this distinction and to keep it clearly in mind has led to confusion,
even on the part of legislatures, learned judges, and able economists.
If property is said to be (for example) a house and lot and at
the same time the right to that house and lot, then there are two
properties at once for each economic good, viz.: the object itself and
the right to it.[3]

This difficulty could be avoided by the consistent definition and use
of terms. A material economic object is a good, is a form of wealth.
The usance of wealth and the service of laborers at the moment
rendered constitute forms of income. The right of ownership, i.e., the
right to control, use, or direct the use of wealth and services, is
property, which is therefore the right to receive incomes. The value
of the incomes of an individual constitute his capital. Goods, rights
to goods, value of rights to goods: these three things are clearly
distinguishable.

§ 4. #Some theories of private property#. Various theories have been
framed to explain the origin and to justify the existence of private
property. The occupation theory is that property is based upon
the priority of claim of one who finds wealth without an owner and
appropriates it. This is not an explanation of the property rights
that are arising every moment, nor does it give a logical reason for
the continuance of ancient property rights. It is a statement applying
to a case that has rarely happened, the settlement of an unoccupied
territory.

More adequate to explain many cases is the conquest theory, that
property is based on force; for nearly all lands to-day are occupied
by the descendants of conquering invaders who took the lands and