The purpose of this essay is to align two pressing questions. The first is the English “question“; a question that carries a very obvious cultural, as well as geo-political charge. The second is the question of constitutional reform; a matter which appears to have gained an especial impetus since 1997. The most immediate expression of this alignment is represented by devolution; an experience that is every bit as cultural as it is constitutional. It is impossible to discern the possibilities of a distinctive English constitution without properly understanding what “England” is supposed to mean. And it is equally impossible to make sense of an English constitution without first appreciating that it draws on a constitutional tradition that is very different from that which was recast during the nineteenth century in order to clothe the now defunct empire of “Greater England” with some vestige of political legitimacy.
Until 2007 the King's Law Journal was known as the King's College Law Journal. It was established in 1990 as a legal periodical publishing scholarly and authoritative Articles, Notes and Reports on legal issues of current importance to both academic research and legal practice. It has a national and international readership, and publishes refereed contributions from authors across the United Kingdom, from continental Europe and further afield (particularly Commonwealth countries and USA). The journal includes a Reviews section containing critical notices of recently published books.