Emil Lederer · 1920
This official commission speaking turn addresses the institutional organization of the coal economy. Lederer responds to Wissell’s proposal by asking whether its redistribution of authority would actually simplify the existing system. His central argument is that effective reform requires concentrating powers in the Reichskohlenrat (Reich Coal Council), rather than preserving overlapping institutions while modifying their composition or supervisory relationships. The contribution moves from a cautious assessment of Wissell’s organizational scheme to a more fundamental proposal for consolidating authority.
Lederer initially reserves judgment on the proposal’s details, which would require reconsideration against the legislation. Nevertheless, he identifies a structural problem: the Reichskohlenrat, Reichskohlenverband (Reich Coal Association), and syndicates would all remain.
Wenn ich recht verstanden habe, würde danach die Anzahl der heutigen Instanzen nicht vermindert werden.
English translation: If I have understood correctly, the number of existing bodies would not thereby be reduced.
The qualification matters: Lederer presents his objection as an interpretation to be tested in discussion, not a definitive rejection. Wissell’s scheme would give the council predominance by making the association essentially its organ. Lederer acknowledges that retaining this institutional form might be politically easier. Yet political practicability does not resolve the question of organizational economy.
Der Struktur nach würde es mir einleuchtender und zweckmäßiger scheinen, wenn man den Reichskohlenverband einfach kassieren könnte oder die Funktionen, die er heute hat, auf den Reichskohlenrat bzw. sein Direktorium übertragen würde.
English translation: In structural terms, it would seem more convincing and expedient to me if the Reich Coal Association could simply be abolished or the functions it currently has transferred to the Reich Coal Council or its directorate.
His distinction is between institutional form and functional control. Whether the council appoints the association’s supervisory board and directs its conduct, or formally assumes its functions through an organ of its own, makes relatively little substantive difference. Abolition or direct transfer would express that relationship more clearly.
Lederer regards the proposed transformation of the syndicates through the addition of worker representatives as a greater difficulty. He turns to an agreement envisaging state takeover of the syndicate, while explicitly noting that the commission is not bound by it. Wissell interrupts to describe that proposal as insufficiently thought through. Lederer likewise acknowledges its ambiguity, but treats it as an opening for interpretation: the council, its directorate, and any subordinate organs could receive the production functions currently exercised by the syndicates. Whether intermediate bodies are needed, or those functions should pass directly to the council, remains unsettled.
Aber das scheint mir doch das Wesentliche zu sein, daß wir eine Vereinfachung der ganzen Organisation anstreben sollten, eine Vereinfachung, welche die Kompetenzen möglichst in einer Stelle konzentriert und diese Stelle so aufbaut, daß ihr gemeinwirtschaftlicher Einfluß auf ein Maximum gebracht wird; und das kann ja nach unser aller Überzeugung wohl nur der Reichskohlenrat sein.
English translation: But what seems essential to me is that we should strive to simplify the entire organization, a simplification that concentrates powers as far as possible in one body and structures that body so that its influence in the interest of the common economy is maximized; and, according to the conviction we all share, that can surely only be the Reich Coal Council.
Administrative simplification thus serves a substantive purpose: maximizing influence oriented toward the common economy. Lederer concludes that merely amending paragraphs 10 and 22 of the implementing provisions for the Coal Economy Act would be insufficient. He reserves further elaboration of the principle that the council should hold the entirety of authority. The intervention’s significance lies in this shift from altering representation and supervision to reallocating institutional functions; it states a governing principle while leaving its detailed implementation open.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian