This article was published in the
Spring 1996 issue of Formulations
by the Free
A Model Lease for Orbis
by Spencer Heath MacCallum
Working Draft 10-15-95
Copyright © 1995 by Spencer H. MacCallum
table of contents of FNF archives) (to
start of article)
II. ORBITAL FURTHER COVENANTS AND PROMISES:
III. P COVENANTS AND PROMISES TO ORBITAL:
IV. ORBITAL AND P FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREE:
(to top of page)
Prefatory Note: Long-time libertarians and followers
of the new-nation movement may recall hearing of Atlantis, the attempt
by Werner Stiefel to found a proprietary community on a coral formation
in the Caribbean outside the territorial limits of Haiti during the mid-1960s.
The following article began as a commission in exchange for equity in Atlantis.
Unfortunately, Stiefel's efforts came to nought when he was chased off
the site by Duvalier's gunboats. Although nothing remains of Atlantis,
the master lease for this proprietary community has survived and has been
revised during the intervening years. Since Stiefel wanted to retain
a low profile while he was building Atlantis, when the lease was published
it was promoted as being for ORBIS, the name of a hypothetical proprietary
community in outer space.
The author, Spencer MacCallum, is a social anthropologist
who has specialized in the study of proprietary communities. He has
followed in the footsteps of his grandfather, Spencer Heath (1876-1963),
who originated the idea of proprietary administration of all public services,
such as roads, common areas, and police protection. Both Heath, in
his major work, Citadel. Market and Altar: Emerging Society
(1957), and MacCallum, in The Art of Community (1970), have explored
"the rationale of a community in which all matters of common concern would
be administered contractually, according to voluntary agreements, without
recourse to taxation or other institutionalized coercion."
Proprietary administration of public services is not some
"pie-in-the-sky" idea. In his book, Public Goods and Private Communities
(1994), Dr. Fred Foldvary offers empirical evidence for and theoretical
justification of proprietary communities. In addition, there is a
growing body of practical experience in this area embodied in what the
real estate industry labels "multiple-tenant income properties," such as
hotels, shopping centers, marinas, industrial parks, residential apartment
communities, medical and professional centers, and combinations of all
of these. Their significant structural feature is found in the fact
that the land on which they are established remains in undivided ownership
with the component parts leased or rented instead of sold. "The developer's
intact interest in the whole, i.e., the single title under which he planned
and built the development, survives to become the basis for the ongoing
administration of the community." The proprietors of such communities
are in the "business of manufacturing and marketing 'optimal human environment'."
The proprietor creates land value by manufacturing and merchandising the
"environment" of the community he has built. His "interests are directly
aligned with the general well-being and prosperity of his tenants" because
his rental or lease income can only be generated out of their productive
In a lengthy introduction titled, "Drafting a Constitution for Orbis,"
the author of this contract has identified the basic principles he has
used to formulate the lease provisions. In no special order, they
include the following:
1. Public services amply provided through exclusively
free-market enterprises without resort to taxation.
Voluntaryists should find these ideas exciting, as they offer a non-political
and non-electoral method for maintaining social cooperation and peace.
The following draft of the lease is appended with explanatory notes (numbered
in sequence) which indicate how it has taken on a life of its own during
the last 30 years. Reader comment is invited "to lessen the weaknesses
and build on the strengths of this first attempt at a [non-statist] constitution
for a permanent community in space," or anywhere else for that matter.
2. Community administrators exercising little or no police
3. Personal interests of the owners and administrators
aligned with the public interest, the common good of the whole community.
4. Flexibility of land uses, permitting changes to take
place incrementally over time without prejudice to contracted rights.
5. An exact standard by which to determine and measure
quantitatively the "good of the community."
6. A cultural bias toward settling differences creatively
by means that do not include resorting to physical force.
7. A competitive market free of any and all coercive
restraints on trade.
MacCallum's lengthy and highly informative preamble to the
lease, including a bibliography of the proprietary community, is available
without charge from him at Box 21, Pine Hill, New Mexico 87357 (Tel.
505-775-3750). Those who write rather than phone should include a
phone number (which Mr. MacCallum promises to keep confidential) since
it is his policy to speak with people and be informed of the nature of
their interest before sending out material to them. (This unusual
policy has been highly successful, he says, not only in terms of self-education
but also in terms of the friendships that have resulted.) Earlier
versions of the lease were delivered as a lecture at the Twenty-third Annual
Meeting of the American Astronautical Society, Airport Hilton Hotel, San
Francisco, CA, October 20, 1977; and published in Rampart Individualist,
Winter & Spring 1981.
