No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 June 2021
Abstract
This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that investigating Stephen’s liberalism holds lessons for us today about the structure of liberal theory. Stephen, the paper demonstrates, articulated robustly both technocratic and pluralistic visions of politics. Perhaps more stridently than any Victorian, he put forward an argument for the necessity and legitimacy of expert rule against claims for popular government. Yet he also insisted on the plurality of perspectives on public affairs and on the ineluctable conflict between them. Because both of these facets existed in his work, he fit within the liberal ranks, but he did not show how the two dimensions fit together. The tension that we discover from reading Stephen is, the article concludes, not peculiar to him, but a permanent feature of liberal theories, which always include both technocratic and pluralistic elements.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association
References
Abizadeh, Arash. 2011. “Hobbes on the Causes of War: A Disagreement Theory.” American Political Science Review 105(2): 298–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annan, Noel. 1955. “The Intellectual Aristocracy.” In Studies in Social History: A Tribute to Trevelyan, G. M., ed. Plumb, John H., 243–87. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1873. “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.” British Quarterly Review 58: 256–58.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1996. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, ed. Burns, J. H. and Hart, H. L. A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biagini, Eugenio. 1992. Liberty, Retrenchment, and Reform: Popular Liberalism in the Age of Gladstone, 1860–1880. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Christopher, and Accetti, Carlo Invernizzi. 2017. “Populism and Technocracy: Opposites or Complements?” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20(2): 186–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourke, Richard. 2018. “What is Conservatism? History, Ideology, Party.” European Journal of Political Theory 17(4): 449–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrow, J. W. 1992. “Holmes in His Intellectual Milieu.” In The Legacy of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., ed. Gordon, Robert, 17–30. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Carlyle, Thomas. 1904. New Letters of Thomas Carlyle, 2 vols, ed. Carlyle, Alexander. London: J. Lane.Google Scholar
Cazzola, Matilde. 2019. “Un lume indiano sui problemi europei: James Fitzjames Stephen e il governo del Reform Act.” Storia del pensiero politico 8: 89–108.Google Scholar
Cocks, Raymond. 2004. Sir Henry Maine: A Study in Victorian Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colaiaco, James. 1983. James Fitzjames Stephen and the Crisis of Victorian Thought. New York: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comte, Auguste. 1865. A General View of Positivism, trans. Bridges, J. H.. London: Trbner.Google Scholar
Conti, Gregory. 2016. “James Fitzjames Stephen, John Stuart Mill, and the Victorian Theory of Toleration.” History of European Ideas 42(3): 364–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conti, Gregory. 2021a. “Inegalitarian Inclusivity: A Reading of J.S. Mill’s Mature Theory of Representation and Electoral Institutions in Context.” History of Political Thought 42 (1): 98–130.Google Scholar
Conti, Gregory. 2021b. “James Fitzjames Stephen and the Landscape of Victorian Political Thought.” Modern Intellectual History 18 (1): 261–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conti, Gregory. Forthcoming. “James Ftizjames Stephen’s Other Enemies: Catholicism and Positivism in Liberty, Equality, Fraternity and Beyond.” Global Intellectual History.Google Scholar
Deslauriers, Théophile. N.d. “James Fitzjames Stephen and Henry Maine on Status and Contract in Britain and Its Empire.” Princeton University. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Dicey, Albert Venn. 1890b. “Ought the Referendum to Be Introduced into England?” Contemporary Review 57: 489–511.Google Scholar
Dicey, Albert Venn. 1914. Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England. London: The MacMillan.Google Scholar
Edwards, David. 1985. “Toleration and the English Blasphemy Law.” In Aspects of Toleration, eds. Horton, John and Mendus, Susan, 75–98. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Eliot, George. 1998. Selections from George Eliot’s Letters, ed. Haight, Gordon. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gauchet, Marcel. 2007. L’avènement de la démocratie, I: La révolution moderne. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Gottfried, Paul. 1996. “Liberalism and Democracy.” Journal of Libertarian Studies 12 (2): 233–55.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1988. “Morality and Ethical Life: Does Hegel’s Critique of Kant Apply to Discourse Ethics.” Northwestern University Law Review 83(1&2): 38–53.Google Scholar
Hajdenko-Marshall, Catherine. 2012. “Sir James Fitzjames Stephen (1829–1894): un intellectuel sceptique, critique des idées libérales de son temps.” Cahiers Victoriens et Édouardiens 75: 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Frederic. 1873a. Letters to John Morley, 1873 folio 1. London: Harrison Papers, British Library of Political and Economic Science, London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Harrison, Frederic. 1873b. “The Religion of Inhumanity.” Fortnightly Review 13: 677–99.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert. 1991. The Rhetoric of Reaction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, Mark. 1963. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: The Proving Years. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. 1898. The Will to Believe and Other Essays. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Jones, Emily. 2017. Edmund Burke and the Invention of Modern Conservatism, 1830–1914. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, Christopher. 1969. “Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy.” Victorian Studies 13(2): 181–98.Google Scholar
