Ludolf Camphausen

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ludolf Camphausen

Gottfried Ludolf Camphausen (born January 10, 1803 in Hünshoven , Département de la Roer , French Republic , † December 3, 1890 in Cologne ) was a Rhenish banker and politician. As a moderate pole among the leading liberals of the Prussian Rhine Province in Vormärz , Camphausen was Prime Minister of the Prussian March government from March to July 1848 during the revolution .

Origin and family

Former family summer residence on Brühler Kaiserstraße

Ludolf Camphausen was born as a citizen of the First French Republic during the annexation of the Rhineland by Napoleon Bonaparte and did not become Prussian until 1815 . The Camphausen family has long played an important role in trade and the manufacturing industry in the Rhineland . Gottfried Ludolf was the son of Gerhard Gottfried Camphausen, a businessman who ran a tobacco and oil business. The mother was Maria Wilhelmine nee Peuchen. The couple had several children. Brother August was later a business partner of Ludolf Camphausen. Another brother was the future Prussian finance minister Otto von Camphausen .

Camphausen attended grammar school in Weilburg . Later he went to the commercial schools in Rheydt and Berg. He then did a commercial apprenticeship in Düsseldorf and took part in the city's cultural life. By attending commercial schools, Camphausen belonged to the small group of highly educated early entrepreneurs. This later made it easier for him to get in touch with the educated citizens on the one hand and with the business citizens who often came from practical experience on the other.

Ludolf Camphausen married Elise Lenssen, the daughter of a spinning mill owner from Rheydt. He was married to her for more than sixty years. The marriage resulted in a daughter who later married a judiciary Nacken from Cologne.

Entrepreneurial action

Camphausen played a leading role in the financing of the Bonn-Cölner Railway (painting around 1844)

Together with his brother August Camphausen took over the family business after the death of their father. This later became the trading and banking house A. u. L. Camphausen . In 1826 they set up a branch in Cologne. As the business volume of the Cologne branch grew rapidly, Ludolf Camphausen moved entirely to Cologne in 1831. The bank quickly became one of the four largest Cologne banks. Camphausen had been a member of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce since 1831, and its president from 1838 to 1848. As President of the Chamber, he tried to influence the Prussian government authorities with submissions and memoranda. Together with Heinrich Merkens , Wilhelm Ludwig Deichmann and Heinrich von Wittgenstein , Camphausen tried to give Cologne's economy new impetus and to develop the city into the dominant trading and transport center of the Rhineland. Camphausen was a supporter of free trade more than other Rhenish liberal politicians like Gustav Mevissen . In the 1840s, Mevissen and Camphausen were also protagonists in the dispute between free traders and supporters of the protective tariff, which at times split the Chamber of Commerce, the city council and the citizenry into two camps. The free trade position of Camphausen was ultimately able to prevail.

While most entrepreneurs in the early German industrialization period initially concentrated on one business area, there were also people like Camphausen, especially in the Rhineland, who invested in a wide variety of companies. A particular focus was on expanding the transport infrastructure. An innovation in shipping was the introduction of steam-powered tugs and barges. Camphausen founded a Rhenish steam tugboat company in 1841, which became the leading shipping company on the Rhine alongside Mathias Stinnes' . Above all, however, he was committed to building railways. After moving to Cologne, Camphausen began to deal intensively with the subject. To this end, he studied the railway literature and related legislation in England, Belgium and the USA. For Camphausen, the railway was a key “lever for promoting material welfare. […] The progress from ordinary roads to railways is so huge that a land that owns them may rightly regard the land that does not own them as being of a lower cultural level, ”wrote Camphausen in 1838. Until 1837 he wrote altogether 18 memoranda on economic issues. Probably the most famous is that of the " Iron Rhine ", the railway from Cologne to Antwerp. In addition to Camphausen, David Hansemann and Gustav Mevissen also played a leading role in the implementation. Camphausen eventually got out of the leadership. The reason for this was a dispute over the route between the Cologne investors and a group from Aachen around Hansemann. Camphausen was also heavily involved in the construction of the Cologne-Minden and Bonn-Cologne railways . His many activities also included participating in the founding of the (older) Rheinische Zeitung in 1842. Camphausen, Mevissen and other upper-class citizens financed the paper with the intention of establishing a progressive organ for politics and business in their sense. Journalistically, however, it was shaped by left-wing intellectuals like Karl Marx , whose contributions were much more radical than intended by the financiers. Although Camphausen continued to support the newspaper financially and doubled his equity stake, he was critical of its radical course. In order to have a balancing effect, both Camphausen and Gustav Mevissen wrote their own contributions for the paper. However, this could not prevent the newspaper from being banned as an opposition newspaper by the Prussian authorities in 1843.

