ALGERNON SIDNEY (1623-1683):
A MARTYR TO LIBERTY
Libertarian Alliance
Peter Richards
Peter Richards is a Hampshire businessman and writer. Besides being a supporter
of the LA, he is a member of the Rationalist Association, the Society for Individual
Freedom and the Freedom Association. He has also contributed to The Freethinker,
Right Now! and The Individual. In 2011, the Book Guild published Free-born John
Lilburne: English Libertarian: And Other Essays on Liberty, many of the chapters of
which were first published by the LA or SIF.
Libertarian Heritage No. 29
ISBN 9781856376549
ISSN 0959-566X (Print)
ISSN 2042-2733 (Online)
For Life, Liberty, and Property
© 2012: Libertarian Alliance & Peter Richards
The views expressed in this publication are those
of the author and not necessarily those of the
Libertarian Alliance, its Committee, its Advisory
Council or its subscribers.
Dr Chris R. Tame (1949-2006): Founder
Dr Sean Gabb: Director
David Davis: Blogmaster & Scientific Adviser
Dr Nigel Gervas Meek: Publications Director
Mario Huet: LA Forum Listmaster
David Carr: Legal Affairs Spokesman
Suite 35
2 Lansdowne Row
Mayfair
London
W1J 6HL
Telephone: 07956 472199
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.libertarian.co.uk
Page 1
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
ALGERNON SIDNEY (1623-1683):
A MARTYR TO LIBERTY
Peter Richards
Introduction
The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee this year provided the United
Kingdom with an excuse for a celebration. Although republicanism lives on as an aspiration for many, the British monarch’s power is constrained to such an extent that it no
longer poses the threat of tyranny that it once did in 17th
century England, a time when ‘monarchy versus republic’
was a major political issue. This essay goes back to that era
and focuses on one of the key figures responsible for the
promotion of republicanism.
‘God helps those who help themselves’,1 is a saying that is
familiar to most English people, but few I suspect know the
name of the man who first coined this phrase: Algernon
Sidney.
Algernon Sidney was a 17th century English patriot, a brilliant political writer and principled freedom fighter, whose
battles for liberty and justice continued throughout his
eventful life: he fought against King Charles I’s forces in the
English Civil War, fighting with honour and distinction at
the battle of Marston Moor in 1644; as Member of Parliament for Cardiff he opposed the King’s execution in 1649 as
unlawful; he refused to leave the House when Oliver Cromwell dissolved Parliament in 1653 but was removed by force;
in 1679 he worked with William Penn for religious freedom
in England ; and finally he was executed for treason in 1683
for an alleged plot to kill King Charles II when his political
writings were used as ‘evidence’ of his guilt. He was completely exonerated after the Glorious Revolution of 1688.
Although barely known today, Algernon Sidney’s masterwork, Discourses Concerning Government, is credited by scholars
as being a major influence on both the Glorious Revolution
of 1688 in England and the Declaration of Independence in
America in 1776. In fact, after his death he became one of
the most influential English political writers of all time.
Inscribed beneath the frontispiece of the Discourses is this
quotation of Sidney’s in Latin:
Manus haec inimica tyrannis
Einse petit placidam cum liberate quietem2
Algernon Sidney first wrote this motto in the visitor’s book
of Copenhagen University. In translation, this literally
means:
This hand, enemy to tyrants,
By the sword seeks calm peacefulness with liberty.
A more poetic translation reads:
This hand, the rule of tyrants to oppose
Seeks with the sword fair freedom’s soft repose.
The State of Massachusetts still retains the second line of
this Latin inscription as their official motto.
Over a hundred years later, John Adams (America’s second
president) recognised Sidney’s significance, in a letter to
Thomas Jefferson dated 17th September 1823:
I have lately undertaken to read Algernon Sidney on government… As often as I have read it, and fumbled it
over, it now excites fresh admiration [i.e. wonder] that this
work has excited so little interest in the literary world. As
splendid an edition of it as the art of printing can produce
– as well for the intrinsic merit of the work, as for the
proof it brings of the bitter sufferings of the advocates of
liberty from that time to this, and to show slow the progress
of moral, philosophical and political illumination in the
world – ought to be now published in America.3
Before his execution, Sidney wrote these words in Apology in
the Day of His Death:
I had from my youth endeavoured to uphold the common
rights of mankind, the laws of this land, and the true
Protestant religion, against corrupt principles, arbitrary
power, and Popery, and I do now willingly lay down my
life for the same.4
In this essay I will explore the life and work of this little
known and yet extraordinary man, and conclude by suggesting that he was, to use Thomas G. West’s description, ‘a
martyr to liberty.’5
Ancestry
Algernon Sidney’s mother Dorothy was from the aristocratic
Percy family,6 whose most famous character was Henry
Percy (or Henry Hotspur of the North, as he was more usually known) who was killed at the Battle of Shrewsbury in
1403. This is the Hotspur of Shakespeare’s plays, Richard
II, and Henry IV Part I, who, with his father, the first Earl
of Northumberland, was involved in rebellions against both
of these kings. In the final Act of the latter play, in which
Hotspur is mortally wounded by Prince Hal, he is given the
famous line:
O, Harry, thou hast robb’d me of my youth!
Hotspur then declares that the imminent loss of glory and
honour is more difficult for him to bear than his own death:
I better brook the loss of brittle life,
Than those proud titles thou hast won of me;
They wound my thoughts, worse than thy sword my flesh:-
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
Page 2
But thought’s the slave of life, and life, Time’s fool,
And Time, that takes survey of all the world,
Must have a stop. O’I could prophesy,
But that the earthy and cold hand of death
Lies on my tongue: - No, Percy thou art dust,
And food for -And Prince Harry (Prince Hal), the future Henry V, and the
son of Henry IV, completes the line:
For worms, brave Percy. Fare thee well, great heart!7
Clearly, there is a fighting spirit, as well as a rebellious streak
running in Algernon’s family.
On his father’s side of the family were the intellectuals, the
most renowned being Algernon’s great uncle, Sir Philip Sidney, a celebrated Elizabethan poet. A staunch supporter of
the Protestant cause, Sir Philip met his death after an injury
fighting the Spanish in the Netherlands. Edmund Spenser,
the most famous poet of the Elizabethan age, best known
for his masterpiece, The Faerie Queene, memorialised Sidney in
the poem Astrophel, which he subtitled, A Pastorall Elegie vpon
the death of the most Noble and valorous Knight, Sir Philip Sidney.
The Sidneys were able to combine their noble military tradition with that of scholarship. Algernon Sidney possessed all
the right character traits to maintain these family traditions.
This is how Sidney was described by a contemporary:
A man of the most extraordinary courage, a steady man,
even to obstinacy, sincere, but of a rough and boisterous
temper, that could not bear contradiction, but would give
foul language upon it. He seemed to be a Christian, but
in a particular form of his own. He thought it was to be
like a divine philosophy in the mind, but he was against
all public worship, and every thing that looked like church.
He was stiff to all republican principles, and such an
enemy to every thing that looked like monarchy, that he set
himself in a high opposition against Cromwell when he
was made protector. He had indeed studied the history of
government in all its branches beyond any man I ever
knew.8
Early life
Algernon Sidney was born in 1623, and spent his early years
living at the family estate at Penshurst Place in Kent. He
was named after his mother Dorothy’s brother, Algernon
Percy, the 10th Earl of Northumberland. Algernon and his
elder brother Philip were taken to across the Channel to
Paris when their father, Robert Sidney, 2nd Earl of Leicester,
took up the post of ambassador in France. Algernon was in
his teens at the time, and lived for the next six years in
France where he was educated in the classics.
While in Paris, Robert Sidney became a friend of the Dutch
political philosopher, Hugo Grotius, whose work was to
become a major influence on Algernon’s thinking. Algernon
regarded Grotius’s Law of War and Peace as the most important book on political theory ever written.
Algernon was privileged to have a father who owned a vast
library with an extensive range of books on philosophy, history and politics, both ancient and modern.
The Civil War and the trial and execution of Charles I
Back in England, Sidney joined the military and at the age of
nineteen was a captain of cavalry. His father was appointed
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Algernon arrived in Dublin
in February 1642 with the army to begin his commission
there. He returned from war service in Ireland in 1643 and
in April the following year, he became a colonel in Manchester’s regiment of horse in the Eastern Association, choosing
to fight on the side of parliamentarian forces in the First
English Civil War.
This was no easy decision, as he was known to have said,
“Nothing but extreame necessity shall make me thinke of
bearing arms in England.”9
However, King Charles I had ruled without parliament from
1629 for what became known as the ‘Eleven Years Tyranny’
and had only recalled parliament to raise taxes in 1640. Dissent amongst the people had become widespread, the King
had attempted to arrest MPs in the House of Commons, and
civil war had broken out in August 1642 when the king’s
standard was raised in Nottingham. Sidney would now be
fighting against a monarchical tyranny and for the liberty of
the people.
In 1644 he [Sidney] fought in the battle of Marston Moor,
where an eyewitness reported that “Colonel Sidney charged
with much gallantry in the head of my Lord Manchester’s
regiment of horses, and came off with many wounds, the
true badges of his honor.” The wounds were severe.10
When Sidney was appointed to a command in the New
Model Army in April 1645, he resigned; his injuries made
him unfit for service. Sidney assured Fairfax, ‘I have not left
the army without extreame [sic] unwillingness … [and only]
by reason of my lamenesse’ [sic].11
On 10th May 1645 Sidney became governor of Chichester in
Sussex, which involved being commander of the Chichester
garrison and working with the Sussex County Committee.
In December that same year, Sidney was elected to the
Long Parliament (so called because it lasted for many years)
as MP for Cardiff.
By the end of 1648, the Second Civil War was effectively
over; the Royalists had suffered defeats across the country
leaving only Pontefract Castle in Cavaliers’ hands and the
King was in captivity at Hurst Castle. Pride’s Purge, the
measure taken by Colonel Thomas Pride to bar from Parliament all who were sympathetic to a compromise with the
King, gave rise to what became known as the Rump Parliament.
135 Commissioners were appointed
a show trial at Westminster Hall,
Cromwell had already determined.
January 1649; Judge John Bradshaw
and a Court was set for
the outcome of which
The trial began on 20th
presided and the Solici-
Page 3
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
tor General John Cooke led the prosecution of King Charles
I, who was charged with high treason.
At the time of the King’s trial, Sidney expressed doubts
about its legality and later recorded his thoughts in an account written to his father in 1660:
[in] the directing of that businesse, I did positively oppose
Cromwell, Bradshawe, and others, whoe would have the
triall to goe on, and drewe my reasons from theis tow
points: First, the King could be tried by noe court; secondly, that noe man could be tried by that court. This
being alleged in vaine, and Cromwell using formall words
(I tell you, wee will cut off his head with the crowne upon
it) I replied: you may take your own course, I cannot stop
you, but I will keep myself clean from having any hand in
this businesse, immediately went out of the room, and never
returned.12
Although nominated to serve as a Commissioner at the
King’s trial, Sidney refused to take an active part in the proceedings.
The High Court of Justice reached its verdict: Charles I was
condemned to death. 59 of the Commissioners signed the
death warrant (Oliver Cromwell was one of them, Algernon
Sidney was not).
The execution of Charles I took place on 30th January 1649,
on the scaffold erected in front of Banqueting House at
Whitehall Palace. Simon Schama describes the final scene,
starting with the king’s last words:
“I go from a corruptible to an incorruptible Crown: where
no disturbance can be, no disturbance in the world,” he
said, in that deep, quiet voice. Stray hairs tucked back
into his white cap, he lay down before the low block, and
the executioner, Richard Brandon, cut through his neck
with a single blow.13
The Republic
The new Commonwealth (or Republic), having abolished
the monarchy and the House of Lords, was governed by the
Council of State at the head of the Rump Parliament. Sidney, as a member of this purged parliament, was appointed
to a number of committees, including Irish affairs, Commonwealth accounts, and one dealing with the succession of
future Parliaments. He was also responsible for the governorship of Dover Castle, important for its role as a defence
against the exiled future king, Charles II.
In 1652, Sidney became a member of the Council of State,
and a senior government figure, with particular responsibility
as a spokesperson on Foreign and Naval Affairs. However,
relations between Sidney and Cromwell had been strained
during the period of the Republic and things came to a head
when Cromwell dissolved Parliament by force in 1653.
