648 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



interfere and take the land occupied by such, individual, as the 

 whole community acting in common as owners might have ejected 

 the first taker, yet on the principle of natural justice and moral 

 right it can do so only upon reimbursing the occupant for all 

 improvements to the land that is, for all the product of labor 

 expended upon it, including that which he has become possessed 

 of by purchase. Since all the value in land is due to the employ- 

 ment of capital and labor, such reimbursement should equal the 

 present commercial value of the land to the occupant (owner). 

 Upon this naturally just and moral principle rests the constitu- 

 tional restriction to eminent domain, that private property shall 

 not be taken for public use without just compensation. 



Nor can I see that, because land occupied by an individual may 

 have a value beyond the value of the labor expended upon it, by 

 reason of its proximity to other lands upon which greater wealth 

 has been expended by other individuals, the injustice of depriva- 

 tion is lessened. The same rule of reasoning applies to this un- 

 earned increment as applies to the actual labor value of the land. 

 The present owner has acquired it by the exchange of his capital, 

 which was the product of his labor elsewhere, and it is really as 

 much a value made in the land by the expenditure of capital and 

 labor as that represented by the actual labor of the first occupant. 

 If so, it is included in the present commercial value of the land. 



And why should land alone be deprived of this unearned in- 

 crement ? Other possessions receive a borrowed value from ex- 

 traneous circumstances, such as the occurrence of war, change of 

 fashion, etc., and no one suggests that it is not a true value to 

 which the property or commodity is entitled. 



To recapitulate : 



By natural law land is owned by all men in common. 



The first taker or occupant might rightfully appropriate so 

 much to his exclusive use as a proper use thereof permitted. 



His possession, to the exclusion of every one else, might con- 

 tinue so long as he used the land, or while he was using it. 



Upon possession ceasing, his right to use it ceased, and the 

 land was again held in common, subject to be again appropriated 

 for use. 



Insecurity in the use, since the occupant's labor added to the 

 soil what before it was devoid of a commercial value necessi- 

 tated a more substantial tenure, a sort of property in the soil 

 which is called private ownership. 



To secure this to individuals, social governments and social 

 laws sprang into being. 



These latter, either by common usage long established and 

 acquiesced in, or by express provision, not only recognize but 

 assert the law of nature in respect to property in land. 