Last but not least, Bankhaus Camphausen invested in industrial and mining companies in the emerging Rhenish-Westphalian industrial area. Together with the Schaaffhausen'schen Bankverein, it was involved in founding one of the first mining joint-stock companies in the Ruhr area. In the railways, mining, and large-scale industry, stock corporations had proven to be a particularly effective and powerful form of raising capital. In 1839 Camphausen consequently demanded the possibility of running banks as joint stock companies. For years this was met with sharp rejection by the Prussian authorities.

Through his entrepreneurial activity, Camphausen, like his brother, earned an annual income of around 24,000 thalers. Both belonged to Cologne's upper class, which only made up around 2% of the total population.

Politicians in the pre-march

Rhenish liberalism

In addition to his economic activity, Camphausen devoted himself to political issues early on. In the municipal sector, he proposed the establishment of a municipal bond with progressive repayment rates to finance municipal tasks. In 1831 he became a member of the Cologne City Council. This was an unusually early political success given that he had only acquired citizenship a year earlier. With only brief interruptions, he was a member of the committee until the eve of the revolution of 1848.

Since the 1830s, a variety of liberalism developed in the Rhineland, supported by the upper-class entrepreneurs in the region . In the early 1840s, Friedrich Wilhelm IV's accession to the throne raised hopes for reforms. In the “Montagskranzchen”, an informal discussion group in which Camphausen participated intensively, the liberal movement in the Rhineland began to intensify. Alongside Hermann von Beckerath , Mevissen and Hansemann, Camphausen was one of the leading figures in the Rhenish liberals. Since there were no parties yet, Camphausen and Hansemann in particular also expanded the Cologne Chamber of Commerce into a political platform. In contrast to southern German liberalism, Rhenish liberalism was less theoretically oriented, but more powerful and self-confident. Economic issues played an important role in this group, although free trade, as advocated by Adam Smith , was not undisputed. The Rhenish liberals sharply criticized the government's control of the economy. Based on their own experiences, they saw more clearly than the southern German liberals, who dreamed of a classless society of middle existences on a pre-industrial basis, that the development would proceed in the direction of industrialization and social change. While the southern German liberals not infrequently feared the impending monopoly of money and advocated the protection of the old trade, Camphausen saw the displacement of handicrafts by industry as inevitable. Here are pauperism and misery of homeworkers painful, but essential for a transitional period.

There were different ideas about the political influence of the lower classes. While Mevissen, for example, was oriented towards social policy and advocated equal political rights, Camphausen and other Rhenish liberals wanted to limit the political rights of the dispossessed. In 1844 Camphausen was outraged that democratic intellectuals were trying to "teach the working classes to feel their rights and the equality of their position with us [...]". The strong democratic and socialist influence caused Camphausen to withdraw from the establishment of a local branch of the Centralverein for the good of the working classes . To protect their interests, Camphausen and the Rhenish Liberals therefore demanded census voting . At the same time they fought against the privileges of the nobility and the remnants of feudalism . Their plea for a strong parliament was also a challenge to the existing monarchical system.

Constitutional discussion in the pre-march

In 1843 Camphausen was elected to the Rhenish provincial parliament. There he advocated the introduction of freedom of the press . At the same time, despite all the restrictions, the state parliament offered the possibility of a stronger union of the Rhenish liberals. Camphausen played an important role in this. Mevissen noted: "At the head of the liberal party of the Landtag of 1843 is L. Camphausen from Cologne, who was equally distinguished by his sharpness of mind, prudence and clarity." In 1845, referring to the resolutions of the Congress of Vienna, he submitted the motion to " Formation of a representation of the people in the sense of the royal decree of May 22, 1815. ”Camphausen combined this with, among other things, sharp criticism of the Prussian civil service regiment. This led to a heated debate in the provincial assembly. Almost all the leading representatives of Rhenish liberalism took part in it, who unanimously rejected the proposal of the chairman of the first curia , von Bianco, to leave the decision on a constitution to the king alone. Numerous cities in the Rhineland supported this demand with appropriate petitions. Camphausen summed up that the estates had shown a more parliamentary attitude than in earlier state parliaments and had “directed their main forces on the sore spots of the state organism”. With his application, Camphausen joined a whole series of comparable applications, for example in the province of Westphalia by Georg von Vincke .

