The Essential Federalist and Anti-Federalist PapersHackett Publishing, 15. sep. 2003 - 392 strani Here, in a single volume, is a selection of the classic critiques of the new Constitution penned by such ardent defenders of states' rights and personal liberty as George Mason, Patrick Henry, and Melancton Smith; pro-Constitution writings by James Wilson and Noah Webster; and thirty-three of the best-known and most crucial Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. The texts of the chief constitutional documents of the early Republic are included as well. David Wootton's illuminating Introduction examines the history of such American principles of government as checks and balances, the separation of powers, representation by election, and judicial independence—including their roots in the largely Scottish, English, and French new science of politics. It also offers suggestions for reading The Federalist, the classic elaboration of these principles written in defense of a new Constitution that sought to apply them to the young Republic. |
Iz vsebine knjige
Zadetki 1–5 od 30
... Montesquieu's.) Locke was prepared to accept that the best government would be a form of limited monarchy (for one needed a strong and unified executive), but during the English Civil War others insisted that monarchs would always ...
... Montesquieu's conviction that republics must be small in size, and wrong to con- clude that one could not unite America into one republic, but could at best gather a number of States into a loose confederacy. The principle of ...
... Montesquieu (whom he does not mention by name, but who is one of the “theoretic politicians” he has in mind) was wrong because he did not understand the significance of representation. Moreover, the larger the republic, the greater the ...
... Montesquieu had believed to be the key argument against large republics. In a large republic, Montesquieu claimed, it will be hard for individuals to think of their private interests as indistinguishable from the common interest, both ...
... pursuing the public good, so that one could easily argue that a limited monarchy (such as that of Britain) was a true commonwealth or republic. Montesquieu, on the other hand, had used republic and monarchy xxiv Introduction.