The same author suggests that the origin of private property is probably founded in nature, but that the modifications under which we at present find it, the method of conserving it in the present owner, and of translating it from man to man, are entirely derived from society; and are some of those civil advantages, in exchange for which every individual has resigned a part of his natural liberty.*

*1 Bl. Com. 138. In the second book of his commentaries Blackstone thus comments on private property: "Pleased as we are with the possession we seem afraid to look back to the means by which it was acquired, as if fearful of some defect in our title; or at best we rest satisfied with the decision of the laws in our favor, without examining the reason or authority upon which those laws have been built. We think it enough that our title has been derived by the grant of the former proprietor, by descent from our ancestors, or by the last will and testament of the dying owner, not caring to reflect that (accurately and strictly speaking) there is no foundation in nature or in natural law, why a set of words upon parchment should convey the dominion of land; why the son should have the right to exclude his fellow creatures from a determinate spot of ground, because his father had done so before him, or why the occupier of a particular field or of a jewel, when lying on his death-bed, and no longer able to maintain possession, should be entitled to tell the rest of the world which of them should enjoy it after him. These inquiries, it must be owned, would be useless and even troublesome in common life. It is well if the mass of mankind will obey the laws when made, without scrutinizing too nicely into the reasons of making them."-2 Bl. Com. 2.

Verily, there is nothing new under the sun! Thomas Jefferson was but reiterating Blackstone when he said the world belongs to the living. The reformers of our day are simply asking, in pertinent manner, the questions which the lawyers and statesmen of

Sec. 274. PROTECTION TO PROPERTY AT COMMON LAW.-The common law is extremely watchful in ascertaining and protecting the right to property. Magna Charta declared that no freeman shall be disseized, or divested, of his freehold, of his liberties, or free customs but by the judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. And this declaration was enforced by many subsequent statutes to prevent the king from seizing to his own use the goods and properties of the subject. So great is the regard of the law for private property, observes Blackstone, that it will not authorize the least violation of it, even for the general good. So a road through private grounds could not be constructed without the consent of the owner, though it would be beneficial to the public. But the legislature, and it alone, could compel the individual

the past touched upon, but were too timid of tyrannical rulers to bring to the front. "The mass of mankind are to obey the laws, and not scrutinize too nicely the reasons of them." Is this not the maxim of the money kings and their educated tools? An inquiry into the reason of unjust laws is always troublesome, and reformers are at best but meddlesome fellows! Vested rights, however unjust, create no trouble as long as the persons injured submit tamely. Only when some leader, some Wat Tyler, Cromwell, or Lincoln begins to reason, and the masses awake to a sense of their wrongs through these same vested rights, does the storm come. As a result of the investigation better conditions arise, and a new civilization is born. Let the masses always scrutinize the reason and spirit of the laws and civilization will keep pace step by step with the development of human justice, and not lag a century or two behind, and have to catch up by the drastic means of revolutions and civil wars.

to acquiesce in the taking of his property for public uses upon compensation being given for the injury sustained. The legislature obliges the individual to sell his possessions to the public use for a reasonable price. (1 Bl. Com. 139.)

So in the matter of taxes, protection to private property was found in the well-guarded principle, confirmed by many charters and statutes, that no subject could be constrained to pay any aids or taxes, even for the defense of the realm or the support of government, but such as are imposed by his own consent, or that of his representatives in parliament.*

Sec. 275. PROTECTION TO PROPERTY IN THE UNITED STATES.-The Federal constitution, in the Fifth Amendment, provides that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. And this restraint is extended to the State governments by the Fourteenth Amendment. The State constitutions likewise contain provisions protecting property rights.†

*1 Bl. Com. 140. Under the subjects, "Personal Property and Real Property," in succeeding numbers of this series will be given a description of the various remedies given for a violation of property rights.

"Private property shall ever be held inviolate, but subservient to the public welfare. When taken in time of war or other public exigency, imperatively requiring its immediate seizure, or for the purpose of making or repairing roads, which shall be open to the public, without charge, a compensation shall be made to the owner, in money, and in all other cases, where private property

Property is that which is recognized as such by law. In America the law which determines what is property is for the most part the common or customary law, to which the statutes make some additions. The protection of due process of law applies to acts of governmental officers as well as those of private citizens. Executive, ministerial and judicial officers must act within the scope and authority of the power vested in them by law or their acts will not be by due process of law. (Cooley, Principles, 3d ed. 346-7.)

Sec. 276. SAME SUBJECT-THE EMINENT DOMAIN.-Both Federal and State constitutions recognize that the private right of an individual to specific property must yield to the eminent domain of government, whenever the public good requires it. But to avoid hardships and equalize the burden the owner of the property so taken is given a compensation, which by statute is usually required to be full, just, and in money.

This power of eminent domain Judge Cooley defines "as the lawful authority which exists in every sovereignty to control and regulate those rights of a public nature which pertain to its citizens in common, and to appropriate and control individual property for the pubshall be taken for public use, a compensation therefor shall first be made in money, or first secured by a deposit of money, and such compensation shall be assessed by a jury, without deduction for benefits to any property of the owner." (Const. Ohio, Art. 1, Sec. 19.)

*Walker, Am. Law, Sec. 81; In re Wells County Road, 7 O. St. 21; Cooley's Bl. Com. I, 140n.

lic benefit, as the public safety, necessity, convenience, or welfare may demand." (Principles, p. 363.) This power is exercisable by either the Federal or State government, according to the needs of government. In the exercise of powers conferred by the Constitution the Federal government may construct piers, fortresses, lighthouses, public buildings, military roads, etc., and condemn land for same. The States may provide highways, and take land for other State and municipal purposes, the limitation being, that it be taken for a public purpose, and within the sphere of the government providing for it. (Cooley, Prin. 366; U. S. v. Gettysburg Elec. Ry. Co., 160 U. S. 688; Monongahela Nav. Co. v. United States, 148 U. S. 312.)

Sec. 277. SAME SUBJECT-CONTRACTS.The provisions of the fundamental law aim to protect property in expectancy as well as in possession. Thus contracts, which are the chief species of property in expectation, are not to be impaired, when made by any future State action. See Vol. 2, Cyclopedia of Law, Sec. 172.

Sec. 278. SUBORDINATE RIGHTS MENTIONED BY BLACKSTONE.-In addition to the three great primary rights of personal security, personal liberty and private property, Blackstone observes that the constitution of England has established certain other auxiliary subordinate rights of the subject, which serve as outworks to protect and maintain inviolate the others, and does not suffer their enjoyment to depend upon the dead letter of the laws. These are: