Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
Apr 19, 2025 8:20 AM

Yesterday was the birthday ofWilliam Penn, the influential English Quaker and founder of Pennsylvania. This year also marks the 300th anniversary of his death.

Although Penn was an Englishman, he became, as Gary M. Galles says, the first great champion of American liberty. As Galles notes,

When Charles II died, a large debt to Penn’s father was settled in 1681 by granting him what would e Pennsylvania. Penn implemented his authority over the colony in his 1682Frame of Government, Pennsylvania’s first constitution. Despite being answerable only to the King, Penn provided for elected representatives, a separation of powers, religious freedom, and fair trials, all of which were incorporated in our Constitution.

In 1679, three years before he took over the American colony, Penn laid the groundwork by arguing in the English Parliament for the recognition of three fundamental rights that should belong to all citizens: the right to property, the right to share in the making of the laws, and the right to be judged by a jury of one’s peers. Penn wanted to warn his countrymen about the dangers offorgetting their rights—a lesson we still need to hear today.

Because Penn’sseventeenth century grammar and vocabulary is unfamiliar to us, I’ve taken the liberty of “translating” his speech for modern readers:

We, the members of the House of Commons of England, are a great part of the fundamental government of the country. Three rights are so particular and important to us that we will not relinquish them for fear or favor, for meat and drink, or for those other little present profits, that men of ill will offer to tempt us with. These rights cannot be altered or repealed. And this I was willing to give you a brief hint of, that you may know what sort of creatures you are and what your power is, lest through ignorance of your own strength and authority, you e captive the fickle moods of those in power, that properly and truly are but your servants, and ought to be used so.

The first of these three fundamentals is property. You have the right and title to your own lives, liberties, and lands. In this, every man is a sort of little supreme authority to himself. No other man has power over him, to imprison or hurt it, or over his property to trespass or seize it. Only your own violation of the civil laws, (and those you made through your representatives) lays you open to losing your property, which is but the punishment due to your crimes, and this but in proportion to the mitted. So that the legitimate power of the state of England is the power of laws, which is the only form that should truly merit the name of legitimate government. That which is contrary to the rule of law, is a tyranny, and not properly a government. Now the law is umpire between King, Lords and Commons, and the right to one’s property is the same for all men!

The second fundamental right, as your birthright and inheritance as Englishmen, is the right of legislation, or the power of making laws. No law can be made or repealed in England without you. Before Henry III’s time, your ancestors, the landowners of England, would represent themselves. But their population has increased, and there is now so many people that such direct assemblies are no longer a practicable way of conducting the business of governance. This way of representation was first proposed as an expedient measure, both to maintain mon right of making law, and to avoid the confusion of trying to do it in large assemblies of people. So that now, as in the past, no law can be made, no taxes imposed, and no money demanded of you (even to defray the costs of the government) without your own consent. Is there a better way of creating free and secure people?

Your third great fundamental right and privilege is the right to a jury. The right is connected to the other two, in order plete both your freedom and security. This right is your share in the administration of justice, in the execution and application of those laws that you agree to be made. To the extent that no man, according to the ancient laws of the nation, can be adjudged in matters of life, liberty, or property, but it must be by the judgment of his peers, that is, twelve men of the monly called a jury. Though this right has been infringed by two acts made in the previous Parliament—one against the Quakers in particular, and the other against dissenters in general—called, An Act against Seditious Religious Meetings, where persons are declared offenders of the law and punished without a jury. It is hoped this Parliament will think fit in their wisdom to repeal this law, though with less severity, than one of the same nature (as to punishing men without juries) was by Henry VII, who beheaded Edmund Dudley and Sir Richard Empson for embezzlement.

