James Wilson， U.S. Supreme Court Justice and professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania， in 1790 and 1791， undertook a survey of the philosophical grounds of American property law. He proceeds from two premises：“Every crime includes an injury： every injury includes a violation of a right.”（ Lectures， III， ii.） The government s role in protecting property depends upon an idea of right. Wilson traces the history of property in his essay On theHistory of Property. In his lecture，“Of the natural rights of individuals”，（ Lectures， II， xii） he articulates related contemporary theory.
That theory was brought to a focus on the question of whether man exists for the sake of government， or government for the sake of man—a distinction which may derive from， or lead to， the question of natural and absolute rights， and whether property is one of them. While he doubts this is so， he nonetheless states：“In his unrelated state， man has a natural right to his property， to his character， to liberty， and to safety.”James Wilson asks whether“the primary and principal object in the institution of government. . . was. . . to acquire new rights by human establishment. Or was it， by a human establishment， to acquire a new security for the possession or the recovery of those rights . . . ？”He indicates a preference for the latter.
In the opening sentence of On the History of Property， he states quite clearly：“Property is the right or lawful power， which a person has to a thing.”He then divides the right into three degrees：possession—the lowest；possession and use；and， possession， use， and disposition—the highest. Further， he states：“Man is intended for action. Useful and skilful industry is the soul of an active life. But industry should have her just reward. That reward is property， for useful and active industry， property is the natural result.”From this simple reasoning he is able to present the conclusion that exclusive， as opposed to communal property，is to be preferred.Wilson does， however， give a survey of communal property arrangements in history， not only in colonial Virginia but also ancient Sparta.
Classification
Property law is characterized by a great deal of historical continuity and technical terminology. The basic distinction in common law systems is between real property（ land） and personal property （ chattels） .
Before the mid-19th century， the principles governing the devolution of real property and personal property on intestacy were quite different. Though this dichotomy does nothave the same significanceanymore， the distinction is still fundamental because of the essential differences between the two categories. An obvious example is the fact that land is immovable， and thus the rules that govern its use must differ. A further reason for the distinction is that legislation is often drafted employing the traditional terminology.
The division of land and chattels has been criticized as being not satisfactory as a basis for categorizing the principles of property law since it concentrates attention not on the proprietary interests themselves but on the objects of those interests. Moreover， in thecase of fixtures， chattels which are affixed to or placed on land may become part of the land.
Real property is generally sub-classified into：
Corporeal hereditament—tangible real property （ land） ；
Incorporeal hereditament—intangible real property such as an easement of way.
Possession
The concept of possession developed from a legal system whose principal concern was to avoid civil disorder. The general principle is thata person in possession of land or goods， even as a wrongdoer， is entitled to take action againstanyone interfering with the possession unless the person interfering is able to demonstrate a superior right to do so.
In the United Kingdom， the Torts （ Interference with Goods）Act 1977 has significantly amended the law relating to wrongful interference with goods and abolished some longstanding remedies and doctrines.
Transfer of property
The most usual way of acquiring an interest in property is as the result of a consensual transaction with the previous owner，for example，a sale or a gift. Dispositions by will may also be regarded as consensual transactions， since the effect of a will is to provide for the distribution of the deceased person s property to nominated beneficiaries. A person may also obtain an interest in property under a trust established for his or her benefit by the owner of the property.
It is also possible for property to pass from one person to another independently of the consent of the property owner. For example， this occurs when a person dies intestate， goes bankrupt， or has the property taken in execution of a court judgment.
Priority
Different parties may claim an interest in property by mistake or fraud， with the claims being inconsistent of each other. For example， the party creating or transferring an interest may have a valid title， but intentionally or negligently creates several interests wholly or partially inconsistent with each other. A court resolves the dispute by adjudicating the priorities of the interests. But according to the Indian property law， it defines that the“transfer of property”means an act by which a living person conveys property， in present or in future， to one or more other living persons， or to himself and one or more other living persons； and“to transfer property”is to perform such act.
Lease
Historically， leases served many purposes， and the regulation varied according to intended purposes and the economic conditions of the time. Leaseholds， for example， were mainly granted for agriculture until the late 18th century and early 19th century， when the growth of cities made the leasehold an important form of landholding in urban areas.
