A new look at economic causes of the constitution
Monetary and trade policy in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12006281 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mary Mckinney Schweitzer (Villanova University) |
| Year | 1989 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 15-26 |
| Publication date | 1989-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Social Science Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0362-3319 • E-ISSN: 1873-5355 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1016/0362-3319(89)90034-7 |
| OpenAlex | W2091549485 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 5 |
By contrast to Charles Beard's 1913 economic interpretation of the Constitution, this article maintains that the key is the economic policies of the various colonial (later state) legislatures. Prior to independence the colonies had strong and autonomous economic policies which they defended vigorously against the British government. Although they resented regulation from London, they also benefited because London kept their neighboring colonies in line. After independence, this restraint was gone. If they wanted the benefits of cooperation, they had to negotiate it themselves. Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia faced these problems and sought a solution in a strong Constitution
Colonialism · Constitution · Economics · Government (linguistics · Independence (probability theory · Interpretation (philosophy · Legislature · Negotiation · Political economy · Political science · State (computer science · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Public Administration
| Highly cited | No |
|---|