The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-05-17

state. Ninety years ago the Legislature, blinded
probably by passions OF the revolution, passed an
act declaring land to be held not In fee but in al
I0dtun. In that release OF certain conditions OF
property In the soil the blow dealt at the Crown
goes TO vitiate OF the right held In land by
the sovereignty IN the form OF an estate In re-
mainder. The rights assumed by this people are,
however, not only those OF succession The rev0-
luton plucked all that belonged TO the public from
the grasp of both king and baron. The sovereignty
which 1t bestowed Is supreme In ell the pientude
OF the peoples pleasure. 1t halts not at the limi
tatlons set upon 1t by either the mobiles OF England
the Legislature OF New York, but goes on to the
full extent claimed by william OF Normandy, 30 far
as his assertions OF sovereignty are sustained by
natural justice and democratic policy. By suces-
sion this people hold In land the rights OF "Lord
Paramount" OF q "Universal Lord" OF an "Ulti-
mate Lord.n What do these rights cover, where
can they apply. private property In the soil 60,
as claimed by commentators, from the use to the
substance Again, the original title vests In the
State. Much OF this being proper to the SOW
ereignty THAT original title cannot be transferred
wbcs s M ss sn aas tnat
place, no existence, II the conveyance to the In
diyidual extend beyond the use to he substance.
some reservations held by the sovereign in land
are express. Including the right OF way. the right
OF condemnation, tue right OF escheat the right OF
forfeiture these amount in fact to ownership. EN-.
DTacing, as these reservations do the right OF tax
alton, that ownership covers in ne teeth OF even
as broadly as the exaction OF peppercorn or mill
tary service, that the Ian tlord Is but tenant OF
Sne sovereign me public being therefore. the
ance carry with 1t beyond the right OF perpetual
use the soil is part OF the sovereignty. Its pro,
quot can DC transferred by the individual to an
other realm; but, even where the Strengthening OF
fence would make the change. the soil itself can.
Gent to show that the distribution in the title to
iand stands tnus:-The rights OF ownership belong
pa % n nd IN
country Is understood by both parties to be nomt-
nal The consideration OF their conveyance Is, IN
withheld rom production in presence OF famine,
the title can be treated as null and void. Like
corporate franchise, 1t becomes, not only In natu-
raj right but also BY failure OF consideration, sub
ject IN that case to forfeiture by non user.
Private right in land Is limited In reason and the
good or society to It's use And this use Is subject
TO restrictions, to even forfeiures Tor the public
good. But ON grounds OF justice and policy It
ries with it, nevertheless the right growing up
under Its exercise the tenants right to the value OF
M s 5 By IS of
those Interpretations or notifications OF = baro-
NAL tenure called for in the Justice and reason OF
eighty. That remainder in the value OF city
iot belongs Of right TO the people. is demonstrate
owner as he Is called, has, 1t Is true, given the lot
its real value but can it be said that is he who
their presence, their industry, their taxes, their
legislation, their protection, this market value in
me people TO urge absolute, total ownership IN
the lot IN Justification OF the apprO priarOn oil that
excess exc by the individual is . violation OF right
the sovereign. The pubic remainder IN the
prices OF realty may be shown polntediy by special
Illustration. In Hudson county, New Jersey, q
boulevard had been undertaken az the cost OF the
people. II the expenditure contemplated had
been made, estimates showed that private parties
holding titles on the route would have been bene-
nted by an enhancement OF what is called their
property to the extent OF several millions. BY
that enhancement OF market values-arslng as 1t
would have done from an expenditure OF the credit
OF the publtc-wOuld have belonged, in natural
justice or in republican rendering OF law, to
few individuals In Brooklyn certain area Of
land was ten years ago wilderness, not saleaDle
at over lew hundred dollars an acre. Public
money to the amount Of millions was applied to
you, the market value OF that wilderness rose to
$4,000 or S4o, 900 an acre On what principle OF
"owners" Of those wild lands became possessed OF
right In them at the value OF Prospect Park lots
price ninety-nine hundredths of which is the pro-
duct OF the money and enterprise OF the people :
Property should 1t is true, be invioable. Its pro-
lection to the last limit OF its right does not, how
beyond properly there is clearly another Fight in
realty, right in remainder, which belongs TO the
rlgnt represents an actual. ascertainabe guam
thy. Borrowing term used in a somewhat differ
neutrality-suspicious. the difference between
the real and the market value-is designated here,
the commonly in realty cannot it may be objected,
be asserted because OF innocent purchase. mn0-
cent purchase was not an tnsuperable obstacle
to the abolition OF slavery. And there Is degree
ofinnocence which public policy cannot suppose.
1t certainly cannot suppose an innocence which
amounts to moral Obiqutty. The vendor OF city
lot may have sold 1t on the understanding or rep
resentation that 1t was exempt from taxation and
from all public rights and reservations, the COM
monty included; but whether this was done in
fraud or accepted In "innocence,' the sale cannot
vtiate one little OF the rights OF the sovereign.
Rural prices are but little II anything
in excess Of the value OF property. The.
'denial' in settling and clearing tract Of
land in the wilderness Is q prinld J1cie justinca-
ton OF sucn price as $50 an acre. But the case
is very widely different in cities, where land sells
In the market at the rate per acre OF several mill
ions. propose, therefore, that, holding agrcul-
tural property 10 constitute right, good to the
full extent OF the market price, the public shall
take steps now to come into the enjoyment OF that
which passes in city values, beyond property into
commonly.
An onicial assessment OF oil city realty ought to
be made on the basis OF real values. Limiting the
interest on the capital represented by those values
at the maximum allowed on money, the product
of that interest added to that or o small percent
age for maintenance, on the value or each parcel
OF property, would supply Just limit on the prt-
vate right to rent. The individual protected in
the use OF his property and in the full value OF It's
improvements. the public would come thus into
the enjoyment or Its remalnder-its commonly.
By q simple justice. Q benefcenE Intervention OF
the sovereignty between q baronial tenure and
the rights OF the people, labor would become in
this way lIgntened OF burdens that now weigh
crushingy on It's energies by reduction OF rent
taxation from thirty forty per cent Of Its TOLL to
the rate paid under that head IN Europe, eight or
ten per cent.
Reserving for my next, my last letter, the ques-
ton or restrictions individual wealth. have
'Ae '-'o' - N' N. BUTT HEwsoN.
NEW YORK, May II, 1874.