This "Prefatory Note" was prepared by Carl Watner in conjunction
with Spencer MacCallum. It will appear in a forthcoming issue of
Watner's publication The Voluntaryist, "the only pure free-market
newsletter to eschew electoral politics and violent revolution."
(Sample issues available for $1: Box 1275, Gramling SC
For permission to recopy "A Model Lease for Orbis,"
please contact Spencer MacCallum. He will always give permission,
but he wants to know who is copying it, who is interested.
(to top of page)
A MODEL LEASE
I. WHEREAS ORBITAL COMMUNITIES ("ORBITAL"), owner of the proprietary
community known as Orbis, is engaged in the business of developing, maintaining
and promoting the growth of human environments conducive to the fullest
enjoyment of community living, and of marketing such environments by leasing
to its members exclusive sites through the occupancy of which they can
obtain full access to and enjoyment of same, and
WHEREAS PERSON ("P") desires membership in the community of Orbis
for the purpose of residing and/or engaging in business there,
NOW THEREFORE ORBITAL, for the consideration set forth below, conveys
in perpetuity to P, his heirs and assigns, subject only to the terms and
conditions of this agreement, full membership in the community of Orbis,
which membership conveys equal access with all other members to its common
areas and facilities and, in addition, exclusive occupancy of a space,
which in this case shall be that space, or space of equivalent character
and utility, known as [property description follows, reserving sub-surface
rights and air rights above 000 meters].
Note 1. The absence of a fixed date of termination is for several
reasons. With a safeguard clause that permits Orbital to move the occupant
to another site under certain conditions (II.D), the community retains
planning flexibility — a consideration of ever greater importance in a
culture of accelerating technological change. At the same time, the individual
gains the security of permanent membership in a community, provided only
that he continue to observe the terms of that membership. Such tenure without
specified term is the functional equivalent of citizenship, which is likewise
without term, in the established nations of earth. Although no longer recognized
under Anglo-American law, such perpetual leaseholds are traditional and
customary in many parts of the world.
II. ORBITAL FURTHER COVENANTS AND PROMISES:
(to top of page)
A. To guarantee P quiet possession of the space reserved for his
exclusive use and, subject only to the terms and conditions of this agreement,
freedom to make full and undisturbed use of that space and of the public
portions and facilities of Orbis enjoyed in common with others. ORBITAL
promises not to impose or permit to be imposed within Orbis any tax on
the person or property of P or of anyone else in Orbis. The word "tax"
shall be understood to mean any imposition of any levy, fine or assessment
other than as provided for by the terms of this or other agreements voluntarily
B. To act at all times with utmost diligence to secure the safety
of persons and property in Orbis, including specifically but not limited
to the following:
1. Promotion of research into and wide public dissemination of
Note 2. The membership/lease agreement does not forbid specific
kinds of behavior that might endanger or be a nuisance to others, since
this would call for policing — inspections and enforcement — by Orbital.
As the community proprietor, Orbital is already such a big fish in this
pond that it seems wise to avoid or minimize situations that could lead
to confrontations with members. Instead, the member covenants (III.C) to
exercise all due diligence to avoid creating a nuisance. In the event a
dispute arises between members, it will go first to mediation and then
to arbitration (IV.E), and a private arbitrator will determine whether
one or the other acted unreasonably. If the arbitrator finds that a member
has acted otherwise than reasonably, then Orbital will be free to act on
that information, which will then be public knowledge. The issue of reasonable
behavior turns partly on the question of whether the defendant was sufficiently
informed to have known how to behave in the situation, or whether he acted
in ignorance and could not reasonably have had access to such information.
Consquently, a fundamental role of Orbital, a basic public service, will
be to ensure that up-date technical information about the "how" of community
living is readily and easily available to everyone in the community.
a. Health and safety.
b. Available insurance coverage of all kinds.
c. Available technologies of all kinds for the abatement of measurable
such as noise, smoke and other particulate matter, vibration, noxious
glare and heat, fire and explosive hazards, traffic, and waste effluent.
d. Private means of dispute resolution.
