This thesis investigates a federal tradition in British political and constitutional thought from 1850 to 1950. It uses four major figures as case studies: Lord Acton, James Bryce, John Neville Figgis, and Harold Laski. From them a brand of liberal federalism emerges that is subsequently developed within socialist thought. These figures are concerned with challenging the ascendant unitary theory of the British state articulated by A. V. Dicey and transformed into a dominant orthodoxy within the mainstream of British Conservative-Unionist and Labour politics. Two major themes run through the thesis. Firstly, it aims to show how the federal tradition is more closely related to subsequent pluralist ideas than has previously been appreciated. Secondly, it examines challenges to British unitarism before, during, and after the publication of Dicey’s seminal Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution in 1885. Emphasis is placed on a continuous tradition of thought that develops between the eras of Acton and Laski. Concern with federalism emerges in the late 1850s as a reaction to European nationalism. Interest grew as the American Civil War placed a disputed federal constitution at the forefront of political discourse; in the 1870s and 1880s the Irish question raised similar debates in Britain. The political pluralism of Figgis and Laski was shaped by a non-territorial brand of federalism with its genealogical roots in Acton. Read as an examination of unitarism, Acton offers a pre-Diceyan interpretation of the British constitution that was looser, historicist, and, as such, less narrowly constricted. Bryce provides insight into the immediate context of Diceyan unitarism as it emerged. His jurisprudence illustrates an attempt to reconcile federal institutions with indivisible sovereignty via scientific analogy. Figgis and Laski reflect a post-Diceyan perspective that moves the debate away from formality and towards a pragmatic analysis of real life.
Stuart Arthur Neave (Wed,) studied this question.