Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:26:14.496Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Legal Unity in Germany, 1870–1896

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Michael F. John
Michael F. John
Affiliation:
Jesus College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Over the last two decades, noticeable progress has been made towards a more complete understanding of the political dynamics of Wilhelmine Germany. The older emphasis on the ‘high politics’ of Bismarck and his successors has given way to a much more differentiated picture of a political system in constant flux as it attempted to cope with the complexities of a rapidly industrializing society. Old orthodoxies concerning the weakness of German liberalism have been subjected to new examination and scholars have become increasingly aware of the potential of powerful interest groups to challenge as well as to buttress the Establishment. The overall effect of this general advance in the historiography of the Second Empire has been to direct attention away from the motives of individual decision-makers, at least at the ‘high-political’ level, and to investigate the structural constraints on the formulation of policy. Despite certain recent attempts to reinstate a more personalistic approach, it seems clear that no future history of late nineteenth-century German politics can afford to neglect these developments.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , June 1985 , pp. 341 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Out of an enormous literature, see especially Stürmer, M. (ed.), Das kaiserliche Deutshland. Politik und Gesellschaft 1870–1918 (Düsseldorf, 1970)Google Scholar; Wehler, H.-U., Das deutsche Kaiserreich 1871–1918 (Göttingen, 1973)Google Scholar; Evans, R. J. (ed.), Society and politics in Wilhelmine Germany (London, 1978)Google Scholar.

2 Röhl, J. C. G. and Sombart, N. (eds.), Kaiser Wilhelm II. New interpretations (Cambridge, 1982)Google Scholar.

3 See especially Jakobs, H. H. and Schubert, W., Die Beratung des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuchs in systematischer Zusammenstellung der unveröffentlichten Quellen, 6 volumes to date (Berlin and New York, 1978, ff.–)Google Scholar.

4 A good example being the essays in Going, H. and Wilhelm, W. (eds), Wissenschaft und Kodifikation des Privatrechts im 19. Jahrhundert, 5 volumes to date (Frankfurt a.M., 1974, ff.–)Google Scholar.

5 On Savigny, see especially Caroni, P., ‘Savigny und die Kodifikation. Versuch einer Neudeutungdes “Berufes”’, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Germanistische Abteilung, LXXXVI (1969), 97–176Google Scholar.

6 See in general Getz, H., Die deulsche Rechtseinheil im 19. Jahrhundert als rechtspolitisches Problem (Bonn, 1966)Google Scholar.

7 Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des Reichstags (hereafter SBRT), 20 March 1867, p. 285.

8 On these developments, see John, M. F., ‘“The final unification of Germany”; politics and the codification of German civil law in the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch of 1896’ (Oxford University, D.Phil, thesis, 1983)Google Scholar, chs 3 and 4.

9 See Thieme, J., ‘Zur Entstehung der Konkursordnung (Cologne, 1977), pp. 51 ffGoogle Scholar. On Prussian practices in general, see Landau, P., ‘Die Reichsjustizgesetze und die deutsche Rechtseinheit’, in Vom Reichsjustizamt zum Bundesministerium der Justiz (Cologne, 1977), pp. 168ffGoogle Scholar.

10 Bülow, report of 8 February 1874, Staatsarchiv Schwerin, Ministerium der Justiz Nr. 282, fo. 48.

11 See Schubert, W., ‘Franz von Kübel und Württembergs Stellung zur Erweiterung der Reichskompetenz für das gesamte bürgerliche Recht’, Zaitschrift für württembergische Landesgeschichte, ZXXVI (1977), 167–98Google Scholar.

12 For the reports of the Vorkomission and of the Justice Committee of the Bundesrat, see Rassow, H., ‘Die Verhandlungen der kommission zur Ausarbeitung eines bürgerlichen Gesetzbuchs für Deutschland’, Gruchots Beiträge zur Erläuterung des Deutschen Rechls, XXI (1877), 167–245Google Scholar.

13 Lasker, , SBRT, 15 11 1871, p. 285Google Scholar; 29 May 1872, p. 598; 31 May 1872, p. 622; Hen, 9 November 1871, p. 215.

14 Kübel to Mittnacht, 18 April 1874, Hauptstaatsarchiv (HStA), Stuttgart, E 130a, Nr. 819, fo. 65.

15 See in general, Jakobs, and Schubert, , Beratung des BGB, I, 40–50Google Scholar.

16 Scriften des Vereins für Sozialpolitik, XXI and XXVIII (Leipzig, 1882 and 1884)Google Scholar; cf. Dei Hessische Bauer, 5 July 1885, pp. 166f.

17 Marschall, report of 25 October 1889, Generallandesarchiv (GLA), Karlsruhe, Abt. 233/13994.

18 Zentrales Staatsarchiv (ZStA), Potsdam, RJM 3810, fo. 122.

19 Planck, G., ‘Zur Kritik des Entwurfes eines bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches für das deutsche Reich’, Archiv für die civilistische Praxis, LXXV (1889), 332Google Scholar.

