summary Court certainly meant that important administrative law rulings were moved from the political branch of public power to the judicial branch. However the name ‘Royal Supreme Administrative Court’ illustrates that the intention was not to draw a clear boundary between the State’s executive and judicial powers. On the contrary, the Court and Government were closely linked, among other things through a joint organisation for the preparation and drafting of matters. The practice of the Supreme Administrative Court was published in the Court’s yearbook and was subsequently systematised by legal scholars. In time this would result in a ‘general part’ of Swedish administrative law, albeit not codified. The most important initiatives for developing this new ‘science’ during the period 1910 to 1925 were undoubtedly taken by Carl Axel Reuterskiöld at the Law Faculty in Uppsala. Like his predecessor Blomberg, Reuterskiöld was politically active, as a member of Uppsala City Council, Uppsala County Council and the Riksdag’s First Chamber (upper house). Reuterskiöld represented a conservatism that may be considered remarkably complex. He defended the union with Norway and was sceptical about universal suffrage. For this reason a reform could not be formulated whereby the old classes were deprived of their power. Reuterskiöld also worked to promote a strong, but not absolute, royal power and wanted to see a campaign government to combat the left-wingers and other advocates of parliamentarism. In 1912, he warned Gustav V and Crown Prince Gustaf Adolf about socialism, urging the King to appoint a campaign ministry. In 1939, he tried to persuade Gustav V to replace Prime Minister Per Albin Hansson with a more ‘powerful’ person. Reuterskiöld was outspokenly negative about women becoming legally equal to men. His politics spilled over into his academic activities. Before the law students in Uppsala, he referred to custom as a legal basis for the master’s rule having to prevail within domestic law, according to which the man, being the ‘primary person’, was entitled to exercise certain force in relation to subordinate ‘secondary persons’, including women who, by entering into marriage, had become ‘duty bound to carry out duties in the home’. 275
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=