Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum - Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum
Adolescent up to studies 1792–1811
On September 19, 1792, under the reign of Prince-Bishop Franz Ludwig von Erthal , Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum was born as the twenty-first child in Bamberg. Even though many of his siblings no longer lived in their parents' house, his youth was characterized by crampedness and poverty. The father of the then 14-year-old Birnbaum died on April 22, 1806. This led to a further deterioration in the situation and living conditions.  Birnbaum himself wrote in his diary: "Here I had the misfortune of losing my honest, German-minded, honest father." From this point on, Birnbaum had to pay for the funds for his maintenance and, above all, for his school and later academic career himself, a problem that would haunt him for a long time, because his long-awaited doctoral thesis was to be delayed a long time because the the necessary means for subsistence were missing. To finance his school, he worked as a tutor in Bamberg and even provided his mother and siblings with a small livelihood.
But the following time at high school led the young Birnbaum to a humanistic education, shaped by ancient languages, but also by mathematics and natural sciences . In this milieu of intellectual openness, outside the cramped and labor-intensive parental home, Birnbaum's love for the "purified views of philosophy and philology"  could develop. He also distinguished himself as the best student in his high school and performed very well.  This and the close contact with his teachers  led to Birnbaum's intellectual development, which was an indispensable prerequisite for his theories of criminal law theory.
Once again, the financial resources hampered Birnbaum's development and progress in knowledge. It was not until 1811 that, thanks to the mediation of influential friends, he was able to begin studying at the University of Erlangen. At first, however, the path to law was still very uncertain and rather covered by the idea of studying philology . But Birnbaum attended a lecture given by the pandectist Christian Friedrich von Glück on November 15 and wrote in his diary: “The erudition of this man and his lively lecture astonish me; In the very first few days I developed a decided love for jurisprudence " This moment can certainly be seen as the birth of his affection for law, a love that would last for 66 years. At this point, however, it should not be ignored that Birnbaum saw himself as a romantic and repeatedly wrote poetic works. If you ask yourself how this relates to the history of criminal law, it quickly becomes clear that his works were always part of himself and thus reflect the human being Birnbaum. And a large part of that person was a poet and playwright. Therefore, Birnbaum wrote and published a few poems and a drama with the title “The Spell of Fate” during this time. Works "in the tone of patriotic enthusiasm [...] which dominated the youth in those years"  , or his main work of this time, the trilogy Adalbert von Babenberg . 
The year 1813 marked the decisive turning point in Birnbaum's life: the move to the University of Landshut . This was accompanied by the opportunity to study with lawyers such as Paul Johann Anselm von Feuerbach , Carl Joseph Anton Mittermaier and Friedrich Carl von Savigny . But it is not only the people who shape a personality, it is also always time and history that shape a personality and give it shape.
Landshut was a city that was constantly influenced by military unrest during the Austro-French Wars . Austria declared war on France in 1809  and after Bavaria, in whose territory Landshut was located, sided with the Austrians, French troops passed through it several times. Certainly this has severely impaired both university and day-to-day operations. This atmosphere was created to strengthen the national identity and to break it out of the shapelessness. Especially the play in the Bamberg theater "Deutsche Treue" captivated the Bavarians. This jubilation from the theater spread to the streets and also captured the city of Landshut with a national euphoria. Birnbaum himself reports that "joy and joyful communication of the experienced and reported events had an [intoxicating] effect on his mind"  This joy was transferred to student leisure activities and Birnbaum lived an exuberant student life and still devoted himself to his poetry.
Certainly the most momentous encounter of Birnbaum - the encounter with Carl Joseph Anton Mittermaier (1787–1867) - gave further and new impulses. Although Mittermaier was only five years older than Birnbaum, he had been professor of law at the University of Landshut since 1810. The resulting friendship lasted a lifetime, despite some professional controversies, and influenced Birnbaum like no other.
Mittermaier was characterized primarily by his "comparative law"  . Mittermaier's central line of thought was to focus on foreign legal systems - coming from natural law itself - and the idea of expanding the scope of legislation only by comparing the rights.  Nevertheless, Mittermaier never started from the principle "which absolutely and unconditionally opens up access to truth and justice". This urge to keep researching for new things, even if, as a natural lawyer, he had to be able to start from the naturally correct law, was a characteristic that captivated Birnbaum and also shaped his research and teaching. It was "nothing less than the determination to maintain an independent intellectual position between firmly established views."  On September 1, 1814, Birnbaum completed his studies in Landshut with the first state examination in law and then, as often before, stood in his Life, penniless there.
