DOCSLIB.ORG

Constitutional History of England Since 1603 Ad

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Constitutional History of England Since 1603 Ad MANONMANIAM SUNDARANAR UNIVERSITY DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE & CONTINUING EDUCATION TIRUNELVELI 627012, TAMIL NADU B.A. HISTORY - III YEAR DJH3D - CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND SINCE 1603 A.D. (From the academic year 2016-17) Most Student friendly University - Strive to Study and Learn to Excel For more information visit: http://www.msuniv.ac.in 1 DJH3D: CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND SINCE 1603 A.D. Unit - I Early Stuart kings and their conflict with the Parliament – General causes of conflict between king and Parliament. – James I and his parliament – Charles I and his Parliament- Royal Absolutism and its consequence – Eleven years Tyranny – Long Parliament – Civil War – causes - nature and results. Unit-II Common Health and Protectorate – Rump Parliament – constitutional experiment of carnmell – events leading to Restoration of Monarchy- Later Stuarts and their rule Module – Charles II and his parliament – James II and events leading to Revolution of 1688 – Settlement of Glorious Revolution. Unit- III Parties and cabinet government in England – Emergence of political parties - Growth of cabinet system during George I and George II – Pessonal rule of George III its failure - Chartism and the Reform Era – The Reform Act of 1832 – The Act of 1867 – The Act of 1884. Unit- IV Constitutional Reforms in post- Victorian Age. The Parliamentary Actof 1911 - War cabinet – The Act of 1918 and Women’s sufferage - Constitutional changes in inter - war period - The Act of 1928 – The stature of Westernisation – Abdication of Edward VIII. Unit -V Development in post war years – Ireland under the union and after – Second Parliament Act of 1949 – Regency Legislation- British Constitutional History since 1949 – Features of Modern British Constitution – Constitutional development upto 1970 – common wealth relations. Reference Books: 1. Charles Duke Yonge - The Constitutional History of England 1760 to 1860 2. Henry Hallam - The Constitutional History of England 1760 to 1860 from Henry 3. Maitland F.W. - The Constitutional History of England VII to Death of George II 4. William Forbest - A Constitutional History of United Kingdom. 2 Unit - I Early Kings James I (1603 - 1625) James VI King of Scotland was the great grandson of Margaret, the daughter if HenryVii of England. The accession of James Stuart to the English throne as James I, on the death of Elizabeth in 1603, brought about the peaceful union of the rival monarchies of England and Scotland. He tried to make the union of two very different lands complete by assuming the title of King of Great Britain. There was peace in England and people did not fear any danger from a disputed succession inside the country or from external aggression. So strong monarchy was not considered essential for the welfare of the people. Even towards the end of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Parliament began to oppose the royal will. The attempts of the new king to make the two lands to have one parliament, one church and one law failed miserably, because the Scots were not interested in the union and the English Parliament did not co- operate with him for it did not trust him. James I had experience as the King of Scotland and he knew very well the history of the absolute rule of the Tudor monarchs in England. So he was determined to rule with absolute powers. He believed in the theory of Divine Right Kingship and his own accession to the English throne was sanctioned by this theory. The Succession Act of 1604 also recognized his hereditary right. According to the Divine Right theory, a monarch was accountable only to God. So he thought he was not responsible to Parliament or to the nation and it resulted in his clash with the Parliament. The Commons, who suffered under the restraints of the Tudors, opposed his attempts to become absolute. THE CAUSES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE KING AND THE PARLIAMNET IN THE 17TH CENTURY: The important event of the Stuart period was the struggle between the King and Parliment which lasted for a century and ended only when the Parliment secured its control over the crown. The struggle of the struggle of the 17th century was not the result of any new circumstance, but due to several circumstances that had been developing ever since the beginning of the Tudor period. There was a need for a strong and centralized monarchy in the Tudor Period. But with the settlement of the religious question, suppression of the baronage by the Tudor rulers and the defeat of the Spanish Armada, the country began to enjoy the atmosphere of peace and security. There was no fear from external danger and internal disorder. The undisputed right of James I to the English throne also