Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:05, 22 January 2008

The Frankfurt Parliament (German: Frankfurter Nationalversammlung, literally Frankfurt National Assembly) was the first freely elected parliament for all of Germany. It was in session from the 18th of May 1848 until the 31st of May 1849 in the Paulskirche at Frankfurt am Main. Its existence was both part and result of the "March Revolution" in the states of the German Confederacy.

Through long and controversial debates, the assembly produced the so-called Paulskirche Constitution (Paulskirchenverfassung), based on the principles of parliamentary democracy. This constitution fulfilled the main demands of the liberal and nationalist movements of the Vormärz, both of which stood in opposition to Metternich's system of Restoration. It would have provided for a catalogue of basic rights and a constitutional monarchy headed by a hereditary emperor (Kaiser).

The Frankfurt Parliament and the constitution it approved failed due to the Prussian king Friedrich Wilhelm IV's refusal to accept the office of emperor when it was offered to him. In the 20th century, however, major elements of the Frankfurt constitution became models for the Weimar Constitution of 1919 and the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany of 1949.

Background

Napoleonic upheavals and German Confederation

In 1806, the Emperor, Francis II had relinquished the crown of the Holy Roman Empire and dissolved the Empire. This was the result of the Napoleonic Wars and of direct military pressure from Napoléon Bonaparte.

After the victory of Prussia, the United Kingdom, Russia and other states over Napoléon in 1816, the Vienna Congress created the German Confederation (Deutscher Bund). This was a system of independent states, only loosely connected, and dominated by its two most powerful members, Austria and Prussia. After the so-called "Wars of Liberation" (Befreiungskriege, the German term for the German part of the War of the Sixth Coalition), many contemporaries had expected a nation-state solution and thus considered the subdivision of Germany as unsatisfactory.

Apart from this nationalist component, political discourse was also dominated by the call for the granting of civic rights. Influenced by the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Code Civil had led to the introduction of civic rights in some German states in the early 19th century. Furthermore, some German states had adopted constitutions after the foundation of the German Confederacy. Between 1819 and 1830, the Carlsbad Decrees and other instances of Restoration politics had cut back on such developments. The unrest that resulted from the 1830 French July Revolution led to a temporary reversal of that trend. But after the demonstration for civic rights and national unity at the 1832 Hambach Festival, and the abortive attempt at an armed rising in the 1833 Frankfurter Wachensturm, the pressure on representatives of constitutional or democratic ideas was raised through measures such as censorship and bans on public assemblies.

The 1840s

In the mid-1840s there was a renewed increase of the frequency of internal crises. This was partially the result of large-scale political developments, such as the escalation of the Schleswig-Holstein Question and the erection of Bundesfestungen (large scale fortifications controlled by the German Confederation) at Rastatt and Ulm. Additionally, a series of bad harvests in part of Germany led to famine-related unrest. The changes caused by the beginnings of industrialisation exacerbated social and economic tensions considerably.

Meanwhile, in reform-oriented states, such as Baden, a lively scene of Vereine (clubs or voluntary associations) had developed, providing an organisational framework for democratic opposition. Especially in south west Germany, the press could not be suppressed effectively any longer. At rallies by radical democrats, especially the Offenburg Popular Assembly of September 1847, there were calls to overthrow the status quo. At the same time, the bourgeois (here used to describe the Middle Class) opposition had increased its networking activities and began coordinate its activities in the individual chamber parliaments more and more confidently. Thus, at the Heppenheim Conference on the 10th of October, 1847, eighteen liberal members from a variety of German states met to discuss common motions for a German nation-state.

Around the turn of 1847 and 1848, this internal tension was aggravated by international developments. The first climax was the February Revolution in France, which deposed the Citizen King Louis-Philippe and resulted in the declaration of the Second Republic. In many European states, the resistance against Restoration policies increased and led to revolutionary unrest. In several parts of the Austrian Empire, namely in Hungary, Bohemia and Northern Italy, there were bloody revolts, calls for local or regional autonomies and even for national independence.

The final impulse for the election of a pan-German assembly (or parliament) Friedrich Daniel Bassermann, a liberal deputy in the second chamber of the parliament of Baden. On the 12th of February 1848, referring to his own motion (Motion Bassermann) in 1844 and a comparable onw by Carl Theodor Welcker in 1831, he called for a representation, elected by the people, at the Bundestag in Frankfurt am Main. The Bundestag (or Bundesversammlung), made up of representatives of the individual princes, was the only institution representing all of Germany. Two weeks later, news of the successful coup in France fanned the flames of the revolutionary mood. The revolution on German soil began in Baden, with the occupation of the Ständehaus at Karlsruhe. This was followed in April by the Heckerzug (named after its leader, Friedrich Hecker), the first of three revolutionary risings in the Grand Duchy. Within a few days and weeks, the revolts spread to the other German principalities.