Member of the United State Parliament, the Prussian and German National Assemblies (including Camphausen)

In 1847, King Friedrich Wilhelm IV was forced to appoint a state agency on the basis of the State Debt Act of 1820 in order to approve the necessary funds for the construction of a railway line from Berlin to Königsberg. Instead of an elected Prussian state parliament, however, only a class-based assembly made up of members of the provincial parliaments , the United State Parliament , was convened. Immediately after the corresponding patent of March 3, 1847, Camphausen sharply criticized the monarch's actions in a letter to his brother and made it clear that the Rhenish liberals were ready to go on the offensive and to have the opportunity to enforce a state constitution use. The patent must “necessarily provoke a constitutional dispute, and if the numerous vulnerable bodies were not there, the opposition would have to go to them. The livelier knowledge of the rights and duties in the state and the participation in them, increased to the point of fearlessness and devotion, can only be won in the struggle that the press has to open. "

Camphausen was elected to the United Landtag by the Rhenish provincial parliament. In addition to von Beckerath, Hansemann, August von der Heydt , Mevissen, Maximilian von Schwerin-Putzar and von Vincke, he was one of the leading figures in the liberal-constitutional opposition. Immediately after the opening, he was one of those who advocated forming a uniform assembly to discuss the laws instead of the corporate structures. Camphausen also called for such an assembly to meet periodically. In order to emphasize the demands of the moderate liberal opposition, Camphausen drafted a petition together with von Beckerath and von der Heydt, which was signed by 139 members of the assembly. Camphausen supported von Beckerath's motion to repeal the law that previously linked eligibility to certain denominations.

However, Camphausen was also willing to compromise. On June 25, 1847, he pleaded for the gentlemen's curia to be accommodated on the constitutional question in order to reach an agreement at all. His willingness not to further deepen the opposition to the crown was also evident after the king's rejection of the constitutional demand. While Hansemann, supported by another 138 MPs, reaffirmed the liberal goals in a declaration, Camphausen wanted to leave the royal declaration unanswered and instead take the petition route.

As a weak substitute for the periodicity of the Diet, united committees were conceded by the King. While a minority around Hansemann refused to participate in the committee elections, Camphausen spoke out in favor of participation, but insisted that the committees were no substitute for a state parliament and left no doubt that the constitutional question would remain acute for the liberal opposition. When the committees were convened at the end of 1847 to deliberate on the draft penal code, the majority of the Rhenish liberals, who saw French law in effect in the Rhineland, pleaded for a boycott. Camphausen drew the displeasure of the other Liberals when he spoke out in favor of participation in order to explain the position of the opposition there.

As a member of the United States Committee, Camphausen made sure that the constitutional question remained on the agenda. He questioned the legitimacy of this body and accused the government of having "angrily pushed back" the hand of the representatives of the cantons, which was outstretched for understanding, at the end of the first session of the United State Parliament. In doing so, the liberals set an example in Prussia before the start of the March Revolution. However, they wanted to avoid a revolutionary upheaval at all costs.

During the March Revolution

Limiting the Revolution

Opening of the second United State Parliament (1848)

The February Revolution in Paris startled the German liberals. Camphausen wrote on March 1st that the events "in France acted like lead on all the senses". While part of the liberals wanted to use the revolution in France as a means of pressure to finally persuade the governments in Germany to reform, Camphausen refused. In particular, Hansemann's participation in the Heidelberg assembly , the resolutions of which ultimately led to the Frankfurt National Assembly , met with criticism from Camphausen, who had already rejected Hansemann's invitation to participate in the Heppenheim conference in October 1847 .

Instead, he relied on an agreement between the bourgeois opposition and the sovereigns and ultimately on reform of the German Confederation through a congress of princes instead of change through a revolutionary parliament. The German Confederation should be reshaped in the liberal sense and given a representative body. According to Camphausen, the pre-parliament , which had come about in a revolutionary way, was to be blown up by a legitimate assembly. “What the Heidelberger, including Hansemann, decided would be no less than the German Republic; I might want to speak to my senses and have my hand in it for the time being. ”In the Rhineland Camphausen tried to pin down the opposition on his extremely moderate line. He succeeded in influencing the petitions of the Cologne municipal council in his favor. After heated controversies with Hansemann and Mevissen, he also pushed through his position at a conference of leading Rhenish liberals in Bonn. The declaration that was finally adopted remained ineffective, however, since the situation had fundamentally changed with the March Revolution in Berlin on March 6, 1848.

