You are bidding on oneLatin document (certificate of study) from the RheinischeFriedrich Wilhelm University of Bonn.
DatedBonn, the 8th June 1832.
Signed by hand from the dean of the law faculty, the lawyer Ferdinand Mackeldey (1784-1834), who had been completely deaf since 1807.
Issued for the law students Johann Joseph Brandt (later district judge in Bochum, lawyer in Hattingen and judicial councilor). He had attended Mackeldey's lectures on the Pandects in the SS 1832 and the lectures on Roman inheritance law, the common German and Prussian civil procedure and guardianship law in the WS 1832/33.
With paper covered seal.
Format: 31.3 x 18.5 cm.
About the student (I offer additional documents about him in parallel): Johann Joseph Brandt, born in Hoengen (today OT von Selfkant, LK Heinsberg) as the son of the farmer Johann Arnold Brandt and Margaretha, née. Hartmans, both died in Höngen before 1832. He attended the Catholic high school in Cologne (= Jesuit high school / Dreikönigsgymnasium) until 1830 and studied from November 1830 to March 1833 in Bonn and from SS 1833 to WS 1833/34 in Halle (first three semesters of Catholic theology, then switching to jura ).
Brandts studied theology in Bonn, among others, with Georg Hermes (1775-1831), Johann Wilhelm Joseph Braun (1801-1863) and Johann Heinrich Achterfeld (1788-1877), jura with Clemens-August von Droste zu Hülshoff (1793-1832), Carl Ludwig Arndts von Arnesberg (1803-1878), Ferdinand Mackeldey (1784-1834) and Peter Franz Ignaz Deiters (1804-1861).
In Halle he studied with Ernst Friedrich Pfotenhauer (1771-1843), Ludwig Pernice (1799-1861), Karl Friedrich Dieck (1798-1847), Wilhelm Eduard Wilda (1800-1856), Karl Otto von Madai (1809-1850), and Anton Friedrich Hohl (1789-1862).
Professional career:
December 1834 - November 1835: Higher Regional Court Ausculcator in Duisburg
July 1837: Higher Regional Court trainee in Duisburg
Until 30. August 1841: Higher Regional Court trainee in Hamm
31. August 1841: Assessor with limited voting rights at the Hamm Higher Regional Court
Min. April 1846 - March 1850: Higher Regional Court Assessor in Hattingen
June 1850 to October 1855: District judge at the Bochum district court
November 1855: Lawyer at the district court in Bochum and notary at the Hamm appeal court
From at least 1858: Lawyer in Hattingen
1875: Appointed judicial councilor
1. July 1878: Dismissed from the judicial service and awarded the Red Eagle Order 4. Class.
Marriage and offspring:
On the 9th In July 1846 he married Julie Bergmann, née in Hattingen. on the 25th. June 1824 in Hattingen as the daughter of the economist Matthias Johannes Bergmann (* 5. June 1787 in Hattingen as the son of Heinrich Wilhelm Bergmann and Anna Christina, née. Sintermann) and Charlotte, née. Loebel (born around 1799 as the daughter of Johann Heinrich Loebel). Her parents had on the 12th. Married in Hattingen in December 1819.
Children of Johann Joseph Brandts:
Maximilian Joseph Brandts (* 12. October 1848 in Hattingen; attended high school in Recklinghausen)
Johanna Julie Brandts (* 22. May 1852 in Bochum)
Paul Heinrich Brandt (baptized 9. July 1854 in Bochum; gest. already in February 1882 as a trainee lawyer at the Hattingen district court)
Aurelia Constantia Brandts (baptized 27. December 1860 in Hattingen)
Julius Cornelius Brandts (* 18. April 1864 in Hattingen).
Condition: Fine handmade paper browned and slightly stained; with corner bend. bplease note the pictures too!
Internal note: Kostbhf. 22-10-1 Autograph Aztograph
About Ferdinand Mackeldey (Source: wikipedia & ADB):
Ferdinand Mackeldey (*5. November 1784 in Braunschweig; † 20. October 1834 in Bonn) was a German lawyer and university professor at the universities of Helmstedt, Marburg and Bonn.
