American Revolution: A Constitutional Interpretation: 9

by Charles Howard McIlwain

The American Revolution: A Constitutional Interpretation is a Pulitzer Prize awarded history which deals with legal and political aspects of the American Revolution. The American Revolution began and ended with the political act or acts by which British sovereignty over the thirteen English colonies in North America was definitely repudiated. All else was nothing but cause or effect of this act. Of the causes, some were economic, some social, others constitutional. But the Revolution itself was none of these; not social, nor economic, nor even constitutional; it was a political act, and such an act cannot be both constitutional and revolutionary; the terms are mutually exclusive. So long as American opposition to alleged grievances was constitutional it was in no sense revolutionary. The moment it became revolutionary it ceased to be constitutional. When was that moment reached? The Problem The Precedents The Realm and the Dominions The Precedents Natural and Fundamental Law Taxation and Virtual Representation The Charters

Genres: History, American

64 pages, Paperback

First published December 30, 1899

Reviews

[Andrew · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was bored silly. But I'm glad through all of the Latin and textual analysis, McIlwain was able to prove that the American Revolution was constitutional!

[Dave Carroll · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was America's case for revolution a constitutional or corporate argument?

This Interpretation of the American Revolution honestly felt more like a thesis than a book. In fact, I would not be surprised that this was a dusty paper resurrected in book fashion by Charles Howard McIlwain was a Princeton History Professor who probably only received the 1924 Pulitzer Prize for History because Princeton was in charge of choosing the winners that year and many Princeton academics and alumni were bestowed Pulitzer Prizes that year. In his thesis he argued the American Revolution came about because of a disagreement over the interpretation of the constitution of the United Kingdom . And while the American Colonies were ready to fight over taxation without representation, as Parliament had dared with the Stamp Act, in truth, as America was a for-profit venture, like a ship or a bank, it may not have been entitled to representation than any other corporate entity. It's an intriguing argument.

[William Whalen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I laughed, I cried, I screamed in horror. Sorry, that was a different book that I'm currently reading. This was a boring slog, but very enlightening. It served its' purpose well.