professorspolitik och samhällsförändring 1900. A Law Faculty was founded at Stockholm University College in 1907, although administrative law did not assume any prominent position there in the early decades of the 20th century. It was in Uppsala that this was to happen: Hugo Blomberg was appointed as a full professor in constitutional law, administrative law and public international law in 1894. He was a typical professor-politician, with a mixture of the old and new, of domestic and foreign, typical of his time: in favour of customs protection, against dissolution of the union with Norway and the introduction of universal suffrage, yet in favour of women’s rights of appointment to certain government offices and against antisemitism. Blomberg liked to refer to foreign law in his writings and teaching. He had made several research trips and, among other things, had studied for Paul Laband in Strasbourg. Like an echo from his masters, Blomberg claimed that the State was a legal entity, founded “in a higher world order or in the ethical necessity of the State”. However he liked to emphasise what he considered as the special nature of Swedish law, with an unclear boundary between public administration and the administration of justice, collegial government work and autonomous authorities. With reference to legal security, the heavy workload of the Government and foreign models, he recommended, as Bergfalk and Matthias Theodor Rabenius done before him, the establishment of a supreme administrative court. Blomberg was critical about his Royal Majesty’s sovereign right to legislate on economic and municipal issues, and claimed that the democratically elected Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) must be allowed to have a say, a perspective that illustrates the general shift of the time from an authoritarian state to a civil state. As Rabenius had done several decades previously, Blomberg pointed out that the municipalities had dual functions. Although he did not categorise these as ‘the real state power’, he emphasised that it was the State that decided, and in these thoughts he closely adhered Otto Mayer’s theses that an individual must be protected legally against the growing central administration. 272
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=