Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
Mar 27, 2026 5:55 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 These rights cannot be altered or repealed.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
‘A Church That Walks Serene’
“Let us not forget: we are a pilgrim church, subject to misunderstanding, to persecution, but a church that walks serene, because it bears the force of love.” ― Oscar A. Romero, The Violence of Love It is no secret to Christians that being one is not easy. However, the public practice of Christianity is ing more and more difficult world-wide. The recent kidnapping of two Orthodox bishops in Syria is but one story of the on-going violence towards Christians in...
Conservatives and the Non-Triumph of Capitalism
Conservatives need to stop shying away from principled, as opposed to merely utilitarian, defenses of economic freedom and its associated institutions, says Acton research director Samuel Gregg in an article for Public Discourse: Some fiscal conservatives are certainly too sanguine about creative destruction’s unintended negative effects on our lives. But these side effects are not sufficient reasons to try to slow or even stop the process, let alone assume that higher taxes and the welfare state (which itself breeds plenty...
Augustine on ‘Spiteful Benevolence’
“Help me help you.” Yesterday in conjunction with this week’s Acton Commentary I looked at Tim Riggins’ gift of freedom to his brother and the corresponding sense of responsibility that resulted. When Tim takes the rap for Billy, Billy has a responsibility to make something of his life. As Tim puts it, that’s the “deal.” When Tim feels that Billy hasn’t lived up to his end, it causes conflict. Tim’s gift has created an obligation for the recipient. This reality...
Tim Riggins’ Gift
In this week’s Acton Commentary, I explore the dynamics between gift, gratitude, and stewardship. The proper response to a gift that has been given is gratitude, and the proper expression of es in faithful stewardship. I’ve heard it repeated in many times and in many places that for a gift to truly be a gift, there must be no responsibility of response on the part of the recipient. As I write in “Gift, Gratitude, and the Grace of Stewardship,” that...
The Market is a Moral Teacher
Does the free market encourage moral behavior? Virgil Henry Storr, Research Associate Professor in the Department of Economics at George Mason University, recently wrote a report called “The Impartial Spectator and The Moral Teachings of Markets.” He addresses critics’ concerns that the free market brings out and nurtures human vices. mentators have stated that “engaging in market activity can be corrupting.” Storr highlights two notable quotes. Aristotle “believed that there was something unnatural about the kind of wealth getting that...
Fatherhood as Vocation in Richard Scarry’s ‘The Bunny Book’
“What do you want to be when you grow up?” It’s a question we are routinelyaskedas youngsters, with the more cliché responses ranging from “fireman” to “astronaut” to “explorer.” Yet,as I’ve argued previously,we needn’t limit such contemplations to work outside of the home. As Karen Swallow Prior recently noted, using terminology from aKnot Yetstudy, family needn’t be viewed as a “capstone”to personal achievement,but should instead be seen as a “cornerstone” —an anchor and foundation from which those who are called...
The Regulators Are Coming for Bitcoin
Last month, in my series on Bitcoin, I wrote that for the crypto-currency to succeed it will one day have to e trusted by more mainstream consumers, which requires adding such features as regulatory oversight and a centralized monetary authority—the very features of other currencies that Bitcoin was created to avoid. That day may ing sooner than later: Senior officials at a top US financial regulator are discussing whether Bitcoin, the controversial cyber-currency, might fall under their regulatory remit. Bitcoin...
The Injustice of US Educational Attainment
mencement ceremonies once again are being celebrated around the country, I was reminded again of the moral crisis of US education. Elise Hilton recently surveyed the dismal employment rate among young adults in the US, writing that we have moved in twelve years from having the best rate in the developed world to being among the worst, following the path of Greece, Spain, and Portugal. She highlights two possible solutions. The better one is from Acton’s director of research Samuel...
Verizon Shareholders Reject Net Neutrality Resolution
Last week, Verizon Communications Inc. shareholders rejected a wireless network neutrality proxy resolution from two prominent Interfaith Center for Corporate Responsibility members, Nathan Cummings Foundation and Trillium Asset Management Corporation. As this writer noted in a March 28, 2013, blog post concerning a similar proxy resolution submitted to AT&T Inc., advocacy of network neutrality is far removed from the ICCR’s goals of furthering social justice because it kills jobs, deters technical innovations and drives up consumer bills. The NCF and...
Big Business and Republicans Say Internet Sales Tax is States’ Rights Issue
In The Examiner, Tim Carney asks, “When do 21 Republicans senators vote for higher taxes? Answer: When the biggest businesses and local politicians hire top K Street lobbyists to push for the tax-hike legislation.” A few weeks ago I wrote about how government and big corporate collusion decreases market fairness. NPR had a great write up explaining why Amazon is one of the main culprits pushing for expansion of online sales taxes. Carney explains how former Mississippi Senator and Republican...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved