What do you think?
Rate this book
Property Rules: Political Economy in Chicago, 1833-1872
In Property Rules , Robin L. Einhorn uses City Council records-previously thought destroyed-and census data to track the course of city government in Chicago, providing an important reinterpretation of the relationship between political and social structures in the nineteenth-century American city.
A Choice "Outstanding Academic Book"
"[A] masterful study of policy-making in Chicago."— Choice
"[A] major contribution to urban and political history. . . . [A]n excellent book."—Jeffrey S. Adler, American Historical Review
"[A]n enlightening trip. . . . Einhorn's foray helps make sense out of the transition from Jacksonian to Gilded Age politics on the local level. . . . [She] has staked out new ground that others would do well to explore."—Arnold R. Hirsch, American Journal of Legal History
"A well-documented and informative classic on urban politics."—Daniel W. Kwong, Law Books in Review
A Choice "Outstanding Academic Book"
"[A] masterful study of policy-making in Chicago."— Choice
"[A] major contribution to urban and political history. . . . [A]n excellent book."—Jeffrey S. Adler, American Historical Review
"[A]n enlightening trip. . . . Einhorn's foray helps make sense out of the transition from Jacksonian to Gilded Age politics on the local level. . . . [She] has staked out new ground that others would do well to explore."—Arnold R. Hirsch, American Journal of Legal History
"A well-documented and informative classic on urban politics."—Daniel W. Kwong, Law Books in Review
295 pages, Paperback
First published October 25, 1991
18 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
August 14, 2013
This book is a result of one of those lucky quirks of historical research. Einhorn found city records from Chicago thought to be lost in the Great Fire of 1871. It was quite the fortunate find. Einhorn is able to mine the data for all it worth and shed a great deal of light on the antebellum and pre-fire functions of city government.
Einhorn takes on the notion that Sam Bass-Warner popularized when discussion urban growth and Philadelphia in his classic work, The Private City. Bass-Warner argued that privatism ruined the city, added to the corruption of urban life and set the precedents for later city government. Einhorn also sees privatism, but in a much more positive light. As she notes, it was the principle of "states rights" taken to a much more local level. Namely, those that wanted a city improvement, like a new sidewalk or something done about a sanitary ditch were the most important people in the decision making process; the neighbors and businesses most effected needed to agree to the change and, most importantly, pay for it. The rest of the city residents were not liable for any of the cost. Einhorn finds mountains of evidence of special assessments for local projects supporting this method of city planning and development. It wasn't, according to Einhorn so much a privatization plot, but more an expression of the American political philosophy common before the Civil War.
A number of issues begin to fragment the private system, mostly under the ambiguous term, "public interest." One of the largest issues to start driving more city-wide initiatives, affect everyone regardless of their opinion or not, was the temperance issue. Suddenly a tavern anywhere was a threat everywhere. Second, the Civil War saw a change in the political ethos within the US, even at the local level. Local rights became secondary to "the common good."
Looking at this system as Einhorn describes it, one can't help but think of the current problems facing the Chicago Public School system. Families in the most affect areas are being told that closing their neighborhood school is for the "public good" yet it is hard to believe that when, less than a year after the school closings, done in the name of cutting costs, a series of new charter schools is being proposed, some in the very buildings that were shut down.
All things considered, city records and history books that use them as the dominant source of information doesn't make for the most exciting reading. Even so, finding someone to take a different tack on our thinking about antebellum urban development is a worthwhile read. I suggest reading at a desk however, couches and city planning data are a recipe for sleep.
Einhorn takes on the notion that Sam Bass-Warner popularized when discussion urban growth and Philadelphia in his classic work, The Private City. Bass-Warner argued that privatism ruined the city, added to the corruption of urban life and set the precedents for later city government. Einhorn also sees privatism, but in a much more positive light. As she notes, it was the principle of "states rights" taken to a much more local level. Namely, those that wanted a city improvement, like a new sidewalk or something done about a sanitary ditch were the most important people in the decision making process; the neighbors and businesses most effected needed to agree to the change and, most importantly, pay for it. The rest of the city residents were not liable for any of the cost. Einhorn finds mountains of evidence of special assessments for local projects supporting this method of city planning and development. It wasn't, according to Einhorn so much a privatization plot, but more an expression of the American political philosophy common before the Civil War.
A number of issues begin to fragment the private system, mostly under the ambiguous term, "public interest." One of the largest issues to start driving more city-wide initiatives, affect everyone regardless of their opinion or not, was the temperance issue. Suddenly a tavern anywhere was a threat everywhere. Second, the Civil War saw a change in the political ethos within the US, even at the local level. Local rights became secondary to "the common good."
Looking at this system as Einhorn describes it, one can't help but think of the current problems facing the Chicago Public School system. Families in the most affect areas are being told that closing their neighborhood school is for the "public good" yet it is hard to believe that when, less than a year after the school closings, done in the name of cutting costs, a series of new charter schools is being proposed, some in the very buildings that were shut down.
All things considered, city records and history books that use them as the dominant source of information doesn't make for the most exciting reading. Even so, finding someone to take a different tack on our thinking about antebellum urban development is a worthwhile read. I suggest reading at a desk however, couches and city planning data are a recipe for sleep.
October 19, 2024
After the author's unbelievably shrill jeremiad of a preface, I was ready to put the book down for good, but what, was I not going to read the only sustained treatment of municipal taxation in the 19th century? Hmph, unlikely.
And after the intro it proved to be an immensely well researched, engaging and, in the main, evenhanded approach to Chicago's early government.
She shows how special assessment taxation (where people in the neighborhood of an improvement (like street widening, water mains, sewers etc.) paid for the majority of its costs) constituted the main activity of Chicago's antebellum government before it was given over to the machine.
And despite her concerns about "privatism" and "segmented government" she also shows this most corrupt of cities was once among the cleanest. People's immediate interests in the projects they themselves had to pay for meant even minor solecisms in government were denounced and corrected, but she also shows how legal battles over taxation districts hampered this method and led to now common system of general property taxation.
A great look at how an antebellum government actually functioned
And after the intro it proved to be an immensely well researched, engaging and, in the main, evenhanded approach to Chicago's early government.
She shows how special assessment taxation (where people in the neighborhood of an improvement (like street widening, water mains, sewers etc.) paid for the majority of its costs) constituted the main activity of Chicago's antebellum government before it was given over to the machine.
And despite her concerns about "privatism" and "segmented government" she also shows this most corrupt of cities was once among the cleanest. People's immediate interests in the projects they themselves had to pay for meant even minor solecisms in government were denounced and corrected, but she also shows how legal battles over taxation districts hampered this method and led to now common system of general property taxation.
A great look at how an antebellum government actually functioned
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews