Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
William Penn on the three fundamental rights of citizens
Mar 2, 2026 5:40 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 These rights cannot be altered or repealed.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
How Did George Orwell Know?
For those trapped behind the Iron Curtain, Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four seemed more a documentary than a work of dystopian fiction. How did a man who had never traveled munist Russia get so much so right? Read More… The collocation in the title captures the thoroughgoing exploration of the topic in a phrase: George Orwell and Russia. Masha Karp is not the first to ponder George Orwell’s relationship to Stalinist Russia—and the relationship of both Stalinist and munist Russia to Orwell—but...
Getting Beyond Right-Wing and Left-Wing
The stark polarization that marks our politics may be more a misclassification of certain positions. A little history lesson is in order. Read More… Back in the 1970s, Sixty Minutes had a regular feature called Point/Counterpoint, which came at the end of every show. Each week there would be a different topic. Journalist Shana Alexander would present a standard-issue “liberal” version of the argument while James J. Kilpatrick assumed the “conservative” side. Although the sparring partners sniped at one another,...
Is Neoliberalism Dead?
The Chilean Miracle of the 1990s is usually pointed to as a win for the Chicago School of economics, which advocated laissez faire capitalism, limited regulation, and cuts in government spending. But that was then, and this is the era of Bidenomics and a “post-liberal” New Right. Are free markets as dead as General Pinochet? Read More… Louis Menand wrote a curious article for the New Yorker called “The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism.” The article is curious on two...
The Strange Death of DEI
More Americans than you think support training in diversity, equity, and inclusion. And why are more and more corporations looking beyond it? Read More… Once considered the highest rising feature of America’s business spaces, the cliffs of corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are slowly eroding under the reliable and unrelenting tide of American apathy. Fewer and fewer businesses are seeking to hire a chief diversity officer, and those who manage to get hired are finding their jobs often paired...
No, Chicago, We Don’t Need Government-Run Grocery Stores
After Walmart shuttered locations due to rising crime, the mayor of Chicago decided the answer was to … open their own grocery stores. What could go wrong? Read More… The city of Chicago is plagued by waves of violence, looting, and plunder dating back to 2020, which was deemed “the summer of looting” by the Chicago Tribune, spurred by the murder of George Floyd while in police custody amid COVID lockdowns. That summer, the Chicago police superintendent called for longer...
Laudate Deum: Or, Is the Catholic Church Just Another NGO?
Is there a way to balance economic growth and sound environmental stewardship? If only Pope Francis would take his own advice. Read More… If there is anything we have learned about Pope mentaries on issues ranging from economics to the environment, it is that they invariably add up to a by-now predictable mixture. Parts of this mélange consist of often profound insights and wisdom. But it also reflects straw man arguments, the random assembling of pieces of data plucked out...
John Newton: From Slave Trader to Abolitionist Pastor
The story of John Newton’s conversion is legendary. His hymns, like “Amazing Grace,” perennial favorites. His pastor’s heart, exemplary. His fight for an abolition of the slave trade, monumental. But none of this came quickly or easily. Read More… John Newton (1725–1807) is a pivotal figure in the English evangelical revival or awakening. His is an early example of a settled evangelical ministry in the second half of the 18th century, involving pastoral work, hymn-writing, and even mentoring the likes...
Tom Wolfe and the Strangeness of America
A new documentary about the parable novelist and social critic demonstrates, however unintentionally, why we’ll probably never see the likes of Wolfe again. Read More… Conservatism doesn’t really produce or nurture writers nowadays. The notable exception in the past couple of generations is Tom Wolfe, who died in 2018. Wolfe was universally beloved. He sold millions of copies of his various writings. Wolfe had a distinctive Southern-gentleman plete with “trademark white suit and vest, a high-necked blue-and-white-striped plemented by a...
Claudia Goldin Is the Ideal Academic Researcher
The latest recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences has contributed much useful data in understanding the role of women in the workforce. Her restraint in policy prescriptions may, in fact, be her greatest contribution of all. Read More… Harvard’s Claudia Goldin is our newest Nobel laureate in economics. Her accumulated efforts have helped us better understand women’s roles in the labor market—both historically and in contemporary society. It’s worth noting that the economics prize isn’t one of...
Willmoore Kendall and the Meaning of American Conservatism
Less well-known than Kirk and Buckley, the pugnacious and discerning Kendall is nevertheless a voice that needs to be revived in the present fractious moment. Read More… In our moment, the nature and meaning of conservatism is disputed, sometimes hotly, and it’s unsurprising to observe participants turn to history for wisdom or support. Either in praise or vilification, current schools frequently mention John Courtney Murray, Russell Kirk, Frank Meyer, Irving Kristol, and William F. Buckley (obviously), among others. The appropriation...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved