constitutional law

Just what sorts of ideas were going on in the Framers' minds when the drafted the federal constitution? This book provides great insight into the ideas, concepts and intellectual history and framework that the Framers were operating upon.

An extremely capable historian and writer, McDonald starts out by noting some important considerations facing the Framers: protecting the life, liberty and property of citizens; their commitment to republican government (although there was disagreement and uncertainty as to what that precisely meant); history (in the sense of convention, legacy and their place in its continuing flow); and political theory.

The chapter on the Rights of Englishmen begins with the Framers understandings of freedom, liberty, and property-as inherited through English common law, refined by Blackstone, and developed independently in the New World. Blackstone considered property a third "absolute right," following life and liberty. Of course, he used the word property in the more narrow sense of dominion (rather than the sense of proper as something proper or particular to an individual person). In any case, McDonald discusses Blackstone's qualifications and exceptions to this absolute right, which allowed for the regulation of property (through sumptuary laws, eminent domain, taxation, and the granting of monopoly privileges). McDonald then relates America's experience in light of the English understandings and tradition. The emphasis on property is particular important because, until the Revolution, Americans' general views about liberty were grounded in the same kinds of historical, philosophical and legal foundations as their views of property.

McDonald's chapter on political theory is particularly enjoyable, as he traces the tensions existing amongst the different theories of rights held by the Framers, as well as some of their respective implications. He discusses the appeals made by Americans to natural law as transcending the general norms of English law. A succinct discussion of John Locke's natural law views, which McDonald insists has been "astonishingly misinterpreted." McDonald then proceeds to an interesting comparison and contrast of the two predominant strands of republicanism in America: puritan and agrarian. He proceeds to analyze the "country party" oppositionists as a third influential group and delves into Montesquieu. Many readers will be struck with the differences McDonald describes between the notion of "separation of powers" and a system of "checks and balances"-since most people today describe them as one in the same.

Also interesting is the political economy chapter. McDonald has written more extensively on this subject elsewhere, and it is also the subject of much attention in his stellar biography of Alexander Hamilton. Indeed, the latter part of the chapter is devoted to Hamilton's sophisticated ideas about commerce and finance. The earlier part of the chapter discusses the influence of the French physiocrats, Adam Smith and other early political economists, and continues with an overview of England's experience with public debt.

One chapter is devoted to principles and interests-both those that motivated Framers and (relatedly) how the Framers understood the role and effects of those concepts. Here one finds an interesting discussion of Madison's understanding of factions-made famous in Federalist No. 10. McDonald traces the intellectual roots of this idea, discussing the views of Hume on factions and contrasting them with the Bolingbrokean understandings of republicanism. "[I]t is meaningless to say the Framers intended this or that the Framers intended that," notes McDonald, "their positions were diverse and, in many particulars, incompatible." His survey certainly affirms this understanding (which is also adequately covered in Jack Rakove's "Original Meanings").

A succinct chapter describing the Constitutional Convention follows, in which McDonald catalogues how different groups at the Convention employed the arguments of different political theorists in order to advance their respective viewpoints as to how the federal government was to be constituted, what powers were to be entrusted to it, and to which respective branch they would be entrusted. Much to my delight, McDonald contrasts the understanding of the separation of powers as embodied in the Constitutional document with pre-existing understandings of the separation of powers and the duties commonly thought proper to the respective branches.

Finally, the concluding chapter discusses the powers given to the federal government in the Constitution, and how they operate.

All in all, this is an excellent volume that anyone appreciating political theory, American history and our nation's Constitution should enjoy.

Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitutuion written by Forrest McDonald is a look at the time and mindset of the Framers of the Constitutuon of the United States. Novus Ordo Seclorum is translated as "A new order of the ages (is created);" and is the the moto on the great seal of the United States and is found on the backside of the one-dollar bill.

I must say this, if you plan on reading about the orgins of the Constitution of the United States, this is a must book to read. I would not make this book my first attempt into this subject though. You need a background of information to really get the benefit of this writing. A look at the "Federalist Papers, Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Debates, and read some of Bernard Bailyn writings along with some knowledge of the principles involved in the framing itself, ie. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton are just a few.

This being said and a basis of knowledge at hand, reading and understanding the work that was involved in forming a working, viable government that was appropriately balance and checked and refined, lest it become an engine of tyranny; was the task at hand. Principles and interest played an improtant part as we read in the book making the job that much more difficult, but not unattainable. As both a good knowledge was needed of political science and economics otherwise you have no driving force behind your engine of government making it moot.

Dual-sovereignty is another good point raised (States Rights) in this book and the eventual resolution. What I found interesting is that the author is not a big fan of Charles A. Beard's "Economic Interpretation of the Constitution" and he is not alone in that feeling. I found this book to employ the most modern techniques of analyis and uses caution to bear on concepts and information, to bring it in context to this eighteenth-century subject. The Founders left an enormous quanity and variety of written materials, informing us from many points of view what they did, what they read, what they believed, and what they thought. It is up to us to understand this and make imformed decisions.

After reading this book, you will have a greater appreciation for the longer-term necessity as to why the Constitution of the United States was framed as it was.

A very balanced book. It really brings the complexity of the writing of the Constitution to life. The most important thing to take from the book is that it is wrong to say "the framers believed this" or "the framers believed that". The framers were a diverse group with many views. The Constitution is document of compromize that came out as a work of political genius. Too bad we don't follow it much anymore. Of course, one might reply that if it was a work of political genius, we'd still be following it. Touche to myself!