Pioche daily record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1872-1876, 1874-08-22
RIGHTS OF PROPERTY.

Newspapers, either through ignorance
or interest, do some times promulgate
some extraordinary doctrines, though that
perhaps is Identifying such chimeras too
much, the term notions. is more applica.
BILE. One of the latest instances Of this
journalistic folly has been exhibited by
the San Francisco Post and re-echoed
by the Carson Appeal. II appears that
the owners and builders of the great
hotel now being erected in San Fran.
cisco, want more room and wish to &C.
quire the title to some additional land.
The proprietors Of the desired property
ask very high price for it, and this is
what excites the ire of the Post and it
airs it folly as follows.
We want q law which, in cases like
this, would permit the valuation and
condemnation of ground necessary for
improvements which would benefit the
whole city, as the Palace Hotel will
benefit it. The title of land is only
conventional one at the best, and no one
should be permitted to hold it to the
public detriment.
Judging from this. the Post wants q
law to the effect that when any opulent
individual or wealthy corporation wants
any one else's property, they can get it
aoleas uo,ens. We would tell the Post
aud its echo, the Appeal, that the right
of small property-holder is just as sacred
in the eye of the law as those owning
acres by the million. That that inviola-
bility is just as necessary for the posses
sions of the great proprietor as it is of
the small one. And if the rights of the
latter are attacked, those Of their more
wealthy brethren will soon be endang-
cred. These are elementary principles in
municipal law: First, that private prop
erty shall not be taken, except for public
use; second, that such property shall
not be taken until fair compensation
has been ascertainei and paid. Prop
erty is taken for streets, roads both
ordinary and rally, and other purposes,
but all have an actual or quasi public
purpose, and from the use Of which 1t
is supposed that the community will de-
rive benefit. OF course, as in the case
Of railways, this ultimate benefit is fire.
quently lacking. but that does not affect
the principle and is owing to defects in
reducing them to practice. These are
the well understood and settled rules
which govern such matters, and in view
of them is it not singular to hear public
journals showing their mischievous
ignorance by lamenting that a pri-
vate enterprise cannot be permitted
to gobble its smaller and weaker
neighbors, whether they wish it or not.
Even in despotic country like Prussia,
more than hundred and twenty years
ago, this principle was asserted by the
Courts and respected by the sovereign Of
the country. Who has not heard Of the
miller of Potsdam, who would not sell
his mill to Frederick, his sovereign? The
latter tried brides and menaces, but the
sturdy miller would not sell. and his in.
dependence was acknowledged and re-
spected by his ruler, who, if he had
chosen, could have taken the property
vi ct armis, with nothing but his OWE
conscience to gainsay him. This oc
cured before the United States was
nation, and under potentate whose viii
and that only was law. Yet at til,
present era, within the territory Of tn,
great Republic, public journals are found
to advocate proceedings so tyrannical, 81
subversive of the rights Of persons ant
property that an autocrat Of the last cen
fury, who ruled by divine right, wa
ashamed to enforce them, because de
structive of the best interest of society
Seeing this, one cannot but come to tn
conclusion that there is no fool or wicke
folly but will find q journal silly enougl
to praise and defend them or it.