Cromwell, Sydney recalled, paced:
up and down the stage or floor in the middle of the
House…chid[ing] them soundly, and pointing particularly
upon somme persons, as…Whitlock…[and] Sir Henry
Vane to whome he gave very sharpe language…After this
he sayd to Corronell Harrison ‘Call them in’…and presently brought in…five or six files of Musqueteers …It
happened that day, that Algernon Sydney sate next to the
Speaker on the right hand; the Generall sayd to Harrison
‘Put him out’…but he sayd he would not go out, and sate
still…then Harrison and Wortley putt theyr hands upon
Sydney’s shoulders, as if they would force him to go out,
then he rose and went towards the doore. The Generall
went to the table where the mace lay…and sayd, ‘Take
away these baubles;’[and] sayd to young Sir Henry
Vane…that he might have prevented this extraordinary
course, but he was a Juggler, and had not so much as
common honesty. All being gon out, the door of the House
was locked.14
The Barebone’s Parliament, set up by Cromwell to replace
the Rump was short-lived and was quickly followed by the
Protectorate, a regime headed by Cromwell as Lord Protector, which Sidney regarded as a tyranny. The story goes that
Sidney mocked Cromwell’s claim to legitimacy by playing
Brutus in a production of Julius Caesar. Sidney was strongly
opposed to Cromwell’s rule under the banner of the Protectorate and would play no part in it.
After the death of Oliver Cromwell on 3rd September 1658,
his son Richard Cromwell became Lord Protector, but discontent amongst the army officers caused the downfall of
‘Tumbledown Dick’ as Richard was known, and in 1659 the
Protectorate was dissolved and the Rump Parliament restored.
Sidney resumed his role in Parliament and became part of a
peace delegation to negotiate between the kings of Denmark
and Sweden, enabling a treaty to be signed, which made a
lasting peace settlement between these two nations, to the
advantage of the Commonwealth of England.
In exile
After the restoration in 1660, Sydney was for the best part of
eighteen years in voluntary exile, the first three years of
which were spent in Italy where he devoted his time to study
and quiet contemplation at the country villa where he lived.
He travelled through Europe, spending time in Switzerland,
Flanders and the Netherlands in 1663.
He visited a number of European cities including Copenhagen, Venice, Geneva and Brussels. In 1664, he went to Germany and returned to the Netherlands in 1665. In 1666
Sydney moved to Paris and then to the south of France
where ‘Le Compte de Sidney’ as he became known, stayed
until 1677.
During his time in exile he survived two assassination attempts by royalist agents.
He also changed his mind about the execution of Charles I
and defended the regicide overseas as ‘the justest and bravest acti[o]n that ever was done in England or anywhere’.15
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
Sidney believed that England, under Charles II, was in danger of becoming an absolutist monarchy and so he thought
the best way to restore the republic would be to engage foreign help. He approached Dutch republicans with a view to
encourage them to invade England for that purpose but was
turned down. He also intrigued with France, even to the
extent of seeking financial backing for the republican cause
from Louis XIV.
Sidney returned to England in 1677 to attend to personal
matters.
Back in England
Not long after Sidney’s return to England his father died,
leading to a legal dispute with his elder brother Philip over
their father’s will. This is Sidney own account of what happened:
My father dyed within a few weeks after my coming over;
and when I prepared myself to return into Guascony, there
to passe the remaining part of my life, I was hindered by
the earl of Leicester my brother, who questioned all that
my father had given me for my subsistence; and by a long
and tedious suite in chancery, detained me in England,
until I was made a prisoner.16
What is interesting here is that Algernon clearly agrees with
his late father, who goes against the aristocratic tradition of
primogeniture by leaving his more merit-worthy son a substantial portion of the inheritance normally due to the eldest
son. This mirrors Algernon’s political views regarding the
relationship between inheritance and merit.
Religious liberty
In 1679, Sidney collaborated with his friend William Penn, a
Quaker, on a project to establish the right to ‘liberty of conscience’ in matters of religion in England. Penn recorded his
view that:
the government of conscience belongs to God, and cannot be
delegated to another, because no other can be infallible.
Christ’s kingdom is a spiritual kingdom; worship at the
command of the magistrate is not the spiritual worship
which God requires.17
Sidney, although not a Quaker himself, shared with Penn the
aim of religious toleration.
The Rye House Plot and Sidney’s execution.
Charles II’s reign was plagued by rumours of plots against
the Merry Monarch, caused mainly by fears of a Catholic
succession. Despite having many illegitimate children,
Charles had produced no legitimate heir. Next in line to the
throne was his brother James, whose ‘secret’ conversion to
Catholicism had become widely known. This gave rise to
what became known as the Exclusion Crisis. David Horspool explains:
What Parliament wanted to exclude was the succession of
a Catholic, something the brother of the Catholic in ques-
Page 4
tion would never agree to. The split over this issue led to
the great divide in English party and national politics
between ‘Tories’ and ‘Whigs’: the former, defenders of the
rights of royal succession despite any difficulties of religion;
the latter seeing a Catholic on the throne as the first step
towards an absolutist monarchy, which would force popery
onto the country at large.18
Whig extremists were accused of being involved in the Rye
House Plot, an alleged plan to assassinate King Charles II
and James, Duke of York, at Rye House, Hertfordshire, on
their way back from Newmarket races. Horspool gives
more details:
The man around whom this plot centred, although he
disavowed personal knowledge of it, was one whom many
Whigs would like to have seen succeed Charles instead of
his brother: James Scott, Duke of Monmouth. Monmouth was Charles’s illegitimate son by Lucy Walter, a
Welsh courtesan with whom Charles had had an affair
when in exile.19
Horspool continues:
The plot was revealed in June 1683 by one of the conspirators, and, as before, Charles and his government took the
opportunity to cast their net wide to catch anyone who
might be, or might be made to seem, involved. Though
several plotters fled or traded evidence for their freedom,
Lord Russell and the Earl of Essex were both arrested.
Essex committed suicide, apparently cutting his own
throat. Russell was sentenced to death. Monmouth himself had fled, but surrendered on the promise of a pardon,
though his backsliding on that infuriated his ever-forgiving
father, so much that he spent nearly all the rest of the reign
in exile. One man who was less fortunate was Algernon
Sidney, who was certainly a committed republican (and
therefore could be inculpated in the plot to remove the King,
though not to replace him), but against whom only one
witness could be found. The presiding judge, George Jeffreys, remembered for his vengeful part in the final act of
Monmouth’s life, decided that the words of Sidney’s unpublished Discourses Concerning Government,
which argued that ‘seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man’, provided the vital second witness for a treason trial, and Sidney was duly sentenced to death, taking his place as a Whig martyr in the
following century.20
This then is how Sidney met his end; he was beheaded on
Tower Hill on 7th December 1683 for his alleged involvement in the Rye House Plot. John Miller, who describes
Sidney as an ‘unbending aristocratic republican’, summarised
the real reason for his fate:
The evidence against him was weak – a republican tract
had to serve as the second witness that the law required –
but like his old friend Sir Henry Vane, he was executed
more for what he believed than for what he had done.21
One who attended his execution reported:
When he came on the scaffold, instead of a speech, he told
Page 5
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
them only that he had made his peace with God, that he
came not thither to talk, but to die; put a paper into the
sheriff’s hand, and another into a friend’s, said one prayer
as short as a grace, laid down his neck and bid the executioner do his office.22
In the written speech handed to the Sheriff, but not read
out, Sidney famously stated:
Moreover, we live in an age that makes truth pass for
treason, and as I dare not say anything against it, so the
ears of those that are about me will probably be found too
tender to hear it. This my trial and condemnation do
sufficiently evidence.23
Jonathan Scott has the full details of Sidney‘s execution:
Once on the scaffold, Sidney ‘bowed twice to the people’,
‘pulled off his hat and coat and doublet and gave them to
his servants and said, I am ready to die’. He ‘gave three
guineas to the executioner…[who] seemed to grumble as if
it were to[o] little, then he bid his man give him a guinea
or two more, which he did’.
‘Traversing the Scaffold’ Sidney ‘kneeled on the SouthSide, and Prayed to himself’, ‘Scarse 2 minuts’, or ‘while
you might tell 20’. Then having ‘Ordered the Executioner
to take his time, without expecting any sign, he layd down
his Head’.
Sidney’s head was ‘struck off at one Blow, all but a small
matter of flesh, which the Executioner sundred with his
knife…the Body at the time of the stroak scarcely moving…and so [he] took up his head and showed it round
the Scaffold, which was hung with mourning and the floor
also covered with black and a black coffin’.24
Algernon Sidney had faced his death with dignity and courage, and the bloody deed, ordered by a king and enabled by
an executioner’s axe, had confirmed his status as a martyr to
liberty.
After his life ended, Sidney became famous, not only for the
manner of his death but also for the influence of his writings: Court Maxims, and Discourses Concerning Government, both
of which were published posthumously.
Court Maxims
Sidney wrote Court Maxims between 1665 and 1666, but the
manuscript was not published until 1996, more than three
centuries after his death. Written after the Restoration, the
Maxims is an unrestrained criticism of what Sidney regarded
as the Stuart tyranny:
And as death is the greatest evil that can befall a person
Monarchy is the worst evill that can befall a nation.25
212 pages long, the Maxims is divided into 15 chapters and
written as a dialogue between ‘Eunomius ye Commonwealthsman’ and ‘Philalethes a morall Honest Courtier and
Lover of State Truth.’ Many of the arguments used in the
Maxims are repeated in his later work.
However, as the Maxims was not published until the 20th
century, its influence has not been as significant as Sidney’s
later and more famous work, Discourses Concerning Government,
which was written between 1681 and 1683.
The Discourses
Sidney’s Discourses Concerning Government was written as a response to Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriacha: A Defence of the Natural Power of Kings against the Unnatural Liberty of the People, a
book published in 1680, which argued in favour of the divine right of kings and of absolute monarchy, as existed in
France under Louis XIV. At the time of Sidney’s execution,
his major work, Discourses Concerning Government, remained
unfinished and unpublished, and yet it had been used in
evidence against him. It was eventually published posthumously in 1698.
Although the Discourses is regarded as a republican tract, Sidney did not argue against monarchy per se; he was opposed
to absolute power in the hands of a monarch:
‘only absolute monarchy…that I dispute against, professing much veneration for that which is mixed, regulated by
law, and directed to the public good’.26
In fact Chapter Two, Section 16, of the Discourses is headed:
The best Governments of the World have been composed of
Monarchy, Aristocracy and Democracy.
In this section he states:
...there never was a good government in the world, that did
not consist of the three simple species of monarchy, aristocracy and democracy.27
Later in the Discourses he notes:
The difference therefore between good and ill governments is
not, that those of one sort have an arbitrary power which
others have not, for they all have it; but that those which
are well constituted, place this power so as it may be beneficial to the people, and set such rules as are hardly to be
transgressed; whilst those of the other sort fail in one or
both these points.28
Sidney, who had studied world history and English history in
particular, had a high regard for some English monarchs
such as Henry V and Elizabeth I; but not all kings and
queens were so well regarded:
Tho [sic] we have little reason to commend all the princes
that preceded Henry the fifth; yet I am inclined to date the
general impairing of our government from the death of that
king, and his valiant brothers. His weak son became a
prey to a furious French woman, who brought the maxims
of her own country into ours, and advanced the worst of
villains to govern according to them. These measures were
pursued by Edward the fourth, whose wants contracted by
prodigality and debauchery, were to be supplied by fraud
and rapine. The ambition, cruelty and perfidiousness of
Richard the third; the covetousness and malicious subtlety
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
of Henry the seventh; the violent lust, rage and pride of
Henry the eighth, and the bigoted fury of Queen Mary,
instigated by the craft and malice of Spain, persuaded me
to believe that the English liberty did not receive birth or
growth from the favour and goodness of their gracious
princes.29
Sidney concludes:
And if we examine our history we shall find, that every
good and generous prince has sought to establish our liberties, as much as the most base and wicked to infringe
them.30
In the Discourses, Sidney is not just challenging Filmer’s assertion of the divine right of all kings; he is also making a case
for liberty as these extracts demonstrate:
…that exemption from the dominion of another, which
we call liberty … is the gift of God and nature.31
…the principle of liberty in which God created us …
includes the chief advantages of the life we enjoy, as well as
the greatest helps towards felicity, that is the end of our
hopes in the other.32
…liberty … is not a licentiousness of doing what is pleasing to everyone against the command of God; but an exemption from all human laws, to which they have not given
their assent.33
…the whole fabrick [sic] of tyranny will be much weakened, if we prove, that nations have a right to make their
own laws, constitute their own magistrates; and that such
as are so constituted owe an account of their actions to
those by whom, and for whom they are appointed.34
He also links property with liberty as this extract shows:
Property also is an appendage to liberty; and ‘tis as impossible for a man to have a right to lands or goods, if he has
no liberty, and enjoys his life only at the pleasure of another, as it is to enjoy either when he is deprived of them.35
With regard to the law, Sidney famously wrote, “That which
is not just, is not Law; and that which is not Law, ought not
to be obeyed.”36
As for good government:
If the publick [sic] safety be provided, liberty and propriety
secured, justice administered, virtue encouraged, vice suppressed, and the true interest of the nation advanced, the
ends of government are accomplished.37
And as to the right to legal and constitutional change:
As governments were constituted for the obtaining of justice, and …the preservation of liberty, we are not to seek
what government was the first, but what best provides for
the obtaining of justice, and preservation of liberty…Law
and constitutions ought to be weighed, and whilst all due
reverence is paid to such as are good, every nation may not
Page 6
only retain in itself a power of changing or abolishing all
such as are not so, but ought to exercise that power according to the best of their understanding, and in the place of
what was either at first mistaken or afterwards corrupted,
to constitute that which is most conducing to the establishment of justice and liberty.38
The most controversial aspect of the Discourses at the time of
its discovery was its justification of rebellion:
Rebellion, being nothing but a renewed war…of itself is
neither good nor evil, more than any other war; but is just
or unjust, according to the cause or manner of it.39
One of the most damning statements of which is:
[Kings] may call parliaments, if there be occasion, at times
when the law does not exact it; they are placed as sentinels,
and ought vigilantly to observe the motions of the enemy …
but if the sentinel fall asleep, neglect his duty, or maliciously endeavour to betray the city, those who are concerned may make use of all other means to know their
danger, and to preserve themselves … if that magistrate
had been drunk, mad, or gained by the enemy, no wise
man can think , that formalities were to have been observed. In such cases every man is a magistrate; and he
who best knows the danger, and the means of preventing it,
has a right of calling the senate or people to an assembly.
The people would, and certainly ought to follow him …
[for] nations … would be guilty of the most extreme stupidity, if they should suffer themselves to be ruined for
adhering to such ceremonies.40
The following extract from the Discourses was read out at
Sidney’s trial:
We may therefore change or takeaway kings … and in all
the revolutions we have had in England, the people have
been headed by the parliament, or the nobility and gentry
that composed it, and, when kings failed of their duties, by
their own authority called it.41
This statement helped to secure Sidney’s conviction for treason.
Legacy
Although his methods were often Machiavellian, Sidney’s
purpose was always principled; he stood unwaveringly for
liberty and against tyranny.
The Glorious Revolution of 1688 saw Sidney transformed
into a Whig martyr and an Act passed in 1689 declared that
his conviction was ‘wrongful and unjust’. The fact that the
new settlement, with William and Mary on the throne, would
not have been entirely to Sidney’s satisfaction seems to have
been conveniently overlooked.
Sidney’s greatest influence however was to be on the American continent in the 18th century. Thomas Jefferson gave
credit to Sidney and others, for their contribution to the
principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence of 1776:
Page 7
LI BE R T A R I A N A L LI A N C E
All its authority rests then on the harmonising sentiments
of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters,
printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right,
as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney &c.42
Jefferson described Discourses Concerning Government as, “a rich
treasure of republican principles” and “probably the best
elementary book of the principles of government, as
founded in natural right which has ever been published in
any language.”43
William Lloyd Garrison, one of the leaders of the American
anti-slavery movement, described Sidney as ‘the father of
modern Abolitionism’ and often quoted Sidney’s words in
his speeches.