removed all danger of wars due to dispute succession. Peace and prosperity enjoyed by the people 3 during the Tudor period made them become critical of the absolutism of the monarch. The influential middle class people became very assertive, especially when they acquired political training by being appointed to the posts of Justices of Peace, Sheriffs etc. Now they wanted to acquire more power and wealth. Further, James I believed in the Divine Right Theory of Kingship which had been developed by the Anglican Church and it maintained that hereditary monarchy was a divine institution favoured by God. Accordingly the King was answerable only to God. But the House of Commons which contained mostly the upper middle classmen like merchants, lawyers, etc., considered the King obstinate. Parliament had become an essential institution in the State by the time the Stuarts came to power and now it was aware of its powers and privileges obtained in the middle ages. The Stuart Kings also did not follow the Tudor methods of getting the support of the Parliament and so, they clashed with the Parliament often for there were certain things which could be done only by Parliament like levying a tax, or altering an existing tax. Another cause for the great struggle in the 17th century was the financial difficulties of the King which afforded the Parliament its opportunity. These financial difficulties were party due to a general rise in prices as a result of the increased inflow in Europe of Gold and Silver from the Spanish American mines, and partly due to the extravagance of the Stuart monarchs especially James I. This naturally resulted in financial difficulties which made the Stuart rulers resort to convening the Parliament to ask for money. Parliament which wanted to control the government began to lay down conditions for the grant of money. The intermingling of religion and politics, the legacy of Reformation was another cause for the struggle. Temporal and spiritual questions were linked together. The Church became a part of the State and subordinate to the government but the common people found it hard to identify religion with politics and harder still to subordinate their sacred faith to their political ideas and principles. Hence, when the great power of the State which had overwhelmed the Church decreased in the Stuart period, the cause of religion made itself increasingly felt. The ambiguity of certain English laws which were interpreted in different ways, served as another factor which facilitated the political struggle of the 17th century. Magna Carta was read in a different way. It appeared that Edward Coke could have invented Magna Carta and used his invention as a weapon in the struggle against his opponents. Another reason for this struggle between the Stuart Kings and their Parliament was the character of the Stuart Kings themselves. They never understood the psychology of the English nation. Therefore they could not feel the pulse of the 4 English ways. Their ideas were already formed and they never made an honest attempt to understand the English. Moreover James I was very conceited and obstinate. So the natural result was lack of co-operation between the ruler and the ruled. Different Stages of the Struggle The struggle between the king and Parliament in the 17th century was a long one, going on for more than a century. It can be divided into 4 periods. 1) The first period between 1588 - 1603 was one of transition from the Tudor period to the Stuart period. Parliament was seen in this period becoming very critical of Elizabeth's rule. 2) Second period 1603 - 1641 was one of constitutional struggle when attempts were made to impose each party's claims while opposing claims were described as illegal. There was also active criticism of governmental policy, but there was no violence involved in this struggle which was essentially a legal one. 3) The third period 1641 - 1660 was one of Puritan Revolution and Civil War. It was characterized by the spread of violence like suspension of monarchy, execution of the king and the establishment of the first and the only Republic which was short lived. 4) Fourth period 1660 - 1688 was that of Protestant Revolution when both Puritans and Anglicans joined hands as Protestants to rise against the Catholic tendencies of the later Stuarts and when James II was finally forced to abdicate and make room for Protestant successors William and Mary. The concluding period, though not one of the struggle can be regarded as that from 1689 - 1714, namely the period of the Revolution Settlement, at the end of which the Stuart dynasty came to a close in 1714 with the death of Queen Anne. 1. Period Between 1588 - 1603: The first period which was essentially a transition period was not very important except it served as an approach to the struggle of the 17th century. Very faint traces of the struggle between the Crown and Parliament could be seen in this period but the time was not yet ripe for the contest.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brycheiniog Vol 42:44036 Brycheiniog 2005 28/2/11 10:18 Page 1
    68531_Brycheiniog_Vol_42:44036_Brycheiniog_2005 28/2/11 10:18 Page 1 BRYCHEINIOG Cyfnodolyn Cymdeithas Brycheiniog The Journal of the Brecknock Society CYFROL/VOLUME XLII 2011 Golygydd/Editor BRYNACH PARRI Cyhoeddwyr/Publishers CYMDEITHAS BRYCHEINIOG A CHYFEILLION YR AMGUEDDFA THE BRECKNOCK SOCIETY AND MUSEUM FRIENDS 68531_Brycheiniog_Vol_42:44036_Brycheiniog_2005 28/2/11 10:18 Page 2 CYMDEITHAS BRYCHEINIOG a CHYFEILLION YR AMGUEDDFA THE BRECKNOCK SOCIETY and MUSEUM FRIENDS SWYDDOGION/OFFICERS Llywydd/President Mr K. Jones Cadeirydd/Chairman Mr J. Gibbs Ysgrifennydd Anrhydeddus/Honorary Secretary Miss H. Gichard Aelodaeth/Membership Mrs S. Fawcett-Gandy Trysorydd/Treasurer Mr A. J. Bell Archwilydd/Auditor Mrs W. Camp Golygydd/Editor Mr Brynach Parri Golygydd Cynorthwyol/Assistant Editor Mr P. W. Jenkins Curadur Amgueddfa Brycheiniog/Curator of the Brecknock Museum Mr N. Blackamoor Pob Gohebiaeth: All Correspondence: Cymdeithas Brycheiniog, Brecknock Society, Amgueddfa Brycheiniog, Brecknock Museum, Rhodfa’r Capten, Captain’s Walk, Aberhonddu, Brecon, Powys LD3 7DS Powys LD3 7DS Ôl-rifynnau/Back numbers Mr Peter Jenkins Erthyglau a llyfrau am olygiaeth/Articles and books for review Mr Brynach Parri © Oni nodir fel arall, Cymdeithas Brycheiniog a Chyfeillion yr Amgueddfa piau hawlfraint yr erthyglau yn y rhifyn hwn © Except where otherwise noted, copyright of material published in this issue is vested in the Brecknock Society & Museum Friends 68531_Brycheiniog_Vol_42:44036_Brycheiniog_2005 28/2/11 10:18 Page 3 CYNNWYS/CONTENTS Swyddogion/Officers
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia Law Review
    COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW VOL. 99 DECEMBER 1999 NO. 8 GLOBALISM AND THE CONSTITUTION: TREATIES, NON-SELF-EXECUTION, AND THE ORIGINAL UNDERSTANDING John C. Yoo* As the globalization of society and the economy accelerates, treaties will come to assume a significant role in the regulation of domestic affairs. This Article considers whether the Constitution, as originally understood, permits treaties to directly regulate the conduct of private parties without legislative implementation. It examines the relationship between the treaty power and the legislative power during the colonial, revolutionary, Framing, and early nationalperiods to reconstruct the Framers' understandings. It concludes that the Framers believed that treaties could not exercise domestic legislative power without the consent of Congress, because of the Constitution'screation of a nationallegislature that could independently execute treaty obligations. The Framers also anticipatedthat Congress's control over treaty implementa- tion through legislation would constitute an importantcheck on the executive branch'spower in foreign affairs. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................... 1956 I. Treaties, Non-Self-Execution, and the Internationalist View ..................................................... 1962 A. The Constitutional Text ................................ 1962 B. Globalization and the PoliticalBranches: Non-Self- Execution ............................................. 1967 C. Self-Execution: The InternationalistView ................
    [Show full text]
  • Why Did Britain Become a Republic? > New Government
    Civil War > Why did Britain become a republic? > New government Why did Britain become a republic? Case study 2: New government Even today many people are not aware that Britain was ever a republic. After Charles I was put to death in 1649, a monarch no longer led the country. Instead people dreamed up ideas and made plans for a different form of government. Find out more from these documents about what happened next. Report on the An account of the Poem on the arrest of setting up of the new situation in Levellers, 1649 Commonwealth England, 1649 Portrait & symbols of Cromwell at the The setting up of Cromwell & the Battle of the Instrument Commonwealth Worcester, 1651 of Government http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/ Page 1 Civil War > Why did Britain become a republic? > New government Case study 2: New government - Source 1 A report on the arrest of some Levellers, 29 March 1649 (Catalogue ref: SP 25/62, pp.134-5) What is this source? This is a report from a committee of MPs to Parliament. It explains their actions against the leaders of the Levellers. One of the men they arrested was John Lilburne, a key figure in the Leveller movement. What’s the background to this source? Before the war of the 1640s it was difficult and dangerous to come up with new ideas and try to publish them. However, during the Civil War censorship was not strongly enforced. Many political groups emerged with new ideas at this time. One of the most radical (extreme) groups was the Levellers.