The March Revolution

Main article: Revolutions of 1848 in the German states

The central demands of the German opposition(s) were the granting of basic and civic rights, the appointment of liberal governments in the individual states and most importantly the creation of a German nation-state, with a pan-German constitution and a popular assembly. On the 5th of March 1848, opposition politicians and state deputies met at the Heidelberg Assembly to discuss these issues. They resolved the formation of a Vorparlament (a pre-parliament), which was to prepare the elections for a national constitutional assembly. They also elected a "Committee of Seven" (Siebenerausschuss), which proceeded to invite 500 individuals to Frankfurt.

This development was accompanied and supported since early March by protest rallies and risings in many German states, including Baden, the Kingdom of Bavaria, the Kingdom of Saxony, the Kingdom of Württemberg, Austria and Prussia. Under such pressure, the individual princes recalled the existing conservative governments and replaced them with more liberal committees, the so-called "March Governments" (Märzregierungen). On the 10th of March 1848, the Bundestag of the German Confederation appointed a "Committee of Seventeen" (Siebzehnerausschuss) to prepare a draft constitution; on the 20th, the Bundestag urged the the states of the confederation to call elections for a constitutional assembly. After bloody streetfights (Barrikadenaufstand) in Prussia, a Prussian National Assembly was also convened, with the task of preparing a constitution for that kingdom.

The Vorparlament was in session at the Paulskirche (St. Paul's Church) in Frankfurt from the 31st of March to the 3rd of April, chaired by Carl Joseph Anton Mittermaier. It decided, with the support if the moderate liberals and against the opposition of the radical democrats, to cooperate with the Bundestag, now willing to support reforms, so as to form a national constitutional assembly to compile a new constitution. For the transitional period until the actual formation of that assembly, the Vorparlament formed the Committee if Fifty (Fünfzigerausschuss), as a representation to face the German Confederation.

The electoral law for the new national assembly was up to the individual states of the confederation, who chose different solutions. While Württemberg, Holstein, the Electorate of Hesse-Kassel and the four remainingfree cities (Hamburg, Lübeck, Bremen and Frankfurt) ahd direct elections, most states chose an indirect procedure, usually involving a first round, voting to constitute an Electoral college which chose the actual deputies in a second round. There also were different arrangements regarding the right to vote, as the Frankfurt guidelines only referred to be limited to adult general and equal vote by independent (selbständig) adult males. The definition of independence was handled differently from state to state and was frequently the subject of vociferous protests. Usually, it was interpreted so as to exclude the recipients of any poverty-related support, but in some areas it also barred any person who did not have a household of their own, including apprentices living at their masters' homes. It is estimated that about 85 % of the male population could vote. In Prussia, the definition used would have pushed this up to 90 %, whereas the laws were much more restrictive in Saxony, Baden or Hanover. Originally, 649 electoral districts had been agreed upon, but eventually only circa 585 members were elected. The discrepancy was caused by boycotts in several Austrian constituencies with non-German populations, and by the situation in Tiengen (Baden), where the leader of the Heckerzug rebellion, Freidrich Hecker, who was in exile in Switzerland, was elected in two rounds.

Organisation of the Nationalversammlung

Social background of the deputies

The social make-up of the total of 809 or 812 (replacements included) members of the Frankfurt National Assembly (see list on German wikipedia) was very homogeneous throughout the session. The parliament mostly represented the educated bourgeoisie (Middle Class). 95 % of deputies had the abitur, more than three quarters had been to university, half of which had studied jurisprudence. A considerable number of deputies were members of a Corps or a Burschenschaft. In terms of profession, upper-level civil servants formed the majority: this group included a total of 436 deputies, including 49 university lecturers or professors, 110 judges or prosecutors, and 115 high administrative clerks and district administrators (Landräte). Due to their oppositional views, many of them had already been in conflict with their princes for several years, including professors such as Jacob Grimm, Friedrich Christoph Dahlmann, Georg Gottfried Gervinus and Wilhelm Eduard Albrecht (all counted among the Göttingen Seven, and politicians such as Welcker and Itzstein who had been champions of constitutional rights for two decades. Among the professors, besides lawyers, experts in German Studies and historians were especially common, due to the fact that under the sway of restoration politics, academic meetings in such disciplines, eg. the Germanisten-Tage of 1846 and 1847, were often the only occasions were national themes could be dsicussed freely. Apart fron those mentioned above, the academic Ernst Moritz Arndt, Johann Gustav Droysen, Carl Jaup, Friedrich Theodor Vischer and Georg Waitz are especially notable.

Because of this composition, the National Assembly was later often dismissively dubbed the Professorenparlament ("Professors' parliament") and ridiculed with verses such as „Dreimal 100 Advokaten – Vaterland, du bist verraten; dreimal 100 Professoren – Vaterland, du bist verloren!“ ("Three times 100 advocates - Fatherland, you are betrayed; three times 100 professors - Fatherland, you are doomed".

