Reaction era
The time after the end of the revolution of 1848 is called the reaction era . The German Confederation was restored as it had existed before 1848 and again served to suppress all opposition movements. The epoch lasted about ten years until a new king came to power in Prussia. Since then, first Prussia, and later Austria too, tried to win the sympathy of the German national movement.
The restoration of the German Confederation
Already relatively quickly after the end of the German National Assembly , the German Bund and the Bundestag in Frankfurt emerged on an Austrian initiative . As long as Prussia stuck to its union policy , this state and other German states stayed away from the Bund, and the Bundestag was only a rump assembly.
The contrast between Austria and Prussia came to a head in connection with the Hessian state crisis in 1850; In addition, the declaration of Nicholas I of Russia in favor of Austria gave the conflict an international dimension. This weakened the position of the Prussian Foreign Minister Joseph von Radowitz , the actual builder of Prussian union policy. After Radowitz's resignation, this led to the support of a revitalization of the German Confederation in Prussia.
In the Treaty of Olomouc on November 29, 1850, Prussia renounced its claim to leadership as the German state, the Prussian army withdrew from the Electorate of Hesse and also agreed to surrender Schleswig-Holstein. The later small-German-Borussian-minded historiography referred to this as the "disgrace of Olomouc" and interpreted it as a step backwards on the way to a nation-state . In fact, however, the agreement also contributed to preventing an open conflict between Austria and Prussia for a decade.
However, the Austrian Prime Minister Felix zu Schwarzenberg tried to enforce his concept of an Austrian-dominated Germany and to dominate Prussia with the help of the states of the " Third Germany " (i.e. the middle states). However, this failed at the ministerial conferences in Dresden . Prussia successfully demanded parity with Austria in the future German Confederation. It then asked the other members of the Erfurt Union to rejoin the German Confederation. A secret alliance treaty between Austria and Prussia secured the intra-German compromise.
Response policy
The hopes that a considerable part of the Liberals had linked to the Erfurt Union policy , which had at least provided for representation at the national level, now gave way to open reaction . Since then, both German great powers have concentrated on coordinated internal anti-revolutionary policies. The new Prussian Prime Minister Otto Theodor von Manteuffel put it this way: "Yes, it is a turning point in our policy: We should definitely break with the revolution." In particular, the years between 1851 and 1857 are considered the climax of the domestic political reaction in the German Confederation.
Interfering with the internal affairs of states
One aspect of this policy was the reversal of the results of the revolution. For example, on August 23, 1851, the Federal Assembly repealed the basic rights of the German people of November 27, 1848 - which had become the law of all federal states.
The later so-called “Federal Reaction Decision” concealed the decision that the Bundestag actually became the supreme control authority over the constitutions of the individual states. The review of the facilities created since 1848 was also in the foreground. The resolution determined "to subject the state institutions and statutory provisions adopted in the federal states, in particular since 1848, to a careful examination and then, if they are not in accordance with the basic law of the federal government, to restore this necessary conformity without delay." The following points were considered to be “revolutionary”: 1. a constitutional oath of the army (instead of an oath of allegiance to the respective monarch), 2. democratic suffrage (general, equal and secret), 3. a comprehensive budget right of the state parliaments, 4. a Association law , which enabled the establishment and existence of political parties, and 5. the guarantee of freedom of the press in the press law of the federal states.
A central body that represented a really strong federal authority in this area was the so-called “reaction committee”. This had the task of checking the state constitutions, electoral laws and similar provisions for actual or alleged revolutionary provisions and to force changes. This affected Saxony-Coburg-Gotha , Anhalt , Liechtenstein , Waldeck , Lippe , Hessen-Homburg , Hanover , Frankfurt , Bremen and Hamburg . In some cases there was even military action. This applied for example to Bremen and to Kurhessen. The intervention in Electorate Hesse, for which the federal government drafted a new constitution, which Elector Friedrich Wilhelm imposed in 1852, was particularly far-reaching . This blatantly contradicted the federal provisions of 1815/20, which on the one hand forbade the federal assembly to repeal a state constitution and on the other hand provided for the approval of the estates.
The police association for the suppression of revolutionary efforts
The initial attempt to eliminate the opposition by the conventional means of the rule of law did not prove particularly effective. The acquittal of Benedikt Waldeck in December 1849 ended after his release in the largest political mass demonstration since March 1848. After the Cologne communist trial in 1852 did not lead to the result desired by the authorities, political proceedings in Prussia were withdrawn from the jury as far as possible and from the Berliners Assigned to the chamber court.
The reaction decision of the German Confederation specified the political opponents: The states were obliged "to bring about the suppression of newspapers and magazines by all legal means with punishment of the guilty, who pursue atheistic, socialist or communist, or aimed at the overthrow of the monarchy." bourgeois Democrats and Republicans also fell under this provision in the last somewhat vague sentence .
The Federal Press Act of July 6, 1854 reintroduced all press restrictions that had been abolished by the German National Assembly. In the same year, the Federal Association Act of July 13, 1854 stipulated that all political associations were prohibited in principle. If the state laws stipulated otherwise, the federal provision applied that no association was allowed to enter into a connection with other associations. This made supra-local organization impossible, which affected trade unions and similar organizations as well as political parties. The General German Workers' Association fell victim to this decision .
The attempt to create a federal central police failed, but a " secret police association " formed in 1851 for the mutual exchange of information proved to be effective against revolutionary ideas and its supporters . However, this was not based on a federal resolution, but rather goes back to the cooperation of the police authorities in Prussia, Austria, Hanover and Saxony, which most of the other federal states gradually joined. Without a formal legal basis, the cooperation, as Karl Ludwig Friedrich von Hinckeldey , Police President of Berlin and driving force of the association, described it, took place in a "completely formless and noiseless manner."
