ABSTRACT
Contract and property relations in general have been treated as secondary, derivative matters by both teleological and procedural ethics. Contract, minimally conceived and minimally realized, does require only two parties, and what pertains to the form of their agreement does characterize the basic relation of any contractual agreement. The juridical requirement of equivalent exchange in real contract is a simple matter, which Peter Benson’s account of the common will underlying exchange contract tends to obscure. Hence, far from raising the question of with what must ethics begin the problem of property entitlements and contractual obligation seems only to enter when ethics is well under way, provided, of course, that one accepts teleological and procedural approaches as the only options available. The plurality of property owners has been accounted for, together with the right of alienation of property inherent in ownership and the basic acts of will by which ownership is established.
