By Ogbodo, Ignatius Ifeanyichukwu
John Locke defined property right as right acquired through fixing of property by means of mixing personal labour with natural resources. Locke asserts that what constitutes primary title for property is labour. In the state of nature, a man’s labour is his own and what he mixes with his labour becomes his own. He focuses attention on propounding natural right to property. As man has the right and duty to self-preservation, so has he the right to the means required for this purpose. He argues that God, who gave the world to men in common, gave them reason to make use of it to the best advantage of life and convenience. However, he sets limit to what a man can mix with his labour and convert to his property. For him, the same law of nature that gave man property also sets acquisition limit such that as much as one can use for the advantage of life before it spoils can he with his labour fix as property. The implications of Locke’s position on property right is that if mixing of labour with resources lying in nature is the only criterion for property right then those who acquire theirs through other means such as inheritance, gift, transfer and trade cannot claim any property right in them because they did not mix any personal labour with resources lying in nature to fix them as property. Though, Locke is correct by proposing mixing of labour with resource lying in nature as the condition for property right, it is not the only means of property acquisition. Property can also be acquired through inheritance, transfer, gift and transaction on already acquired piece of property. However, its strength is that it addresses the prevalent social ill of demanding and receiving emoluments without proportional work output.