149 deputies were self-employed bourgeois professionals, such as lawyers, doctors, journalists or clergymen, including well-known politicians such as Alexander von Soiron, Johann Jacoby, Karl Mathy, Johann Gustav Heckscher, Wilhelm Emmanuel von Ketteler and Wilhelm Murschel.

The economically active Middle Class was represented by only about 60 deputies, including many publishers, including Bassermann and Georg Friedrich Kolb, but also businessmen, industrialists and bankers, such as Hermann Henrich Meier, Ernst Merck, Hermann von Beckerath, Gustav Mevissen and Carl Mez.

Tradesmen and representatives of agriculture were very poorly represented - the latter were mostly represented by big landowners from east of the Elbe, accompanied by only three farmers. Craftsmen like Robert Blum or Wilhelm Wolff were associated almost exclusively with the radical democratic Left, as they knew the social problems of the underprivileged classes from personal observations. A few of them, e.g.. Wolff, already saw themselves as explicit socialists.

A further striking aspect is the large number of well-known writers among the deputies, including Anastasius Grün, Johann Ludwig Uhland, Heinrich Laube and Victor Scheffel.

On the 18th of May 1884, circa 330 deputies assembled in the Kaisersaal and walked solemnly to the Paulskirche to hold the first session of the German national assembly, under its chairman (by seniority) Friedrich Lang. Heinrich von Gagern, one of the best-known liberals throughout Germany, was elected president of the parliament.

Factions and Committees

In his opening speech on the 19th of may 1849, Gagern defined the main tasks of the national assembly as the creation of a "constitution for Germany" and the achievement of German unification. This was followed by a total of 230 sessions, supported by 26 committees and five commissions, in the course which the deputies developed the imperial constitution.

While the opening session had generally been quite chaotic, the deputies seated haphazardly, independent of their political affiliations, ordered parliamentary procedures developed quickly. Soon, deputies started assembling in Klubs (clubs), which served as discussion groups for kindred spirits and led to the development of Fraktionen (Parliamentary groups), a necessary prerequisite for the development of political majorities. These Fraktionen were perceived as clubs and thus usually named after the location of their meetings; generally, they were quite unstable. According to their stances, especially on the constitution, on the powers of parliament and of central government as opposed to individual states, they are broadly divided in three basic camps:

1. The democratic left (demokratische Linke) - also called the "Ganzen" ("the whole ones") in contemporary jargon - consisted of the extreme and the moderate left (Deutscher Hof) group and its later split-offs Donnersberg, Nürnberger Hof and Westendhall
2. The liberal centre - the so-called "Halben" ("Halfs"), consisting of the left and right centre (the right-wing lineral Casino and the left-wing liberal Württemberger Hof, and the later split-offs Augsburger Hof, Landsberg and Pariser Hof.
3. The conservative right , composed of protestants and conservatives (first Steimernes Haus, later Café Milani)

The largest groupings in numerical terms were the Casino, the Württemberger Hof and since 1849 the combined left, appearing as the Centralmärzverein ("Cental March Club").

In his memoirs, the deputy Robert Mohl wrote about the formation and functioning of the Clubs:

"that originally there were four different clubs, based on the basic political orientations That in regard to the most important major questions, for example about Austria's participation and about the election of emperors, the usual club-based divisions could be abandoned temporarily to create larger overall groups, as the United Left, the Greater Germans in Hotel Schröder, the Imperials in Hotel Weidenbusch.

"These party meetings were indeed an important part of political life in Frankfurt, significant for positive, but clearly also for negative, results. A club offered a get-together with politically kindred spirits, some of whom became true friends, comparably rapid decisions and, as a result, perhaps success in the overall assembly.".

Presidents of the National Assembly

• Friedrich Lang as presindent by seniority (18th May 1848 until 19th May 1848)
• Heinrich von Gagern (19th May 1848 until 16th December 1848)
• Eduard Simson (18th December 1848 until 11th May 1849)
• Theodor Reh (12th May 1849 until 30th May 1849)
• Friedrich Wilhelm Löwe as president of the Stuttgart rump parliament (6th June 1849 until 18th June 1849)

(A list of all further parliamentarians can be found on German Misplaced Pages on Members of the German National Assembly as well as in the category Category:Members of the German National Assembly).

Provisional central power

Since the national assembly had not been initiated by the German Confederation, it was lacking not only major constitutional bodies, such as a head of state and a government, but also legal legitimation. A modification of the Bundesakte, the constitution of the German Confederation could have brought about such legitimation, but was practically impossible to achieve, as it would have required the unanimous support of all 38 signatory states. Partially for this reason, influential European powers, including France and Russia, declined to recognize the Parliament.

