John Locke and the Development of English Common Law

Through most of the seventeenth century, countries in Western Europe struggled to find widespread representation and a balance of power within their systems of government. Although John Locke's Second Treatise of Government - written in 1690, following the Glorious Revolution - was a step in the right direction towards justifying England's move from absolutism to constitutionalism, he neglected to recognize the role of the landless and of women. Years later, set during the Enlightenment in France, in 1762, Jean-Jacques Rousseau provided his own commentary on government and citizen representation with his creation of The Social Contract.

In times of absolute monarchy, there were constant power struggles between the monarchs and members of the nobility. Louis XIV of France is a prime example of an absolute monarch, all powerful but unconcerned with the struggles of his nation. Throughout Western Europe, people became tired of war and famine and yearned for a government more responsive to the needs of all citizens not only the monarch and the aristocracy. In England, too, King James I had begun to mirror the policies of absolutism that had been seen in France during the reign of Louis XIV. Upon abdication of the throne in England, parliament seized power and decided to create a Bill of Rights. This helped to limit the power of the king and create a more representative government; this event is known as The Glorious Revolution, or the rise of constitutionalism. John Locke was a strong supporter of this new form of government.

The Second Treatise of Government praised theories of constitutionalism over absolutism. The gist of Locke's theory is that power should rest with the wealthy, land-owning men ("the people") and the people should give up their focus on individual needs and establish legislation balancing power with the monarch and maintaining, for the citizens, what Locke recognized as "life, liberty and property". Additionally, in the event that the king overstepped his boundaries, it was the right and responsibility of the people and their representation in parliament to instate a new monarch.

The Enlightenment (1730-1790) was an era in which people began to question the societal conventions of years past. During this time philosophers like Rousseau questioned the relationship between the government and the people. In The Social Contract, Rousseau argued that each citizen give up all their individual freedoms to work towards the common good of the people. Rousseau's theory works on the basis that the government and the people are closely intertwined and neither will betray the other. The citizen gives up all his power and rights to the controlling force in exchange for full protection under the system.

Men are born and recognized as being naturally free. This sentiment of inherent freedom was accepted and shared by both Locke and Rousseau in their famous political commentaries. They also shared the opinion that citizens need a governing system to protect personal property and work towards the good of the people.

Beyond these shared ideas, they then branched off in two blatantly different directions. Locke's theory explains that there is a legislature that is put in place to establish written law on behalf of the people. Rousseau however, states that, "There can not be any sort of fundamental law binding on the body of the people" (41). In The Social Contract, the people give up all of their rights in exchange for the protection of all aspects of their life by the governing body. In Locke's mind, the only thing that the government has to protect is property. Locke also believes that it is the responsibility of the citizens to overthrow the ruler if they are not happy; the people are the reason that this person is in power to begin with. Rousseau thinks that the people have no right to question the authority of their protecting body as they have given up all their rights and power. The final major difference between these two theories on government is that Locke believes that the "citizen" only includes male landholders, while Rousseau includes all people who are willing to give up their rights, thus placing them in the category of the "citizen."

The development of English common law and Locke's theories are still upheld today as the basis of United States government. His ideas proved to be enduring in large part due to the importance of a balance of power and citizen representation. One of the major changes that can be seen in the United States government is the ability of all citizens to have a say, including women and non-landowners. Some of the initial attempts at representative government failed to be inclusive for all classes and sexes and therefore, did not represent the entire population completely.

The success of the modern United States government represents political growth and further justifies the switch from the seventeenth century, Western European system of absolutism to today's widely accepted system of representative government and constitutionalism. Similar to Britain's parliament and its ability to check the power of the monarch, in the modern day, people are typically represented in government through elected officials - who vote on legislation on their behalf - and the president has only limited power as his decisions are checked by the Senate and the House of Representatives. Though slightly flawed in its early development, the ideas of the English Parliament and John Locke's theories in the seventeenth century showed particular insight into the needs of a representative political system and well-developed, successful society.