Bryce and Dicey

Two towering figures of late nineteenth century constitutional law are Albert Venn Dicey and James Bryce. Their views were valued by Presidents and Prime Ministers. Their works were the key works consulted by those who wrote the Australian constitution. There are frequent references to Bentham  in private letters to each other, but I like the one below particularly. Note that these are hastily type-written letters between friends, and the spelling and grammar can be imperfect:

18 August 1905, Dicey to Bryce

Your letter raises an interesting & perplexing question – how far was a man who gives his name to a movement in reality of great influence on the course of the movement? My answer in the case of Bentham is this.

If he had never existed, many of the changes he & his school advocated would ere thes [sic] have taken place. This holds I fancy of the intellectual or moral leader of every great movement, even of Xtianity [sic] itself. Then too it is the inevitable tendency of all of us to identify a general movement of thought with some man who gave his name to it. From what I have read, as an ignoramus, & from what I have heard definitely said by Huxley, I infer that Bacon did a good deal to preach belief in science but did in reality to promote it. [sic]

But when all these & the like reflections are taken into account, I deliberately think that at the present day, we are more likely to underrate than to overrate the influence of Bentham. A man is sometimes best understood from his failures. Consider from this point of view his attempt to found the Panopticon or model prison. His faith in it is shown by his proposal to be himself the jailor. The ingenuity of the plan by its being all but adopted by Parliament & his having been actually granted some 30,000 pounds, if my memory does not deceive me in compensation for the expenses incurred by him on a plan not ultimately carried out. This by the way is also a curious proof of his influence. The points on wh. [which] I want in this matter to insist is [sic] that Bentham possessed two very rare qualities. He had the gifts of an inventor. He persuaded his generation or rather the best men of it that laws could be systematically reformed on distinct principles with a view to the public good & further e.g. as to procedure thought out the steps by wh. this could be done. Suppose even that his views of public good were erroneous or as I should suppose imperfect, consider how few have been the cases in wh. the preachers of law reform have thought out even a tolerable system.  If a man of Bentham’s talent could at the present day think out a systematic scheme of Socialist reform or innovation. Suppose he had made himself a master of the existing law of England. Suppose he had preached his doctrine for 50 or 60 years. Suppose he had at last now when the world is clearly tending towards socialism created a small school of ardent disciples & gained the attention of leading politicianss. His influence might, in my judgment be disastrous but would I think be enormous. And all that I have supposed is, I think, true of Bentham. His absurdities & pedantries were in later life patent. Sydney Smith derided & Macaulay attacked the Utilitarians. Yet they are both careful to speak with respect of Bentham. James Mill & Place were the most self-assertive & crabbed & hardest of men, yet they both gloried in being B’s disciples. Bulwer whose whole aim was to represent the predominant sentiment of every time in wh. he wrote gives in his earlier writings great consideration to benthamism. [sic]

Of course I entirely admit that B’s work was carried on by men only indirectly influenced by him. Still I believe that his influence really was far greater than we now imagine.

Bentham scores several mentions in their correspondence. Dicey’s views on Bentham’s influence might be seen in thee letter above as a little equivocal, though it seems fair to suggest that it finally settles on the idea the influence was profound. Some further mentions add a liitle weight to the place of Bentham in their thoughts.

30 Sept 1902, Dicey to Bryce

On the matter of poor relief bentham [sic] & his School were surely absolutely in the right.

14 November 1914, Bryce to Dicey

But surely the badness of present legislation is a reason why men should, like Bentham, devote themselves to improving it.