Life: Ferdinand Mackeldey was the son of the Ducal Braunschweig equerry Johann Wolfgang Mackeldey († 1810) and his wife Elisabeth, née Hundeiker, sister of the Ducal Braunschweig school councilor Johann Peter Hundeiker. After his father was transferred to the University of Helmstedt as university stable master, Ferdinand attended the local high school from 1793 and the Collegium Carolinum in Braunschweig from 1800. In 1802 he enrolled at the University of Helmstedt and was graduated there on the 19th. He received his doctorate in law in May 1806. Mackeldey joined the university's board of judges as an auditor, established himself as a lawyer and completed his habilitation as a private lecturer in 1807.
After Mackeldey on the 7th After he permanently lost his hearing in November 1807, for no apparent reason at the time, he resigned from his law practice and concentrated on his work as a legal scholar and university lecturer. In 1808 he was appointed associate professor and in 1810, after the University of Helmstedt was closed, he was transferred to the University of Marburg, where he was appointed full professor in 1811.
In the fall of 1818, Mackeldey received an appointment at the newly founded University of Bonn as a professor of Roman law. He took up teaching in Bonn in the summer semester of 1819.
His lectures were described as clear and lively and, despite his deafness, he was said to have managed to give his voice the necessary modulation. In contrast, the politician, lawyer and writer Jodocus Temme describes that in Mackeldey's lectures "tumultuous nonsense and mockery", which some of the listeners allowed themselves due to their deafness, were the order of the day.
The Prussian government awarded Mackeldey the title of Privy Councilor of Justice in 1824 and the Order of the Red Eagle 3rd in 1828. Class. Nevertheless, colleagues from the faculty made massive complaints about the quality of his scientific work. After significant arguments among his colleagues, Mackeldey resigned as full professor of the university's ruling committee in 1828 in order to concentrate exclusively on teaching tasks.
Marked by illness, he had himself carried into the lecture hall for his last lectures. Ferdinand Mackeldey died penniless in October 1834.
Family: He's been around since he was 16. Married in May 1816 to Mathilde von Wedel, daughter of General Karl Alexander von Wedel. His younger brother Friedrich Mackeldey was a judge and minister in the Electorate of Hesse.
Works (selection)
Dissertationes inauguralis quatenus Actio de recepto contra aurigas et curatores mercium seu speditores competat sectio prima De actione de recepto contra aurigas generatim admittenda. 1806.
Discussion of the question of whether, among Protestants, a marriage performed without the consent of the parents is void. Helmstedt 1806.
Theory of the order of succession according to Napoleon's code. 1811.
Textbook of the institutions of today's Roman private law. Heyer, Giessen 1814.
Textbook of today's Roman law. 2 volumes. 1818. (Digitized volume 1, 8. ed. 1829), (Volume 2, 1829).
Mackeldey: Ferdinand M., lawyer, is on the 5th. Novbr. Born in 1784 in Braunschweig, where his father was ducal equerry. In Helmstädt, where he was transferred in 1793 as a university stable master, M. attended high school and then briefly entered the educational institute of his maternal uncle JP Hundeiker zu Groß-Lafferde (see vol. XIII, p. 399 ff.), moved to the Carolinum in Braunschweig in 1800 and the University of Helmstädt in 1802, where he graduated on 19. He received his doctorate in law in May 1806. He soon joined the board of the law faculty as an auditor, established himself as an advocate and completed his habilitation as a private lecturer in 1807. On the 7th Novbr. This year a misfortune struck him that would be fatal for his entire life: in the course of half an hour, without any previous illness and without any apparent cause, he lost his hearing completely and forever. The next consequence was that he had to resign from the practice of law, which had become impossible for him to continue practicing after the introduction of the oral procedure. He devoted himself all the more zealously to his work at the Spruchcollegium and his academic career; In 1808 he was appointed associate professor and in 1809 associate assessor of the tribunal collegium. When the University of Helmstädt was abolished on 10. Decbr. In 1809 he was transferred to Marburg. His economic situation, which was very difficult with a salary of 400 francs, improved significantly in 1811 when he was appointed full professor. In 1816 he married the daughter of the Prussian general von Wedell, Dame of the Order of Louis. M. had spent nine happy years in Marburg when, in the fall of 1818, he was offered the professorship for Roman law at the newly founded University of Bonn with a salary of 1,500 Thlr. was applied. It was only with a heavy heart that he decided to leave a country that had become home to him and several of his relatives in prominent positions. In Bonn, where he began his teaching post in the summer semester of 1819, M., as a member of the Spruchcollegium, of which he was full professor from 1821 to 1828 after