Treatises of Government (1690) (Cambridge University Press, rev. ed 1963, Mentor Paperback); William Blackstone, 2 Commentaries on the Law of England (1765-1769). All of these appear in any number of editions produced by various publishers over the years, and so far as I know there is no standard edition to be cited. This presents no problem in the case of Blackstone, because virtually every edition has star pages, and I cite to these. As to Hobbes and Locke, I cite by page to the editions I used but add, for the sake of those without access to the particular volumes, parenthetical citations to chapters in the case of Hobbes, and to sections in the case of Locke. This is convenient enough because the chapters in Hobbes and the sections in Locke are usually short. I take the same approach in the case of Hume, who figures later. Hobbes, supra note 2, at 81-84 (ch. 13). 3 Locke, supra note 2, at 328-29 (§ 27). See also id. at 330 (§ 28) ("it is the taking of any 4 part of what is common, and removing it out of the state nature leaves it in, which begins the property. .. ."). Locke's view is reflected in the rule of capture familiar to modern property law, according to which wild animals in their natural condition belong to the first person to kill them, capture them in hand, trap them, or mortally wound them. See, e.g., Pierson v. Post, 3 Cai. R. 175,-2-I. COOP A. The Argument The roots of COOP can be traced back several hundred years, to Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and William Blackstone. For our purposes, a very 2 condensed distillate of their views will suffice. Each of them imagined an original situation of open access to a common stock of resources, no ownership, and no civil government (the state of nature). Hobbes figured that any commoner taking a thing out of the common stock would thereafter treat it as has own, but would have to stand ready to defend his possessions against grabbing by intruders. Commoners might try to enhance the security of their holdings by making contracts among themselves, promising not to interfere with the possessions of others so long as others promised the same in return, but self-help was the only means of restraining promisors from reneging. Hence, Hobbes concluded, life would be marked by ongoing battles. Locke agreed. His labor theory dictated 3 that anything taken from the commons rightly belonged to the taker, provided there was enough and as good for everyone else, but conceded that commoners 4 4