Locke on Rights

Paper: Themes in Comparative Political Theory

Lesson: Locke on Rights

Author: Dr. Mushtaq Hussain

College/ Department: SGTB Khalsa College, Deptt. of

Political Science, University of Delhi

1
 Locke on Rights

Table of Contents

Chapter: Locke on Rights

 Introduction
 State of Nature
 Locke’s Theory of Social Contract

 Importance of Morality
 Negotiable Social Contract

 Natural Rights

 Natural Rights and Labour

 Limits of Liberty/ Rights

 Criticism
 Glossary
 Questions
 References

2
 Locke on Rights

Locke on Natural Rights

Introduction

The focus on rights in political theory gained ground in the nineteenth century, as
theorists worked towards proposing a model for ideal citizenship thereby defining
society and charting a framework that binds it together. It was in this context that
John Locke (1632-1704) was writing about natural law and rights of the individual,
particularly in response to changing social expectations as a determining factor. The
influence of Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, though unacknowledged, is
unmistakable in Locke’s works. The other major influence was the political climate
of the time in which Locke was writing his seminal work, Two Treatises on Civil
Government, in which he expounds on his ideas of the origin of government/state
and the nature of the relationship between the state and the individual. This was
during the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the most moderate and the most successful
of all revolutions in England.

"John Locke" by Sir Godfrey Kneller- State Hermitage Museum, St.

Petersburg,Russia. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia
Commons–

3
 Locke on Rights

[Link]
[Link]. Access date- 25 February 2015.

A major part of Locke’s works was one in the 1680s after events in England
interrupted his political activities that he had till then conducted under the shadow
of his patron, the First Earl of Shaftesbury. It was through Shaftesbury that Locke
became involved with the English ‘Triangular Trade’ (Welchman: 1995). Being
himself involved in numerous conspiracies at this time, the political currents of this
time had a strong and distinctive impact on Locke’s political philosophy, as is
evident from his work. Locke’s vision of political society is immensely significant not
just to the time in which he was writing, but to subsequent centuries of political
struggle and political development. Particularly important is his integration of
individualism within the framework of law and the conception of the state as well as
his account of the origins and limits of a legitimate state or government authority,
which are reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence (1776) as well
as in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in France.

Value Addition: Did you know

John Locke was considered to be the most influential thinkers of the Age of
Enlightenment. He is known as the ‘Father of Classical Liberalism’ whose thoughts
influenced the later political thinkers such as Voltaire and Rousseau. In addition to
being a major political thinker, Locke was also an accomplished doctor who worked
for many years as a personal physician!

State of Nature

In order to understand the conception of natural rights in Locke’s thesis, it is

important to understand the context in which they exist, that is, in the creation of
the state, what existed before it, and wherein lies the origin of these rights.
According to Locke, what existed before the creation of the state or government
was the state of nature. Locke’s idea of political society or community is based on a
hypothetical consideration of the human condition before the commencement of
political communal life. Locke’s ideas on the origins of the state are similar to those
of Hobbes in his famous work Leviathan, in that he too propounds the theory of a
pre-existing state of nature, in which the social contract between individuals was
formed, thus leading to the creation of the entity of the state (or the sovereign).

4
 Locke on Rights

"Locke treatises of government page". Licensed under Public Domain via

Wikimedia Commons

[Link]
#mediaviewer/File:Locke_treatises_of_government_page.jpg. Access date- 25
February 2015.

One of the key differences between the theories of Hobbes and Locke, however,
was Locke’s conception of the state of nature. Unlike Hobbes, he did not envisage it
as the war of all against all, neither did he think of man or the individual in negative
terms like Hobbes did. The state of nature, according to Locke, was pre-political,
but not pre-moral. It had an inherent morality which was reflected in the law of
nature as well as the natural rights of man. Locke did not view the state of nature
to be lacking in moral foundations. Locke held that man is essentially a good being
and the state of nature one of peace. In the state of nature, each individual is
essentially and entirely free and equal. Equality in that sense is the central element
of Locke’s imagination of this state of nature.