2. Reimbursement, through rent remission or otherwise, of uninsured
losses resulting from fire, theft, or bodily injury suffered in the public
areas of Orbis, or in the private areas
when said fire, theft or attack originated outside those areas and
was not caused by negligence of P or his tenants, guests or invitees. Provided,
however, in the case of property loss, that P has apprised ORBITAL beforehand
of any unusual amounts of property in his possession and has taken reasonable
precautions for its safety.
Note 3. This provision has long precedent at common law, where
an innkeeper is held to be insurer of the safety of persons and property
of his guests.
C. To promote the systematic collection and public dissemination
of marketing statistics and
related data and in other ways to encourage and assist members to
make informed land-use decisions.
Note 4. In lieu of zoning, building codes or other land-use restrictions,
this clause seeks to achieve the same end by an extension of the public-information
services of Orbital noted earlier (II.B.1). The assumption is that inappropriate
land-use decisions generally result from inadequate information, and that
if such information is readily available, the nonconforming land uses will
be small enough in number and in kind that the community will be able to
live with them. They will be a small price for avoiding the inspection/enforcement
syndrome of duties under the conventional restrictive approach.
D. If, in the judgment of ORBITAL, its own interest and those of
the members in general would be served by ORBITAL resuming possession
of all or any portion of the leased site and allocating it to a
different category of use, such as from industrial use to residential or
commercial use, and if ORBITAL for this reason elects to make such a
land-use change, then ORBITAL promises to:
Note 5. This right of Orbital might never have to be exercised for
a variety of reasons. A common misapprehension is that nonconforming land
uses cannot be tolerated, when actually they seldom hurt an over-all plan;
the classic hold-outs, such as the brownstone tobacconist at Rockefeller
Center, do little more harm than offend our sense of symmetry. Nor do such
nonconforming uses very often last beyond a person's lifetime, if that
long, personal circumstances being as changeable as they are. Moreover,
where people have all the facts they need to make a rational decision,
they will generally do so. That being the case, in Orbis, where information
will be more available than elsewhere, holdouts will be even more exceptional.
In Orbis, also, in the absence of tax and regulatory features that elsewhere
tend to "freeze" existing land uses (by creating incentives, for example,
to hold onto property to avoid capital gains tax liability) the market
as a whole will be more responsive to changing conditions. Nevertheless,
it is of fundamental importance to the community that Orbital reserve the
right to move a member from one site to another of equivalent character
and value. The conditions it would have to meet, however, assure that such
a right, if exercised at all, would not be exercised lightly.
1. Give P not less than two years written notice.
2. Grant P a right of first refusal, during the period of notice,
to himself undertake the land use envisioned for that site.
3. Offer P, at the same rent for the balance of the unexpired rental
period, alternative space in Orbis equally well situated and otherwise
suited for the purpose for which P was using the space originally
4. Reimburse the full appraised market value of P's fixed improvements
on the site, constructed prior to the time of receiving notice,
or, at the election of P, to reproduce the same or comparable improvements
on the new site.
5. Assume the full cost of moving P and his personal and business
belongings from the old site to the new site or elsewhere in Orbis.
6. Compensate P for any business loss due to closure or disruption
during the move, except any that might have been caused by carelessness
or neglect on the part of P.
E. To conduct its business always in a manner calculated to maximize
the total value, as income property, of its basic productive capital
consisting of the site of Orbis.
Note 6. The ultimate protection of the members is that Orbital will
be operated as a business and hence more rationally than if it were not.
If it were operated for any other reason — ideological, charitable or whatnot
— there would not be this protection. The impersonal, rational pricing
mechanism of the market is the ultimate safeguard of justice in a civilized
community. The rental income from a proprietary community affords a quantitative
measure of its success as a community and a yardstick by which to measure
proposed improvements. It introduces into community planning a rationality
that has hitherto been lacking; for it offers in principle a quantitative
measure and feedback for ascertaining whether and by how much a given undertaking
adds to or detracts from the common good — the success of the community
F. To have in effect at all times adequate insurance or reserves
specifically to compensate P for any loss or inconvenience that
P might suffer as a result of ORBITAL violating any of the terms
of this agreement.
