Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
Jan 14, 2026 12:42 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 These rights cannot be altered or repealed.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 Challenge to ‘Work-Life Balance’
Upon the recent birth of our third child, I took a brief “vacation” from “work” (quotes intended). The time spent with family was special, joyous, and fulfilling, yet given the extreme lack of sleep, the sudden rush of behavioral backlash from Toddler Siblings 1 and 2, and a host of new scarcities and constraints, it was also a whole heap of work. Needless to say, when I arrived back at the office just a week later, I felt like I...
‘The Monuments Men:’ Art Matters
Robert M. Edsel’s The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves, and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History is a terrific book regarding a part of World War II history that few are aware of. One of Hitler’s goals was to amass great art for his personal collection, and to build a museum and a cathedral in Linz, Austria. What Edsel calls a “backwater of factories and smoke” would e, in Hitler’s vision, a cultural center to rival anything Europe had...
Acton University 2014 Speaker Spotlight: Ross Douthat
The core economic challenge facing the American experiment is not e inequality per se, but rather stratification and stagnation —weak mobility from the bottom of the e ladder and wage stagnation for the middle class. These challenges are bound up in a growing social crisis— a retreat from marriage, a weakening of religious munal ties, a decline in workforce participation— that cannot be solved in Washington D.C. But economic and social policy can make a difference nonetheless, making family life...
Presuming the Best
Kierkegaard once wrote, “The majority of men are subjective toward themselves and objective toward all others, terribly objective sometimes–but the real task is in fact to be objective toward one’s self and subjective toward all others.” In this week’s Acton Commentary, “Discounting the Unseen,” I explore our responsibility to presume the best of others, particularly with regards to what remains unknown or assumed about them. This is a significant task given our natural propensity to excuse ourselves and to condemn...
Economic Facts: More Gut-Wrenching Than ‘Fun’
gives us a list of “fun” facts about the economy. Of course, “fun” is used in an ironic way, which e clear when you look at just how dreary these facts are: $1.8 Trillion: Cost Of ObamaCare’s Coverage Provisions From 2014 To 2023 (CBO, 7/30/13)$1 Trillion: The Total Student Debt Held By Americans. (Josh Mitchell, “Student-Loan Debt Slows Recovery,” The Wall Street Journal’s Real Time Economics, 12/30/13) $174 Billion:Federal Budget Deficit For The First Three Months Of FY2014. (U.S. Treasury...
Poverty, Development, and the Idealist
In the latest EconTalk podcast, Nina Munk, journalist and author of The Idealist: Jeffrey Sachs and the Quest to End Poverty, talks about how she spent six years following Jeffrey Sachs and the evolution of the Millennium Villages Project — an attempt to jumpstart a set of African villages in hopes of discovering a new template for development. Munk details the great optimism at the beginning of the project and the discouraging results after six years of high levels of...
Actually, We Won the War on Poverty
“Why, if we have made such great strides reducing poverty,” asks Scott Winship, “is there such widespread belief that, to quote Ronald Reagan, ‘We fought a war on poverty, and poverty won’?” We won the War on Poverty in the sense that the prevalence of material hardship has declined. According to Meyer and Sullivan, just 8 percent of Americans live at the low standard of living endured by a third of Americans in 1963. But it was a limited and...
Why is the State of the Union Always ‘Strong’?
I have a can’t miss prediction: tonight, when President Obama gives his sixth State of the Union address, he will describe the state of the union as “strong.” Admittedly, predicting that the state of our union will be described as “strong” is about as safe a bet as you can make when es to politics. Over the last hundred years presidents have described the State of the Union (SOTU) in various ways — Good (Truman), Sound (Carter), Not Good (Ford)....
Evaluating Net Neutrality via Walter Eucken
On January 14, as Brad Chacos so perfectly put it for PC World, “a Washington appeals court ruled that the FCC’s net neutrality rules are invalid in an 81-page document that included talk about cat videos on YouTube.” Reactions have been varied. Joe Carter recently surveyed various arguments in his latest explainer. For my part, I mend the German, ordoliberal economist Walter Eucken as a guide for evaluating net neutrality, which as Joe Carter put it, “[a]t its simplest …...
Pete Seeger, 1919-2014
Pete Seeger performing the Woodie Guthrie song “This Land is Your Land” at President Obama’s “We Are One” Inaugural Concert, January 19, 2009. Environmentalist, agent provocateur, leftist activist, recovering Communist and ardent redistributionist – all apply to the folksinger who died Monday in New York at the age of 94. Pete Seeger, for better or worse, answered to all of the above adjectives but it’s his legacy as a songwriter and performer for which this writer prefers to remember him....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved