In 1773 John Adams observed that one source of tension in the
debate between England and the colonies could be traced to the
different conceptions each side had of the terms "legally" and
"constitutionally"--different conceptions that were, as Shannon
Stimson here demonstrates, symptomatic of deeper jurisprudential,
political, and even epistemological differences between the two
governmental outlooks. This study of the political and legal
thought of the American revolution and founding period explores the
differences between late eighteenth-century British and American
perceptions of the judicial and jural power.
In Stimson's book, which will interest both historians and
theorists of law and politics, the study of colonial juries
provides an incisive tool for organizing, interpreting, and
evaluating various strands of American political theory, and for
challenging the common assumption of a basic unity of vision of the
roots of Anglo-American jurisprudence. The author introduces an
original concept, that of "judicial space," to account for the
development of the highly political role of the Supreme Court, a
judicial body that has no clear counterpart in English
jurisprudence.
Originally published in 1990.
The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand
technology to again make available previously out-of-print books
from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press.
These paperback editions preserve the original texts of these
important books while presenting them in durable paperback
editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly
increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the
thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since
its founding in 1905.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!