    [Show full text]
  • A-Level History, HIS1D: Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy 1603-1702 Absolutism Challenged: Britain 1603-49 Section 2: Revolution 1629-1649
    A-Level History, HIS1D: Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy 1603-1702 Absolutism Challenged: Britain 1603-49 Section 2: Revolution 1629-1649. Part 1: 1629-1642 KEY TOPIC AREAS 1629-42: KEY TOPIC AREAS 1629-42: Divisions over Religion: Arminianism and Laudianism; Puritanism, and Millenarianism Political divisions in Personal rule: Short Parliament • Arminianism and Laudianism • The Short Parliament • Puritanism • Continued Opposition in 1640 • The emergence of Millenarianism Political divisions • The Long Parliament. Political divisions in Personal rule: Finance • The leadership and importance of John Pym. • Fiscal policy used in Personal rule Causes of the English Civil War • The opposition that it caused • Events culminating in the outbreak of the Civil War. Political divisions in Personal rule: Scotland • Policies in Scotland • The Crisis of 1637-42 • The extent of Opposition Political divisions in Personal rule: Ireland • Policies in Ireland • The Crisis of 1637-42 • The extent of Opposition A-Level History, HIS1D: Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy 1603-1702 Absolutism Challenged: Britain 1603-49 Section 2: Revolution 1629-1649. Part 1: 1629-1642 KEY WORDS KEY INDIVIDUALS Articles of Perth: had been forced through the Scottish Kirk in 1618. They were a set of Charles Stuart: ruled as Charles I 1625-1649 commands outlining religious practices. To Presbyterians, the commands seemed like William Laud: a key Arminian cleric who became the Archbishop of Canterbury in Catholicism 1633 and made changes to the Anglican Church Bill of Attainder: medieval method which allowed anyone who was seen as a threat to the Henrietta Maria: Catholic wife of Charles I, she aroused suspicion of a Catholic state t be removed by Parliament without formal trial conversion of the King and the court Book of Sports: originally produced by James in 1618.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing Another Continent's History: the British and Pre-Colonial Africa
    eSharp Historical Perspectives Writing Another Continent’s History: The British and Pre-colonial Africa, 1880-1939 Christopher Prior (Durham University) Tales of Britons striding purposefully through the jungles and across the arid deserts of Africa captivated the metropolitan reading public throughout the nineteenth century. This interest only increased with time, and by the last quarter of the century a corpus of heroes both real and fictional, be they missionaries, explorers, traders, or early officials, was formalized (for example, see Johnson, 1982). While, for instance, the travel narratives of Burton, Speke, and other famous Victorians remained perennially popular, a greater number of works that emerged following the ‘Scramble for Africa’ began to put such endeavours into wider historical context. In contrast to the sustained attention that recent studies have paid to Victorian fiction and travel literature (for example, Brantlinger, 1988; Franey, 2003), such histories have remained relatively neglected. Therefore, this paper seeks to examine the way that British historians, writing between the Scramble and the eve of the Second World War, represented Africa. It is often asserted that the British enthused about much of Africa’s past. It is claimed that there was an admiration for a simplified, pre-modern existence, in keeping with a Rousseauean conception of the ‘noble savage.’ Some, particularly postcolonialists such as Homi Bhabha, have argued that this all added a sense of disquiet to imperialist proceedings. Bhabha claims that a colonizing power advocates a ‘colonial mimicry’, that is, it wants those it ruled over to become a ‘reformed, recognizable Other, as a subject of difference that is almost the same, but not quite’.