In 1815 he was able to begin his legal dissertation to achieve a doctorate.  This work is judged very controversially. While Gareis speaks of a “brilliant [disputation]” “which deserves the fullest legal interest”  , the New Archive for Criminal Law writes : “Recens. does not see why the author went so far unnecessarily; on the other hand, he is not about to call the second section excellently worked ”. Nonetheless, Birnbaum took the view that "what is meritorious always lies in the endeavor to write with inner conviction, and should lead this astray, it seems ... always better to err by following one's own views than getting onto the right path through the blonde prayer of strangers, unconsciously and by chance. ”  This attitude to almost all areas of his life also led to Birnbaum first looking for the way to Bamberg after his doctorate -Year-olds rekindled the conflict between jurisprudence and poetry. Only over time and with permanent employment as court master had Birnbaum give up his poetic works and devote himself entirely to jurisprudence.
Birnbaum's time in Leuven 1817–1830
Why Birnbaum now ended up at the University of Leuven has not been conclusively clarified. It is clear, however, that the only 24-year-old Birnbaum was offered a professorship in Leuven. Gareis suspects that through the mediation of the "diplomatic agent of the House of Nassau-Orange , the Freiherr von Gagern " , whom he got to know in the house of the von Westphalen family, got in touch with the Dutch and with it the possibility of this professorship. Undoubtedly, this may have been beneficial and therefore necessary, but certainly not a sufficient condition for the appointment. So it remains to be assumed that Birnbaum only came as a “substitute” for good scientists who should actually give the newly founded university a reputation.  This original disadvantage was to be turned into an advantage. So the "German teachers were the medium between Dutch, Flemish and French". 
As it turned out, it was precisely Birnbaum who demonstrated an enormous adaptability in terms of language  and teaching. So Birnbaum's “emergency solution” became a blessing for the university. During this time he also distinguished himself through his school at Mittermaier. Birnbaum came to work on comparative law through Mittermaier and was therefore familiar with both domestic and foreign legal systems. So it is not surprising that, despite his limited academic experience, he was entrusted with the assessment of the draft of a new Dutch penal code. Rector in 1822/23 and 1824/25Elected to the Reichsuniversität Leuven, Birnbaum strove to achieve an exchange with the surrounding universities. His time in Leuven concluded with the Order of the Dutch Lion in 1829. 
This work also meant that Birnbaum completely removed himself from poetry and at the same time finally had a regular income that was sufficient for him. He used the money at his disposal for trips to Germany, Switzerland, and later to France, Italy and Hungary. This multilingual and inter-European travel route brought Birnbaum personal and academic acquaintances. Not least, he met his future wife Clara Wilhelmine Laumayer in this way in 1823 and married her in 1824. Scientifically, Birnbaum spent the first years in Leuven very unproductive. It was not until 1826 that he began to publish and his and the work of colleagues in the specially founded journal " Bibliothèque du jurisconsulte et du publisciste" to publish.
Birnbaum's time in Bonn, Freiburg and Utrecht
In 1830 Birnbaum finally left the Netherlands and went to Bonn .  Equipped with rights by the royal Prussian government, Birnbaum began to give lectures at the Friedrich Wilhelm University in Bonn . His broad repertoire of comparative law knowledge earned him this position, much to the chagrin of his professorial colleagues, who saw him more as a competitor than a specialist colleague. The 38-year-old Birnbaum had become a well-known teacher of criminal law in Germany and “threatened” to elicit the audience from the traditional professors.  Because of the tense situation, Birnbaum only spent two years in Bonn and accepted a positionFreiburg i. Br. An. From an academic point of view, it can be stated from this time that Birnbaum was very active in civil and public law, something he had not done before.
The following time in Freiburg i. Br. Accepted Birnbaum out of economic considerations. With the acceptance of the call [to Freiburg] the granting of the title of "grand ducal court counselor"  was also connected. The annual salary there was 2000 Dutch guildersand thus 800 guilders higher than in Bonn. It is also noteworthy that Birnbaum had major problems with his colleagues from the start. Here, too, as in Bonn, his position was viewed critically. Even former friends now turned against Birnbaum. Even if his contributions during his time in Freiburg were not as numerous as in Bonn, his most important work “On the requirement of a violation of the law on the concept of crime” was written in Freiburg. "Through him, criminal law theory received the impetus to overcome the formalistic abstraction in the formation of the concept of crime" 
His two other writings from the time in Freiburg  also prove the intellectual sharpness and education that Birnbaum had acquired in the previous years. Well-founded knowledge of Roman, French and English criminal law flow into these works, which, however, have hardly met with reception and therefore received even less attention than the work on which they are based.
