Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 8400 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Thursday, January 19, 2017

On Property, Essay by James Madison 1792

On Property, Essay by James Madison

29 Mar. 1792

This term in its particular application means "that dominion which one man claims
and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other
In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces everything to which a man may attach a
value and have a right; and which leaves to everyone else the like advantage.
In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandize, or money is called his property.
In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of
He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and
practice dictated by them.
He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person.
He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects
on which to employ them.
In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to
have a property in his rights.
Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is
safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.
Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho' from an opposite cause.
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in
the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This
being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially
secures to every man, whatever is his own.
According to this standard of merit, the praise of affording a just securing to property,
should be sparingly bestowed on a government which, however scrupulously guarding
the possessions of individuals, does not protect them in the enjoyment and
communication of their opinions, in which they have an equal, and in the estimation
of some, a more valuable property.
More sparingly should this praise be allowed to a government, where a man's
religious rights are violated by penalties, or fettered by tests, or taxed by a hierarchy.
Conscience is the most sacred of all property; other property depending in part on
positive law, the exercise of that, being a natural and unalienable right. To guard a
man's house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact
faith, can give no title to invade a man's conscience which is more sacred than his
castle, or to withhold from it that debt of protection, for which the public faith is
pledged, by the very nature and original conditions of the social pact.
That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property
which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary
seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest. A magistrate issuing his
warrants to a press gang, would be in his proper functions in Turkey or Indostan,
under appellations proverbial of the most complete despotism.
That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where arbitrary
restrictions, exemptions, and monopolies deny to part of its citizens that free use of
their faculties, and free choice of their occupations, which not only constitute their
property in the general sense of the word; but are the means of acquiring property
strictly so called. What must be the spirit of legislation where a manufacturer of linen
cloth is forbidden to bury his own child in a linen shroud, in order to favour his
neighbour who manufactures woolen cloth; where the manufacturer and wearer of
woolen cloth are again forbidden the oeconomical [Volume 1, Page 599] use of
buttons of that material, in favor of the manufacturer of buttons of other materials!
A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under which unequal
taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species: where arbitrary
taxes invade the domestic sanctuaries of the rich, and excessive taxes grind the faces
of the poor; where the keenness and competitions of want are deemed an insufficient
spur to labor, and taxes are again applied, by an unfeeling policy, as another spur; in
violation of that sacred property, which Heaven, in decreeing man to earn his bread by
the sweat of his brow, kindly reserved to him, in the small repose that could be spared
from the supply of his necessities.
If there be a government then which prides itself in maintaining the inviolability of
property; which provides that none shall be taken directly even for public use without
indemnification to the owner, and yet directly violates the property which individuals
have in their opinions, their religion, their persons, and their faculties; nay more,
which indirectly violates their property, in their actual possessions, in the labor that
acquires their daily subsistence, and in the hallowed remnant of time which ought to
relieve their fatigues and soothe their cares, the influence [inference?] will have been
anticipated, that such a government is not a pattern for the United States.
If the United States mean to obtain or deserve the full praise due to wise and just
governments, they will equally respect the rights of property, and the property in
rights: they will rival the government that most sacredly guards the former; and by
repelling its example in violating the latter, will make themselves a pattern to that and
all other governments.


  1. This essay runs true to me. I've been writing very similar words with regard to property. Property is a bundle of valuable rights. Rights are invested in property

  2. Madisons accessment of property rights, although well worded and using venacular unknow in this present day was written in a day and age much less complicated and distracted by 100's of things that dull the minds of the mmass majority of people who have traded any "truth" by never attempting to ever fact check or do any real investigation themselves as to law and rights, except through their "fake news" media which has replaced any trueful investigation of truth out of shere laziness, which has had the affect of instead of everyone really thinking they know and have trueful, actual facts, instead have only "opinions" of individual rights, without a shread of concern for anyone elses rights to be happy besides the rights they personally interprete are litterly limitless, unless someone has been actually damaged. "Injury", was never properly defined right for this day and age, where people living in large "Metropolises" like i live in, are living either right next to other neighbors or right on top of them. Back in the day Madison wroote those words, peple usually owned large parcels, even acres of land, making it easy to get along with other people who had a much higher degree of respect for one another, in most cases because they actually knew their neighbors, unlike we have today where people dont even know or care to know the people living right above them or next to them. That has led to defintions of rights never intended by our forefathers, especially by people who are so self centered, selfish , and materialistic, their whole definitions of rights is vertually unlimited according to their "opinion". And thats because the forefathers, having no conception of the world we now live in, just assumed people would remain the same as them, which was a misplaced assumption. In todays moderan society, "INJURY" takes two forms...1) Actual, meaning actual physical damage to them or their property or 2)Constructive injury, a much more subtle, but nonetheless has risen to the level of criminal tresspass because it doesnt take into account of injury to another persons quite enjoyment to be just as happy as them, without the 10 dogs and 3 cats and 5 kids living within a few feet of them. That is the rule of "Common Curtesy" that no one has today, because everyone sees their neighbors as complete strangers rather than their brothers and sisters under Christ. If someone actually had one brain cell left im their brain, the right and moral thing to do is ask his neighbor first you mind if i get any animal, but especially dogs which constanty bark, night and day, when they hear the least little noise at 12 midnight, making my life a living hell sinse i dont have or will allow any animal into my house, sinse it is the single most investment anyone has ever had because of its inherent equity, which is in some citys, quite substancial. Of course, your probable one of those animal lovers who will only see it your way, like everyone else. How am i damaging you....well let me count the ways...!!!. ....continued..

  3. This is the whole reason we have created govt agencies now who have become rulers over us
    even if the bankers never set up shop here. People are scandalous and lost all moral and respect for anyone because they value "things" more than other people, and because having lost their connection to GOD, and our savior, jesus. The only "thing" that will truely make them happy, because hes the only one capable of umconditional love...not your dog, although he might get closer than anything else in this world. Until people realize that sometimes they have to make sacrifices that dont please them , but ultimately is the moral and decent thing to do, if for nothing else than to lesson the arguents and hatred lf people living a couple of ft
    away from you. Make sense. We cant live in a world with nothing but self pleasures. In the interest of justice and peace people who try and solve all their loneliness using animals as a crutch, instead of making social adjustments in overpopulated citys, the best thing to do is move to the country for the good lf all.


Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.