Evarts Boutell Greene

Summary

Evarts Boutell Greene The American Historical Review (1917)

Sometimes, as for instance in the case of currency and "bank" legislation, a conservative minority in America was disposed to seek imperial protection against a radical majority. In other cases the royal veto was invoked to protect a colony against injurious legislation by one of its neighbors.
Generally speaking, the colonists did not question the legality of this prerogative and even so radical a person as Jefferson recognized its place in the constitution of the empire.
Source: Wikisource

Evarts Boutell Greene The American Historical Review (1917)

Its utility is sufficiently displayed in the British System. Nothing could maintain the harmony and subordination of the various parts of the empire, but the prerogative by which the Crown stifles in the birth every Act of every part tending to discord or encroachment. It is true the prerogative is sometimes misapplied thro' ignorance or a partiality to one particular part of the empire: but we have not the same reason to fear such misapplications in our System. [6]
Source: Wikisource

Evarts Boutell Greene The American Historical Review (1917)

In short, Jefferson, while condemning the "wanton exercise" of this prerogative, regarded it as a potentially useful part of the imperial, or federal, system.
In the enthusiasm of 1776, Americans were naturally not inclined to emphasize the advantages of the royal veto; but in the conservative reaction which followed the war, the problem of an effective control upon provincial radicalism or particularism was seen in a new light. In the Federal Convention of 1787, the members were fairly well agreed as to the desirability of some check on state laws
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature