Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

forcing the less productive land int.o use, Ingalls conten
d edthat the revers e wa s t rue: the ex i s tenceof r en t
forced the use of less productive land. While the need
for land increased with the increase in population,
Ingalls believed that the title-holders to the land,
backed by the power of the government, were able to
demand payment for the mere right to use land that
w0 u I dot her w i seli e f a I 1ow • Th us r en t the a r g ued, wa s
aresuI t 0 f go v e. r n men t a I pro tee t. i on of land tit Ies
beyond that of occupancy and use.
If, then, land titles were based on the principles
of equity, viz., the exchange of labor for an equivallent
amount of labor, ownership could not extend beyond
actual occupancy and rent would be eliminated. Not
only would implementation of the occupancy principle
eliminate the problem of wealth concentration but
I n g a I I s eve n bel i eve d t hat i t wo uIds0 decen t r a lize
1and 0 wn e r s hip a s to rna k e Wa r r en' s Iabo r c he c k s Ystem
practical. Ingalls proposed a gradual transition from
legal "ownership" to actual "occupancy," where the curr
e n tie g a lown e r s 0 f Iand wo u I d ret a i nthe i r proper t y
rig h t suntil the i r dea t hs, aft e r wh i c h proper t y righ t s
would be determined by use or occupancy.(56)
Ingalls' view that land holdings should be limited
b y 0 c c u pa n c y i san imp 0 r tan t ref i nerne n t 0 f Wa r r en's
principle that labor-cost should be the limit of price.
It is also significant in its impact on subsequent anarchist
thought. "Occupation-and-use-tenure of land,"
says Martin, "a nearly-forgotten theory in non-radical
circles, became firmly established in anarchist teaching
from the time of J. K. Ingalls."(57)
The only major nineteenth century philosophical
a n archis t not a d her' i n g tot h e view t hat 1and own e r s
should be 1 imi ted by occupancy was Lysander Spooner.
In 1853, Spooner published his The Law of Intellectual
Property which was intended to demonstrate that individuals
had, by natural law, perpetual property right
ina 1 1 proper ty, tang i ble or in tangi ble. Star t i ng from
his Lockean natural rights position of individual self
own e r s hip and, byex ten s ion, 0 ne 's own e r s hip 0 f the
fruits of his labor, Spooner maintained that:
The . p r inc i pie 0 f proper t y is, t hat the own e r
of a thing has absolute dominion over it,
whether he have it in actual possession or
not, and whether he himself wish to use it or
not;· t hat noon e ha s a rig h t tota ke po ssession
of it, or use it, without his consent ...
196