Contrary to previous accounts of the imagined state of nature, there is no hierarchy

in Locke’s conception of the state of nature. Not only is each individual completely
free, but further, according to Locke, each individual is subject only to the will of
the God. Locke talks about the law of nature, opposing the theory that the state of
nature was inherently anarchic and violent due to complete lawlessness. Rather he
states that God is the source of the law of nature, and that each individual is bound
by this natural law. Not only that, it is the duty of each individual to enforce this
law as well as obeying it. It is important to note that Locke based these ideas on

5
 Locke on Rights

the assumption that just as the state of nature was not essentially a state of war of
all against all, similarly he also stated that man is a rational being, and possesses
many positive qualities even in the state of nature. He has the ability and
willingness to abide by the law of nature and maintain peace in the state of nature.

Yet, according to Locke, there was a need for the state of nature to progress to the
formation of the state and a political community or society through a social
contract. The duty of each individual to enforce the law of nature and the right to
punish offenders is a necessary condition of the state of nature in Locke’s
conception. However, placing the right to punish in the hands of each individual
could lead not only to injustice but also to violence. Therefore a civil government
created by the common consent of all individuals through a social contract is
deemed necessary to enforce and maintain law in society. In the absence of such
an agency or institution, there would always be the threat of the law of nature and
the rights of individuals being severely violated. In the words of Locke,

The pravity of mankind… being such that they had rather injuriously prey
upon the fruits of other men’s labours than take pains to provide for
themselves, the necessity of preserving men in what honest industry has
acquired… obliges men to enter into society with one another (Jenkins: 1967,
p. 150).

Value Addition: Did you know

Perhaps the best known work of Locke is the Essay Concerning Human
Understanding, in which he offers an analysis of the human mind and how it
acquires knowledge. He said that human mind was like a blank slate at the time of
birth and that knowledge is slowly gathered through life experiences. This theory is
the origin of the modern conceptions of identity and the self.

Locke’s Theory of Social Contract

A social contract leads to the creation of such a state or government which enforces
law and protects the rights of individuals. Any contract is legitimate as long as it
does not infringe upon the law of nature, and must be entered into with the
common consent of all individuals of the society. Enforcement of such a contract is
facilitated or guaranteed when there is some higher human authority to require
compliance with it. Thus it is the duty of a society to create a framework for the
effective enforcement of such a contract, which is legitimate and has been freely
entered into by all individuals in society. A legislative body is central to the new
political community, yet it is imperative that this body cannot create laws that
violate or infringe upon the law of nature, because it is the enforcement of the
natural law regarding life, liberty and property, which is the primary function and

6
 Locke on Rights

basic foundation upon which the whole system is created. Having given their
consent, people must abide by the laws of the state or government. However, if the
state or government violates or fails to provide conditions conducive to people
enjoying their natural rights, they are entitled to remove this ruler, by force if
necessary. Thus in an extreme situation of grave violation of natural law and
natural rights, revolution, according to Locke, is permissible.

In this too, he differs from Hobbes’ conception of the social contract. According to
Hobbes, once people have entered into a social contract and created a sovereign,
they have surrendered all their rights except the right to life to the sovereign. The
sovereign becomes all-powerful. The only condition in which people may then rebel
against the sovereign is when their right to life is threatened by the sovereign.
Unlike Hobbes, Locke envisages a social contract and a state which guarantees not
only to protect life, but also the liberty and rights of the people. This is the most
important aspect of Locke’s thesis as he was one of the first political thinkers to
propound a theory of state whereby people were entitled to rights and liberties such
as right to property along with the right to life. Thus, according to Locke, under the
social contract man did not surrender all his rights to one single person or entity,
but surrendered only the right to preserve and maintain order and enforce the law
of nature. He still retained the rights to life, liberty and estate as these are
considered the natural rights of man, and are inalienable.

Value Addition: Did you know

Locke was highly regarded as an expert on educational matters. He taught many
students at Oxford and also served as a private tutor. Locke’s expertise led to the
important work on the subject: Some Thoughts Concerning Education. The work
had its origins in a series of letters Locke wrote giving advice on the education of
children and focuses on morality and the best ways to inculcate virtues.

Importance of Morality

Where he found shortcomings in the state of nature was in the lack of organization,
the lack of an agency or institution of the state and law. In his estimation, “positive
law adds nothing to the ethical quality of different kinds of conduct but merely
provides an apparatus for effective enforcement ” (Sabine and Thorson: 1973, p.
485). Locke acknowledges the importance of morality and moral values as they
existed in the state of nature. The problem, however, was that moral values are
more universal than specific, cover all aspects of life, be it aspects within the
purview of law or outside, and most of all they have a much broader scope of
application than rules of positive law and are valid whether governments observe
them or not. According to Sabine and Thorson, “Locke emphatically held that moral

7
 Locke on Rights

rights and duties are intrinsic and prior to law; governments are obligated to give
effect by their law to what is naturally and morally right” (Sabine and Thorson:
1973, p. 486).

