Why Were Nineteenth-Century Liberals So Fixated On Constitution-Making And Constitutional Reform

Why were nineteenth-century liberals so fixated on constitution-making and constitutional reform?

The nineteenth century saw drastic political and social transformations across Europe, marked by the decline of absolute monarchies and the rise of liberal thought. For liberals, constitutions became indispensable for protecting individual freedoms, stabilising governance, and creating more inclusive political systems (Sellinger, P341). Prominent thinkers like Alexis de Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill viewed constitutions as essential tools for balancing liberty with stability (Collins, P4). Tocqueville, shaped by the turbulence of post-revolutionary France, believed that constitutions could act as safeguards against democratic excess and instability (Jennings, p. 367). Meanwhile, Mill’s push for constitutional reform in England aimed to expand civil liberties and individual freedoms within a representative system (Pitts, p.
Tocqueville, who studied the American democratic system in ‘Democracy in America’, admired its emphasis on local governance and citizen participation. He saw this model as something France could emulate to integrate more voices into politics without risking national instability (Jennings, p367). Tocqueville observed that because the aristocracy in America had been dismantled, “the people governed,” which he believed was instrumental to a stable democracy (Jennings, p. 367). In particular, he noted how the American constitution allowed for decentralised power, with authority distributed between state and federal governments, enabling a broad yet controlled participation. While he did not believe that France should copy America, he suggested that France could benefit from adopting similar structures to give communities a voice in governance while maintaining order (Jennings,