Frame of Government Written by William Penn, April 25, 1682

Penn’s remarkable frame of Government, dated April 25, 1682, was so far in advance of the age that, as Bancroft says, “its essential principles remain to this day without change.” Another competent critic has said that in it was “the germ if not the development of every valuable improvement in Government or legislation which has been introduced into the political systems of more modern epochs.”

The government was to consist of the Governor, a Provincial Council, and a General Assembly. These bodies, which were to make laws, create courts, choose officers and transact public affairs, were to be elected by the freemen by ballot. By freemen, were meant not only handholders, but “every inhabitant, artificer, or other resident that pays scot or lot to the Government.” Penn believed that “any government is free to the people under it, whatever be the frame, where the laws rule and the people are a party to those laws, and more than this is tyranny, oligarchy or confusion.”

The “Frame of Government” and the “Laws Agreed Upon in England” were the final products of all Penn’s best thinking and conferences, and were brought with him to the Colony. Though changed in form many times, they shaped all future Constitutions of Pennsylvania, of other States and even the Federal Union.

This frame was published by Penn, together with certain laws agreed on between himself and the purchasers under him, entitled “The Frame of the Government of the Province of Pennsylvania, in America; together with certain laws, agreed upon in England by the Governor and divers of the Free Men of the aforesaid Province. To be further Explained and Confirmed there, by the First Provincial Council and General Assembly that shall be held, if they seem meet.”

James Claypoole called it in one of his letters, “the fundamentals for government.” In effect it was the first Constitution of Pennsylvania. It was the work of William Penn and reflects precisely some of the brightest and some of the much less bright traits of his genius and character.

The “preface” or preamble to this Constitution is curious, for it is written as if Penn felt that the eyes of the court were upon him. The first two paragraphs form a simple excursus upon the doctrine of the law and the transgressor as expounded in St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans: “For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under the sin,” etc. From this Penn derives “the divine right of 294government,” the object of government being two-fold, to terrify evildoers and to cherish those who do well “which gives government a life beyond corruption (i. e., divine right), and makes it as durable in the world as good men should be.” Hence Penn thought that government seemed like a part of religion itself, a thing sacred in its institution and end.

“They weakly err,” continues Penn, “that think there is no other use of government than correction; which is the coarsest part of it. * * * Men side with their passions against their reason, and their sinister interests have so strong a bias upon their minds that they lean to them against the good of the things they know.”

The form, he concludes, does not matter much after all, “Any government is free to the people under it (whatever be the frame) where the laws rule and the people are a party to these laws.” Good men are to be preferred even above good laws. The frame of laws now published, Penn adds, “has been carefully contrived to secure the people from abuse of power.”

In the Constitution which follows the preamble, Penn begins by confirming to the freemen of the province all the liberties, franchises and properties secured to them by the patent of King Charles II.

After stating how the government was to be organized, he directed that the council of seventy-two members, was to be elected at once, one-third of the members to go out, and their successors elected each year, and after the first seven years those going out each year shall not be returned within a year. Two-thirds of the members constituted a quorum on all important matters, but twenty-four would suffice on minor questions.

The Governor was to preside and to have three votes. All bills should be prepared and proposed by the Council for presentation to the General Assembly, which body, on the ninth day should pass or defeat such measures as presented.

To be sure the Provincial Council also was an elective body, but the difference was in the fact that it was meant to consist of the Governor’s friends; it was an aristocratic body, and therefore not entirely representative.

Aside from this fatal defect there is much to praise in Penn’s Constitution and something to wonder at, as being so far in advance of his age.

Besides carefully defining and limiting the executive functions of the Governor and Council a wholesome and liberal provision was made for education, public schools, inventions and useful scientific discoveries.

The Constitution could not be altered without the consent of the Governor and six-sevenths of the Council and the General Assembly, which rule, if enforced, would have perpetuated any Constitution, however bad.

295On May 15, 1682, Penn’s code of laws, passed in England, to be altered or amended in Pennsylvania, was promulgated. It consisted of forty statutes, the first of which declared the character or Constitution, which has just been analyzed to be “fundamental in the Government itself.”

Regulations as to taxes, trials, prisons and marriage were clearly set forth in the code. It was also arranged that every child of twelve should be taught some useful trade. Members of the Council and General Assembly, as well as Judges, were to be professing Christians. Every one was to be allowed to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience and this not as a mere matter of toleration, but because it was an inherent right.

The penalty of death was to be inflicted sparingly; some 200 offenses which were named as capital by English law were to be punished in a lighter manner.

During Penn’s absence there was clashing, dissension and tumult. If he could have kept his hand in person on the Government for a generation there would have been a wonderful difference in the results attained.