Formation of the Camphausen-Hansemann government

In most of the German states the monarchs showed themselves ready to call moderate opposition members from the Vormärz to the government in the hope of being able to slow down the revolutionary movement. These governments are commonly referred to as the March Ministry . The first attempt in Prussia failed, however, because it mainly consisted of civil servants. Immediately after the beginning of the revolution, the king appointed Adolf Heinrich von Arnim-Boitzenburg, a new prime minister. However, his cabinet was sharply criticized, especially in the Rhineland, and instead called for a “popular ministry”. There were even rumors of separatist tendencies. The District President of Cologne, Karl Otto von Raumer, argued that only one cabinet would be accepted in the Rhine Province that would include Camphausen and, if possible, Hansemann. The king initially wanted to integrate Camphausen into the Arnim-Boitzenburg cabinet. When Camphausen refused, Friedrich Wilhelm IV was forced to form a new government under Camphausen on March 29, 1848. Camphausen was the first commoner to hold this post. As finance minister and later also trade minister, Hansemann also played an important role. Hence this government is usually referred to as the Camphausen – Hansemann cabinet . King Friedrich Wilhelm IV demonstrated his recognition of the revolution by appointing leading representatives of the pre-March opposition . As an important side effect, the creditworthiness of the Prussian state, which had been shaken by the revolution, was restored through the government participation of Camphausen and Hansemann.

The Camphausen-Hansemann government consisted of moderate, liberal upper-class citizens and nobles. Alfred von Auerswald was Minister of the Interior, Friedrich Wilhelm Ludwig Bornemann Minister of Justice and Heinrich Alexander von Arnim was Minister of Foreign Affairs. War Minister was Karl von Reyher for a few days and then August Wilhelm Graf von Kanitz . The new cabinet showed a strong continuity: only Camphausen, Hansemann and Kanitz were new, the other ministers remained in office or, like Bornemann, came from the high ministerial bureaucracy. The government saw its task in doing everything to "save the state". The fulfillment of the constitutional promise was of central importance. In doing so, the government did not initially rely on a national assembly, but on the reconstitution of the United State Parliament, in order to demonstrate continuity to the pre-revolutionary era. The achievements of the March Revolution should be secured, at the same time the revolution itself should be "closed". Camphausen later described the character and objectives of his government as a "ministry, according to its personal composition suitable to lead the state over the gap that separates the old system from the new without life-threatening jerks." Another self-characterization was a " Ministry of Transition, Mediation ”.

Government policy

Friedrich Wilhelm IV.

Camphausen's actions were directed entirely towards Prussia, and he refused to merge into a German nation-state. The policy of the new government was characterized by moderate reforms, a resolute stance against the radical democrats and attempts to find a compromise with the nobility and the crown. Nevertheless, the Camphausen cabinet was the first Prussian government to demonstrate ministerial responsibility and self-confidence towards the monarch. Several times there were confrontations with the anachronistic insistence of the king on his divine right . Camphausen did not shy away from the conflict with Friedrich Wilhelm IV on military issues either. For example, he had a vigilante parade organized by the king forbid because the responsible ministers had not been invited to it. However, the king resisted any attempts to restrict royal rights in the military. So the king pushed Kanitz through as Minister of War against Camphausen's will. The action of the new government was made more difficult not least by the state bureaucracy, which still felt connected to the old system. The attempt, especially by Hansemann, to fill central key positions, essentially failed because of the hesitant resistance of the higher administrative officials. Camphausen only supported these plans to a limited extent, as these interventions would have meant new conflicts with the crown. Apart from the Hansemann division, the appointment of Jodocus Donatus Hubertus Temme, who had been banned from Berlin for political reasons in March, as public prosecutor in Berlin was an exception. An outward sign of the state ministry's greater self-confidence was its move from the Berlin City Palace to Wilhelmstrasse 74. One of the reforms was the decree of April 3, 1848 with the intention of finally regulating the relationship between rural landowners and landlords. Not least for this purpose, a new Ministry of Trade, Industry and Public Works was created. Of course, it was not until the spring of 1849 that the replacement of the feudal rights of the landlords could finally be settled. The so-called April Laws also included the basic granting of rights such as freedom of assembly and freedom of the press, which could, however, be restricted under certain circumstances. Against the background of obstruction by the bureaucracy, the government was unable to initiate judicial and administrative reform. The restoration of Rhenish law was an exception. The Civil Code thus became the code of law in the left bank of the Rhine; in the rest of Prussia, general land law remained in force. An army reform got stuck in the beginning. Hansemann's reform proposals were rejected not only by the crown, but also by Camphausen.

In April the government began to work on a draft constitution. The aim was to finally reach an agreement between the Crown, Cabinet and National Assembly. According to Camphausen's view, this should take into account “what the present has brought [and] what has remained of the past.” The Camphausen government largely eluded the king's pressure to consider class elements. The draft, in which Hansemann was heavily involved, followed largely constitutional-liberal ideas. The king could only be convinced of the concept with difficulty. Ultimately, Camphausen prevailed with the argument that the “relentless violence of the moment” does not allow “to deviate significantly from the now popular constitutional forms and patterns”.