While the left demanded to solve this situation by creating a revolutionary parliamentary government, on the 24th of June 1848, the Paulskirche parliament voted, with a 450 votes against 100, for a so-called Provisional Central Power (Provisorische Zentralgewalt). This newly-created provisional government was headed by Archduke Johann of Austria as regent (Reichsverweser), i.e. as a temporary head of state. The practical task of government was performed by a cabinet, consisting of a college of ministers under the leadership of a prime minister (Ministerpräsident). At the same time, the Provisional Central Power built a government apparatus, made up of specialised ministries and special envoys, employing, for financial reasons, mainly deputies of the assembly. After the Bundesversammlung of the German Confederation had declared the end of its work and delegated its responsibilities to the provisional government on the 12th of July 1848, Archduke Johann appointed his first government, under Ministerpräsident Prince Karl zu Leiningen, on the 15th.

Ministerpräsidenten of the Imperial Government

• Karl zu Leiningen (15th July 1848 until 5th September 1848)
• Anton von Schmerling (24th September 1848 until 15th Dezember 1848)
• Heinrich von Gagern (17th Dezember 1848 untilis 10th May 1849)

(A list of ministers can be found on de:Kategorie:Reichsminister (Provisorische Zentralgewalt).)

Main political issues

Schleswig-Holstein Question and development of political camps

See articles: First Schleswig War and Schleswig-Holstein Question

Influenced by the general nationalist atmosphere, the political situation in Schleswig and Holstein became especially explosive. According to the 1460 Treaty of Ribe, the two duchies were to remain eternally undivided and stood in personal union with Denmark. Nonetheless, only Holstein was part of the German Confederation, whereas Schleswig, with a mixed population of German-speakers and Danish speakers, formed a Danish fiefdom. German national liberals and the left demanded that Schleswig be admitted to the German Confederation and be represented at the national assembly, while Danish national liberals wanted to incorporate Schleswig into a new Danish national state.

Then, under orders from the German Confederation, Prussian troops occupied Schleswig-Holstein. On the 26th of August, Prussia and Denmark, under pressure from Britain, Russia and France, signed a ceasefire in Malmö (Sweden). Its terms included the withdrawal of all soldiers from Schleswig-Holstein and a shared administration of the land.

On the 5th of September 1848, at Dahlmann's instigation, the Frankfurt Assembly initially rejected the Malmö Treaty, which had been signed without consulting the assembly. It was defeated with 238 against 221 votes. After that, Leiningen resigned as Ministerpräsident. As Dahlmann was unable to form a new government, Anton von Schmerling succeeded Leiningen.

In a second vote, on the 16th of September 1848, the Assembly accepted the de facto position and accepted the Treaty with a narrow majority. In Frankfurt this led to the Septemberunruhen ("September unrest"), a popular rising that entailed the murder of parlamentarians from the Casino faction, Lichnowsky and Auerswald. The National Assembly was forced to call for the support of Prussian and Austrian troops serving the Confederation at the confederate fortification of Mainz.

Henceforth, the radical democrats, whose views were both leftist and nationalist, ceased to accept their representation through the National Assembly. In several states of the German Confederation, they resorted to individual revolutionary activities. For example, on the 21st of September, Gustav Struve declared a German republic at Lörrach, thus starting the second democratic rising in Baden. The nationalist unrest in Hungary spread to Vienna in early October, leading to a third revolutionary wave, the Wiener Oktoberaufstand ("Vienna October rising"), which further impeded the work of the Assembly.

Thus, the acceptance of the Traty of Malmö marks the latest possible date of the final breach of cooperation between the liberal and the radical democratic camps. Radical democratic politicians saw it as final confirmation that the bourgeois politicians, as Hecker had said in spring 1848, "negotiate with the princes" instead of "acting in the name of the sovereign people", thus becoming traitors to the cause of the people. In contrast, the bourgeois liberals saw the unrests as further proof for what they saw as the short-sighted and irresponsible stance of the left, and of the dangers of a "left-wing mob" spreading anarchy and murder. This early divide of its main components was of major importance for the later failure of the National Assembly, as it caused lasting damage not only to the esteem and acceptance of the parliament, but also to the cooperation among its factions.

Oktoberaufstand and execution of Blum

After the October Rising at Vienna had escalated, forcing the Austrian government to flee the city, the National Assembly, instigated by left-wing deputies, attempted to mediate between the Austrian government and the revolting revolutionaries. In the meantime, the Austrian government violently suppressed the rising. In the course of events, the deputy Robert Blum, one of the figureheads of the democratic left was arrested, court-martialled and executed by shooting on the 9th of November, ignoring his parliamentary immunity. This highlighted the powerlessness of the National Assembly and its dependence on the goodwill of the governments of the individual states of the German Confederation. In Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany (1852), Friedrich Engels wrote:

"The fact that fate of the revolution was decided in Vienna and Berlin, that the key issues of life were dealt with in both those capitals without taking the slightest notice of the Frankfurt assembly - that fact alone is sufficient to prove that the institution was a mere debating club, consisting of an accumulation of gullible wretches who alowed themselves to be abused as puppets by the governments, so as to provide a show to amuse the shopkeepers and tradesmen of small states and towns, as long as it was considered necessary to distract their attention."