    [Show full text]
  • Stapylton Final Version
    1 THE PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE OF FREEDOM FROM ARREST, 1603–1629 Keith A. T. Stapylton UCL Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2016 Page 2 DECLARATION I, Keith Anthony Thomas Stapylton, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed Page 3 ABSTRACT This thesis considers the English parliamentary privilege of freedom from arrest (and other legal processes), 1603-1629. Although it is under-represented in the historiography, the early Stuart Commons cherished this particular privilege as much as they valued freedom of speech. Previously one of the privileges requested from the monarch at the start of a parliament, by the seventeenth century freedom from arrest was increasingly claimed as an ‘ancient’, ‘undoubted’ right that secured the attendance of members, and safeguarded their honour, dignity, property, and ‘necessary’ servants. Uncertainty over the status and operation of the privilege was a major contemporary issue, and this prompted key questions for research. First, did ill definition of the constitutional relationship between the crown and its prerogatives, and parliament and its privileges, lead to tensions, increasingly polemical attitudes, and a questioning of the royal prerogative? Where did sovereignty now lie? Second, was it important to maximise the scope of the privilege, if parliament was to carry out its business properly? Did ad hoc management of individual privilege cases nevertheless have the cumulative effect of enhancing the authority and confidence of the Commons? Third, to what extent was the exploitation or abuse of privilege an unintended consequence of the strengthening of the Commons’ authority in matters of privilege? Such matters are not treated discretely, but are embedded within chapters that follow a thematic, broadly chronological approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Rump Ballads and Official Propaganda (1660-1663)
    Ezra’s Archives | 35 A Rhetorical Convergence: Rump Ballads and Official Propaganda (1660-1663) Benjamin Cohen In October 1917, following the defeat of King Charles I in the English Civil War (1642-1649) and his execution, a series of republican regimes ruled England. In 1653 Oliver Cromwell’s Protectorate regime overthrew the Rump Parliament and governed England until his death in 1659. Cromwell’s regime proved fairly stable during its six year existence despite his ruling largely through the powerful New Model Army. However, the Protectorate’s rapid collapse after Cromwell’s death revealed its limited durability. England experienced a period of prolonged political instability between the collapse of the Protectorate and the restoration of monarchy. Fears of political and social anarchy ultimately brought about the restoration of monarchy under Charles I’s son and heir, Charles II in May 1660. The turmoil began when the Rump Parliament (previously ascendant in 1649-1653) seized power from Oliver Cromwell’s ineffectual son and successor, Richard, in spring 1659. England’s politically powerful army toppled the regime in October, before the Rump returned to power in December 1659. Ultimately, the Rump was once again deposed at the hands of General George Monck in February 1660, beginning a chain of events leading to the Restoration.1 In the following months Monck pragmatically maneuvered England toward a restoration and a political 1 The Rump Parliament refers to the Parliament whose membership was composed of those Parliamentarians that remained following the expulsion of members unwilling to vote in favor of executing Charles I and establishing a commonwealth (republic) in 1649.
    [Show full text]
  • Topic Key Foci Suggested Tasks/ Homework Information the Political
    Topic Key Foci Suggested Tasks/ Homework Information The Political Nation and the social What was the Political Nation? Mind map THE POLITICAL NATION: The Pages 1-8 basis of power Social basis of power Monarch, Basis of Power, Political Importance of land ownership and rival forms of Nation Revision Guide Page 6 wealth James I and Charles I: character, Characters of James and Charles Produce a table showing the Pages 9-16 court and favourites Shape and style of monarchies- each monarchs views differences in James and Charles’ view Favourites especially Buckingham on monarchy Revision Guide Pages 7-9 19. Crown and Political Nation, 1604-1640 The finances of the Crown and Financial weaknesses of the Crown- causes Construct a timeline from 1603-1629 Pages 17-26 attempts at reform Attempts to reform and strengthen royal finances that shows all attempts by both kings during James’ reign to reform and improve crown finances- Revision Guide Pages 10-13 Great Contract colour code successes in green and Attempts to reform and strengthen royal finances failures in red during Charles reign Forced Loan Religion and religious divisions Challenges to James’ church from Catholics Mind map JAMES I AND RELIGION: Pages 27-36 Challenges to James’ church from Puritans Puritans, Scottish Kirk, Catholics Hampton Court Conference Revision Guide Pages 14-17 Bancroft’s Canons Mind map RELIGIOUS ISSUES UNDER Development of Arminianism CHARLES: Charles’ religious views, 18. Street Wars of Religion: Puritans and Charles’ favouring of Arminianism
    [Show full text]
  • Canada's Evolving Crown: from a British Crown to A
    Canada’s Evolving Crown 108 DOI: 10.1515/abcsj-2014-0030 Canada’s Evolving Crown: From a British Crown to a “Crown of Maples” SCOTT NICHOLAS ROMANIUK University of Trento and JOSHUA K. WASYLCIW University of Calgary Abstract This article examines how instruments have changed the Crown of Canada from 1867 through to the present, how this change has been effected, and the extent to which the Canadian Crown is distinct from the British Crown. The main part of this article focuses on the manner in which law, politics, and policy (both Canadian and non-Canadian) have evolved a British Imperial institution since the process by which the federal Dominion of Canada was formed nearly 150 years ago through to a nation uniquely Canadian as it exists today. The evolution of the Canadian Crown has taken place through approximately fifteen discrete events since the time of Canadian confederation on July 1, 1867. These fifteen events are loosely categorized into three discrete periods: The Imperial Crown (1867-1930), A Shared Crown (1931-1981), and The Canadian Crown (1982-present). Keywords: Imperial, the London Conference, the Nickle Resolution, the British North America Act, Queen Victoria, Sovereignty, the Statute of Westminster 109 Canada’s Evolving Crown Introduction Of Canadian legal and governmental institutions, the Crown sits atop all, unifying them by means of a single institution. This Crown has remained both a symbol of strength and a connection to Canada’s historical roots. The roots of the Crown run deep and can be traced as far back as the sixteenth century, when the kings of France first established the Crown in Canada in Nouvelle-France.
