Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen · 1894
Schullern’s brief review evaluates the expanded third edition of Bornhak’s account of German social legislation. Moving from its emergence as an independent publication to its usefulness abroad, he makes a case for comparative legal knowledge while distinguishing institutional understanding from evidence of legislative effects.
The review situates Bornhak’s book within a reform movement driven by social and economic change against inherited doctrines:
Der reformatorische Geist, der seit mehr als einem Jahrzehnte auf dem Gebiete der socialen und ökonomischen Gesetzgebung nach hartem Kampfe gegen überlieferte Schulmeinungen, gefördert durch die unaufhaltsam vorwärts rollenden Thatsachen des socialen und wirtschaftlichen Lebens, ausschlaggebend geworden ist, bedarf eines Führers, und diesen stellt ihm die Erfahrung bei.
English translation: The reforming spirit which for more than a decade has become decisive in the field of social and economic legislation, after a hard struggle against inherited school opinions and furthered by the unstoppably forward-rolling facts of social and economic life, stands in need of a guide, and this experience supplies to it.
Experience here means learning from other states’ legislation, its origins, and its consequences. Germany’s leading role in some areas makes Bornhak’s exposition particularly valuable to foreign readers. Schullern praises its compressed presentation, emphasis on essentials, and fluent style: these reveal both the animating principles and the institutional structure of German social policy without overwhelming readers with subordinate details.
Yet this praise has a precise limit. Knowledge of institutions and their historical development permits an assessment of their significance in Germany and their possible usefulness elsewhere only when national circumstances are considered. Even then, Schullern calls the judgment theoretical. A stronger verdict requires statistics showing the legislation’s effects, a demand he explicitly separates from Bornhak’s chosen task:
Eine solche zu bieten, konnte aber nicht in den Rahmen der Aufgabe fallen, die sich Bornhak gestellt hat.
English translation: To offer such a one, however, could not fall within the framework of the task which Bornhak has set himself.
The review’s central distinction is thus between a concise legal account that enables informed comparison and an empirical evaluation that establishes practical results. Bornhak supplies the former; Schullern values it as guidance for reform without treating institutional description as sufficient proof of success.
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