Takings and Compensation in Early America: The Colonial Highway Acts in Social Context

American Journal of Legal History

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 1996, Pages

  Hart, John F ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0345880323     PISSN: 00029319     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/845622     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
2. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
3. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
4. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
5. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
6. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
7. See, e.g., James W. Ely, Jr., The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights 10-81 (1992); idem., 'That due satisfaction may be made:' the Fifth Amendment and the Origins of the Compensation Principle, 36 Am. J. Legal Hist. 1 (1992); William Michael Treanor, Note, The Origins and Original Significance of the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment, 94 Yale L.J. 694 (1985); Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1780-1860 at 63-85 (1977); Harry N. Scheiber, Property Law, Expropriation and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789-1910, 33 J. Econ. Hist. 232 (1973); William B. Stoebuck, A General Theory of Eminent Domain, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 553, 555-68, 572-83 (1972); William Weston Fisher III, The Law of the Land: An Intellectual History of American Property Doctrine, 1776-1880 at 303-53 (1991) (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University).
8. See, e.g., 4 Nichols' The Law of Eminent Domain § 12.01 at 12-37 (Julius L. Sackman ed., 3d ed. 1990) (compensating according to market value "was recognized in colonial times" and "has never been disputed"); Stoebuck, supra note 1 at 583 ("early state courts were justified in their claim that compensation was a principle of the common law - of immemorable usage"); Ely, Origins of the Compensation Principle, supra note 1 at 4 ("Far from representing an innovation, the takings clause simply codified a long-standing constitutional principle").
9. See, e.g., 4 Nichols' The Law of Eminent Domain § 12.01 at 12-37 (Julius L. Sackman ed., 3d ed. 1990) (compensating according to market value "was recognized in colonial times" and "has never been disputed"); Stoebuck, supra note 1 at 583 ("early state courts were justified in their claim that compensation was a principle of the common law - of immemorable usage"); Ely, Origins of the Compensation Principle, supra note 1 at 4 ("Far from representing an innovation, the takings clause simply codified a long-standing constitutional principle").
10. See, e.g., 4 Nichols' The Law of Eminent Domain § 12.01 at 12-37 (Julius L. Sackman ed., 3d ed. 1990) (compensating according to market value "was recognized in colonial times" and "has never been disputed"); Stoebuck, supra note 1 at 583 ("early state courts were justified in their claim that compensation was a principle of the common law - of immemorable usage"); Ely, Origins of the Compensation Principle, supra note 1 at 4 ("Far from representing an innovation, the takings clause simply codified a long-standing constitutional principle").
11. Ely, Guardian of Every Other Right, supra note 1 at 10. See Harry N. Scheiber, The Jurisprudence - and Mythology - of Eminent Domain in American Legal History, in Liberty, Property, and Government: Constitutional Interpretation Before the New Deal 217-20 (Ellen Frankel Paul & Howard Dickman eds. 1989).
12. Ely, Guardian of Every Other Right, supra note 1 at 10. See Harry N. Scheiber, The Jurisprudence - and Mythology - of Eminent Domain in American Legal History, in Liberty, Property, and Government: Constitutional Interpretation Before the New Deal 217-20 (Ellen Frankel Paul & Howard Dickman eds. 1989).