Mittermaier's departure, but primarily as a teacher of Roman law, as well as feudal law and common civil processes, had an extensive and successful activity unfolded. His delivery is praised as clear and lively; and despite his deafness he is said to have managed to give his voice the necessary modulation. In the best of times, his pandect lectures were attended by more than 100 listeners. The The government recognized his services by appointing him as Privy Councilor of Justice (1824) and by awarding him the Order of the Red Eagle 3rd. Classe (1828) was repeatedly recognized, but despite multiple requests from the curatorial authority (extraordinary government representative v. Rehfues), he was never granted a salary increase. His income, which apart from the salary of 1500 thousand hlrn. an average of 1500 thr. College funds, which were then supplemented by the considerable fees for the work in the Spruchcollegium as well as for the repeated editions of his textbook and probably also for some private reports, allowed him to run his household on a broad basis and to practice a hospitality that, like Rehfues in an official report (1828), which was to the honor and benefit of the university. His most extensive work, through which his name became known in the widest circles of students and practitioners, is his “Textbook of the Institutions of Today's Roman Law,” which was first published in 1814 and which he completely revised in 1818 under the changed title “Textbook of Today's Roman Law.” Right” was published for the second time. It appeared repeatedly “multiplied and improved” in 4. Edition, 1822 in two volumes; in the 7th edition. In 1827, the previously followed institutional order was replaced by a separate system. In the penultimate year of his life (1833), M. published the 10th, once again enlarged edition and was able to report in the preface that his textbook was also distributed through translations in France, Spain and Russia. After his death it was made by Roßhirt with additions in the 11th. (1838) and 12. Edition (1842) was published. A chrestomathy of the passages cited therein appeared in 1832 under the fictitious name Ludwig Hermann, under which the friends studying in Marburg at the time, Ludwig Buff (see vol. III, p. 503) and Hermann Kersting (see vol. XV, p. 650) were hiding. – The scientific value of this textbook is low; His shallowness in both his historical and dogmatic statements later became almost proverbial. Vangerow, who was otherwise so gentle in his judgments, used to say from the lectern: “Mackeldey's book was first a useful textbook for institutions, then was intended to become a textbook for pandects and is now neither of those things.” But it more than satisfied the superficial need for learning of the large crowd The “Höpfnerian Commentary” that prevailed there, which, as Hugo said in the review of the 7th Edition (God. gel. No. 1827. p. 809) noticed, repressed. The diligent effort to keep the reader up to date with scientific advances is also to be acknowledged. – Mackeldey's teaching gifts, erudition and practical ability were not enough to cover up the lack of a higher scientific significance; and as with Hasse's (see vol. X, p. 759) Transfer to Bonn, an equally outstanding and self-confident representative of Savigny's historical-philological school took the mild-minded Mittermaier's place in the faculty, a period began in which M. was most sensitive to the scientific inferiority of his talent and direction was made tangible. In “Temme's Memories” (published by St. Born 1883. pp. 73-88) there are stories from the winter semester of 1822/23, which, even if they may not be reliable, sometimes even contradict the facts attested by the documents, but generally give a correct picture of Mackeldey's position and reputation. According to Temme's story, in Mackeldey's lectures, tumultuous nonsense and mockery, which some of the listeners allowed themselves due to their deafness, were the order of the day. According to the records, a complaint by Mackeldey dated 28. Jan. 1823) about bringing dogs and smoking in his auditorium caused the Senate to issue a warning to the entire audience; and the clumsy and careless manner in which the rector (von Münchow), accompanied by the university judge and two pedellas, discharged this order in the auditorium caused a violent ferment in the student body. Since the rector, supported by the government representative from Rehfues, refused the requested satisfaction, it was decided in repeated student meetings to leave Bonn en masse; A declaration of disrepute by the university also appears to have been secretly made. However, the university authorities managed to conjure up the storm through clever and firm stance. Temme, who studied in Bonn as a companion of a Prince of Bentheim, gives an incorrect account of these events. He also quite wrongly calls Rehfues, who is as insightful and skilful as he is benevolent, an intriguing and domineering, ruthless bureaucrat. Temme himself is described in the files as an agitator. But his departure from the university, which Rehfues caused him to do, did not take place during the riots, as he claims, but only on January 1st. On April 18, 1823, after