Page "Regulatory taking" Paragraph 16

It is not likely that our founders considered the right to ownership of property as absolute.

They understood that in a community, ownership of property, indeed the very value of property itself, rested to some extent on mutual obligations.

“ Ownership in land — the most tangible, and in the early days of the Republic, the most important form of property — had never meant absolute control over that property or an unfettered right to use it in any way the owner wanted.

Traditions going back to English common law have always placed restrictions on property.

The common law doctrine of nuisance, for example, prevented owners from using their land in a way that interfered unreasonably with the rights of their neighbors.

Custom often allowed hunting on private, unenclosed land, or required that an owner allow access to rivers and lakes.

Property in the form of businesses also had regulations on them ; taverns, ferries and coach lines, for example, were often heavily regulated in both England and the North American colonies .” While our founders regarded the right to own property as sacrosanct, they certainly did not regard that right as implying immunity from regulation.