THE IMPORTANCE OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN AMERICA
“What gives them the right to keep people out?”
“The law of property, which is the cornerstone of
any civilization worth its name.”[1]
Why did Little Rock’s leaders specifically target West Rock? In order to fully understand the value West Rock had to Little Rock leaders and their future plans for Little Rock’s westward expansion, one must understand the importance of land in America. Land, and its ownership, was, and still is, is perhaps the most important asset of generational wealth in the United States. Peerage, or the practice of bestowing titles and land ownership on worthy white men, was one of the reasons English citizens fled their native country for the continent of North America. The founding fathers, themselves British citizens, possessed such beliefs.
Peerage was a subject often debated in British politics.[2] With a title bestowed by the English sovereign came land. And that land would be passed from son to son, causing generational wealth only a few families could obtain.[3] News of free land and the promise of the release from a single sovereign-led nation proved too tempting to pass up. That there were peoples with thousands of years of history and culture occupying the lands was of no importance. As far back as 1540, this can be seen. Prominent English lawyer Richard Hakluyt wrote overseas colonization had three ends:
1. To plant Christian religion.
2. To trafficke.[4]
3. To conquer.[5]
In his document, Hakluyt wrote pages and pages of plans regarding the “soile and climate” of the new land. Wine, oil, sugar cane, herbs, figs, sassafras, cedar, hogs, and materials for clothes, baskets, barrels, “poldavies,” and mining were just a few of the plans he laid out for consideration.[6] The sheer volume of his document demonstrated that, from the beginning, land ownership would be a pivotal, and therefore crucial element, of the new world. Not only did it prove to be an economic backbone of the civilization, it would eventually become the foundation of citizenship in America. Land ownership became the basis for the democracy upon which the nation would be based: the right to vote. When one considers the importance of voting in a democracy, it cannot be lightly considered. The one person, one vote is the very foundation of our government. This is easily seen through the history of the United States. At its beginning, only land-owning, white males had the right to vote. Gradually, all Americans were granted the right to vote.
White, land-owning males: November 24, 1789, No Amendment, First Presidential Election,
African-American males: July 9, 1868, 14th Amendment.
Women: August 18, 1920, 19th Amendment.
Native Americans: The Synder Act of 1924.
Meanwhile, for Native Americans, by 1816, Secretary of War Crawford on Trade and Intercourse, wanted to bring Indians into “the pale of civilization,” especially through the institution of private property and land ownership. In 1834, under the banner of the Trade and Intercourse Act with Indian tribes, a new code of Indian policy began: “…in order to promote civilization among the friendly Indian tribes…the Pres. of the US…shall cause them to be furnished with useful domestic animals, and implements of husbandry, and with goods or money…” but not land ownership.[7]
Missouri Senator Carl Schurz, who would later become Secretary of the Interior from 1877 to 1881, argued the virtues of land ownership in 1880. A German-born political refugee, he understood the undeniable connection of land ownership and citizenship:
“It will inspire the Indians with a feeling of assurance as to the permanency of their ownership of the lands they occupy and cultivate; it will give them a clear and legal standing as landed proprietors in the courts of law; it will secure to them for the first time fixed homes under the protection of the same law under which white men own theirs; it will eventually open to settlement by white the large tracts of land now belonging to the reservation, but not used by the Indians.”[8]
The next year, he approached the subject again when he admitted “…it cannot be denied that the conveyance of individual fee simple title to Indians would be a hazardous experiment, except in the case of those most advanced in civilization…”[9] The solution, he proposed, was for legal provisions “making the title to their farm tracts inalienable for a certain period of time, say twenty-five years, during which the Indians will have sufficient opportunity to acquire more provident habits, to become somewhat acquainted with the ways of the world, and to learn how to take care of themselves.” The use of the word “inalienable” was a direct connection to the Declaration of Independence which famously stated the self-evident truths that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…”
City leaders who felt West Rock impeded the American tradition of progress, regardless of the price paid by those who stood in the way, doubtlessly had the American tradition of land ownership by those they deemed different from their own ideas. These groups of people faced a campaign of relentless prosecution until plans were confirmed. Labels such as “less fortunate, slums, blight, and ignorance” have been applied since the first white man stepped on the soil that would become known as the United States of America.
[1] Daisy to Mr. Carson, Downton Abbey, PBS, Season 6, Episode 6.
[2] According author Clyve Jones, the only detailed accounts of 17th-century peerage considered by political or parliamentary historians include: “Venice Preserv’d; or A Plot Discovered: The Political and Social Context of the Peerage Bill of 1719” in A Pillar of the Constitution: The House of Lords in British Politics, 1640–1784, ed. Clyve Jones (1989), 79–112; Colin Brooks, “The Debate on the Peerage Bill,1719” in Bicameralisme: Tweekamerstelsel vroeger en nu, ed. H. W. Blom, W. P. Blockmans, and H. de Schepper (The Hague, 1992), 261–77; E. R. Turner, “The Peerage Bill of 1719,” EHR, xxviii (1913), 243–59; The British Aristocracy and the Peerage Bill of 1719, ed. John F. Naylor (1968); and Clyve Jones, “The Postponement of the Peerage Bill in April 1719 Revisited,” Parliamentary History, xxiv (2005), 226–30.
[3] The system of passing to the eldest son is called “male preference primogeniture.” It came from the Act of Settlement of 1701. The British royal family followed the system until the Succession to the Crown Act which Queen Elizabeth II signed in 2013. In addition to a title and land, the eldest son also became a member of the House of Lords. The House of Lords Act of 1999 excluded most hereditary peers.
[4] To carry on trade.
[5] Richard Hakluyt (The Elder), “Inducements to the Liking of the Voyage Intended towards Virginia in 40. and 42. Degrees, 1585.” Envisioning America: English Plans for the Colonization of North America, 1580-1640, Part of The Bedford Series in History and Culture Series, Peter C. Mancall, ed. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1995), 39.
[6] Ibid. Poldavy was a coarse canvas used for sailcloth.
[7] Carl Schurz, “Recommendation of Land in Severalty,” in Americanizing the American Indians: Writings by the "Friends of the Indian" 1880-1900, Francis Paul Prucha, ed., (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 85. “Recommendation of Land in Severalty,” from Report of November 1, 1880 in House Executive Document No. 1, part 5, 46 Congress, 3 session, serial 1959.
[8] Carl Schurz, “Present Aspects of the Indian Problem,” in Americanizing the American Indians: Writings by the "Friends of the Indian" 1880-1900, Francis Paul Prucha, ed., (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 21. “Present Aspects of the Indian Problem” originally published in the North American Review, Vol. CXXXIII, July 1881.
[9] Documents of United States Indian Policy, Third Edition, Francis Paul Prucha, ed. (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2000).
Land ownership, citizenship, and voting rights proved difficult for the former slaves of America. After passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865, the question of citizenship regarding former slaves had to be confronted and answered. The 14th Amendment, passed in 1868, declared all persons born in the United States were citizens. But that did not answer the question of the vote for African-American men. In 1870, the 15th Amendment granted them the right to vote. However, the journey toward full voting rights proved to be arduous, contentious and long .
In 1967’s Black Panther Ten-Point Plan, the so-called militant group listed a detailed program to address the perceived wrongs perpetrated on the African-American race, as well as other people of color. The ten points are listed below. The full text on items 3, 4, and 10 are included as they follow the abstract of this paper.
There are some thought-provoking themes in the list such as the use of the word “we” and, more importantly, the reference to the Declaration of Independence to those not included in the 1776 document.