Note 7. This was suggested by a similar provision in the constitution
of Ciskei, south Africa, and is intended as a further protection against
tyranny--the main protection being the business nature of the public enterprise
(II.E). This provision bonds Orbital to perform its promises to the members,
in effect insuring the constitution of Orbis.
(to top of page)
III. P COVENANTS AND PROMISES TO ORBITAL:
A. To pay the annual ground rent of the leasehold, exclusive
of improvements thereon, to ORBITAL or its successors or assigns,
in equal amounts on or before the first of January and July of each
B. To exercise due diligence to avoid endangering the health,
safety and property of others, this and the following covenants
C, D, F, G, H, I and J to run to the benefit of the present and
future members of Orbis, their tenants, guests and invitees.
Note 8. This would include actions not only within Orbis, but also
while traveling abroad, actions that might compromise the security of Orbis
or be considered provocative by one or more governments on earth, leading
to the possibility of sanctions or retaliatory action against Orbis. In
other words, members would have to observe the strict political neutrality
of Orbis. "Reasonable behavior" again would be the criterion or test.
C. To exercise due diligence to avoid causing any public nuisance,
including observing reasonable performance standards when processing materials
or disposing of wastes.
D. To carry liability insurance against any loss or injury
he or his tenants, guests or invitees might cause others in Orbis.
Note 9. John Yench, of Long Beach, California suggested this and
the following insurance clauses to eliminate any need for health and safety
inspections and policing by Orbital.
E. To insure against loss of his own life, property or earning
capacity due to fire, sickness, accidental injury or acts of God, including
natural disasters and the effects of war.
Note 10. This clause insures the member against loss of membership
from inability to pay rent because of accident, injury or other calamity.
By the same token, it protects against the member or his dependents becoming
a burden on the community, and it protects other members who might be creditors
or contractual partners of the member in question.
F. To insure against loss or injury to others specifically resulting
from P's violation of any part of this agreement, including especially
but not limited to Paragraph III.B.
Note 11. Here P insures his word as Orbital does its word in II.F.
This provision shifts from Orbital to the insurance provider(s), in whose
interest it now is, the burden of inspections and policing with respect
to security (see III.B and accompanying explantory note 8). The insurance
providers in turn are closely monitored by the consumer rating services
(III.G). To complete the picture, no one — rating services included — escapes
the eye of the ever watchful equities market.
G. To purchase insurance in conformance with this agreement
only from firms carrying the highest certification from a major consumer
rating service, and in all such policies to name ORBITAL as co-insured.
Note 12. Because insurability is the foundation stone on which the
security of Orbis rests, it is essential that the insurance firms relied
upon be real and reputable. Emalie MacCallum suggested consumer rating
as an alternative to Orbital maintaining a list of approved companies.
The market could then operate more freely, whereas certification by Orbital
would be tantamount to licensing, which would be in restraint of trade.
H. To refrain absolutely from engaging in collusion in restraint
of trade in Orbis or aiding or abetting persons or organizations so
Note 13. This provision is responsive to Mançur Olson's thesis
in The Rise and Decline of Nations (Yale University Press, 1982)
and is intended to forestall the formation in Orbis of cartels in restraint
of trade and of special-interest groups that would restrict occupational
entry. The profound importance of this provision is impressively developed
by Olson. It also harmonizes with E.C. Riegel's thesis in The New Approach
to Freedom (Heather Foundation, 1976) that competition is the touchstone
of individual dignity. It is a premise underlying this model constitution
for Orbis that unrestricted competition will help to promote an energetic
and prosperous population, and that this, in turn, is the basis of healthy
I. To seek every means of avoiding the use or threat of physical
force against any person, for whatever reason, in Orbis.
Note 14. The test, again, is reasonable behavior. This explicit
rule confers a psychological and cultural benefit in Orbis: By removing
any and all violent action from the category of "right and justified behavior,"
the individual is challenged in every case to look for peaceful means of
resolving differences. The working assumption is that there are always
peaceful solutions to differences. The challenge is to find them. While
such an assumption cannot be proved, it is like the scientist's working
assumption that the universe is rational and understandable; such an assumption
is productive of discovery. Physical harm inflicted in any situation whatever
is, in this view, considered tragic. The person who was unable to avoid
inflicting it is not to be condemned, any more than the unsuccessful seeker
after scientific truth. He is rather to be looked on with sympathy and
compassion for his shortcoming in a situation that resulted in tragedy
for a fellow human being. It is hoped that this view will become a part
of the cultural outlook of the new community.
