The history of property, according to Anglo-Saxon theory, the idea
of property is defined by a license given by the ones who hold authority in
many case Monarchy own the land and was devolved to the vassals, but, common land concept was kept and introduce in
Roman Law, where certain areas was designated common area to be of animal
grazing.
In the case of the British Island the Norman invasion in the 10th Century, by William
the Conqueror, took the common land and used to reward loyalty, and for the
first time the Saxon lord had to pay tax tribute. The consequence for almost
500 years the peasantry was in total subjugation, the difference between the
Spanish and the British colonization of the Americas, while the Spanish colonization
was under the Monarchy, the British the colonization was under private
chapter in the Monarchy name.
The objective of British colonization was land and for Spain
wealth, Portugal commerce. In the case of British was peasantry, for the right to
passages to the colony was seven years of servitude, but in the end was the right
of land (See Carson-Studies in Mutualist Political Economics, 2004-Aticopyrigth),
in other words the colony serve is a releases pressure from political-economic
unrest, and the British Monarchy maintains control of the new land and the
loyalty of the Gentry.
While under Christian and Islamic law there is protection to
property law, the idea of property is right and acknowledgment of this right was
codified under Napoleon Code. Property government’s role in protecting property
depends upon an idea of right was express by as James Wilson, U.S. Supreme
Court Justice and professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania, in 1790
and 1791, undertook a survey of the philosophical grounds of American property
law. Wilson proceeds from two premises:
i.
Every crime includes an injury:
every injury includes a violation of a right, (Lectures, III, ii.)
ii.
Wilson traces the history of property in his
essay On the History of Property. In
his lecture, Of the natural rights of
individuals (Lectures II, xii), he articulates, whether man exists for the
sake of government, or government for the sake of man – a distinction which may
derive from, or lead to, the question of natural and absolute rights, and
whether property is one of them. Wilson states: In his unrelated state, man has a natural right to his property, to his
character, to liberty, and to safety. Wilson asks whether: the primary and principal object in the
institution of government… was… to acquire new rights by human establishment?
Or was it, by a human establishment, to acquire a new security for the
possession or the recovery of those rights….
Wilson in On the History of
Property, states: Property is the
right or lawful power, which a person has to a thing.
Wilson divides the right into three degrees: possession, the lowest;
possession and use; and, possession, use, and disposition – the highest.
Further:
Man is intended for
action. Useful and skillful industry is the soul of an active life. But industry
should have her just reward. That reward is property, for of useful and active
industry, property is the natural result.
From this simple reasoning he is able to present the conclusion that
exclusive, as opposed to communal property, is to be preferred, while Wilson survey
to accounts to Sparta misunderstand and underestimated the origin of property—force
use—see, Derrida Lecture in Cardozo Law School about Deconstruction and the Law-especially Pascal
the origin of the la is force and mystique of the law is based in the force who
control the authority to carry and enforce the will, assigned the right, not by
consensus or right, by simple used of force to achieve the possessions or
ownership.