After finishing his time in Freiburg, he accepted a position at the University of Utrecht . Not only was it difficult for him, despite his great popularity with the students, to really arrive academically in Germany, but it was also Birnbaum's great wish to go back to the Netherlands and build on his old experiences and successes from Leuven. Again this came with financial advantages and a secure position both in front of the university and in front of the students. Even an annual pension of 1000 Dutch guilders for his wife was associated with this employment. Only after five years and after an inquiry from the University of Giessenfrom the year 1840, which was also the one with the best conditions of all previous inquiries, Birnbaum decided to leave the Netherlands one last time and to spend the rest of his life (and the rest of his life) in Gießen. The efforts of the University of Utrecht to keep him in the Netherlands are remarkable and indicative of Birnbaum's merit. Among other things, they write about him: “We should regard the departure of this… deserving man as a major loss. He was highly honored by his fellow officials and students and we also believe that he helped shape our time through his teachings. " Shaped by these statements, Birnbaum's path to Gießen was not easy. However, for the sake of his family and in line with his wish to return to the "fatherland", he decided in favor of Giessen. In Utrecht, too, Birnbaum was scientifically very productive. With his work, however, he was no longer able to build on the importance and intellectual sharpness of his earlier contributions. The most noteworthy work from this period is the essay “Discussion of the question whether the penal codes should not contain a general provision with regard to malice”.
Old age in Giessen
Birnbaum arrived in Gießen in 1840  and began his position as a Privy Councilor of Justice . In contrast to his previous positions in Germany, Birnbaum now managed to win the trust and goodwill of his colleagues. This may have been due to the fact that Birnbaum no longer came to the university when he was in his mid-twenties, but was now 48 years old. As a result, he was proposed as rector in the winter semester of 1844/45 and appointed by the Grand Duke. 
Very soon he had to stop his academic teaching, since he was entrusted with the position of Chancellor of the university in 1847. This position required directing the academic administration. Significantly, with his post as Chancellor of the University of Giessen, he also occupied the seat in the First Chamber of the Grand Duchy of Hesse. He always filled this office actively. Here he particularly benefited from the experience gained from Löwen, which had taught him to examine and weight innovation for its practicability. Birnbaum moved more and more away from academic activities and found himself, almost involuntarily and by surprise, in the politics of his time. So he was from Grand Duke Ludwig III.entrusted in 1849 and 1850 with the task of "being present as a sovereign representative in the elections of bishops in Mainz"  . Since there was great tension between the church and Ludwig III at this time. had come, this anger was just spilling over the agent, Birnbaum.  Nevertheless, Birnbaum proved himself on such political missions and was finally appointed a member of the state house of the Erfurt parliament in 1850.
Birnbaum personally experienced the German Revolution of 1848/49 in Gießen and was soon entangled in the political mill because of his employment. After the failure of the Frankfurt National Assembly , it was Prussia that pushed for the unification of the German states. The Erfurt Union Parliament was a first result of these efforts . Birnbaum was elected as the rapporteur of the committee in parliament, which should decide on the draft law on the establishment of a Reich court. In many of these and subsequent votes, Birnbaum made it clear that he must be counted among the “Erfurt right”. For example, he spoke out very decisively against the introduction of universal suffrage and supported the old Prussian three-class suffrage . “I just want to say that I have always been an opponent of universal suffrage, not for a theoretical reason, but because I have never found it to be permanently justified anywhere, neither in republican nor in monarchical states, and because it is everywhere where it is temporarily has asserted itself, expressed such harmful consequences that one was obliged to return from it. " Certainly this also shows the other side of the otherwise very liberal and cosmopolitan appearing pear tree. The unfavorable examples alone lead him to believe in the failure of universal suffrage.