the storm had long since calmed down and the semester had ended, a pedell asked Rehfues whether it would not be possible to get rid of this “greatest corruption of the students and agitators of all kinds who are still here”. It is easy to understand that Mackeldey's reputation was not raised in academic circles by these events. As early as 1823 he wanted to resign from the Ordinariate of the Provincial College because of “difficult personal experiences”. Rehfues manages to appease him, but the resentment fueled by continued friction in the faculty finally bursts into flames in 1828. In a letter addressed to the ruling college, M. declares it incompatible with his honor to continue to hold the office of full professor, given the lack of trust and goodwill as well as the contrasts in direction and inclinations. In the bitter exchange of correspondence that now follows, the faculty appears to be split into two camps: on one side, only Ferd stands next to M. Walter, who has long since withdrawn from the Spruchskolleg; The opposing party is formed under Hasse's leadership by Heffter and v. Droste-Hülshoff. The unpleasant dispute, in which Hasse did not disdain to fill many sheets with petty criticisms, finally reached the attention of Minister Altenstein, who was informed by a rescript dated 9th. January 1829 made his disapproval known to both parties. The differences were exacerbated when Hasse's party promoted his son-in-law Puggé to extraordinarius and Böcking's transfer in the same capacity (see vol. II. p. 785 ff.) from Berlin to Bonn received new growth. In keeping with his distinguished nature, Bethmann-Hollweg, who was also transferred to Bonn in the fall of 1829 (see vol. XII, p. 762 ff.), but was unable to compensate for a conflict that Hasse's attempt to move his Pandect lecture to the winter semester, to Mackeldey's detriment, caused. Only a rescript from Minister von Kamptz dated 5. Aug. 1830), which ordered adherence to the previous order of the curriculum and strongly disapproved of the attitude of the disputants, put an end to the annoying deal. It was not without reason that M. and Walter declared their support in a separate vote (on 26. February 1832.) against the one requested by Böcking and the appointment of the latter as full professor for French civil law, which he had not previously maintained, was approved by the faculty. Rehfues also opposed the promotion so that the ruling party in the faculty would not become even more powerful. – The experiences of these years became even more embarrassing for M. due to their pecuniary consequences. When he left the tribunal college, he lost considerable income; the diminished status of Hasse's successful competition made itself felt in a considerable decline in college funds; and the ministry did not listen to the repeated requests for a salary increase supported by the government representative [16]. In addition to all this hardship, there were physical sufferings that increased from year to year starting in 1825. Just as M. patiently endured his deafness, he also heroically resisted the painful illness. In order to fulfill his teaching duties, he had himself carried into the lecture hall in recent times when his feet were failing. He died on the 20th. October 1834. The government provided generous support to his relatives, whom he left penniless. Writings: “Diss. inaug. Quatenus a. de recepto contra aurigas et curatores mercium s. speditores conpetat”, Helmst. 1806. “Discussion of the question of whether, among Protestants, a marriage performed without the consent of the parents is void (in Braunschw. Magazine 1806)”. “Conspectus Digestorum in ord. redactorum ad Hellfeldii jurisprud. for. In usum scholarum from Fr. Schrader et Fr. Mackeldey”, Helmst. 1810. 4°. “Theory of the order of succession according to Napoleon’s code”, Marburg 1811. (Shown by Hugo Gött. gel. No. 1811. p. 378 ff.). “Theoretically. Development of the species. 787 and 790 of Napoleon's Code of Laws. Addendum to the theory of the order of succession”, Cassel 1811. In Bucher's Repertory of the French. Right, Leipzig. 1812, 1813, anonymous the species. Inheritance, inheritance, inheritance law, succession, division of inheritance and marital community of property. “Textbook of Institutions”, Giessen 1814. 12. Edition by Roßhirt 1842. “Explanation of the subject matter, the order and the plan of his lectures”, Marb. 1817. “Outline for lectures on German private law”, Marb. 1816. “Outline for lectures on the gem. d. Civil process”, Bonn 1828. 1830. “Outline for lectures on gem. d. Feudal Law”, Bonn 1828. “Diss. de ordinum provincialium in Germ. origine”, Bonn 1832. 4°. “Legal discussion of the question: whether Section 71 of the Kurhess. Constitutional document also applies to the deputies of the state university? From a Rhine-Prussian. Legal Scholars”, Bonn 1833. Reviews in the Heidelb. year, in the Halleschen and Jenaer Allg. Lit. Ztg. in the years 1810–1817. After his death, two editions of his textbook were published: “Excurse on individual legal matters”, Gießen 1835. 4°. “Outline of inheritance law”, Bonn 1835.
N. Necrology of the Germans, year. 12. Thl. 2. Files from the Curatorium and the Ruling College in Bonn.