Constituting Empire: New York and the Transformation of Constitutionalism in the Atlantic World, 1664-1830
Univ of North Carolina Press, 2006 M05 18 - 496 páginas
According to the traditional understanding of American constitutional law, the Revolution produced a new conception of the constitution as a set of restrictions on the power of the state rather than a mere description of governmental roles. Daniel J. Hulsebosch complicates this viewpoint by arguing that American ideas of constitutions were based on British ones and that, in New York, those ideas evolved over the long eighteenth century as New York moved from the periphery of the British Atlantic empire to the center of a new continental empire.
Hulsebosch explains how colonists and administrators reconfigured British legal sources to suit their needs in an expanding empire. In this story, familiar characters such as Alexander Hamilton and James Kent appear in a new light as among the nation's most important framers, and forgotten loyalists such as Superintendent of Indian Affairs Sir William Johnson and lawyer William Smith Jr. are rightly returned to places of prominence.
In his paradigm-shifting analysis, Hulsebosch captures the essential paradox at the heart of American constitutional history: the Revolution, which brought political independence and substituted the people for the British crown as the source of legitimate authority, also led to the establishment of a newly powerful constitution and a new postcolonial genre of constitutional law that would have been the envy of the British imperial agents who had struggled to govern the colonies before the Revolution.
Comentarios de la gente - Escribir un comentario
No encontramos ningún comentario en los lugares habituales.
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Constituting Empire: New York and the Transformation of Constitutionalism in ...
Daniel Joseph Hulsebosch
Sin vista previa disponible - 2005
Abraham Yates administration American Revolution Antifederalists appointment argued assembly authority Bailyn Blackstone Board of Trade Britain British Empire Cadwallader Colden century charter civil claimed Clinton Coke Coke’s Colonial New York colonists common law Confederation constitutional law constitutionalism Continental Congress convention corporate crown debate DeLancey DHRC elections elite Elliot enforce England English constitution English law English liberties federal Federalist Federalist Papers George George Clinton Goebel governor Hamilton Ibid imperial agents Indian institutions interpretation Iroquois James Kent John Jay Johnson Papers Journal judges jurisdiction jury Justice Kent’s king king’s land law of nations lawyers legal culture legislation legislature Livingston London Lord loyalists LPAH Madison Melancton Smith ment military Native Americans NYCD NYHS Coll NYPL officers Parliament parliamentary Petition political principles Privy Council Provincial Congress ratification Republic republican royal settlers sovereignty state’s statutes supreme court tion treaty Union William Smith Jr York City York’s Yorkers
Página 30 - And it appears in our books, that in many cases, the common law will control acts of parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void ; for when an act of parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it, and adjudge such act to be void ; and therefore in 8 E 330 ab Thomas Tregor's case on the statutes of W.