As for Orbital itself, it is the proprietary organization's contractual
duty to make Orbis safe for its members. If Orbis or any part of it is
threatened and Orbital can think of no alternative but to use force to
protect it, then it will be up to Orbital to protect it forcibly. But this
will be looked upon as a failure, necessary only because Orbital knew no
other way to handle the situation. It will be considered improper means
and consequently will establish no precedent for using force in the future.
A worse failure, of course, would be to fail in its prime responsibility
of protecting life and property in Orbis. We must not forget Gandhi's pragmatic
injunction: "He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or
their honour by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently
dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.
He has no business to be the head of a family [read "community"]. He must
either hide himself, or must rest content to live forever in helplessness
and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully." (Young
India, November 10, 1928)
J. To be responsible at all times forthe actions of his tenants,
guests or invitees as if those actions were his own.
(to top of page)
IV. ORBITAL AND P FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREE:
A. That this leasehold shall be P's property to sell, sublet, encumber
or otherwise deal with as he sees fit, subject only to the terms
and conditions of this agreement and to ORBITAL's approval, which shall
not be unreasonably withheld. If this leasehold is to be transferred to
a third party or parties, then this original agreement should be returned
to ORBITAL with the proposed transfer endorsed thereon. When and if the
transfer is approved, a new agreement will be issued to the transferee.
In the event P rents or sublets any or all of his space, his agreement(s)
with his guests or tenants must agree with and in no way be inconsistent
with any of the provisions of this agreement.
B. That the starting rent for the site herein leased shall be 0000 valuns
Note 15. The reference to "valuns" as the unit of exchange merely
indicates that a non-political monetary unit, as discussed in E.C. Riegel,
Flight From Inflation: The Monetary Alternative (Heather Foundation,
1978), undoubtedly will be used. The actual instrument(s) used in exchange
will be determined, of course, not by Orbital, but by the consensus of
traders — of whom Orbital will be but one.
and that this rent shall be revised every five years to the then
market rental value of the site, less a ten-percent reduction to P as a
preferred tenant. Market rental value for this purpose shall be appraised
by three disinterested parties selected as follows: ORBITAL and P each
choosing one of three persons named by the other and the third to be selected
by these two. ORBITAL and P shall then each submit to this panel of three
their independent appraisals of the rental value of the site for highest
and best use together with supporting evidence, and it shall be the duty
of the panel to study the appraisals submitted and choose one or the other,
as it stands, without modification.
Note 16. This form of arbitration, which is suited to cases where
the facts are not disputed, was suggested by the late Dr. F.A. Harper,
of Atherton, California. It has the virtue of bringing the parties closer
together in their respective claims rather than farther apart, as in the
adversarial system where each takes an extreme and opposite position in
the hope that eventual compromise will favor him. Under this arrangement,
each party makes his "solution" as close to the other party's claim as
possible in the hope that it will become the decision in the case.
ORBITAL will make its leasing records freely available to assist
the appraisal process.
Note 17. This small but not-to-be-overlooked provision was gleaned
from an intriguing paper, "That We All Might Be Rich: An Investment Proposal
for Georgists," privately circulated by its author, Dan Sullivan, Pittsburgh
PA (412-621-3499), about 1992.
Should P fail to select an appraiser within 30 days after ORBITAL
has submitted three names to him, then ORBITAL may name an appraiser for
him from among the names submitted. Should either party fail to submit
an appraisal, then that of the other shall obtain.
Note 18. Property-management experience teaches that rent collections
must be handled promptly and strictly. It is no favor to a tenant to allow
him to get into arrears, but rather tends to create an unmanageable situation.
In some cases advance arrangements might be made for later payment, the
leasehold might be financeable in the mortgage market, or insurance might
play a role. In any case, rent schedules should be strictly regarded.
C. That if rent payments fall into arrears for ten days, P will
incur a late penalty of ten percent of the balance due, and that
after 30 days of arrears ORBITAL may, upon 24 hours written notice, terminate
this lease and resume possession.
In the event of such termination, ORBITAL shall return any rental
balance pro-rated to the date of the written notice. Compensation for P's
fixed improvements on the site shall be established in the manner set out
in Paragraph IV.B, above.
