The question says, "According to the passage, the English attitude toward the English Constitution differed from the colonial attitude toward constitutions in that the English regarded their Constitution as..."
We're looking for the perspective that the English in ENGLAND had about their constitution. This is discussed in lines 44 through 49, which states, "To the English, the word 'constitution' meant the whole body of law and legal custom formulated since the beginning of the kingdom, whereas to these colonials a constitution was a specific written document enumerating specific powers.
From this, we know that the English in England thought of the constitution as the entire body of law and legal custom since the beginning of the kingdom. In the answer choices, we're looking for the one that best matches this description.
Answer A is incorrect because the English didn't just view their constitution as the legal foundation of the kingdom...they also viewed it as the whole body of law. We can get rid of this because it's too limiting.
Answer B is incorrect because it doesn't mention the English viewing their constitution as a whole body of law and legal custom. We can eliminate this choice.
Answer C says, "a cumulative corpus of legislation and legal traditions." This is a great paraphrasing of "the whole body of law and legal custom formulated since the beginning of the kingdom," so it's the correct answer. It's a restatement of what we read in lines 44 through 47, where we're told how the English viewed their constitution.
Answer D is incorrect because it is too specific and does not factor in the entire body of law, which is what the English viewed their constitution as.
Answer E is incorrect because it misses the point of the English viewing their constitution as the whole body of law and legal custom. It also says unchangeable when in actuality, the English viewed their constitution as changeable.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!