    [Show full text]
  • English Society 1660±1832
    ENGLISH SOCIETY 1660±1832 Religion, ideology and politics during the ancien regime J. C. D. CLARK published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011±4211, USA www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia Ruiz de AlarcoÂn 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain # Cambridge University Press 2000 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published as English Society 1688±1832,1985. Second edition, published as English Society 1660±1832 ®rst published 2000. Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typeface Baskerville 11/12.5 pt. System 3b2[ce] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Clark, J. C. D. English society, 1660±1832 : religion, ideology, and politics during the ancien regime/J.C.D.Clark. p. cm. Rev. edn of: English society, 1688±1832. 1985. Includes index. isbn 0 521 66180 3 (hbk) ± isbn 0 521 66627 9 (pbk) 1. Great Britain ± Politics and government ± 1660±1714. 2. Great Britain ± Politics and government ± 18th century. 3. Great Britain ± Politics and government ± 1800±1837. 4. Great Britain ± Social conditions. i.Title. ii.Clark,J.C.D.Englishsociety,1688±1832.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Life of Edmund Burke
    INTRODUCTION 1 Empire and Revolution Th is is a book about the vicissitudes of empire and revolution as confronted by one of the leading political intellects of the eighteenth century. Th e confrontation was complicated in a number of distinct ways. In the fi rst place the term “revolution” had a range of meanings. At its simplest it could denominate a change in the system of government. Yet it could also cover resistance to an established political order lead- ing to the creation of a new regime. Finally it could refer to the subversion of govern- ment along with the various liberties it was supposed to protect. Over the course of his life, Edmund Burke defended revolution in the fi rst two senses although he ardently set himself against the third. But while he supported the rights of legitimate rebellion, he also consistently upheld the authority of empire. However, the picture here was again a complex one. Burke cherished the rights of British imperial sover- eignty, yet he vehemently opposed the standing policies of the Empire. Underlying this apparent ambivalence was a commitment to the rights of conquest accompanied by a repudiation of the “spirit of conquest.” Th is referred to the attitude of usur- pation that Burke believed had characterised European governments in the gothic past. Although governments of the kind had their origins in expropriation, they had gradually accommodated the “spirit of liberty.” Nonetheless, modern liberty for Burke was a precarious achievement. It was capable of relapsing into the spirit of domination, not least in its interactions with the extra- European world.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Constitutionalism in France and the United States, A
    A COMPARISON OF CONSTITUTIONALISM IN FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES Martin A. Rogoff I. INTRODUCTION ....................................... 22 If. AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALISM ..................... 30 A. American constitutionalism defined and described ......................................... 31 B. The Constitution as a "canonical" text ............ 33 C. The Constitution as "codification" of formative American ideals .................................. 34 D. The Constitution and national solidarity .......... 36 E. The Constitution as a voluntary social compact ... 40 F. The Constitution as an operative document ....... 42 G. The federal judiciary:guardians of the Constitution ...................................... 43 H. The legal profession and the Constitution ......... 44 I. Legal education in the United States .............. 45 III. THE CONsTrrTION IN FRANCE ...................... 46 A. French constitutional thought ..................... 46 B. The Constitution as a "contested" document ...... 60 C. The Constitution and fundamental values ......... 64 D. The Constitution and nationalsolidarity .......... 68 E. The Constitution in practice ...................... 72 1. The Conseil constitutionnel ................... 73 2. The Conseil d'ttat ........................... 75 3. The Cour de Cassation ....................... 77 F. The French judiciary ............................. 78 G. The French bar................................... 81 H. Legal education in France ........................ 81 IV. CONCLUSION ........................................
    [Show full text]