Birnbaum was so involved in his political activities that he only got hold of lectures. Birnbaum hardly published any scientific writings at all during his time in Giessen. Rather, he intervened practically in what was happening and, for example, made a decided statement in September 1846 on the major “prison reform”. The decisive impetus for this reform came from Birnbaum's old teacher and friend Mittermaier. And such a prison reform was a visible expression of a general trend towards more liberalism. Mittermaier's sentence, which has gone down in history: “Our criminal law theory was derived from dogs, it was believed that how to beat a dog so that it no longer steals, then you have to deal with people” makes it clear that time is running out developed from a pure retaliatory criminal law to a criminal law of purposes. Mittermaier's idea was "to build up a penal system that would improve people without afflicting them with the odium of dishonor." At this point, however, Birnbaum does not follow his old master. Neither penitentiary writings nor such progressive contributions to the congregation came from Birnbaum. Here he was still active in the Kantian and Feuerbachian spirit and shied away from promoting a radical change in the criminal justice system, as this would "lead to chaotic confusion".
Birnbaum's last 37 years were often dominated by such reluctance and shyness. The spirit of reform that was once so strong in him seemed to have died out at this time, or it was fear of jeopardizing the fame he had won with an overly radical theory. All in all, during his time in Giessen he hardly produced any work on criminal law and, even as a professor, rarely appeared in front of his students. Due to his reticent nature, however, his star did not die out either. He has been made an honorary member of numerous scientific societies.  He was also awarded high medals for his political and administrative services. "And yet this was the end of his life - the autumn of the same and the life force was in decline."  Physically and mentally, however, Birnbaum could no longer meet his own demands.  In 1872, after 43 years of marriage, his wife died of a stroke . In the same year, his first-born son also died, strokes of fate from which he was no longer to recover. "The painless end on December 14, 1877, was falling asleep, the extinguishing of a flickering light, a life of 85 years, 2 months and 25 days!" 
In retrospect, Birnbaum was attested by his compatriot and colleague Karl von Gareis that he “worked for the sake of work itself, a research life, restlessly hardworking, tirelessly active ... simple, modest and undemanding.” 
On the work "On the requirement of a violation of legal interests on the concept of crime" (1834)
In the 19th century, the crime was formally defined as an act subject to punishment.  Birnbaum should change this. "He would like to make a statement about what actually violates the crime, and he does not want to completely forego a determination of what is" naturally ", ie independent of positive law, to be regarded as a crime."  Birnbaum begins his remarks with the fact that the concept of “violation” has always been understood in “different ways” in criminal law.  He further states that there is a "positive and a natural determination of crime".  He differentiates between "positive determination of crime" and"Natural destiny of crime" . With the first term, Birnbaum means that anything is a crime that is an act punishable by law. This term corresponds to the ideas of common German criminal law of the early modern period.
Birnbaum developed this idea right at the beginning of his work and in the following describes the natural legal concept with the words: “When we speak of the natural legal concept of crime, we mean by that what, according to the nature of criminal law, is reasonably punishable in civil society can be viewed insofar as it can be summarized in a common term. " 
Starting with this distinction, Birnbaum developed the doctrine of crime as a violation of the law. Birnbaum can therefore be methodically located in the "moderate-positivist school"  . From there he does not ask what is “a crime in the nature of things” , but rather what concerns the application of the law than the legislation.  He reflects on his methodological approach and tries to find out whether, starting from the distinction between a positive and a natural legal term, one can pursue the idea that the "crime is called an infringement contained under a criminal law."  ]With this statement, Birnbaum deals with Feuerbach's view , which was prominently represented by him and which was based precisely on this definition of crime. However, without paying attention to the name of Feuerbach, Birnbaum answers this point of contention that has now been raised very harshly. "That the common German criminal law only punish violations of the law, no one will want to claim, even if the broadest sense of this word is accepted." The following distinction between state and private crimes or between police violations and actual crimes, which also goes back to Feuerbach, is viewed very critically by Birnbaum. The problem in this connection, and this will be taken up again later, are crimes of religion and morality . According to the old system, these would be classified under police violations. Birnbaum contradicts this quite emphatically, saying that “one cannot lump these crimes into one pot with not sweeping the streets” . Birnbaum goes even further. He asks whether it is illogical to "list something as a subspecies of a genus that is not included in the generic term"  be.
Apart from these points, he has to criticize the doctrine of infringement in general that it defines the infringing character of the criminal act in a misleading manner.  In the following, he refers to the German legal scholar Christoph Karl Stübel and receives that "even the endangerment of a good as an object of subjective law constitutes an infringement, because the subjective right includes the right to refrain from endangering the property" . This approach is an integral part of Birnbaum's argument. Ultimately, it follows from Stübel's view that it is precisely the legal interest and not the subjective right that must be examined as the subject of the criminal act of infringement. This is not only legally given, but even due to the language used, it would be much more natural to assume a violation of goods than a violation of rights. 
