<story><title>Yale’s 367-year-old water bond still pays interest (2015)</title><url>https://news.yale.edu/2015/09/22/living-artifact-dutch-golden-age-yale-s-367-year-old-water-bond-still-pays-interest</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hn_throwaway_99</author><text>The part about &amp;quot;Harvard is immune to eminent domain&amp;quot; is definitely apocryphal.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m quite positive the United States doesn&amp;#x27;t give legal credence to &amp;quot;dusty old letters from King George&amp;quot;.</text></item><item><author>kibwen</author><text>Similar fun fact: Harvard is immune to eminent domain, because the original constitution of Massachusetts ensured that all of Harvard&amp;#x27;s then-existing rights would remain in effect &amp;quot;forever&amp;quot;, and apparently that includes a dusty old letter from King George or something stating that Harvard cannot be subject to eminent domain. Harvard has used this to reroute a subway tunnel that would otherwise have run under Harvard Yard. So the next time you&amp;#x27;re on the red line and wondering why the train slows to a crawl as it passes that sharp turn around the Harvard stop, now you know.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>beambot</author><text>Actually, it&amp;#x27;s entirely possible. I have friends out in California who still have Spanish land grants that predate the US and California statehood. They have successfully prosecuted their rights (eg water) again &amp;amp; again.&lt;p&gt;For example, see the section about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo on this wiki page:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Ranchos_of_California&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Ranchos_of_California&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>
<story><title>Yale’s 367-year-old water bond still pays interest (2015)</title><url>https://news.yale.edu/2015/09/22/living-artifact-dutch-golden-age-yale-s-367-year-old-water-bond-still-pays-interest</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hn_throwaway_99</author><text>The part about &amp;quot;Harvard is immune to eminent domain&amp;quot; is definitely apocryphal.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m quite positive the United States doesn&amp;#x27;t give legal credence to &amp;quot;dusty old letters from King George&amp;quot;.</text></item><item><author>kibwen</author><text>Similar fun fact: Harvard is immune to eminent domain, because the original constitution of Massachusetts ensured that all of Harvard&amp;#x27;s then-existing rights would remain in effect &amp;quot;forever&amp;quot;, and apparently that includes a dusty old letter from King George or something stating that Harvard cannot be subject to eminent domain. Harvard has used this to reroute a subway tunnel that would otherwise have run under Harvard Yard. So the next time you&amp;#x27;re on the red line and wondering why the train slows to a crawl as it passes that sharp turn around the Harvard stop, now you know.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Spooky23</author><text>In some cases, we do. I worked for a farmer who won an eminent domain action on the basis of a Dutch deed covenant. There’s a lot of crusty old law that protected the rights of landowners and others whose title predates the state or nation. In my boss’s case, his title predated both the state and country.&lt;p&gt;It worked in negative ways too. The Dutch setup a feudal system, but the state limited the ability of the landowner to collect rent in the 19th century. (Baltimore has a system like this too) In this case, the landlords abandoned the title, but many homeowners were in a legal limbo where they didn’t have a clean title.</text></comment>