Second Treatise of Government: Chapter 5: Of Property Summary & Analysis

LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in Second Treatise of Government, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.

As everyone is born with the right to self-preservation, it stands to reason, Locke contends, they have a right to whatever nature affords them for subsistence. God gave the earth to all humankind in common, which makes the ownership of private property difficult for some to understand. But, Locke says, he plans to show how everyone has a right to private property, even though God did gift the earth to all humankind in common.

Locke argues the right to property and the ability to protect that property is implicit in the law of nature. One can’t survive in nature without taking from nature’s bounty, thus Locke argues nature is for everyone to take within reason. The private ownership of land was a hot topic in Locke’s day. While some maintained land could not be owned privately, Locke was a loud advocate of a person’s right to land.

God gave earth to humankind to use for convenience and advantage, and for the support and comfort of one’s being. All of nature ’s fruits and beasts belong to everyone in common, as long as such resources are produced spontaneously by nature. However, fruit or a deer must be appropriated before it is of any use. Locke argues that everyone has a right to “the labour of his body, and the work of his hands.” Thus any fruit one gathers or game they kill becomes their property.

Again, one must take from nature’s bounty if they are expected to survive, which is the cornerstone of Locke’s labor theory of property. The physical labor one exerts in appropriating and harvesting nature’s bounty, in Locke’s view, gives one the right of ownership of whatever they harvest from nature.

If one gathers acorns, Locke argues, then that nourishment belongs to them. The acorns become their property at the moment they gather them through their labor. This person hasn’t been given consent by all of humankind to gather the acorns, Locke points out, but this is not theft. If it was, humankind would have starved long ago. In nature , the acorns exist in common, but when one removes the acorns from nature through their own labor, the acorns officially become their property. The same applies for the deer in the forest and the fish in the sea; when they are removed from a common state, they become private property.

Locke’s theory of labor and ownership relies heavily on the law of nature, which places self-preservation as a top priority. One has an innate right to do whatever they must to preserve their life and health, including taking from nature. Locke earlier argues that God created the earth for the convenience and nourishment of humankind collectively. As everyone collectively own the earth, the only thing that sets any of nature’s bounty aside from the common state is the labor one expends to appropriate it.

Some may think, Locke says, that this theory of private property gives people the right to take as much as they please, but this is not so. The same law of nature that gives a person the right to property limits it as well. God has richly supplied all things for humankind to enjoy, as long as they can make use of it before it spoils. Anything beyond this belongs to someone else. God did not give humankind all of nature to let it spoil and rot.

Here, Locke implies that taking more than one’s fair share of nature’s bounty makes them a thief, which effectively places them in a state of war with whomever they are depriving at the time. Depriving another of subsistence infringes on their right to self-preservation, and they in turn have a right to protect themselves with force.

"My students can't get enough of your charts and their results have gone through the roof." -Graham S.

Locke argues that the same theory applies to the earth itself. God has given humankind the earth to improve—to till, cultivate, and harvest—and when one does so, the property they labor on becomes their own. God gave the world to humankind in common, for their benefit and convenience, and he meant for it be cultivated, as it is no good to anyone before it is appropriated. Of course, Locke admits, there is common land that exists in England, but such land was appropriated through agreement and consent. However, while such land is common to some, it is not common to all.

Locke’s labor theory of property, which again relies on natural law and one’s right to self-preservation, has been instrumental in shaping modern ideas of land ownership and property rights. In addition to other things, Locke’s labor theory greatly informed the homestead principle, which was followed in many places, particularly the early days of America and the settlement of the West.

There are limits to one’s ability to appropriate land, as their labor will only allow them to consume a small portion. Thus, everyone is confined by moderation. Without labor, land and property is worth very little, Locke adds. There is enough land for double the earth’s inhabitants, Locke says, but the invention of money has allowed people to own more than they can use. The invention of money came from an agreement between people that a piece of yellow metal—which doesn’t decay—is worth a field of corn or a piece of meat.

Here, readers must consider the time in which Locke is writing—the late 1600s. In Locke’s day, a high-end estimate of the world’s population was about 580 million people. In the 21st century, the population has climbed to over 7 billion. Locke examines the advent of money quite extensively, but he emphasizes how money completely changed land ownership, inevitably leading to land shortages.

Throughout history, as family size increased and industry grew, people’s possessions grew with them. They built cities, and through consent, they set boundaries for districts. From there, they settled individual properties, and their labor placed value on things. An acre of land planted with tobacco is more valuable, Locke contends, than an empty field. An example of this progression can be seen in the Americans, who have land but little wealth. The Americans have set out to improve the land through labor.

Locke repeatedly points out the importance of consent in entering any civil society. If one does not consent to enter society, it cannot by definition be considered civil. Locke frequently employs the Americans as an example of an emerging civil society and government. In 1689 when Locke was writing, America was still an English colony and had not yet declared independence. In 1789, when America’s Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, they drew heavily from the Second Treatise of Government .

Things that are usually considered useful are of short duration, and if they are not consumed within the appropriate time, they spoil. But people have now agreed that there is value in gold, silver, and diamonds. Locke says if one is gathering apples, that person is only allowed to take what they can use before the apples spoil. If they take more than this, it is considered theft. This keeps anyone from hoarding things that others might use. If one has more apples than they can consume, they can give them away so others may have them before they spoil; or, they may barter the extra apples for some nuts that will last much longer. One may also trade their extra apples for something else that lasts, like wool, metal, or diamonds. One can keep as much of these things as they please, because such things do not spoil.

Here, Locke implies that one can’t hoard apples because they may spoil, thereby robbing another of their right to self-preservation through nature’s bounty; however, one can hoard money because it doesn’t spoil, so it can’t rob another of their right to self-preservation. Again, readers must consider the time in which Locke was writing. Locke’s theory doesn’t exactly fit in modernity where people are absolutely hindered in their right to self-preservation by financial inequalities, but Locke obviously had no way of knowing this in 1689 when the idea of money was in its infancy.

In the beginning of history, the entire world was America, Locke says, and more so, since they knew nothing of the invention of money. Now, money is the lasting thing that does not spoil, which has been assigned value through mutual consent. Money allows one to own much more than they can consume, including land, and they can hoard as much gold and silver as they please without hurting anyone.

Again, Locke points out that money’s value is assigned by mutual consent, which is the only lawful way according to Locke. Money has completely changed the value of things, since now value is not necessarily decided on one’s labor or the usefulness of something. A diamond, even if someone does excavate it from the earth using their labor, isn’t useful in the same way as food or wood for heat. Diamonds only have value because people decide they do.

“Would not have made it through AP Literature without the printable PDFs. They're like having in-class notes for every discussion!”

“This is absolutely THE best teacher resource I have ever purchased. My students love how organized the handouts are and enjoy tracking the themes as a class.”

AI Tools for on-demand study help and teaching prep.

Quote explanations, with page numbers, for over 44,324 quotes.

PDF downloads of all 2,003 LitCharts guides.

Expert analysis to take your reading to the next level.

Advanced search to help you find exactly what you're looking for.

• Expert analysis to take your reading to the next level.
• Advanced search to help you find exactly what you're looking for.