Emil Lederer: Review of Hermann Schuon’s Der Deutschnationale Handlungsgehilfenverband zu Hamburg (1915)

Emil Lederer’s short review assesses Schuon’s organizational history of the Deutschnationale Handlungsgehilfenverband (D.H.V.). It acknowledges the book’s documentary usefulness before developing two connected criticisms: Schuon fails to define the association’s distinctive principles, and his dependence on official sources prevents an independent account of its place within the salaried employees’ movement.

Lederer credits Schuon with making the activities of a major commercial employees’ association accessible through a conscientious, detailed use of records. Yet statistical development, programmatic statements, and descriptions of activities do not adequately explain an organization’s social position. Scientific analysis must reconstruct its underlying theory, even where that theory remains implicit. Schuon should therefore have examined how the D.H.V. understood employees’ class position, strikes, and the conflict of interests between employers and employees, distinguishing its answers from those of competing associations.

Mit der Behauptung des D.H.V., eine Gewerkschaft auf nationaler Basis zu sein, ist seine eigenartige Position nur angedeutet, ohne, namentlich für Ferner stehende, klar bestimmt zu sein.

English translation: With the D.H.V.'s assertion that it is a trade union on a national basis, its peculiar position is merely intimated, without being clearly determined, especially for those standing further off.

For Lederer, an organization’s self-description supplies a problem for interpretation, not a sufficient explanation. This conceptual shortcoming also reflects Schuon’s selection of evidence: he uses official records, proceedings, and pamphlets but neglects the association’s periodical, die deutsche Handelswacht. Lederer explains why that omission matters:

Dieses aber ist (infolge der notwendigen Rücksichtnahme auf die Stimmungen, Ideologien und Wünsche der breiten Mitgliederkreise), wie bei allen Interessenorganisationen, die wertvollste Quelle für die Beurteilung des speziellen Charakters der Verbände.

English translation: This, however, is (in consequence of the necessary regard for the moods, ideologies and wishes of the broad body of members), as with all interest organizations, the most valuable source for judging the particular character of the associations.

The periodical’s responsiveness to members’ moods, ideologies, and wishes makes it especially revealing of the association’s character. Lederer thus directs attention beyond formal organizational statements toward the interaction between leadership and membership.

His second criticism concerns scholarly independence. Reliance on official material, compounded by its sparing use, leaves the movement’s internal struggles, crises, and fundamental problems unexamined.

Seine Schrift ist daher eine Monographie im engsten Sinn des Wortes.

English translation: His work is therefore a monograph in the strictest sense of the word.

The phrase condenses Lederer’s distinction between reproducing a bounded body of facts and interpreting an institution as part of a wider social current. Schuon’s book remains valuable for describing the D.H.V.’s social-policy activities and indirectly illuminating recent questions of commercial employees’ welfare. The review’s broader methodological significance lies in its insistence that organizational history connect documentary detail with comparative analysis, implicit principles, and the conflicts animating the larger movement.