Frank Stacey Memorial Lecture, 1988
| DOI | 10.1177/095207678900400102 |
| Date | 01 March 1989 |
| Published date | 01 March 1989 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
4
Frank
Stacey
Memorial
Lecture,
1988
The
Individual
and
The
State
The
Rt.
Hon.
Lord
Justice
Glidewell
The
theme
of
this
conference
- ’Citizens
Rights
and
the
Modern
British
State’
-
has
been
chosen
to
commemorate
the
tercentenary
of
the
Glorious
Revolution.
The
principal
participants
in
that
Revolution
would
not,
I
believe,
have
used
the
phrase
’Citizens
Rights’
to
describe
what
they
were
seeking
to
achieve.
The
traditional
view
is
that
what
the
revolution
did
achieve
was
the
triumph
of
Parliament
over
the
Executive
i.e.
the
Crown,
the
culmination
of
the
struggle
which
is
the
theme
of
any
political
history
of
England
in
the
17th
century.
No
doubt
that
was,
at
least
for
a
time,
correct.
Certainly
the
accession
of
William
and
Mary
and
the
Declaration
and
Bill
of
Rights
saw
the
beginning
of
the
Whig
ascendancy.
As
Professor
Plumb
points
out,
this
in
turn
led
to
a
long
period
of
political
stability,
a
surprising
change
from
the
passions
and
quarrels
of
the
preceding
85
years.
In
time,
this
stability
coupled
with
the
inability
of
George
I
to
speak
fluent
English
resulted
in
the
development
of
Cabinet
government
and
the
emergence
of
a
Prime
Minister.
It
is
ironic
that
the
Revolution
resulted
in
the
growth
of
the
institu-
tions
which
exercise
powers
far
more
wide
ranging
than
those
of
a
17th
Century
monarch.
It
is
a
commonplace
that
Parliament’s
control
of
Government
is
today
limited
and
spasmodic.
One
must
not
undervalue
the
occasions
when
Parliament
-
par-
ticularly
in
recent
years
the
House
of
Lord
-
has
forced
the
Government
to
retreat.
But
it
is
apparent
that
once
Government
decides
that
some
measure
or
action
is
essential,
it
usually
gets
its
own
way.
The
replacement
of
the
system
of
property
rating
by
the
Community
Land
Tax
is
an
outstanding
recent
example.
On
a
free
vote,
I
have
little
doubt
it
would
be
defeated.
As
matters
stand
the
Bill
will
clearly
be
passed.
If,
then,
Parliament
is
usually
unwilling
or
unable
to
control
the
Executive,
to
what
extent
can
the
courts
do
so,
and
is
it
desirable
that
they
should?
It
is
ironic
that
the
fact
that
it
has
taken
so
long
for
administrative
law
to
be
recog-
nised
as
both
necessary
and
respectable
in
England
can
be
traced
back
to
the
1688
Revolution.
The
common
Lawyers’
successful
determination
to
abolish
the
Star
Chamber
and
other
prerogative
courts
and
to
ensure
that
all
actions
involving
cen-
tral
or
local
government
should
be
tried in
the
ordinary
courts
by
the
normal
con-
To continue reading
Request your trial