Consider for your selves that there is nothing more important to your interest than for you to understand your rights in the government, and to be constantly protective of them, for your well-being depends upon their preservation.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Should the Boston Marathon bomber get to vote?
During a CNN town hall on Monday, a student asked Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris whether they would allow felons in prison to vote: You have said that you believe that people with felony records should be allowed to vote while in prison. Does this mean that you would support enfranchising people like the Boston Marathon bomber, a convicted terrorist and murderer? Do you think that those convicted of sexual assault should have the opportunity to vote...
How the Fed worked after the Great Recession
Note: This is post #120 in a weekly video series on basic economics. Last week we looked at how the U.S. Federal Reserve controlled the supply of money prior to the Great Recession. In response to the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed began to employ some new instruments and approaches to getting the economy back on track. In this video by Marginal Revolution University, economist Tyler Cowen looks at three of these new methods: quantitative easing, paying interest on reserves,...
Acton Line podcast: Green New Deal fantasies; Defending Andrew Jackson
On this episode, we bring John Baden onto the show. A rancher in Bozeman Montana, Baden has co-founded several organizations dedicated to free market environmentalism including the Foundation for Research on Economics and Environment, an organization dedicated to implementing “an economic way of thinking consistent with a society of free and responsible individuals.” Baden will be addressing the environmental concerns raised in the Green New Deal and show how free markets can tackle them. After that, Acton’s Dan Hugger speaks...
When was the original Good Friday?
Today is Good Friday*, the religious holiday memorates the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and his death at Calvary. Christians have celebrated the event for over two millennia. But what was the date of the original Good Friday?Almost all scholars agree that Jesus was crucified in the spring of either A.D. 30 or A.D. 33. In their book,The Final Days of Jesus: The Most Important Week of the Most Important Person Who Ever Lived, Andreas Köstenberger and Justin Taylor contend that...
What if Jesus returns while you’re loafing at work?
As the rest of the world celebrated Easter this weekend, Eastern Orthodox Christians held Palm Sunday services. In the Eastern Christian tradition, the first three evenings of Holy Week we celebrate a service that calls us to deeper spiritual attentiveness. Bridegroom Matins, which is based on Jesus’ Parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins (St. Matthew 25:1-13), drives home the message of watchfulness by repeating the hymn: Behold the eth at midnight And blessed is the servant whom He shall...
What you may not know about members of Congress
[Note: This is the first in an occasional series, Remedial Civics, which provides information on what you should have learned in school—but probably didn’t—about how the U.S. government works (or doesn’t).] The Congress of the United States is a bicameral legislature, which means that it is made up of two chambers, or houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives. Here are some of the basic facts you should know about who they are and how they are elected. Congress...
Should commerce be tolerated?
Should we merce? Should people be allowed to conduct business, buy and sell, make a profit, and even make their livings doing so? The question appears in, of all places, the monumental Theological Commonplaces of the Lutheran scholastic theologian, Johann Gerhard (1582–1637). Gerhard specifically asks merce ought to be tolerated “in a Christian state”—that is, in a state such as the officially Lutheran one in which Gerhard lived and taught in the early seventeenth century. Gerhard raises the question because...
Remedial civics for the rest of us
[Note: This is the introduction to an occasional series that provides information on what you should have learned in school—but probably didn’t—about how the U.S. government works (or why it doesn’t).] For most of my adult life I thought I knew how laws were made. Since the age of seven I had been reciting the lyrics to the 1976 Schoolhouse Rock! segment, “I’m Just a Bill,” and I had learned in civics class the es-law spiel so well I was...
Rev. Sirico: Easter in the wake of the Notre Dame fire
It was a terrible thing on Monday to watch as flames consumed the beautiful and historic Notre Dame du Paris cathedral; I’m certain that I was not alone in fearing that before the conflagration was over, we would see that sublime e crashing down in a heap of ash and shattered stone. Thank God that was not the case, and that the courageous Paris fire brigade was able to bring the inferno under control before what would have been the...
Malaysian High Court upholds ban on Mustafa Akyol’s ‘Islam without Extremes’
The Malaysian High Court has upheld the previous Malaysian government’s ban on three books including Mustafa Akyol’s ‘Islam without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty’. Akyol is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, where he focuses on public policy, Islam, and modernity. He makes a powerful case for reformist trends in Islam which reinterpret religious law by referring to the moral teachings at its core. His mitment to political, economic, and religious liberty...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved