Sec. 31.  It will perhaps be objected to this, that if 
gathering the acorns, or other fruits of the earth, &c. makes a 
right to them, then any one may ingross as much as he will.  To 
which I answer, Not so.  The same law of nature, that does by 
this means give us property, does also bound that property 
too.  God has given us all things richly, 1 Tim.  vi.  12.  is 
the voice of reason confirmed by inspiration.  But how far has he 
given it us?  To enjoy.  As much as any one can make use of to 
any advantage of life before it spoils, so much he may by his 
Tabour fix a property in: whatever is beyond this, is more than 
his share, and belongs to others.  Nothing was made by God for 
man to spoil or destroy.  And thus, considering the plenty of 
natural provisions there was a long time in the world, and the 
few spenders; and to how small a part of that provision the 
industry of one man could extend itself, and ingross it to the 
prejudice of others; especially keeping within the bounds, set 
by reason, of what might serve for his use; there could be then 
little room for quarrels or contentions about property so 
established.

     Sec. 32.  But the chief matter of property being now not 
the fruits of the earth, and the beasts that subsist on it, but 
the earth itself; as that which takes in and carries with it 
all the rest; I think it is plain, that property in that too is 
acquired as the former.  As much land as a man tills, plants, 
improves, cultivates, and can use the product of, so much is his 
property.  He by his labour does, as it were, inclose it from 
the common.  Nor will it invalidate his right, to say every body 
else has an equal title to it; and therefore he cannot 
appropriate, he cannot inclose, without the consent of all his 
fellow-commoners, all mankind.  God, when he gave the world in 
common to all mankind, commanded man also to labour, and the 
penury of his condition required it of him.  God and his reason 
commanded him to subdue the earth, i.e. improve it for the 
benefit of life, and therein lay out something upon it that was 
his own, his labour.  He that in obedience to this command of 
God, subdued, tilled and sowed any part of it, thereby annexed to 
it something that was his property, which another had no title 
to, nor could without injury take from him.

     Sec. 33.  Nor was this appropriation of any parcel of 
land, by improving it, any prejudice to any other man, since 
there was still enough, and as good left; and more than the yet 
unprovided could use.  So that, in effect, there was never the 

less left for others because of his enclosure for himself: for he 
that leaves as much as another can make use of, does as good as 
take nothing at all.  No body could think himself injured by the 
drinking of another man, though he took a good draught, who had a 
whole river of the same water left him to quench his thirst: and 
the case of land and water, where there is enough of both, is 
perfectly the same.

     Sec. 34.  God gave the world to men in common; but since he 
gave it them for their benefit, and the greatest conveniencies of 
life they were capable to draw from it, it cannot be supposed he 
meant it should always remain common and uncultivated.  He gave 
it to the use of the industrious and rational, (and labour was 
to be his title to it;) not to the fancy or covetousness of the 
quarrelsome and contentious.  He that had as good left for his 
improvement, as was already taken up, needed not complain, ought 
not to meddle with what was already improved by another's labour: 
if he did, it is plain he desired the benefit of another's pains, 
which he had no right to, and not the ground which God had given 
him in common with others to labour on, and whereof there was as 
good left, as that already possessed, and more than he knew what 
to do with, or his industry could reach to.

     Sec. 35.  It is true, in land that is common in 
England, or any other country, where there is plenty of people 
under government, who have money and commerce, no one can inclose 
or appropriate any part, without the consent of all his fellow-
commoners; because this is left common by compact, i.e. by the 
law of the land, which is not to be violated.  And though it be 
common, in respect of some men, it is not so to all mankind; but 
is the joint property of this country, or this parish.  Besides, 
the remainder, after such enclosure, would not be as good to the 
rest of the commoners, as the whole was when they could all make 
use of the whole; whereas in the beginning and first peopling of 
the great common of the world, it was quite otherwise.  The law 
man was under, was rather for appropriating.  God commanded, and 
his wants forced him to labour.  That was his property which 
could not be taken from him where-ever he had fixed it.  And 
hence subduing or cultivating the earth, and having dominion, we 
see are joined together.  The one gave title to the other.  So 
that God, by commanding to subdue, gave authority so far to 
appropriate: and the condition of human life, which requires 
labour and materials to work on, necessarily introduces private 
possessions.

     Sec. 36.  The measure of property nature has well set by 
the extent of men's labour and the conveniencies of life: no 
man's labour could subdue, or appropriate all; nor could his 
enjoyment consume more than a small part; so that it was 
impossible for any man, this way, to intrench upon the right of 
another, or acquire to himself a property, to the prejudice of 
his neighbour, who would still have room for as good, and as 
large a possession (after the other had taken out his) as before 
it was appropriated.  This measure did confine every man's 
possession to a very moderate proportion, and such as he might