In more recent times the libertarian philosopher F.A. Hayek
chose this quote to appear on the title page of his famous
work, The Constitution of Liberty:
Our inquiry is not after that which is perfect, well knowing
that no such thing is found among men; but we seek that
human Constitution which is attended with the least, or
the most pardonable inconveniences. ALGERNON
SIDNEY.44
When I consider the number of people across the world still
oppressed by tyrannical regimes, I think Sidney’s wise words
are still relevant today.
Sidney is libertarian in the sense that, like his contemporary
John Locke, he believed in life, liberty and property, and
above all he was opposed not only to absolutist monarchy
but also to tyranny of every kind; what’s more he was prepared to fight and eventually give his life for the cause of
freedom, making him a martyr for liberty.
Notes
(1) Algernon Sidney, Discourses Concerning Government (ed.
Thomas G. West), Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, 1996, p 210.
(2) Ibid p. xvi.
(3) Ibid p. xv.
(4) Ibid p. xxxvi.
(5) Ibid p. xxvi.
(6) The Percy family were descended from William de Perci,
who came to England from Normandy with William the
Conqueror in 1066.
(7) William Shakespeare, The Globe Illustrated Shakespeare: The
Complete Works, Annotated, Gramercy Books, New York,
1993, pp. 559-560: Henry IV Part I, Act V, Scene IV, 7787.
(8) Gilbert Burnet, Burnet’s History of My Own Time, (ed. Osmund Airy) Volume II , Part I : The Reign of Charles the
Second, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1900, p. 352.
(9) Jonathan Scott, Algernon Sidney and the English Republic,
1623-1677, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988, p.
83.
(10) Sidney, 1996, p. xxix.
(11) Ibid, p. 86.
(12) Blencowe, Sidney Papers, pp. 236-9: cited in Jonathan
Scott, Algernon Sidney and the English Republic 1623-1677, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988, p. 92.
(13) Simon Schama, A History of Britain 2: 1603-1776, The
British Wars, BBC Worldwide Ltd, London, 2001, pp. 139140.
(14) Blencowe, Sidney Papers, pp. 140-1: cited in Jonathon
Scott, Algernon Sidney and the English Republic 1623-1677, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988, p. 102.
(15) Scott, 1988, p. 92.
(16) Jonathan Scott, Algernon Sidney and the Restoration Crisis,
1677-1683, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991, p.
86.
(17) Scott, 1991, p. 133.
(18) David Horspool, The English Rebel, Penguin Books Ltd,
London, 2009, p. 281.
(19) Ibid pp. 281-282.
(20) Ibid, pp. 282-283.
(21) John Miller, Charles II, George Weidenfeld and Nicolson
Ltd, London, 1991, p. 367. Sir Henry Vane the Younger,
referred to in this passage, was a parliamentarian during the
English Civil War, and he was executed for high treason in
1662.
(22) Sidney, 1996, p. xxxv.
(23) Colonel Sidney’s Speech, retrieved 11th June 2012,
http://faculty.history.wisc.edu/sommerville/367/sidney%
20speech.htm.
(24) Scott, 1991, pp. 346-347.
(25) Scott, 1988, p. 187
(26) Ibid, p. 81.
(27) Sidney, 1996, p. 166.
(28) Ibid, p. 570.
(29) Ibid, p. 576.
(30) Ibid, p. 578.
(31) Ibid, p. 57.
(32) Ibid p. 8.
(33) Ibid, p. 9.
(34) Ibid, p. 12.
(35) Ibid, p. 403.
(36) Ibid, p. 380.
(37) Ibid, p. 444.
(38) Ibid, pp. 460-461.
(39) Sidney, Discourses, p. 457: cited in Scott, 1991, p. 229.
(40) Sidney, Discourses, p. 466: cited in Scott, 1991, p. 264.
(41) Sidney, Discourses, ch. 2, section 32: cited in Scott, 1991,
p. 264.
(42) Letter to Henry Lee, 8th May 1825 cited in: Thomas
Jefferson, Political Writings, (Ed. Joyce Appleby and Terence
Ball) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999, p. 148.
(43) Letter to John Trumbull, 18th January 1789, cited in:
Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, (ed. Julian P.
Boyd), Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1950, pp. 46768.
(44) F.A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, London, 1960, p. iii.