Negotiable Social Contract

Moreover, Locke’s thesis indicates that rather than being a one-time agreement,
the social contract is a constant negotiation and bargaining process between the
ruler and the ruled, and that the society, and not the government, is the sovereign.
The conception of legislative and executive power has been defined as the natural
power of each individual resigned to the public or to the community. This
resignation of power is justified as a better way of protecting natural rights. This is
the original contract through which men incorporate into or form and become part
of one society. It is an agreement to unite into one political society, which is all the
compact that is, or needs to be, between the individuals, that enter into, or make
up a commonwealth.

The ambiguity in the social contract lies in the question of what it gives rise to- a
society or a government. In his second Treatise he argued that a political revolution
which dissolves a government does not as a rule dissolve the community that the
government rules. Yet in his theory of social contract, Locke did not specify whether
it was the government or society that the contract itself institutionalized. The
natural right resides only in the hands of the individuals until they resign it. Yet
such a surrender of right by the individual is deemed a necessary condition against
both society and government, as envisaged by Locke in his theory of the social
contract.

Natural Rights

The discourse on rights is placed within the context of the relationship between the
individual and the state, and questions pertaining to whether the state or the
individual is more important and powerful, and who owes what to whom. Numerous
philosophers through the ages have expounded on these questions, with many
placing the state as the supreme. Plato, for example, views the state as the
ultimate provider of the justice, and the duty of the individual therefore, is to fulfill
his responsibilities to the best of his abilities. Locke, on the other hand, views the
individual as the central point of his thesis, presenting the state as a means to the
end. The primary function of the state then is to serve the individual, and the rights
of the individual are final or sacrosanct.

8
 Locke on Rights

Source: [Link]. URL: [Link]

mankind-being-all-equal-and-independent-no-one-ought-to-harm-another-in-his-
[Link]. Access date- 26 February 2015.

Unlike Hobbes, Locke does not view the social contract as a one-time agreement
but rather as a constant negotiation between the state and the individual. The other
key difference is that Locke’s social contract theory does not propose a complete
surrender of the rights of the individual. Rather the state, as said above, is the
means to an end which is the protection of natural rights of the individual.
Furthermore, these rights are guarantees against state absolutism to protect the
individual against a tyrannical state, and have their origin in the state of nature or
under natural law. Therefore, these natural rights of individuals are the properties
of men as men, they are inalienable and indefeasible.

…for Locke, the instinct of self-preservation was, as Hobbes had also

granted, the deepest of all human impulses. By Liberty, Locke meant the
right of the individual to follow his own bent. Law, in such an aspect, is
clearly a means to the realization of freedom in the same way that the rule of
the road will, by its common acceptance, save its observers from accident. It
promotes the initiative of men by defining in terms which by their very
statement obtain acknowledgement of the conditions upon which individual
caprice may have its play. The conception of the right to property Locke
derived from some sort of primitive anarchism in which a man was supposed
to defend his property (by every possible means) with which he had
associated his labour, or from a primitive communism which became
transmuted into individual ownership whenever he mingled his labour with

9
 Locke on Rights

some object. The labour theory of ownership lived, it may be stated, to

become, in the hands of Hodgskin and Thompson, the parent of modern
socialism. (Gupta: 1980, pp. 271-272)

Locke’s focus on individual rights is predicated on the enlightened self-interest of

the individual, and appeals to the idea of morality central to political liberalism. The
idea of morality starts with the institution of private property which each individual
owns in the property in his own person. Unlike thinkers before him, Locke
propounded that the right to property was a natural right in that it was a right of
every individual in the state of nature, and therefore existed prior to the state or
government. The institution of the state or government was legitimate as long as it
did not violate the natural rights of man. In fact in Locke’s view, unlimited
sovereignty is contrary to natural law, therefore he propounded a theory of a
limited constitutional government. Locke’s views on private property, as elaborated
in the First Treatise were in reaction to the views of Robert Filmer. Filmer opined
that property should only be acquired by succession, as had been the norm in the
earlier centuries. However, this view was targeted vehemently by Locke. As
explained by David C. Snyder,