Conflict with the National Assembly and failure

Camphausen was put under pressure not only by representatives of the old order, but also by the political left. The initial decision to convene the United State Parliament again instead of convening a national assembly was criticized. The United State Parliament, however, forced the government to convene a constituent national assembly. Against his own conviction, Camphausen advocated largely equal voting rights in order to counter the pressure of the lower classes. “The demand of the moment was to support universal suffrage against better conviction” in order to keep the “howling wolves from the worst”.

His mediation policy and his attempt to continue on the existing - i. h .: pre-revolutionary - moving right-wing ground, sharply criticized. Camphausen made himself extremely unpopular when he helped to enable the return of Prince Wilhelm ("Kartätschenprinz"), who was considered a staunch opponent of the revolution, from exile. In particular, the recall of Wilhelm triggered mass protests in Berlin, which showed that the Camphausen government had already largely lost its support in the capital. Protests also broke out in the provinces. Only under threat of resignation did Camphausen manage to persuade the prince to make a half-hearted confession to the new situation. Even if outwardly unity was maintained, the circle of Rhenish liberals finally split into two groups, one around Camphausen, the other around Mevissen.

The consequence of universal suffrage was that the left forces were remarkably strong in the Prussian National Assembly, while Camphausen and the members of the constitutional opposition of the Vormärz now formed the right wing.

Sing-Akademie zu Berlin  - venue of the Prussian National Assembly 1848 (painting by Eduard Gärtner, 1843)

Camphausen tried to downplay the revolutionary character of the National Assembly and to place it and his government in the pre-March continuity. He believed he could counter the mistrust of the old elites. For this reason, he stuck to the agreement strategy developed in March and did not rely on the democratic slogan of popular sovereignty. However, this failed at the outset because of the left majority in parliament. The concept of the agreement was radically called into question by Julius Berends' motion on June 8, 1848. The motion aimed for a formal recognition of the revolution. In it the National Assembly was called upon to "declare on record in recognition of the revolution that the fighters of March 18 and 19 would have done something for the fatherland." The aim was to make it clear that the National Assembly was by no means in the Pre-March tradition, but acted out of revolutionary law. Supported by the moderate liberals and the right, the government initially survived this challenge.

The constitutional question developed into a further field of criticism. The draft constitution, published by the Camphausen-Hansemann cabinet on May 22, 1848, was rejected by both the democrats and a large part of the liberals, since it guaranteed civil rights, but did not restrict the power of the king and further established special class privileges. On June 15, 1848, Parliament accepted a motion from the MP Benedikt Waldeck . This confirmed the right of parliament to make changes to the government draft or, if necessary, to develop its own draft. In fact, a constitutional committee of parliament subsequently drew up the so-called Charte Waldeck . The government had thus lost a central area of ​​state reorganization to parliament. At the same time, the loss of the vote was viewed as a kind of vote of no confidence. The left-liberal Berlin national newspaper asked: "How is it possible that after such a vote the ministry can still believe it can govern?"

The military crackdown on the Berlin arsenal storm on June 14, 1848 increased the mistrust of the parliamentary left. She refused the army's protection of the National Assembly offered by Camphausen, in order not to become dependent on a pre-revolutionary authority. In this, Camphausen and the king saw an attack on the authority of the crown, which meant the end of the Camphausen-Hansemann government. Camphausen resigned on June 20, 1848, although the National Assembly would have liked to hold on to him despite all the criticism. Temme, for example, wrote in retrospect: “Has Prussia been an honest ministry since then? Certainly not such an honest one! ”Camphausen declared that the purpose of his office had been achieved, the Ministry of Mediation must now be transformed into a Ministry of Execution. His successor in the office of Prime Minister was the liberal nobleman Rudolf von Auerswald .

Envoy in Frankfurt

After Camphausen's resignation, Heinrich von Gagern tried to win him over to join the provisional central authority  - the all-German executive established by the Frankfurt National Assembly . He was intended for the office of foreign minister, other historians suspect, even for the position of president. Camphausen refused because he feared he would be “used and abused” in Frankfurt. Above all, the tendency of the National Assembly to want to govern led to a rejection, although the new Prussian Prime Minister and even the King urged him to accept the office in order to strengthen Prussian influence in Frankfurt.

