Karl Theodor von Inama-Sternegg, “[Rezension zu] Deutsche Reichsgesetze mit Erläuterungen” (1875)

In this German-language review, published in 1875 on pages 641–643 of journal volume 2, Inama-Sternegg assesses four annotated legal publications concerning residence and citizenship, poor relief, industrial regulation, and innkeeping and licensed drinking establishments. His argument establishes a standard for legal commentary that combines practical usefulness with historical and conceptual explanation, then distinguishes the publications’ achievements within that framework.

The review begins from the different demands that imperial legislation places upon scholarship and administration. Commentary must help officials apply laws and private citizens understand them, while strictly scholarly interpretation can proceed more selectively. For Inama, economic and social legislation frequently establishes provisional arrangements rather than definitive solutions. Scholarship may initially investigate foundational principles without pursuing every administrative detail; practical implementation nevertheless requires immediate explanation of the laws’ full content. Provisional legislation must still become effective in social life.

The reviewed publications mediate between these responsibilities. Their practical orientation is supported by accounts of legislative development and governing principles, reconstructed through governmental proposals and parliamentary debate. Their introductions also consider the relationship between imperial and state legislation and the relations among individual states’ laws. Assessment of a law’s adequacy and its effects can thus accompany the explanation of its origins. This approach gives the commentaries greater interpretive value than a compilation of decrees, administrative instructions, and judicial decisions alone.

Their common purpose does not imply uniform scholarly depth:

Im Einzelnen sind dann diese Commentare allerdings sehr verschieden gearbeitet.

English translation: In detail, however, these commentaries are worked out very differently.

Inama finds that Jacobi’s treatment of industrial legislation and Endemann’s discussion of confessional equality satisfy scholarly requirements throughout. Beutner, Herrfurth, and Schläger concentrate more closely on legislative history, legislative motives, parliamentary proceedings, and Prussian administrative practice. The distinction qualifies his general endorsement without discrediting works primarily designed for practical use.

Comprehensiveness remains their shared strength. Prussian materials receive exhaustive treatment, supplemented by material from medium-sized states and the most important provisions of smaller states. Inama’s concluding praise is consequently tied to a defined readership and purpose:

In dieser Weise werden sie dem Bedürfnisse der überwiegenden Mehrzahl aller derjenigen gerecht, welche sich mit der Reichsgesetzgebung vertraut machen wollen, und können füglich als Muster dieser Gattung von Commentaren aufgestellt werden.

English translation: In this way they do justice to the needs of the overwhelming majority of all those who wish to make themselves familiar with imperial legislation, and may fairly be set up as a model of this species of commentary.

The review makes practical coverage, historical explanation, and attention to Germany’s overlapping jurisdictions mutually reinforcing criteria of excellence. Its endorsement rests not on equal theoretical ambition across the publications, but on their capacity to make imperial legislation intelligible and usable while retaining a connection to the principles behind it.