In a “short official channel”, this made it easier for the police authorities to search and communicate across national borders, without having to involve the governments. In the strongholds of political exile, for example in New York , Paris , Brussels and London , there were agents of their own. They monitored not only the exiles from Germany, but the entire heads of the "revolutionary party". These included Giuseppe Mazzini , Victor Hugo , Louis Blanc , Carl Vogt , Arnold Ruge and Gottfried Kinkel . It is noteworthy that Karl Marx was rated as less dangerous.
The commissioners of the police authorities from the member states met regularly until 1866 to exchange news. The findings of the research were summarized in the so-called “weekly reports” and made available to the member states. This cooperation is a central reason for the success of the counter-revolution after 1849. The decidedly opposition press, whether democratic-republican or socialist, was banned. After all, the liberal papers had a hard time surviving. The approaches to forming parties were cut off completely. The party system that emerged during the revolution was smashed and its actors either forced to surrender or forced into illegality.
Karl Biedermann , who as a liberal politician was briefly imprisoned for political reasons and had lost his professorship during the reaction years, wrote in retrospect about this era:
“[...] a reaction went through all of Germany, so systematically, so relentlessly, so trampling on all the noblest feelings of the nation, as there had been nothing similar in the 20s, 30s or 40s, a reaction, theirs Outflows that Dahlmann, who is otherwise so mild, branded with the devastating words: 'Injustice has lost all shame.' "
Differences by state
The German Confederation showed itself to be able to act, especially with regard to the interference with the law of the individual states, but also in the coordination of anti-revolutionary measures. In this respect it was much more like a central state than a confederation. Nevertheless, there were clear differences in the implementation of the response policy.
The example of the two leading powers of the federal government in particular shows that converging goals - suppressing the opposition and restoring the pre-revolutionary order - could lead to significantly different measures. While Austria became an absolutist state again with the abolition of the constitution, Prussia remained a constitutional state. Even a considerable part of the draft constitution drawn up by the Prussian National Assembly was adopted. However, this was revised in 1849 and 1850 in such a way that there could be no doubt about the leadership role of the crown ( Prussian constitution of December 1848 ). In addition to numerous provisions on, for example, emergency law, the creation of a mansion and the introduction of three-tier voting rights also contributed to this . In this respect the break in Prussia with the forces of the movement was less clear than in Austria. In fact, von Manteuffel postulated: "It means scooping water into a sieve if you want to restore the crumbled states of the past." In Prussia, constitutionalism was adhered to, but its bureaucratic-military system was used as a counterweight. This program of enlightened, authoritarian conservatism was supported by leading conservative intellectuals such as Lorenz von Stein and Leopold Ranke . The other states moved between these extremes. A complete surrender of every constitution, as in Austria, remained an exception. Mecklenburg went the furthest, going back to the old class structure of 1755. In Baden , after an initial policy of oppression, Grand Duke Friedrich I returned relatively quickly to a more liberal government. The political reaction in Bavaria was particularly mild .
Response time expires
The end of the reaction time is usually set by science with the beginning of the New Era in Prussia (i.e. the transition of the reign from the incapable of governing Friedrich Wilhelm IV. To Wilhelm I ) in 1858. Even if it was only a question of a change of government in one federal state, the shackles of the authorities in the German Confederation as a whole were loosened. With the decreasing censorship, the opinion press began to recover, and the opposition, from the liberals to the socialist, was able to reorganize itself. In addition, there were reform approaches in the German Confederation itself in the early 1860s .
See also
literature
- Thomas Nipperdey : German History 1800–1866. Citizen world and strong state. Beck, Munich 1983, ISBN 3-406-09354-X , pp. 674-683.
- Wolfram Siemann : Society on the move. Germany 1848–1871. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1990, ISBN 3-518-11537-5 , pp. 25-88.
- Wolfram Siemann: From confederation to nation state. Germany 1806–1871 (= New German History. Vol. 7). Beck, Munich 1995, ISBN 3-406-30819-8 , pp. 395-401.
- Hans-Ulrich Wehler : German history of society. Vol. 3: From the “German Double Revolution” to the beginning of the First World War 1849–1914. Beck, Munich 1995, ISBN 3-406-32263-8 , pp. 197-221.
Individual evidence
- ↑ On the coming into being and the significance of the Treaty of Olomouc see Siemann: Gesellschaft. Pp. 32-36.
- ↑ Quoted from Siemann: Federation of States. P. 396.
- ↑ Quoted from Siemann: Society. P. 41.
- ↑ Quoted from Siemann: Society. P. 41.
- ↑ General provisions to prevent abuse of freedom of the press. In: Protocols of the German Federal Assembly. Vol. 38, 1854, pp. 616-624 ( full text in the Google book search). Compare with Michael Kotulla : German Constitutional Law 1806–1918. A collection of documents and introductions. Vol. 1. Springer, Heidelberg 2005, ISBN 3-540-26013-7 , p. 808.
- ↑ Measures to maintain the legal order and tranquility in the German Confederation, especially regarding the association. In: Protocols. Vol. 38, pp. 835–337 ( full text in the Google book search). Compare with this Kotulla: Constitutional Law. Vol. 1, p. 813.
- ↑ Quoted from Siemann: Society. P. 46.
- ↑ Quoted from Siemann: Society. P. 64.
- ↑ Quoted from Wehler: History of society. Vol. 3, p. 199.