20 See in general Dilcher, G., ‘Der rechtswissenschaftliche Positivismus. Wissenschaftliche Methode, Sozialphilosophie, Gesellschaftspolitik’, Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, LXI (1975), 497–528Google Scholar; cf. Wieacker, F., Industriegesellschaft und Privatrechtsordnung (Frankfurt a.M., 1974)Google Scholar, passim.

21 See E. Lasker, Fünfzehn Jahre parlamentariscker Geschichte (1886–1880), ed. by F. Hertnech (Berlin, n.d.), p. 91; cf. the comments of Schmidt, G., ‘Die Nationalliberalen – eine regierungsfähige Partei? Zur Problematik der inneren Reichsgriindung 1870–1878’ in Ritter, G. A. (ed.), Deutsche Parteien vor 1918 (Cologne, 1918), pp. 208–23Google Scholar.

22 SBRT, 12 Dec. 1884, p. 329.

23 Eley, G., ‘State formation, nationalism and political culture in nineteenth-century Germany’, in Samuel, R. and Jones, G. Stedman (eds), Culture, ideology and politics. Essays for Eric Hobsbawm (London, 1982), p. 290Google Scholar.

24 National-Zeitung, 6 January 1888.

25 See above all Gierke, O., Der Entwurf eines bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch und das deutsche Recht (Leipzig, 1889)Google Scholar, and idem, Die sociale Aufgabe des Privatrechts (Berlin, 1889).

26 Gneist to Oehlschläger, 25 February 1890, ZStA, Potsdam, RJM 3812, fo. 84.

27 Hachenburg, M., Lebenserinturungen ernes Rechtsanwalts (Düsseldorf, 1927), p161Google Scholar.

28 See John, , ‘“The final unification of Germany”’;pp.111–14 and 131–57Google Scholar for the links between Gierke and the agrarian opposition to the 1888 draft code.

29 Heuer, U.-J., Allgemeines Landrecht und Kiassenkampf (Berlin-GDR, 1960), p. 15Google Scholar; Kuntschke, H., ‘Zur Kritik Otto von Gierkes am BGB’, in Csizmadia, A. and Kovacs, K. (eds), Die Entwicklung des zivilreckts in Mitteleuropa (1848–1944) (Budapest, 1970), pp. 153–64Google Scholar.

30 Gierke, O., Personengemeinschaftm und Vermögensinbegriffe (Berlin, 1889)Google Scholar; Verhandlungen des Newizehntm Deutschtn Juristentages, III (Berlin, 1888), 220ff., 321ff.Google Scholar; Gierke, , Entwurf, p. 25Google Scholar.

31 For example, the sending of Heinrich Struckmann of the Reich Justice Office to defend the draft code against Gierke at the meeting of the Prussian Landes-Ökonomie-Kollegium in November 1889.

32 The text of the speech is reprinted in the Frankfurter Journal, 29 May 1888.

33 Schmitt, report of 13 March 1889, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (BHStA), Munich, MJu 16111.

34 The details of this train of events can be found in the letters of Struckmann to Planck, Niedersächsische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen, Planck papers, VIII. For Caprivi's reconciliation of Schelling and Oehlschläger on 17 July 1890, see ZStA, Potsdam, RJM 3811, fo. 99

35 Gierke's election was supported by Oehlschläger (with reservations), Prussia and Saxony, but was rejected by the southern states, especially Bavaria; see Heller, reports of 30 October and 25 November 1890, BHStA, Munich, MA 76 707/2 and MJu 16112.

36 Information on absenteeism is drawn from the unpublished duplicated protocols of the commission, ZStA, Potsdam, RJM 4088–4102.

37 Jacubezky to Leonrod, 28 February 1895 and Gagern to Leonrod, 14 March 1895, BHStA, Munich, MJu 16115.

38 Conrad, J., Lebenserinnerungen. Aus seinem Machlass herausgegeben von Else Kesten-Conrad tmd Herbert Conrad. Als Manuskript gedruckt (Berlin, 1917), p. 195Google Scholar.

39 Mugdan, B., Die gesammten Materialien zvan Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch für das deutsche Reich, I (Berlin, 1899), 195ffGoogle Scholar.

40 Conrad to Heyden, 16 August 1893, ZStA, Merseburg, Rep. 87B,8123, fos. 260–1; cf. Lucius, Votum of 6 June 1890, Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin-Dahlem, Rep. 84a, 11775, fos. 473–81.

41 Schelling to Lucius, 21 November 1890, and Schelling to Caprivi, 28 June 1891, ZStA, Merseburg, Rep. 87B, 8123, fos. 208–11 (quotation fo. 208) and fos. 238–9.

42 Hermes to Hammerstein, 28 February 1895, ZStA, Merseburg Rep. 87B 8123, fo. 356.

43 Boetticher to Oehlschläger, 25 September 1890, and Oehlschläger to Boetticher, 22 October 1890, ZStA, Potsdam, RJM 1068, fos. 21–4 and 38–40.