Kent, Christopher. 1978. Brains and Numbers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, Russell. 1960. The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot. Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
Lecce, Steven. 2008. Against Perfectionism: Defending Liberal Neutrality. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippincott, Benjamin. 1931. “James Fitzjames Stephen: Critic of Democracy.” Economica 33: 296–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippincott, Benjamin. 1938. Victorian Critics of Democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Mantena, Karuna. 2010. Alibis of Empire: Henry Maine and the Ends of Liberal Imperialism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, John. 1997. Carl Schmitt’s Critique of Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendenhall, Allen. 2017. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.: Pragmatism, and the Jurisprudence of Agon. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1963–91. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, 33 vols. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Joseph J. 2003. “J.S. Mill on Plural Voting, Competence and Participation.” History of Political Thought 24(4): 647–67.Google Scholar
Morley, John. 1873a. Letter to Frederic Harrison, 22 April 1873. London: Harrison Papers, British Library of Political and Economic Science, London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Müller, Jan-Werner. 2009. “The Triumph of What (If Anything)? Rethinking Political Ideologies and Political Institutions in Twentieth-century Europe.” Journal of Political Ideologies, 14(2): 211–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, Jerry. 1997. Conservatism: An Anthology of Social and Political Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norton, Charles Eliot. 1913. Letters of Charles Eliot Norton, 2 vols. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
O’Grady, Jean. 1987. “Mill and Fitzjames Stephen: Personal Notes.” Mill Newsletter 22: 2–9.Google Scholar
Parry, J. P. 1986. Democracy and Religion: Gladstone and the Liberal Party, 1867-1875. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, J. P. 2001. “The Impact of Napoleon III on British Politics, 1851–1880.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 11: 147–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Richard. 1991. “Foreword.” In Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, by Stephen, James Fitzjames. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 2012. “The Romance of Force: James Fitzjames Stephen on Criminal Law.” Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 10: 263–75.Google Scholar
Pyle, Andrew. 1994. “Introduction.” In Liberty: Contemporary Responses to John Stuart Mill, ed. Pyle, Andrew, vii–xxi. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Roach, John. 1953. Sir James Fitzjames Stephen: A Study of His Life and Thought. PhD diss. Cambridge University.Google Scholar
Roach, John. 1957. “Liberalism and the Victorian Intelligentsia.” Cambridge Historical Journal 13(1): 58–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodensky, Lisa. 2013. “Introduction.” In The Story of Nuncomar and the Impeachment of Sir Elijah Impey, by Stephen, James Fitzjames, xv–xxxvi. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2013. Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenblatt, Helena. 2019. The Lost History of Political Liberalism: From Ancient Rome to the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Saint-Simon, Henri de. 1975. Selected Writings on Science, Industry, and Social Organisation, ed. Taylor, Keith. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Schneider, Thomas. 2007. “J. S. Mill and Fitzjames Stephen on the American Civil War.” History of Political Thought 28(2): 290–304.Google Scholar
Schneider, Thomas. 2015. “Introduction.” In On Society, Religion, and Government, by Stephen, James Fitzjames, xvii–xxviii. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Selinger, William, and Conti, Gregory. 2020. “The Lost History of Political Liberalism.” History of European Ideas 46(3): 341–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Walter M. 1963. European Positivism in the Nineteenth Century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin. 1998. Liberty before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, K. J. M. 1989. James Fitzjames Stephen: Portrait of a Victorian Rationalist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, K. J. M. 2012. “Stephen, Sir James Fitzjames, First Baronet.” In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/26375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, K. J. M. 2014. “Introduction and Commentary.” In Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: A General View of the Criminal Law of England, ed. Smith, K. J. M, 1–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stapleton, Julia. 1997. “Introduction.” In Liberalism, Democracy, and the State in Britain, ed. Stapleton, Julia, 7–39. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Stapleton, Julia. 1998. “James Fitzjames Stephen: Liberalism, Patriotism, and English Liberty.” Victorian Studies 41(2): 243–63.Google Scholar
Stapleton, Julia. 2017. “Introduction.” In Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, by Stephen, James Fitzjames, xix–xxxviii. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1857a. “Light Literature and the Saturday Review