The execution also indicated that the force of the March Revolution was beginning to flag by the autumn of 1848. This did not apply only to Austria. The power of the goverments appoinbted in March was eroding. In Prussia, the Prussian National Assembly was disbanded and its draft constitution rejected.

Greater German or Smaller German solution

The definition of the national unity of German was a major difficulty for the Frankfurt National Assembly. The still open question regarding the national affiliation of Schlewig turned out to be a smaller problem. Of much more weight was the fact that large portions of the two most powerful states in the German Confederacy, Prussia and especially Austria, lay outside the area were the German language was spoken. The incorporation of such areas into a German nation-state did not only raise questions regarding the national identity of their inhabitants, but also regarding power politics between the German states. In spite of all Czech efforts, the delegates declared Bohemia and Moravia as part of the German Confederacy. Similar, they decided to incorporate the Province of Posen, thereby refusing demands for freedom from the local Polish majority population and its representatives.

regarding the borders of a future German nation-state, only two solutions were basically possible: The Kleindeutsche Lösung ("Smaller German Solution") aimed for a Germany under the leadership of Prussia and excluding imperial Austria, so as to avoid becoming embroiled in the problems of that multi-cultural state. The supportes of the Großdeutsche Lösung ("Greater German Solution"), however, supported the incorporation of Austria. Some of those deputies expected the integration of all the Habsburg monarchy's territories, while other Greater German supporters called for a variant only including areas settled by germans within a German state.

While the majority of the radical left voted for the Greater German variant, accepting the possibility, as formulated by Carl Vogt of a "holy war for western culture against the barbarism of the East" , ie. against Poland and Hungary, whereas the liberal centre supported a more pragmatic stance. On the 27th of October 1848, the National Assembly voted for a Greater German Solution, but incorporating only "Austria's German lands".

The Austrian emperor Ferdinand I was, however, not willing to break up his state. On the 27th of November 1848, only a few days before the coronoation of his successor, Franz Joseph I, he had his Prime Minister Schwarzenberg declare the indivisibility of Austria. Thus, it became clear that, at most, the National Assembly could achieve national unity within the smaller German solution, with Prussia as the sole major power. Although Schwarzenberg demanded the incorporation of the whole of Austria into the new state once more in March 1849, the dice had fallen in favour of a Smaller German Empire by December 1848, when the irreconcilable differences between the position of Austria and that of the National Assembly had forced the Austrian, Schmerling, to resign from his role as Ministerpräsident of the provisional government. He was succeedded by Heinrich von Gagern.

Nonetheless, the Paulskirche Constitution was designed so as to allow a later accession of Austria, by referring to the territories of the German Confederation and formulating special arrangements for states with German and non-German areas. The allocation of votes in the Staatenhaus (§ 87 ) also allowed for a later Austrian entry.

Imperial constitution and basic rights

On the 24th of May 1848, the National Assembly appointed a three-person constitutional commitee, chaired by Bassermann and charged with preparaing and coodinating the drafting of a Reichverfassung ("Imperial Constitution"). It could make use of the preparatory work done by the Commitee of Seventeen appointed earlier by the Bundesversammlung.

On the 28th of December, the Assembly's press organ, the Reichsgesetzblatt published the Reichsgesetz betreffend die Grundrechte des deutschen Volkes ("Imperial law regarding the basic rights of the German people") of 27th December 1848, declaring the basic rights as immediately applicable..

The catalogue of basic rights included Freedom of Movement, Equal Treatment for all Germans in all of Germany, the abolishment of class-based privileges and medieval burdens, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Conscience, the abolishment of capital punishment, Freedom of Research and Education, Freedom of Assembly, basic rights in regard to police activity and judicial proceedings, the inviolability of the home, Freedom of the Press, independence of judges, Freedom of Trade and Freedom of Establishment.

After long and controversial negotiations, the parliament passed the complete Imperial Comnstitution on the 28th of March 1849. It was carried narrowly, by 267 against 263 votes. The version passed included the creation of a hereditary emperor (Erbkaisertum), which had been favoured mainly by the erbkaiserliche group around Gagern, with the reluctant support of the Westendhall group around Heinrich Simon. On the first reading, such a solution had been dismissed. The change of mind came about because all alternative suggestions, such as an elective monarchy, or a Directory government under an alternating chair wre even less practicable and unable to find broad support, as was the radical left's demand for a republic, modelled on the United States.

The people were to be represented by a bicameral parliament, with a directly elected Volkshaus and a Staatenhaus of representatives sent by the individual confederated states. Half of each Staatenhaus delegation was to be appointed by the respective state government, the other by the state parliamant.

