87. Since intrinsic right, in distinction from particular and concrete right, is demanded, it is essential; but just because it is only demanded and in that light merely subjective, it is nonessential, and becomes simply an appearance. When the universal is degraded from the particular will to the merely apparent will, when, e.g., contract is regarded as only an external association of the will, we have fraud.
Addition.— In fraud universal right is abused, but the particular will is respected. The person on whom the fraud is committed, is imposed upon and made to believe that he gets his rights. The right, which is demanded, however, is merely subjective and unreal, and in that consists the fraud.
88. I acquire property by contract for the sake of the special qualities of the thing. But I acquire it, also, because of its inner universality which consists partly in its value, partly in its being the property of another. Now it is at the option of the other party to produce a false appearance in the case of contract. There may be the free consent of both parties to the exchange of the mere given object in its bare particularity, and so far the transaction is not unjust. Yet the object may fail to have any intrinsic universality. (The infinite judgment in its positive expression or identical meaning. See “Encyclopaedia of the philosophical Sciences.”)
89. To guard against the acceptance of a thing in its bare particularity, and in order to be fortified against an arbitrary will, there is at this juncture only a demand that the objective or universal side of the thing should be recognizable, that the objective should be made good as right, and that the arbitrary will, offending against right, should be removed and superseded.
Addition.— No penalty is attached to mere unpremeditated or unintentional wrong, since in it I have willed nothing against right. But to fraud penalties are due, since right is violated.