With these words, Birnbaum rejects the prevailing doctrine of crime as a violation of the law and now tries to explain what, according to the nature of things, can be regarded as a crime in civil society.  The "fight against" the prevailing opinion at the time could mean nothing other than to bring about an ideological dispute with Feuerbach.  Birnbaum himself, however, was dealing with a purely legal matter in this matter. He did not want to deviate from his natural law origin. Birnbaum assigns the protection of legal interests to the state, "since it is part of the nature of the state to guarantee that all people living in the state enjoy certain goods in an equal manner." The state's task of granting the subjective rights of citizens shifted "back to the guarantee of the goods objectively necessary for them for social reasons" .  The point of view changes from the positive to the transportive concept of crime. This also includes that the law infringement theory developed by Feuerbach can no longer be considered as the basis for defining this “transportive concept of crime” , “because it fails to recognize the infringement content of the crime.” 
The doctrine of legal infringement prevailing at the time was based on the state-philosophical doctrine of the social contract , as it were as an ideological basis . Birnbaum himself tries to develop a model of criminal law theory that does without this state-philosophical reference. He himself says: “Whatever one may think about the legal basis and purpose of the state, it will be possible to agree with different views on this if one assumes that it belongs to the essence of state power, all people living in the state in the same way To guarantee the enjoyment of certain goods which are given to people by nature or which are the result of their social development and civil society ” . 
Birnbaum also differentiates between injury classes. He speaks of “first class” injuries as “natural” goods, and “second class” injuries as “social crimes”.  However, he did not develop this theory originally out of an effort to present an antithetical position on Feuerbach. Rather, he sees the dogmatic advantages of his work in terms of criminal law. So it is compatible with the doctrine of legal interests and sometimes also affordable for the first time to make precise distinctions between injury and endangerment or completion and attempt. For this purpose, Birnbaum divides legal interests into those "that are already given to man by nature" and those that are "the result of his social development" are. Crimes against individuals and crimes against the general public can also be categorized dogmatically according to Birnbaum's teaching. The underlying legal good can ultimately be an individual legal good or a common good . In this way, crimes against the general public could be precisely identified and classified. According to Birnbaum, goods of this general public are religious or moral convictions of the people.  In this way, injuries to the same could also be assessed. Birnbaum sees this as a further (and not inconsiderable) advantage of his doctrine of protection.
As often as Birnbaum speaks of “goods”, of “protected goods”, of “general and individual goods”, he does not define the good as such in his work. Based on his remarks at the beginning of the work, Birnbaum seems to indicate that the object of an injury could only be "people or things". Later, however, he writes of the estate as the "object of our rights". Overall, this point remains addressed, but still unresolved. Birnbaum presumably relies on the idea that "invoking the natural conception under the enumeration of the merits of his criminal doctrine could replace an exact definition." 
Birnbaum became a member of the Pre-Parliament in 1848 and of the State House of the Erfurt Parliament in 1850 . From 1847 to 1849 and from 1851 to 1875 he was a member of the First Chamber of the Estates of the Grand Duchy of Hesse .
- Deduction of the rights of the Duke of Looz-Corswarem to the Principality of Rheina-Wolbeck . Aachen 1830.
- The legal nature of tithe . Bonn 1831
- On the requirement of an infringement of the law on the concept of crime, with special regard to the concept of defamation , in: Archiv des Criminalrechts , ed. von Abegg, Birnbaum, Heffter, Mittermaier, born 1834, pp. 149–194
- De Hugh natural to define the true mind . Bonn 1835
- Ludwig Harscher von Almendingen: Presentation of the legal imputation. Legal and political writings , Part I. Giessen 1803
- Knut Amelung: Protection of legal interests and protection of society. Investigations into the content and scope of a criminal law principle based on the history of dogma . Athenaeum, Frankfurt 1972.
- Carl Gareis : Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum - An image of culture and life . Emil Roth's bookstore, Giessen 1878
- Hannelore Götz, Klaus-Dieter Rack: Hessian parliamentarians 1820-1933 , supplementary volume: Biographical evidence for the First Chamber of the Estates of the Grand Duchy of Hesse (= Darmstädter Archivschriften 10), Darmstadt 1995, p. 40
- Hans-Werner Hahn, Helmut Berding, in: Gebhardt: Handbook of German History . Volume 14: Reforms, Restoration and Revolution 1806–1848 / 49 , Klett, Cologne 2010
- Jochen Lengemann : MdL Hessen. 1808-1996. Biographical index (= political and parliamentary history of the state of Hesse. Vol. 14 = publications of the Historical Commission for Hesse. Vol. 48, 7). Elwert, Marburg 1996, ISBN 3-7708-1071-6 , pp. 76-77.
