* Which country is being discussed? The concept of constitutional interpretation varies greatly across different nations.
* What specific historical period is being referred to? The interpretation of a constitution can change over time.
However, I can offer some general insights into the concept of broad versus narrow construction of a constitution:
* Broad Construction: This approach interprets the constitution loosely, allowing for a wider range of applications and adaptation to changing circumstances. It emphasizes the spirit and intent of the constitution, rather than sticking strictly to its literal wording.
* Narrow Construction: This approach interprets the constitution strictly, focusing on the exact language and meaning of its words. It prioritizes a literal interpretation, even if it limits the constitution's applicability in modern times.
Historically, the debate between broad and narrow construction has been ongoing in many countries.
* United States: The US has seen a shift towards broader interpretations of the Constitution in areas like civil rights, but also periods where a more narrow approach prevailed.
* Canada: Canada's constitution is often interpreted broadly, especially regarding issues of federalism and indigenous rights.
* United Kingdom: The UK, with its unwritten constitution, has a more flexible approach, allowing for interpretations based on evolving societal norms and values.
To understand the historical context of the sentence you provided, you need to clarify the specific country and time period.
For instance, if the sentence referred to the United States in the early 20th century, it might be suggesting that there was a consensus at the time for a broader interpretation of the Constitution, particularly regarding issues like the expansion of federal power.
However, without more context, it's impossible to provide a definitive answer.