…Locke’s primary target in the Two Treatises, Robert Filmer, had argued that
since God gave the world to Adam and his heirs in succession (not to
everyone simultaneously), only those who acquire property through some
legitimate transference of entitlement (bequest, gift, exchange etc.) are
morally entitled to it. In opposing this theory (for if true it would support the
divine right of kings view of civil government, and could be used, and was
used, to undermine a justification of revolution, at least given the theistic
assumptions Filmer and Locke share) Locke argues, in the First Treatise, that
God has granted the world to Adam and all his posterity in common, holding
that all have an original equal right to property but that no one has an
original exclusive right to anything (Snyder: 1986, p. 733).

As opposed to prior ideas of common ownership in society, Locke suggested that

the right to property was a natural right of every individual and that man has a
natural right to that with which he has mixed the labour of his person or body. For
instance by tilling the land, man had a natural right to the produce which nature
had to offer and which he obtained through his own toil.

Value Addition: Did you know

In 1669, John Locke wrote the constitution of the British colony of Carolina in North
America, which includes the modern day US states of North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi.

10
 Locke on Rights

Natural Rights and Labour

Consequently the labour of his body and the work of his hands is also his property.
Some scholars have opined that Locke, with his emphasis on the importance of
labour to the concept of property, first conceived of a sense of communism
centuries before Marx did. This claim however, is highly contested. On the question
of private property, Locke opined that man has a natural right to that, to which he
has mixed the toil and labour of his body. To him, the right to property was a
natural right, a right preceding the structure and rules of society, and not one that
was created by the society. In fact, society and the agency of the state were meant
primarily to protect this right of the individual rather than merely grant it to him.
Locke believed that

…the right to private property arises because by labour a man extends, so to

speak, his own personality into the objects produced. By expending his
energy upon them he makes them part of himself. In general their utility
depends upon the labour expended upon them, and thus Locke’s theory led
to the later labour theories of value in classical and socialist economies
(Sabine and Thorson: 1973, p. 487).

This right to private property is prior even to the primitive society or the state of
nature as described by Locke. Since society does not create the right and cannot
fully and justly regulate it unless within limits, the primary function of the society
and government is to protect this natural right. Though Locke did not talk of the
right to property as the only and exclusive natural right of man, he did examine it
at length in his thesis. However, it is important to note that the term ‘property’ in
Locke’s usage is not just limited to material goods and possessions but also extends
to include life, freedom and liberty. Thus the term property encompasses “Lives,
Liberties and Estates” (Snyder: 1986, p. 724). It can thus be said that he conceived
of all natural rights along the same lines as that of property, including the attributes
of the individual, thereby justifying indefeasible claims upon the society as well as
the state or government. These claims are central to the very existence of the state
and society, the most important function of which is to protect the natural rights of
the individual.

…Locke needs a theory of property to explain why political authority is

legitimate. One cannot say when political authority exceeds if proper bounds
if one cannot say what those bounds are. And for Locke part of what
constitutes the limits to government is the limits of men’s willingness to be
governed. In other words, men consent only to that which betters their lot…
and if government is legitimate it must be a good bargain for the governed.
But it will not be a good bargain if the government itself systematically
violates property rights or allows them to be violated. Thus even though the

11
 Locke on Rights

basis for property ownership in the state of nature changes to some extent
once civil society is instituted, if government exists to protect property rights
in its extended sense, and if government is legitimate only if it sufficiently
successful in carrying out its task so that the governed continue to extend
their consent, then Locke’s explanation of how exclusive property rights arise
is an important ingredient in his theory of civil authority and obligation
(Snyder: 1986, p. 725).

Thus the right to property is one of the most important aspects of Locke’s theory of
political organization. It is the protection of the natural rights of man, namely, the
right to life, liberty and property, which is the prime function of the state. The
state’s infringement on these rights or its failure to enforce and protect these rights
would create a legitimacy crisis for the state, justifying a revolution. Revolution and
use of force by the people against the state is permissible in an extreme situation.