Head of state and Kaiserdeputation

As the near-inevitable result of having chosen the Smaller German Solution and the constitutional monarchy as form of government, the Prussian king was elected as hereditary head of state on the 28th of March 1849. The vote was carried by 290 votes against 248 abstentions, embodying resistance primarily by all left-wing, southern German and Austrian deputies. The deputies knoew that Frederick William IV held strong prejudices against the work of the Frankfurt Parliament, but on the 23rd of January, the Prussian government had informed the states of the German Confederation that Prussia would accept the idea of a hereditary emperor.

Further, Prussia, unlike eg. Bavaria, Württemberg, Saxony and Hanover, had indicated its support of the draft constitution in a statement made after the first reading. Additionally, the representatives of the provisional government had attempted through innumerable meetings and talks to build an alliance with the Prussian government, especially by creating a common front against the radical left and by arguing that the monarchy could only survive if it accepted a constitutional-parliamentary system. The November 1848 discussion of Bassermann and Hergenhahn with Friedrich Wilhelm IV were also aiming in the same direction.

On the 3rd of April 1849, the Kaiserdeputation ("Emperor Deputation"), a group of deputies chosen by the National Assembly, offered Friedrich Wilhelm the office of emperor. He declined, arguing that he could not accept the crown without the agreement of the princes and Free Cities. In reality, Friedrich Wilhelm insisted in the principle of the Divine Right of Kings and thus did not want to accept a crown touched by "the hussy smell of revolution". This spelled the final failure of thr Frankfurt Parliament's constitution and thus of the German March revolution. The rejection of the crown was understood by the other princes as a signal that the political scales had tipped against the liberals. Mainly smaller states accepted the constitution reluctantly, Württemberg was the only kingdom to do so after much hesitation.

Rump parliament and dissolution

On the 5th of April 1849, all Austrian deputies left Frankfurt. On the 14th of May, the Prussian pariamentarians also resigned their mandates. The new elections called for by gagern did not take place, further weakening the assembly. In the following, nearly all conservative and bourgeois-liberal deputies left the parliament. The remaining left-wing forces insisted that 28 states had accepted the Franfurt Constitution and began the Reichsverfassungskampagne, an all-out call for resistance against the existing governments, escalating the political situation. The supporters of the campaign did not feel as revolutionaries, since in their view they represented a legitimate national executive power, acting against states that had breached the constitution. Nontheless, only the radical democratic left was willing to use force to support the constitution, notwithstanding their original reservations against it. In view of their failure, the bourgeoisie and the leading liberal politicians of the faction of the Halbe ("half ones") rejected a renewed revolution and withdraw - most of them disappointed - from their hard work in the Frankfurt Parliament.

In the meantime, the Reichsverfassungskampagnehad not achieved any success regarding acceptance of the constitution, but had managed to mobilise those elements of the population that were willing to support a revolution. In Saxony, this led to the May Uprising in Dresden, in the Bavarian part of the Rhenish Palatinate to the Pfälzer Aufstand, a rising during which revolutionaries gained the de facto governmental power. On the 14th of May the Grandduke of Baden, Leopold had to flee the country after a mutiny of the Rastatt garrison. The insurrectionists declared a Baden Republic and formed a revolutionary government headed by the Paulskirche deputy Lorenz Brentano. Together with Baden soliders that had joined their side, they formed an army under the leadership of the Polish general Mieroslawski. While the Prussian military, under orders from the German Confederation, began to crush the revolutionary troops, the Prussian government prepaed the expulsion of the remaining deputies from the Free City of Frankfurt in late May. Further deputies that were not willing to align with radical democratic left resigned their mandates, or gave it up when asked toi by their home governments. On the 26th of May, due to the enduring low presence of deputies, had to lower its quorum to a mere hundred. On the 31st of May, the remaining deputies decided to escape from the Prussian sphere of influence by moving the parliament to Stuttgart in Württemberg. This had been suggested by the deputy Friedrich Römer, who was also prime minister and minister of justice of the Württemberg government. Essentially, the Frankfurt National Assembly was dissolved at this point. From the 6th of June 1849 onwards, its remainder of 154 deputies met at Stuttgart. This convention was dismissivley called the Rumpfparlament ("rump parliament").

Since the provisional government and the regent did not recognise the rump parliament, it celraed both as dismissed and proclaimed a new provisional regency led by the deputies Franz Raveaux, Carl Vogt, Heinrich Simon, Friedrich Schüler and August Becher. Following its view of itself as the legitimate German parliament, the rump parliemant called for tax resistance and military resistance against those states that did not accept the Paulskirche Constitution. Since this view also diminished the autonomy of Württemberg, and the Prussian army was successfully crushing the rebellions in the nearby Baden and the Palatinate, Römer and the Württemberg government rapidly distanced themselves from the rump parliament.

