What we do when we are wrong: Dicey's unpublished papers on the comparative study of constitutions

The paper draws principally on Dicey's comparative constitutional lectures to show what Dicey did when he was wrong and to suggest ways in which we are wrong about Dicey.  It raises, in conclusion, one question and recalls another.  What are we to do to the extent we are wrong about Dicey.  And what happened to his Law of the Constitution when he seemed right?