Limits of Liberty/ Rights

With natural law as the basis for the natural rights of man, and the creation of a
state or government for its protection, these rights become inalienable for all
individuals in society. But they are not without any limits. Locke places a limit on
appropriation of property this refers to both property in terms material goods and
possessions provided by nature and produced by the labour of the human body as
well as the larger idea of the natural rights of man, namely, life, liberty and
property. It implies that no one should take more than their share and the share
that belongs to others. In Locke’s words,

The very law of nature that in this way gives us property also sets limits to
that property. God has given us all things richly… But how far has he given
them to us?... anyone can through his labour come to own as much as he
can use in a beneficial way before it spoils; anything beyond this is more
than his share and belongs to others (Locke: Second Treatise of Government,
p. 12).

While Locke places limits on the liberties of the individuals, he does not necessarily
propagate a limit on the right to property, or in other words he does not put a limit
on the accumulation of material goods, lest they be perishable goods and may be
wasted. In fact, he supports the accumulation or appropriation of non perishable
goods, in which he includes gold and silver, in so far as such appropriation does not
transgress on another individual’s rights. There are certain ambiguities in his views
on the right to private property, which have invited numerous criticisms as well,
which will be discussed in the next section. It is important to note that the limits on
the natural rights encompass the rights to life and liberty as well as property, in
that these are the natural and inalienable rights of an individual in so far as they do
not infringe on the rights of others.

12
 Locke on Rights

But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of license, though
man in that state have an uncontrollable liberty to dispose of his person or
possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any
creature in his possession, but where some nobler use, than its bare
preservation calls for it (Stirk and Weigal: 1995, p. 114).

Locke does not equate liberty with license, in that he limits the liberties of an
individual in so far as they cannot impinge on the liberties of others. Reason
dictates the limits of liberty in Locke’s conception of natural law. “The freedom…of
man and liberty of acting according to his own will, is grounded on his having
reason which is able to instruct him in that law he is to govern himself by” (Cohen:
2001, p. 125). Thus, in the state of nature no one may interfere with the liberties of
another, and if such a thing occurs, everybody has a right to punish the
transgressors of the law. Locke’s ideas on law are rather vague as compared to his
conception of the state of nature and natural rights as is evident from the following
statement,

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone
and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it,
that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his
life, health, liberty or possessions (Cohen: 2001, pp. 124-125).

The limits on the rights and liberties of men in society remain abstract at best, and
often contradictory. Emphasis on equality and freedom of all individuals is a key
factor throughout Locke’s works. This has been one of the most important
contributions of Locke to political philosophy, opening a new dimension for the
imagination of the individual and the nature of citizenship in a state for subsequent
generations. Yet, this is also the most contested part of Locke’s work, particularly
his views on the right to property, which have been severely criticized and
questioned. Some of the criticism against Locke’s views on natural rights and right
to property has been discussed in the following section.

Value Addition: Did you know

Major Works of John Locke
A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689)
Two Treatises of Government (1689)
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690)
Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693)

13
 Locke on Rights

Criticism

The theory of natural rights has been criticized on many grounds. Primarily
contested is the assumption that rights cannot be natural simply because they were
the possession of men in the state of nature. The very concept of the state of
nature in Locke’s thesis has been severely questioned as both vague and
contradictory. Locke’s assumption that the state of nature is not a state of
perpetual war and lawlessness raises several questions about the social contract. If
all individuals were truly free and equal in the state of nature, why would they part
with their natural rights in order to enter into a social contract? Moreover, if they
were rational beings who were bound by a law of nature, what was the need to
form a political community through a social contract regulated by law? Having
stated that God is the source of the law of nature, Locke does not adequately
explain how and why a social contract must establish a system of law and order to
regulate human life, especially if such a law was inherent to the prior stat of nature.

Further, the idea of rights in the state of nature is contested on the grounds that
rights require the existence of an authority to protect them, and since there was no
state in the state of nature, rights could not exist in that state of nature. How could
natural rights exist in a condition where there was no mechanism to protect or
guarantee these rights? The very idea of the state of nature is predicated on certain
assumptions which make the existence of natural rights impossible.

Another highly contested issue in Locke’s thesis is his ideas pertaining to the
specific right to property. His account of property and how it comes to be owned by
individuals faces several questions and criticisms. Given that the law of nature,
which must be protected by the social contract and the state or government, has its
source in the will of God, and that God had granted the world and everything it
contains to all in common, the right to private property cannot be fully justified. In
the words of James Tully, how can exclusive property rights be derived from
inclusive ones? According to Locke, an individual can appropriate property to
himself by mixing the labour and toil of his body with it. It is not clear as to how
much labour should be required to turn any given unclaimed object into a piece of
private property. This assertion provides no guarantee or protection against the
right to property of others from being violated.