On the 17th of June, Römer informed the presidemt of the parliament " that the Württemberg government was no longer in a position to tolerate the meetings of the National Assembly that had moved to its territory, nor the activities of the regency elected on the 6th, anywhere in Stuttgart or Württemberg". At this point, the rump parliament had only 99 deputies and did not reach a quorum according to its own rules. On the 18th of June, the Württemberg army occupied the paliemanetary chamber before the session started. The deputies reacted by organising an impromptu protest march which was promptly squahed by the soldiers without bloodshed. Those deputies that were not from Württemberg were expelled.

Subsequent plans to move the parliament (or what was left of it) to Karlsruhe in Baden could not be implemented due to the looming defeat of the Baden revolutionaries, which was comnpleted five weeks later.

Long-term political effects

After the dissolution of the National Assembly, Prussia chose to support the so-called Unionspolitik ("union policy"), strongly designed by the conservative Paulskirche deputy Joseph von Radowitz, aiming for a Smaller German Solution under Prussian leadership. This essentially entailed a modification of the Frankfurt Parliament's conclusions, with a stronger role for the Prussian hereditary monarch and imposed "from above". The Erbkaiserliche around Gagern supported this policy in the Gotha Post-Parliament and the Erfurt Union Parliament. These efforts were ended by the 1850 Punctuation of Olmütz which forced Prussia to abandon that policy. Nevertheless, the March Revolution led to a major inctrease of Prussia's political importance. On the one hand, through its leading role in suppressing the revolution, Prussia had demonstrated its indispensability as main player in German politics anmd demonstrated its superiority over small and medium states. On the other hand, the Prussian kingdom was now in a far better strategic position. For example, it had won the gratitude of the princely family of the Grand Duchy of Baden as a first important ally in southern Germany. Also, the Smaller German Solution had gained much popularity throughout tha nation. This political pass led to the adoption of the Smaller German Solution after the Prussian victory in the face-off between Prussia and Austria in the 1866 Austro-Prussian War which led to the foundation of the North German Confederation. The Smaller German Solution was implemented after the 1870/71 Franco-Prussian War in the form of Prussian-dominated unification "from above", namely the 1871 proclamation of the German Empire.

Looking for explanations for the German Sonderweg of the 20th century, some historians have suggested the discreditation of democrats and liberals, the estrangement of the aforementioned groups, and the unfulfilled desire for a nation-state, which had led to separation of the national question from the assertion of civic rights, as major factors.

The work of the National Assembly and more generally of the March revolution was judged very negatively in its immediate aftermath. Authors like Ludwig Häuser classed the ideas of the radical democratic left as irresponsible and naive foolishness. The bourgeois liberals were also discredited; many of them left politics disappointed and under great hostility from their fellow citizens in the individual states. It is probably partially due to this that Bassrmann commoitted suicide in 1855. A positive reception of the National Assembly's work only came about in the Weimar Republic and more so after World War II, when both the East German Democratic Republic and the West German Federeal Republic competed for the use of the democratic Paulskirche heritage as specific traditions of the separate states.

See also

• The Revolutions of 1848 in the German states
• German history
• Politics of Germany
• Bundestag