D. That this agreement may be modified or terminated at any time
by mutual consent, or that it may be terminated by either party,
alone, upon appropriate notification as follows:
1. P may at his discretion terminate this agreement and quit the
leasehold without any further liability for rent, under any of the
a. Upon six months written notice, in which case the removal or
sale of any improvements shall be P's responsibility.
b. Upon 20 days written noticefollowing the violation or neglect
by ORBITAL of any of the terms of this agreement, and especially
the commission of any act or threat of violence upon P, his tenants, guests
or invitees, by ORBITAL or its appointed agents, or their entry on the
premises without express permission by P, or the imposition of any tax
upon the person or property of P, his tenants, guests or invitees. In the
event of such termination, ORBITAL shall
1) Return any rents paid ahead by P, pro-rated to the date of the
complaint, and shall compensate P for the value of his site improvements,
such value to be ascertained in the manner set out in Section IV.B, above.
2) At its own cost safely transport P and anyone else residing at the
time on P's premises, together with their personal belongings, to
any place of their choosing. If the cost of transportation to said place
exceeds that of transportation to P's point of origin before coming to
Orbis, P shall pay the excess.
Note 19. This clause is responsive to David Friedman's fear that
the possibly high cost to a tenant of leaving a settlement remotely situated
in space might provide a temptation for the proprietors to renege on their
agreement by unilaterally raising rents. Insurance provided for in II.F
protects P by underwriting his return transportation should Orbital go
further and renege on that as well. For Orbital to disavow its agreement,
however, would be tantamount to relinquishing its business, so that in
practical terms the probability would be remote. Moreover, a poorly managed
income property soon attracts the attention of those in a position to buy
controlling interest and restore its productivity.
2. ORBITAL may, at its discretion, resume possession of the leasehold
under any of the following circumstances:
a. Upon 24-hours written notice following P's failure to pay rent
in full for a period of 30 days after it has become due and payable.
In that event, the compensation for P's fixed improvements shall be established
in the manner set out in Section IV.B, above, and shall be paid to P by
P's successor, if such there be within a year, and otherwise by ORBITAL.
b. Upon fulfillment of all the conditions set out in Section II.D, above,
when in the judgment of ORBITAL its interests and those of the residents
of Orbis generally would best be served by ORBITAL's resuming possession
of the leasehold and disposing it to a different category of land use.
c. At the end of any negotiated rental period following prior written
notice of not less than one year, in the event of repeated complaints
by other residents of disturbances of the peace. Provided, however, that
if in that period no further complaints are received, the notice shall
have no effect.
E. That any dispute with any person in Orbis that cannot be resolved
informally by the parties to it, including any dispute that might
arise over the terms of this lease or the performance of either party to
it, shall be settled by a mediator or, failing that, a neutral arbitrator
in accordance with the rules and regulations of the XYZ Arbitration Association.
The parties agree to be bound by the decisions of the arbitrator.
Note 20. We can assume, whenever there is sufficient market demand,
not only that arbitration companies will come into existence equipped to
provide a complete dispute resolution mechanism entirely outside of any
political system, but that arbitration associations will compete to provide
the fairest possible adjudication of disputes. Much of what we call "due
process" — the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, questions
about the admissibility of evidence, processes of appeals, and the like,
which on earth are handled within the political court systems — might be
transferred in space habitats to an arbitration system.
Many people are presently weighing the feasibility of competing private
companies offering services of justice outside of any political system.
See, for a single example, Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty (New
York: Macmillan 1973), pages 219-252. For an early treatment of the question,
see Francis D. Tandy, Voluntary Socialism (Denver: Tandy 1896),
pages 62-78. See also the following relevant discussions: A.S. Diamond,
The Evolution of Law and Order (Westport CT, Greenwood Press 1975);
Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law (Princeton NJ, Van Nostrand 1961);
William C. Wooldridge, Uncle Sam. the Monopoly Man (New Rochelle
NY, Arlington House 1970), Chapter 5, "Voluntary Justice," pages 94-110;
and Bruce L. Benson, The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without the State
(San Francisco, Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy 1990).
Spencer Heath MacCallum is a theoretical
anthropologist and author of The Art of Community. He directs the
Heather Foundation which administers, among others, the intellectual estates
of Spencer Heath and E. C. Riegel.
table of contents of FNF archives) (to
outline) (to top of page)