Instead, Camphausen went to Frankfurt as the prussian representative of the central authority. This seemed to him to be an opportunity to influence the constitutional discussion from the background and to work for his moderately liberal goals. As in Berlin, he was also an opponent of the democratic movement in Frankfurt and, with the Prussian mandate, advocated a small German- Prussian-oriented solution to the German question . “Only Prussia can create unity in Germany; no other state has the strength, strength and need for it like us; it will inevitably be our lot to have the last word. ” Camphausen rejected the imperial constitution , which was finally passed by the National Assembly , without an agreement with the monarchs, but nevertheless he advised the Prussian king to accept the offered imperial crown. However, his efforts were ultimately unsuccessful because the National Assembly adopted the constitution on March 27, 1849 and he had clearly lost influence over the Prussian government and King Friedrich Wilhelm IV in Berlin. On April 3, the same day on which the imperial deputation commissioned on March 30 in Berlin, Friedrich Wilhelm unsuccessfully applied for the imperial crown, Camphausen dispatched a circular dispatch, which was intended to show how, from the Prussian point of view, the almost inevitable conflict with the National Assembly could be solved. A renewed election of the emperor by the German governments and a constitutional decision by way of an agreement with the German states were presented as elementary - demands that had very little chance of a majority in the National Assembly, but not only for Camphausen, but also for moderate and influential liberals in the Paulskirche such as the chairman of the constitutional committee Friedrich Daniel Bassermann as well as several governments of the German Confederation were acceptable.

On April 28, the National Assembly received the official response from the Prussian government via Camphausen, in which the imperial crown and dignity were rejected with more detailed reasons and detailed requests for changes to the imperial constitution were presented, which the already fragile compromises between democrats and liberals in the Frankfurt National Assembly clearly overwhelmed. As a result, the German National Assembly, which was already more left-wing when conservative and liberal members resigned, rejected the Prussian proposals on May 4, 1849 by 190 votes to 188 and called on the population to stand up for the recognition and implementation of the existing imperial constitution. Due to the foreseeable failure of his mission, Camphausen had resigned from his office a few days earlier.

Work after the revolution

Meeting of the People's House of the Union Parliament in the nave of the Erfurt Augustinian Church

In contrast to the left in the Prussian National Assembly, Camphausen recognized the imposed Prussian constitution of December 5, 1848 as valid legal ground. As a member of the first chamber - the forerunner of the Prussian mansion  - he worked in its central committee in 1849 on the revision of the constitution, which was enacted in early 1850. In the following period (1850/51) he belonged there to the moderately liberal opposition.

In 1850 he was elected a member of the Volkshaus of the Erfurt Union Parliament. This was the legislature of a small German federal state projected primarily by Joseph von Radowitz under Prussian leadership. Camphausen became an adviser to the important constitutional committee. He managed to convince parliament not to vote on each article of the constitution individually, but on the draft en bloc. The efforts of the Union policy of Prussia were not crowned with success, however, as the three kings alliance disintegrated mainly due to Austrian pressure. The Erfurt constitution never came into force.

Grave in the Melaten cemetery

After resigning from the civil service, Camphausen first returned to his previous position as Associé des Bankhauses A. u. L. Camphausen. Since 1868 he also withdrew from business activities and devoted himself as a private scholar to scientific studies. He was particularly interested in astronomy ; Camphausen had its own observatory near Bonn . He developed a new method of location determination. Due to his scientific work, he was awarded an honorary doctorate on October 11, 1860 on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the University of Berlin.

To a certain extent, however, he remained politically active. In 1860 he became a member of the Prussian manor house for life. He was also a member of the North German Reichstag for the Old Liberals from 1867 to 1871 .

Ludolf Camphausen died on December 3, 1890 and was buried in Cologne in the Melaten cemetery (lit. L, between lit. O + N).

