Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T15:33:21.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Property Rights and Institutions: Congress and the California Land Act 1851

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2009

Karen B. Clay
Karen B. Clay
Affiliation:
Karen B. Clay is Visiting Assistant Professor of Economics, The Heinz School, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, and Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, University of Toronto, 150 St. George St., Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Governments frequently establish institutions to govern the transition in property rights when they acquire territory or experience radical changes in political regimes. By examining a specific example—the United States' acquisition of California from Mexico in 1848, this article investigates general questions about these institutions and institutional choice. The article fmds that the specific institution that Congress chose for California best balanced the interests of the federal government, American owners of land grants, and American squatters and settlers. Further, despite the lobbying, litigation, and delay associated with the institution, the institution was more efficient than prior institutions.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 59 , Issue 1 , March 1999 , pp. 122 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

American State Papers, Public Lands. Washington, DC, 1832–1861.Google Scholar
Alston, Lee J., Libecap, Gary D., and Schneider, Robert. “The Determinants and Impact of Property Rights: Land Titles on the Brazilian Frontier.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organizations 12, no. 1 (1996): 25–61.Google Scholar
Bancroft, Hubert Howe. History of California. San Francisco: History Company, 1874–1890.Google Scholar
Bean, Walton, and Rawls, James J.California: An Interpretive History. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy. “Property Rights and Investment Incentives: Theoiy and Evidence from Ghana.” Journal of Political Economy 103, no. 5 (1995): 903–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, J. N. “The Indians and the California Private Land Grants.” Berkeley, CA: Bancroft Library, 1966.Google Scholar
Bradfute, Richard Wells. The Court of Private Land Claims: The Adjudication of Spanish and Mexican Land Grant Titles, 1891–1904. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Briceland, Alan V. “Land, Law, and Politics on the Tombigbee Frontier, 1804.” The Alabama Review 33, no. 2 (1980): 92–124.Google Scholar
California State Agricultural Society. Transactions of the Calfornia State Agricultural Society. Sacramento, 1866.Google Scholar
Clay, Karen B. “The Cost of Uncertainty: Squatters, Contracts, and Conflict in Frontier California.” Unpublished manuscript, 1997.Google Scholar
Cleland, Robert Glass. The Cattle on a Thousand Hills: Southern Calfornia, 1850–80. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, 1941.Google Scholar
Colton, Walter. Three Years in California [1846–1849]. New York: A. S. Barnes, 1850. Congressional Globe, various dates.Google Scholar
Cowan, Robert G.Ranchos of California: A List of Spanish Concessions 1775–1822 and Mexican Grants 1822–1846. Los Angeles: Historical Society of Southern California, 1977.Google Scholar
Cummings, Homer S., and McFarland, Carl. Federal Justice: Chapters in the History of Justice and the Federal Executive. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937.Google Scholar
Ebright, Malcolm. Land Grants and Lawsuits in Northern New Mexico. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Fritzche, Bruno. “San Francisco 1846–1848: The Coming of the Land Speculator.” California Historical Society Quarterly 51 (1972): 17–34.Google Scholar
Gates, Paul Wallace. “Private Land Claims in the South.” Journal of Southern History 22 (1956): 183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gates, Paul Wallace, History of Public Land Law Development. Washington, DC: Zenger Publishing, 1978.Google Scholar
Gates, Paul Wallace, Land and Law in Calfornia. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
George, Henry. Our Land and Land Policy. New York: Doubleday and McClure Company, 1871.Google Scholar
Greaser, Galen D., and de la Teja, Jesus F.. “Quieting Title to Spanish and Mexican Land Grants in the Trans-Nueces: The Bourland and Miller Commission, 1850–1852.” Southwestern Historical Quarterly 95, no. 4 (1992): 444–64.Google Scholar
Gwin, William “Speech of Mr. Gwin, of California, in reply to Mr. Benton. Senate, Thursday, 2 January 1851.” San Marino, CA: Huntington Library, 1851.Google Scholar
Hague, Harlan, and Langum, David J.. Thomas O. Larkin: A Life of Patriotism and Profit in Old California. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Halleck, Henry W. “Report.” House Ex. Doc., 31 Cong., 2 sess., 5, no. 17, serial 573 (1850).Google Scholar
Hamilton, Holman. Prologue to Conflict, The Crisis and Compromise of 1850. Lexington: University of Kentucky, 1964.Google Scholar
Hittell, , Henry, Theodore. History of Caltfornia. San Francisco: N.J. Stone & Company, 1898.Google Scholar
Jackson, SheldonA British Ranchero in Old Calfornia: The Life and limes of Henry Dalton and the Rancho Azusa. Glendale and Azusa: CA, The Arthur H. Clark Company and Azusa Pacific College, 1977.Google Scholar
Jones, William Carey. “Report of the Secretary of the Interior.” Senate Ex. Doc., 31 Cong., 2 sess., 3, no. 18, serial 589 (1850).Google Scholar
Jones, William Carey, Condition of Real Properly in California. San Francisco: Gideon, 1855.Google Scholar
Larkin, Thomas Oliver. The Larkin Papers: Personal, Business, and Official Correspondence of Thomas Oliver Larkin. Berkeley: University of California, 1951–1968.Google Scholar
Paul, Rodman W.. “The Beginnings of Agriculture in California: Innovation vs. Continuity.” California Historical Society Quarterly 52 (1973): 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, Lemont K., “Private Land Claims in Missouri.” Missouri Historical Review 50, no. 2 (1956): 132–144, 271–286, 387–399.Google Scholar
Robinson, W. W.Land in California. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1948.Google Scholar
Surveyor General. “Report of the Surveyor General of California.” Report of the Commissioner of the General Land Office for the Year 1871. Washington, DC: GPO, 1871.Google Scholar
Swisher, Carl Brent. The Taney Period, 1836–1864. New York: McMillan, 1974Google Scholar
Treat, Payson Jackson. The National Land System, 1785–1820. New York: Russell & Russell, 1910.Google Scholar
Whatley, George C., and Cook, Sylvia. “The East Florida Land Commission: A Study Frustration.” Florida Historical Quarterly 50, no. 1 (1971): 39–52.Google Scholar
Wright, Doris Marion. A Yanhee in Mexican Calfornia: Abel Stearns, 1798–1848. Santa Barbara, CA: Wallace Hebberd, 1977.Google Scholar