地，他們的仆人間起了爭(zhēng)執(zhí)，以至于再住在一起已不切實(shí)際。亞伯拉罕為解決這場(chǎng)糾紛竭盡心力：“我求你，在你我之間不要有紛爭(zhēng)。整個(gè)大地都在我們面前，不是嗎？請(qǐng)你拿走你自己的那一份吧。如果你要左邊，我就去右邊；或者你去右邊，那么我就去左邊。”這清楚地說明，擁有未被其他部族占據(jù)的任何一處土地都是得到認(rèn)可的權(quán)利?！傲_德抬起眼，看到約旦平原，水源豐沛，宛若上帝的花園。于是羅德給自己選了約旦平原，就去往東部；而亞伯拉罕則居住在迦南地?！?/p>

隨著世界人口越來越多，如果不影響先前占有者的利益，找到新的居住地點(diǎn)將日益艱難。不斷占有同一地點(diǎn)，大地的果實(shí)將被消耗殆盡，其自然出產(chǎn)將被破壞，以致未來無以為繼。因此，有必要探索某種有規(guī)律的方式來提供穩(wěn)定的產(chǎn)量；而這一需求產(chǎn)生或至少推動(dòng)及拓展了農(nóng)藝。農(nóng)藝借由有規(guī)律的聯(lián)系而最終引進(jìn)和建立了這一財(cái)產(chǎn)觀念，比先前所采用的更為永久。

顯然，沒有耕種，大地不會(huì)豐收；但是，誰會(huì)愿意自己勞作卻讓別人乘機(jī)攫取自己勤勞與技藝的成果？因此，如果地上的財(cái)產(chǎn)及動(dòng)產(chǎn)不被投資于個(gè)人，那么世界將仍是一片榛莽，人們將仍是動(dòng)物的口中餐。然而，如今，上帝仁慈地將我們的義務(wù)與幸福結(jié)合在一起，通過賦予人類提升理性和展現(xiàn)自然才能的機(jī)會(huì)，本出自單純的需求，其結(jié)果卻使人類高貴起來。

需求產(chǎn)生財(cái)產(chǎn)；而為確保財(cái)產(chǎn)，則必須訴諸文明社會(huì)以及隨之而生的一系列建制：國家、政府、法律、懲罰和宗教儀式。當(dāng)這些結(jié)合在一起之后，人們發(fā)現(xiàn)只需一部分人從事體力勞動(dòng)就足以滿足全社會(huì)的需求；而另一些人則擁有閑暇來培育人的心智、發(fā)明實(shí)用技藝及為科學(xué)奠定基礎(chǔ)。