Furthermore, Locke’s ideas about limiting the accumulation of property or material

goods remain vague at best. While on one hand he emphasizes the equality and
equal right to property of all individuals, on the other hand he condones
accumulation of material goods which are not perishable in nature. In this he
includes gold and silver and the concept of money, which was changing the very
basis of economic functioning at the time when Locke was writing his thesis. While
equality and freedom of individuals are frequently highlighted themes throughout

14
 Locke on Rights

his work, his ideas pertaining to accumulation of goods poses a serious challenge to
these themes. There seems to be no clear boundaries or guarantees against the
violation of the rights of some individuals by others.

Glossary

Treatise: A written work dealing formally and systematically with a

subject

Glorious Revolution: The Revolution of 1688 leading to the overthrow of King

James II of England by the English Parliamentarians who
were against the King’s religious tolerance

State of Nature: The state which existed before the creation of the state or
government

Social Contract: A theory which states that persons' moral and/or political
obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement
among them to form the society in which they live

Morality: The capability to differentiate between good and bad; also

a body of standards or principles derived from a specific
code of conduct

Liberty: The social and political freedoms guaranteed to all

citizens

Natural Rights: Rights which are not dependent on any laws or customs
of any society or government, and hence are universal
and inalienable

Property: Locke defined property both as material goods and as a

term to represent broad range of human interests

15
 Locke on Rights

Right to Property: A natural right because it was a right of every individual

in the state of nature, and therefore existed prior to the
state or government

Questions

Multiple Choice Questions

1. Which one of the following political thinkers was the first exponent of the
liberal theory of States?
a.) John Locke
b.) Jean Jacques Rousseau
c.) Thomas Hobbes
d.) T.H. Green
2. Who said that man has a natural right to that with which he has mixed the
labour of his person or body?
a.) Thomas Hobbes
b.) Aristotle
c.) John Locke
d.) None of the Above
3. John Locke’s seminal work was entitled-
a.) The Natural Power of Kings
b.) Two Treatises of Government
c.) Leviathan
d.) None of the Above
4. Which of the following documents reflect an influence of Locke’s thought?
a.) UN Declaration of Human Rights
b.) Declaration of Rights of Man and of Citizen
c.) United States Declaration of Independence
d.) None of the Above
5. According to Locke, state/government was created for the protection of:
a.) Human life
b.) Human dignity
c.) Right to Life
d.) Right to Property

Answers:

1. b
2. c
3. b
4. c

16
 Locke on Rights

5. d

Long Answer Questions

1. According to Locke, what existed before the creation of the state or

government was the state of nature. Discuss.
2. What are the major differences between the conceptions of state of nature
given by Locke and Hobbes?
3. Discuss Locke’s theory of Social Contract.
4. How id Locke’s theory of Social Contract negotiable?
5. Discuss Locke’s theory of Natural Rights with special emphasis on the right to
property.
6. What are the limits to Locke’s theory of natural Rights?

References

Cohen, Martin (2001), Political Philosophy from Plato to Marx, London: Pluto Press.

Gupta, R.C. (1980), Great Political Thinkers: East and West, Agra: Lakshmi Narain
Agarwal Publishers.

Jenkins, J.J (1967), “Locke and Natural Rights”, Philosophy, Vol. 42 (160), pp. 149-
154.

Sabine, George H. and Thomas L Thorson (1973), A History of Political Theory, New
Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Snyder, David C. (1986), “Locke on Natural Law and Property Rights”, Canadian
Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 16 (4), pp. 723-750.

Stirk, Peter M.R. and David Weigal (1995), An Introduction to Political Ideas,
London: Pinter Publishers Limited.

Welchman, Jennifer (1995), “Locke on Slavery and Inalienable Rights”, Canadian

Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 25 (1), pp. 67- 81.

Web links for further reading

1. [Link]
property
2. [Link]

17
 Locke on Rights

3. [Link]
4. [Link]
7215496
5. [Link]
government-1690/
6. [Link]
property-a-critique/

18