44 John, , ‘;“The final unification of Germany”’, pp. 129ffGoogle Scholar.

45 Der Ost- und Westpreussische Bauer, XIV (1896)Google Scholar Nr. 12, pp. 178–86– ‘Der neue bürgerliche Gesetzbuch und die Landwirtschaft’.

46 Letter of 19 December 1893, reprinted in Jakobs and Schubert, Beratung des BGB, I, 360f.

47 For details, see John, , ‘“The final unification of Germany”’, pp. 225–34Google Scholar. The Badenese ambassador, Jagemann, saw the Kaiser's visit to the commission on 13 November 1895 as ‘a further encouragement’ to the successful completion of the code; report of 14 November 1895, GLA, Karlsruhe, Abt. 233/34801, fo. 224.

48 Pfizer, G., ‘Geflickte Schienen’, Allgemeine Zeitung Beilage, 10 10 1891Google Scholar.

49 For example, from commercial interests; see ZStA, Merseburg, Rep. 120A, I, 1; no. I, vol. 4, fo. 266; vol. 5, fos. 105 and 114–16.

50 Even in 1888 only one prominent critic had opposed a code in principle; see Bähr, O., Das bürgerliche Gesetzbuch und die Zukunft der deutschen Rechtssprechung (Leipzig, 1888)Google Scholar.

51 For example, Stadthagen's, Artur assertion that the code was ‘the codified injustice of exploitation’, SBRT, 4 02 1896, p. 742Google Scholar.

52 Frohme, , SBRT, 6 02 1896, p. 787Google Scholar.

53 Schicker, report of 7 May 1896, HStA, Stuttgart, E 74,1, Nr. 87.

54 Enneccerus, L., ‘Die parlamentarischen Aussichten des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches’, Deutsche Juristenzeitung, I (1896), 7–8Google Scholar; cf. von Kiesenwetter, O., Zum 18. Februar 1903. Zehn jahre wirtschafts-politische Kämpfe (Berlin, 1903), p. 94Google Scholar, for the Farmers' League and Freisinnige Zeitung, 3 July 1896, for Richter.

55 See especially F. Wieacker, Industriegesellschaft und Privatrechtsordnung.

56 Blasius, D., ‘Bürgerliches Recht und Bürgerliche Identität’, in Berding, H. et al. (eds), Vom Staat des Ancien Regime zum modemen Parteistaat. Festschrift fur Theodor Schieder zum 70. Geburtstag (Munich and Vienna, 1978), p. 215Google Scholar.

57 For example, Mecklenburg and Prussia in the sphere of land law; see Buchholz, S., Abstraktionsprinzip und Immobiliarrecht. Zur Geschichu der Auflassung und der Grundschuld (Frankfurt a.M., 1978)Google Scholar.

58 See for example liberal concept of property in the Saxon Civil Code of 1863; Hedemann, J. W., Die Fortschritte des Zivilrechts im XIX. Jahrhundert, II/I (Berlin, 1930), 124Google Scholar.

59 For the opposite view, see Blackbourn's, David comments in Blackbourn, D. and Eley, G., Mythen deutscher Geschichtsschreibung. Die gescheiterte bürgerliche Revolution von 1848 (Frankfurt a.M., 1980), pp. 89–90Google Scholar.

60 See Benöhr, H.-P., ‘Wirtschaftsliberalismus und Gesetzgebungam Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts’, Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht, VIII (1977), 187–218Google Scholar.

61 See Heller, report of 11 June 1896, BHStA, Munich, MA 76730.

62 Hence Richter's radical rejection of demands for an agrarian law on the basis of arguments for legal equality; see e.g. Richter, E., Politisches ABC-Buch (8th edn, Berlin, 1896), p. 96Google Scholar.

63 See the general comments in Sheehan, J. J., German liberalism in the nineteenth century (Chicago and London, 1978)Google Scholar, ch. 16; Eley, G., Reshaping the German right. Radical nationalism and political change after Bismarck (New Haven and London, 1980)Google Scholar, ch. 2; Winkler, H. A., ‘Vom linken zum rechten Nationalismus. Der deutsche Liberalismus in der Krise von 1878/79’, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, IV (1978), 27fGoogle Scholar.

64 See von Gneist's, Rudolf speech in Verhandlungen its Neunten deutschen Juristentages, III (Berlin, 1871), 7fGoogle Scholar.

65 Rosenberg, H., Grosse Depression und Bismarckzeit. Wirtschaftsablauf, Gesellschaft und Politik in Mittleuropa (paperback edn, Frankfurt a.M., 1976), p. 79Google Scholar.

66 The code was accepted by 232 votes to 48. The minority comprised 42 Social Democrats, 3 Conservatives and 3 representatives of the Bavarian Peasants' League.

67 Korrespondenz des Bundes dtr Landwirte, 20 October 1895 – ‘Das Zusammentreten des Reichstags’.