- Eva-Maria Lohse: Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum (1792–1877) as a teacher of criminal law . In: Contributions to Freiburg's history of science and universities, Vol. 33, 1966, pp. 126–190
- Klaus-Dieter Rack, Bernd Vielsmeier: Hessian MPs 1820–1933. Biographical evidence for the first and second chambers of the state estates of the Grand Duchy of Hesse 1820–1918 and the state parliament of the People's State of Hesse 1919–1933 (= Political and parliamentary history of the State of Hesse. Vol. 19 = Work of the Hessian Historical Commission. NF Vol. 29) . Hessian Historical Commission, Darmstadt 2008, ISBN 978-3-88443-052-1 , No. 60.
- Andreas Schlack: Johann Michael Franz Birnbaum - On the requirement of an infringement of legal rights , Münster 2010 (unpublished text)
- Birnbaum, 1) Johann Michael Franz . In: Meyers Konversations-Lexikon . 4th edition. Volume 2, Verlag des Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig / Vienna 1885–1892, p. 973.
- Birnbaum, Johann Michael Franz. Hessian biography. (As of November 21, 2019). In: Landesgeschichtliches Informationssystem Hessen (LAGIS).
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 2
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 6
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 8
- This contact continued long after his school days.
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 9
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 3.
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 16.
- See on this: Gebhardt, Handbuch der deutschen Geschichte , Volume 14, p. 37f.
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 17
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 9
- See on this: Mittermaier, Die Mündlichkeit, the indictment principle, the public and the jury , foreword and p. 3.
- Schmidt, Introduction to the History of German Criminal Justice , p. 258
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 6.
- The title of the dissertation is: About the Homicidium committed by several people. As an exegetical explanation of the 148th article of the pHGO of Charles Vten (note CCC - Constitutio Criminalis Carolina) and the L. 11 D. ad leg. Aquil .. With added sentences from the entire jurisprudence .
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 19
- In: Neues Archiv des Civilrechts , Vol. 1, pp. 683ff.
- Birnbaum, pre memories of his dissertation , p.1
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 32
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 11
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 11 and footnote 62
- addition to German, he also spoke fluent French and Dutch
- Cf. "Expert opinion from Professor van Enschut for the King on the personality of Birnbaum for the purpose of Birnbaum's appointment to the University of Utrecht"; Rijksarchief Utrecht, University, Vol. 1835, NR. 4954 b
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 41ff.
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 20
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 24
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 29
- "About the arbitrary judiciary in the case of absolutely indeterminate criminal laws" and "About the profession of expert in criminal proceedings"
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 36
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 48ff.
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 50
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 40
- See on this: Stinzing-Landsberg, III. Section 2nd half volume, notes p. 157
- Stenographic report on the 8th session of the House of States on April 20, 1850
- Lohse, Birnbaum als Criminal Law Teacher , p. 42
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 56.
- In Birnbaum's personal file at the University of Giessen there are numerous permits for sick leave and bathing trips, beginning in 1861
- Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 58.
- Karl Gareis, Birnbaum, S. 4.
- Conrad Franz Rosshirt: Development of the principles of criminal law based on the sources of common German law , p. 159.
- Amelung, Protection of legal interests , p. 43.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 149.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement, p. 153.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 155.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , pp. 157, 158.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 158.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 159.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , pp. 166, 167.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 168.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 171ff.
- Amelung, Protection of legal interests , p. 44.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , pp. 174, 176.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 177.
- Moos, concept of crime in Austria , p. 213.
- Birnbaum, Rechtsverletzung , pp. 175–177, 179, 181, 188, p. 177: “... that it belongs to the essence of state authority to guarantee all people living in the state the enjoyment of certain goods in an equal manner, which the people of given to nature or the result of its social development and civil association ”.
- Birnbaum, legal infringement , p. 178.
- Amelung, Protection of legal interests , p. 45.
|NAME||Birnbaum, Johann Michael Franz|
|SHORT DESCRIPTION||German legal scholar and playwright|
|DATE OF BIRTH||19. September 1792|
|PLACE OF BIRTH||Bamberg|
|DATE OF DEATH||December 14, 1877|
|Place of death||to water|