literature

swell

Secondary literature

  • Erich Angermann :  Camphausen, Gottfried Ludolf. In: New German Biography (NDB). Volume 3, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1957, ISBN 3-428-00184-2 , pp. 112-115 ( digitized version ).
  • Anna Caspary: Ludolf Camphausen's life. According to his handwritten estate . JG Cotta Nachf., Stuttgart / Berlin 1902.
  • Joseph Hansen: King Friedrich Wilhelm IV. And the liberal March Ministry Camphausen-Hansemann i. J. 1848 . Lintz, Trier 1913.
  • Klaus Herdepe : The Prussian Constitutional Question 1848 . Neuried 2002, ISBN 3-936117-22-5 .
  • Jürgen Hofmann: The Camphausen-Hansemann Ministry. On the politics of the Prussian bourgeoisie in the revolution of 1848/49 . Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1981
  • Jürgen Hofmann: Ludolf Camphausen. First civil prime minister in Prussia . In: Helmut Bleiber (among others; Ed.): Men of the Revolution of 1848 . Volume 2. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin (East) 1987, ISBN 3-05-000285-9 , pp. 425-448.
  • Dieter Langewiesche : Social and constitutional conditions for action and objectives of European liberals in the revolutions of 1848 . In: Wolfgang Schieder : Liberalism in the society of the German pre-March . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1983.
  • Ludolf Camphausen . In: Meyers Konversations-Lexikon . 4th edition. Volume 3, Verlag des Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig / Vienna 1885–1892, p. 769.
  • Wolfgang J. Mommsen : 1848. The unwanted revolution. The revolutionary movements in Europe 1830–1849 . Frankfurt a. M. 1998, ISBN 3-10-050606-5 .
  • The Ludolf Camphausen estate in the Cologne city archive (with additions) , revised. by Hildegard Thierfelder In: Messages from the city archive of Cologne. Issue 48, Neubner, Cologne 1964.
  • Thomas Nipperdey : German History 1800–1866. Citizen world and strong state . CH Beck, Munich 1998, ISBN 3-406-44038-X .
  • Herbert Obenaus : The beginning of parliamentarism in Prussia until 1848 . Droste, Düsseldorf 1984, ISBN 3-7700-5116-5 .
  • Karl Obermann : On the activity of Ludolf Camphausen as a Prussian representative in Frankfurt a. M. July 1848 to April 1849. With unpublished letters . In: Jahrbuch für Geschichte, Vol. 8, Berlin 1973, pp. 407–457.
  • Beate-Carola Padtberg: Ludolf Camphausen . In: Ottfried Dascher and Everhard Kleinertz (eds.): Petitions and barricades. Rhenish revolutions 1848/49 . Aschendorff, Münster 1998, ISBN 3-402-05378-0 , pp. 108-110.
  • Fritz Schmitt: Ludolf Camphausen. From businessman to politician . Frankfurt 1924 (Phil. Diss. Dated May 9, 1923).
  • Mathieu Schwann: Ludolf Camphausen . 3 vols., Baedeker, Essen an der Ruhr 1915.
  • Wolfram Siemann : The German Revolution of 1848/49 . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1985.
  • Ulrich S. Soénius : Ludolf Camphausen and David Hansemann. Rhenish entrepreneurs, politicians, citizens. In: Karlheinz Gierden (Ed.): The Rhineland - Cradle of Europe? A search for traces from Agrippina to Adenauer . Cologne 2011, pp. 235-257, ISBN 978-3-431-03859-0 .
  • Jodocus Donatus Hubertus Temme : Eyewitness reports of the German Revolution 1848/49. A Prussian judge as a champion of democracy . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1996, ISBN 3-534-12756-0 .
  • Richard H. Tilly : From Zollverein to an industrial state. The economic and social development of Germany from 1834 to 1914 . Munich 1990.
  • Hans-Ulrich Wehler : German history of society . Volume 2: From the reform era to the industrial and political German double revolution 1815–1845 / 49 . Munich 1989, ISBN 3-406-32262-X .
  • Karl Wippermann:  Camphausen, Ludolf . In: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB). Volume 47, Duncker & Humblot, Leipzig 1903, pp. 425-428.
  • HC Vogel: Death notice . In: Astronomische Nachrichten , Volume 126 (1891), p. 343, bibcode : 1891AN .... 126Q.343. (Obituary for GL Camphausen from an astronomical perspective)