.” Saturday Review 4: 34–5.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1857b. “Mr. Dickens as a Politician.” Saturday Review 3: 8–9.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1859c. “Mr. Mill on Political Liberty.” Saturday Review 7: 186–87.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1862a. Defence of the Rev. Rowland Williams D. D., in the Arches’ Court of Canterbury. London: Smith, Elder & Co.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1864c. “Kaye’s History of the Indian Mutiny.” Fraser’s Magazine 70: 757–74.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1864d. “The Privy Council and the Church of England.” Fraser’s Magazine 69: 521–37.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1865a. “De Tocqueville’s Historical Fragments.” Saturday Review 20: 116–18.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1865b. “English Ultramontanism [I–II].” Fraser’s Magazine 71/72: 671–87, 1–35.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1865c. “Merivale’s Sermons on the Conversion of the Roman Empire.” Fraser’s Magazine 71: 363–82.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1865d. “Senior’s Historical and Philosophical Essays.” Saturday Review 19: 479–81.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1866b. “The Price of Party Government.” Pall Mall Gazette, July 11, 105–6.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1866c. “Two Forms of Liberalism.” Pall Mall Gazette, October 20, 1217–8.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1866d. “Conscience and the Church Rates.” Pall Mall Gazette, May 10, 1505–6.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1868a. “The Archbishop of York on the Limits of Philosophical Inquiry.” Saturday Review 8: 11–12.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1868b. “The House of Commons as a Debating Club, Pall Mall Gazette, June 11.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1869. “The Present State of Religious Controversy.” Fraser’s Magazine 80: 537–74.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1870. “The Problem of Positivism.” Pall Mall Gazette, January 5, 9.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1873a. Letter to Emily Cunningham, 30 January 1873. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1873b. Letter to Emily Cunningham, 7 February 1873. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1873c. “Mr. O’Keefe on Ultramontanism.” Pall Mall Gazette, April 29, 1577–8.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1873d. “Parliamentary Government.” Contemporary Review 23: 1–19, 165–81.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1874a. “The Laws of England as to the Expression of Religious Opinion.” Contemporary Review 25: 446–75.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1874b. Letter to Emily Cunningham, 3 October 1874. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1875. “Legislation under Lord Mayo.” In A Life of the Earl of Mayo, Fourth Viceroy of India, 2 vols, by Hunter, William W., 143–226. London: Smith, Elder & Co.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1879. Letter to Lord Lytton, 1 October 1879. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1882a. Letter to Lady Grant Duff, 20 February 1882. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1882b. Letter to Lady Grant Duff, 13 July 1882. Cambridge: Stephen Papers, Cambridge University Library.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1883a. “The Foundations of the Government of India.” The Nineteenth Century 14: 541–68.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1883b. History of the Criminal Law of England, 3 vols. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 1886. “On the Suppression of Boycotting.” Nineteenth Century 20: 765–84.Google Scholar
Stephen, James Fitzjames. 2017. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stephen, Leslie. 1895. The Life of James Fitzjames Stephen. London: Smith, Elder & Co.Google Scholar
Stokes, Eric. 1959. The English Utilitarians and India. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, David. 1951. England in the Nineteenth Century, 1815–1914. London: Pelican Books.Google Scholar
Thompson, Dennis. 1976. John Stuart Mill and Representative Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tolley, Christopher. 2017. “Editorial Preface.” In The Life of James Fitzjames Stephen, ed. Stephen, Leslie, xli–xliv. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tuck, Richard. 1991. “Introduction.” In Leviathan: Revised student edition, by Hobbes, Thomas, ed. Tuck, Richard, ix–xlv. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vermeule, Adrian. 2015. “Publius as an Exportable Good.” The New Rambler Review, December 3, 2015. https://newramblerreview.com/book-reviews/law/publius-as-an-exportable-good.Google Scholar
Vermeule, Adrian. 2021. “Rules, Commands and Principles in the Administrative State.” Yale Law Journal Forum, January 6, 2021. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/VermeuleEssay_pq1o3t31.pdf.Google Scholar
Vernon, Richard. 2007. The Career of Toleration: John Locke, Jonas Proast, and After. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Von Arx, Jeffrey P. 1985. Progress and Pessimism: Religion, Politics, and History in Late Nineteenth Century Britain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Warner, Stuart. 1993. “Foreword.” In James Fitzjames Stephen: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, ed. Warner, Stuart D., ix–xxiv. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 2004. The Vocation Lectures, eds. Owen, David and Strong, Tracy. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Weill, Rivka. 2003. “Dicey Was Not Diceyan.” Cambridge Law Journal: 62 (2): 474–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.