Bibliography

• Hanna Ballin Lewis (ed.) A Year of Revolutions: Fanny Lewald's Recollections of 1848, 1997. ISBN 1-57181-099-4
• Heinrich Best, Wilhelm Weege: Biographisches Handbuch der Abgeordneten der Frankfurter Nationalversammlung 1848/49. Droste-Verlag, Düsseldorf 1998, ISBN 3-7700-0919-3
• Wilhelm Blos: Die Deutsche Revolution. Geschichte der Deutschen Bewegung von 1848 und 1849. Illustriert von Otto E. Lau. Hg. und eingeleitet von Hans J. Schütz. Reprint of the 1893 edition, Berlin, Bonn: Dietz, 1978. ISBN 3-8012-0030-2. With contemporary images and documents
• William Carr: A History of Germany, 1815-1945. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1969.
• Dieter Dowe, Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, Dieter Langewiesche (Hrsg.): Europa 1848. Revolution und Reform. J.H.W. Dietz Nachfolger, Bonn 1998. ISBN 3-8012-4086-X
• Johann Gustav Droysen: Aktenstücke und Aufzeichnungen zur Geschichte der Frankfurter Nationalversammlung. Edited by Rudolf Hübner. (Deutsche Geschichtsquellen des 19. Jahrhunderts, herausgegen von der Historischen Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vol 14). Reprint of 1924 edition. Biblio-Verlag, Osnabrück 1967. ISBN 3-7648-0251-0
• Frank Eyck: Frankfurt Parliament, 1969 ISBN 0-312-30345-9
• Sabine Freitag (ed.): Die 48-er. Lebensbilder aus der deutschen Revolution 1848/49. C. H. Beck, München 1998, ISBN 3-406-42770-7
• Lothar Gall (ed.): 1848. Aufbruch zur Freiheit. Eine Ausstellung des Deutschen Historischen Museums und der Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt zum 150jährigen Jubiläum der Revolution von 1848/49. Nicolai, Frankfurt am Main 1998. ISBN 3-87584-680-X
• Hans Jessen (Hrsg.): Die Deutsche Revolution 1848/49 in Augenzeugenberichten. Karl Rauch, Düsseldorf 1968.
• Günter Mick: Die Paulskirche. Streiten für Recht und Gerechtigkeit. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1997, ISBN 3-7829-0470-2
• Wolfgang J. Mommsen: 1848 – Die ungewollte Revolution. Fischer Taschenbuch, Frankfurt am Main 2000, ISBN 3-596-13899-X
• Rosemary O’Kane: Paths to Democracy: Revolution and Totalitarianism. New York: Routeledge. 2004. pgs 96-98.
• Steven Ozment: A Mighty Fortress. 2004. NY: Harper
• Wilhelm Ribhegge: Das Parlament als Nation, die Frankfurter Nationalversammlung 1848/49. Droste, Düsseldorf 1998, ISBN 3-7700-0920-7
• Wolfram Siemann: Die deutsche Revolution von 1848/49. Neue Historische Bibliothek. Bd. 266. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1985, ISBN 3-518-11266-X
• Ulrich Speck: 1848. Chronik einer deutschen Revolution. Insel, Frankfurt am Main-Leipzig 1998, ISBN 3-458-33914-0
• Jonathan Sperberg: Rhineland Radicals. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991.
• Veit Valentin: Geschichte der deutschen Revolution 1848-1849. 2 Vols. Beltz Quadriga, Weinheim-Berlin 1998 (Reprint), ISBN 3-886-79301-X

Template:Translation/Ref

References

1. Hans-Ulrich Wehler: Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte. Zweiter Band: Von der Reformära bis zur industriellen und politischen "Deutschen Doppelrevolution 1815–1845/49. C. H. Beck, München 1985. ISBN 340632262X, p. 739
2. after Siemann, Die deutsche Revolution, p. 126. These numbers vary slightly within the academic literature.
3. Werner Frotscher, Bodo Pieroth: Verfassungsgeschichte. Rn 293. Munich 2005 (5th ed.). ISBN 3-406-53411-2
4. Robert von Mohl: Lebenserinnerungen. Bd 2. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Stuttgart-Leipzig 1902, S. 66f., cit. from Manfred Görtenmaker: Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert. 4. Auflage. Leske+Budrich, Opladen 1994, p.116 ISBN 3-8100-1336-6
5. Friedrich Hecker: Flugblatt vom Juni 1848., quoted after Manfred Görtenmaker: Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert. 4th ed. Leske&Budrich, Opladen 1994, p. 123f. ISBN 3-8100-1336-6
6. Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels: Werke. Bd 8. „Revolution und Konterrevolution in Deutschland“. Dietz, Berlin 1960, p. 79, quoted from:
7. Stenographischer Bericht über die Verhandlungen der deutschen constituierenden Nationalversammlung zu Frankfurt am Main., quoted from Heinrich August Winkler: Der lange Weg nach Westen. Vol I. Deutsche Geschichte vom Ende des Alten Reiches bis zum Untergang der Weimarer Republik. 5th ed. C.H. Beck, München 2002, p.122. ISBN 3-406-49527-3
8. Verfassung des Deutschen Reiches., quoted after:
9. Werner Frotscher, Bodo Pieroth: Verfassungsgeschichte. Rn 306 and 317. Munich 2005 (5th ed.). ISBN 3-406-53411-2
10. Zitiert nach Heinrich August Winkler: Der lange Weg nach Westen. Bd I. Deutsche Geschichte vom Ende des Alten Reiches bis zum Untergang der Weimarer Republik. C.H. Beck, Munich 2002 (5th ed.), p.122. ISBN 3-406-49527-3
11. Schreiben des württembergischen Justizministers Römer an den Präsidenten des Parlaments, Löwe., quoted after Manfred Görtenmaker: Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert. Leske+Budrich Opladen 1994 (4th ed.), p.140. ISBN 3-8100-1336-6

Template:Link FA

External links

Sources

• Sources in the German Federal Archives
• Sources (in German) by the German Federal Central Office for Political Education
• Text of the Paulskirche Constitution on Documentarchiv.de
• Collection of pamphlets from 1848 by Frankfurt University – iclues official documents and books
• Gutenberg-DE: Article by Karl Marx in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung 1848/49

Others

• Paper in the German Federal Archive
• Abstract of a themed volume by the Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung
• Informationpage by the Bundestag

Template:Link FA

• Frankfurt
• History of Germany
• Historical legislatures