Definition
Petition of Right refers to two distinct legal concepts that share a name but operate in entirely different domains. Researchers must identify which meaning applies before proceeding.
1. Procedural remedy (private law): A common law and equity proceeding by which a subject of the Crown could seek relief for certain injuries caused by the Crown or its servants — including wrongful seizure of goods, unlawful detention of land, or claims arising from breach of contract. The petition was addressed directly to the sovereign, setting out the petitioner's right to the thing demanded and praying the Crown to do justice and make restitution. It functioned as the functional equivalent of a civil suit against the Crown in an era when the Crown could not be sued as of right. Upon filing, the petition required the Crown's endorsement — traditionally "Soit droit fait al partie" ("Let right be done to the party") — before the matter could proceed to judicial determination.
2. Constitutional instrument (public law): The Petition of Right of 1628, a landmark English parliamentary declaration of the liberties of the subject, assented to by King Charles I. It affirmed that the Crown could not impose taxes without parliamentary consent, imprison subjects without cause shown, billet soldiers in private homes without consent, or impose martial law in peacetime. It is a foundational document of English constitutional history, standing alongside Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights 1689.
Common Language
Wiktionary: "A remedy available to subjects to recover property from the Crown."
Editorial note: Wiktionary captures only the procedural, private-law meaning and omits entirely the constitutional instrument of 1628. In legal and historical research, the constitutional document is often the more significant referent. A researcher encountering "Petition of Right" in a constitutional history context who relies on the Wiktionary gloss will fundamentally misread the source.
Common Confusion
The two meanings are easily conflated because they share identical names and both involve a subject addressing a grievance to the Crown. The procedural remedy (meaning 1) was a continuing legal mechanism used across centuries in equity and common law; the constitutional instrument (meaning 2) was a single parliamentary act of 1628. Historical sources frequently use the phrase without clarifying which they mean, and some earlier legal dictionaries treat only one meaning. Burrill addresses only the 1628 constitutional document; Black's and Bouvier address only the procedural remedy. Neither dictionary alerts the reader that the other meaning exists.
Why It Matters in Research
The split between the two meanings is the central navigational challenge. A researcher working in English constitutional history will encounter the 1628 Petition of Right as a primary source document with a specific, fixed content. A researcher working in English private law or early equity will encounter petition of right as an ongoing procedural form with a body of case law and formal requirements.
In the procedural sense, the mechanism evolved significantly. By the nineteenth century it had been refined by case law and was used for money claims as well as property recovery. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 largely abolished the petition of right as a procedural device in English law, replacing it with direct suit against the Crown. Any research into post-1947 English Crown liability should not expect to find petition of right as a live mechanism in modern sources.
American researchers should note that the petition of right as a procedural tool never transplanted directly into American law, which developed its own sovereign immunity doctrine independently. The 1628 constitutional document, however, was well known to American Founders and is sometimes referenced in constitutional debates and early American legal writing. Encountering "petition of right" in an early American constitutional text almost always signals the 1628 instrument, not the procedural remedy.
Corpus researchers should also be alert to the phrase "right to petition," which is a related but distinct concept — the First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances — and should not be conflated with either meaning of "petition of right."
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries divide sharply by meaning, and none of the shelf sources covers both.
Black's Law Dictionary and Bouvier's Law Dictionary both treat petition of right exclusively as the procedural chancery remedy, defining it as the proceeding by which a subject recovers property from the Crown. Bouvier adds useful descriptive detail, noting that the petitioner sets out his right and prays the king to do justice, and that the proceeding is analogous to a civil action. Both dictionaries cross-reference "petition de droit," the Anglo-French form.
Rapalje & Lawrence provides the most operationally useful historical account of the procedural remedy, specifying the categories of cognizable claims — illegal seizure of goods, wrongful possession of land, and contract-based money claims — and citing Thomas v. The Queen for the governing principles. This is the most practically detailed historical account among the shelf sources.
Burrill's Law Dictionary, by contrast, defines petition of right solely as the 1628 constitutional instrument, citing Blackstone's Commentaries and the State Trials. Burrill makes no mention of the procedural remedy at all.
The gap is significant: no single shelf source treats both meanings, and a researcher relying on any one of these dictionaries will have an incomplete picture of the term's full scope.
Jurisdictional Note
The procedural petition of right was an English law mechanism that did not take root in American jurisdictions. In England, it was effectively superseded by the Crown Proceedings Act 1947. The 1628 constitutional document is part of the inherited English constitutional tradition and appears in both English and American historical legal sources, but it is not operative law in the United States.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
The Right to Petition and Access to Courts — Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia, constitutional_107
The Petition Clause and Lobbying Regulation — Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia, constitutional_190