Web links

Commons : Ludolf Camphausen  - Collection of images, videos and audio files

Remarks

  1. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 202.
  2. ^ Padtberg: Camphausen . P. 109; Nipperdey: civil world . P. 206; Wehler: Social history . Volume 2, p. 110.
  3. ^ Nipperdey: Bürgerwelt . P. 190.
  4. ↑ cit. after Hofmann, p. 427.
  5. ^ Nipperdey: Bürgerwelt . S. 191.
    On the history of the Rheinische Eisenbahngesellschaft and the role of the banks: Richard H. Tilly : Vom Zollverein zum Industriestaat. The economic and social development of Germany from 1834 to 1914 . dtv, Munich 1990, ISBN 3-423-04506-X , pp. 61-66.
  6. ^ Wilhelm Klutentreter: The Rheinische Zeitung of 1842/43 in the political and intellectual movement of the Vormärz (= Dortmund contributions to newspaper research 10). Dortmund 1966, pp. 9, 24 ff., 35, 48, 123, 128 f.
  7. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 110.
  8. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 105, extracts from the Camphausen memorandum are reprinted in: Tilly, pp. 157–163.
  9. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 178.
  10. ^ Padtberg: Camphausen . P. 109.
  11. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 208.
  12. ↑ Langewiesche: Liberalism . P. 32.
  13. ↑ Quoted from Wehler: History of society . Volume 2, p. 203.
  14. ↑ Obenaus: Beginnings of Parliamentarism . P. 642.
  15. ^ Nipperdey: Bürgerwelt . P. 299, p. 387; Wehler: Social history . Volume 2, p. 207.
  16. ↑ Quoted from Karl Obermann: Gustav Mevissen. Rise, renunciation of power politics and economic success of a Rhenish liberal . In: Helmut Bleiber (among others; Ed.): Men of the Revolution of 1848 . Volume 2. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin (East) 1987, ISBN 3-05-000285-9 , p. 395.
  17. ↑ cit. after Hofmann, p. 430.
  18. ↑ Mommsen: Unwanted Revolution . P. 76 f.
  19. ↑ Description of the pictures: Carl Mittermaier , David Hansemann , Maximilian von Schwerin-Putzar , Rudolf von Auerswald , Benedikt Waldeck , Friedrich von Römer , Friedrich Christoph Dahlmann , Ludolf Camphausen, Hermann von Beckerath , Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch , Carl Theodor Welcker .
  20. ↑ Quoted from Mommsen: Revolution . P. 81.
  21. ↑ Quoted Mommsen: Revolution . P. 97; Hoffmann, p. 432.
  22. ↑ Quoted from Hoffmann, p. 433.
  23. ^ Roland Hoede: The Heppenheimer Assembly of October 10, 1847 . W. Kramer, Frankfurt am Main 1997, ISBN 3-7829-0471-0 , p. 88 f.
  24. ↑ Quoted from Hoffmann, p. 433.
  25. ↑ Hoffmann, p. 434 f.
  26. ^ Herdepe: Constitutional question . P. 77 f.
    Siemann: German Revolution . P. 71.
  27. ^ Opening of the (second) United State Parliament by Camphausen on April 2, 1848 ( Memento of February 1, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 1.0 MB)
    Nipperdey: Bürgerwelt . P. 599.
  28. ↑ Quoted from Langewiesche, p. 349.
  29. ↑ B. Holtz: Introduction in Acta Borussica . Volume 4/1, p. 28.
    Herdepe: Constitutional question . P. 101.
  30. ^ Mommsen: Revolution . P. 127.
    Hoffmann, P. 439.
    Herdepe: Constitutional question . P. 100.
  31. ↑ Temme, p. 159 f.
  32. ^ Mommsen: Revolution . P. 137.
    Hoffmann, p. 439.
    Padtberg: Camphausen . P. 109.
    Herdepe: Constitutional question . P. 101.
  33. ↑ Quoted from Hoffmann, p. 439.
  34. ↑ Quoted from Hoffmann, p. 440.
  35. ^ Wehler: history of society . Volume 2, p. 738.
  36. ↑ For example by Karl Marx, see for example: Neue Rheinische Zeitung . No. 3 of June 3, 1848 ( digitized version ).
  37. ^ Herdepe: Constitutional question . P. 100.
    Karl Marx: Camphausen's statement at the meeting on May 30th . In: Neue Rheinische Zeitung of June 3, 1848 ( digitized version ).
  38. ^ Siemann: German Revolution . P. 141.
  39. ↑ Quoted from Mommsen: Revolution . P. 205.
  40. ↑ Quoted from Nadja Stulz-Herrnstadt: Franz Leo Benedikt Waldeck. Parliamentarians in the constituent assembly in Berlin on the border between liberalism and democracy . In: Helmut Bleiber (among others; Ed.): Men of the Revolution of 1848 . Volume 2. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin (East) 1987, ISBN 3-05-000285-9 , p. 337.
  41. ↑ Quoted from Temme, p. 166; Mommsen: Revolution . P. 255; ADB, p. 427.
  42. ^ Nipperdey: Bürgerwelt . P. 648.
  43. ^ Mommsen: Revolution . P. 200; Hoffmann, p. 441.
  44. ↑ Quoted from Hoffmann, p. 442.
  45. ↑ Wolfgang von Hippel: Revolution in the German Southwest (= writings on political regional studies of Baden-Württemberg, Volume 26). Verlag W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1998, p. 280 ff.
  46. ↑ Text of the letter contained in To the Prussian People! , Annex B. (Online offer of the University Library Frankfurt am Main).
  47. ↑ von Hippel, p. 282.
  48. ^ Josef Abt, Johann Ralf Beines, Celia Körber-Leupold: Melaten - Cologne graves and history . Greven, Cologne 1997, ISBN 3-7743-0305-3 , p. 168.
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on August 4, 2007 .
personal data
SURNAME Camphausen, Ludolf
ALTERNATIVE NAMES Camphausen, Gottfried Ludolf (full name)
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Prussian Prime Minister
DATE OF BIRTH January 10, 1803
PLACE OF BIRTH Hünshoven , Département de la Roer , First French Republic
DATE OF DEATH December 3, 1890
Place of death Cologne