‘We demand a universal German right of domicile and full freedom of movement 
throughout the German fatherland.” 

So said His Majesty Frederick William IV in his charter of March 
18.25! 

But the King proposes and Herr Geiger disposes. Herr Geiger, 
acting Police Superintendent of Cologne, is insisting on the expul- 
sion of Herr Karl Schapper on the pretext that Herr Schapper is a 
citizen of Nassau and moreover a German in partibus infideliwm.* 

Yesterday a police-sergeant pushed his way into Frau Schapper’s 
bedroom and deposited the following letter, which we reproduce 
exactly as it was written. What might appear to be incorrectness is 
perhaps nothing more than a Prussian protest against German 
grammar. 

Herr Schapper, 

I am instructed to inform you that the Police Superintendent still continues to 
insist that you should leave the city, should you however have any objection to raise 
against the laws then please lodge an appeal immediately with the Police Inspector, to 

be sent to him immediately. 
Cologne 17/8. 48 

Quetting 

Police-Sergeant 

* Beyond the realm of reality (literally “in the country of infidels”)—an addition 
to the title of Catholic bishops appointed toa purely nominal diocese in non-Christian 
countries.— Ed. 

The Attempt to Expel Schapper 391 

Thereupon, Herr Schapper addressed the following note to the 
Police Inspector: 

Dear Sir, 

Under the date of the 11th of this month you signified to me that I must leave the 
city of Cologne within a week, in accordance with the decision of Herr Geiger, Police 
Superintendent. I had already lodged a protest against the decision on that occasion. 
You have now communicated to me through a police-sergeant that the said expulsion 
order still stands but that I may appeal against it. This I am now doing and I base my 
case on the following reasons. 

1) As early as March 18, 1848, the day before the March revolution, the King of 
Prussia issued a charter calling on all German states to observe a universal German 
right of domicile and admit the freedom of movement. No Prussian authority ought to 
refuse the citizens of another German state what the King of Prussia has demanded 
for citizens of the Prussian state. The charter of March 18 either has no meaning at all 
or it implies the abolition of all earlier provisions for the expulsion of non-Prussian 
German citizens. 

2) On July 21 of this year the German National Assembly at Frankfurt adopted 
Paragraph 2, Article 1, of the German Fundamental Rights” in a form 
which expressly forbids all expulsions of Germans from German cities or states. 
It says: 

“Every German has the right to sojourn and make his domicile, acquire real estate 
etc., etc. ... pursue any type of employment in any part of the territory of the Empive.... 

“The conditions of sojourn and domicile will be laid down for the whole 
of Germany ... by a law of domicile issued by the imperial authority. Until such a 
time as these laws of the Empire are proclaimed, the exercise of the said rights is 
open to every German in every German state under the same conditions as apply to 
the citizens of the state in question. 

“No German state may make any distinction in connection with civil, penal 
or adjective law between its own citizens and the citizens of any other German 
state whereby the latter, as foreigners, are treated at a disadvantage.” 

According to this paragraph I have the right, until the proclamation of the relevant 
laws of the Empire, to sojourn or domicile in Cologne, a town situated on the territory 
of the German Empire, and gain my livelihood as a proof-reader under the same 
conditions as the citizens of the Prussian state. But citizens of the Prussian state can 
only be expelled from Cologne, under the existing laws, if they have no means of 
subsistence. I have not been accused of lacking these and if I were I could at any 
time prove the contrary, since my salary as proof-reader on the Neue Rheinische 
Zeitung is sufficient to guarantee myself and my family a decent standard of 
living. 

It is not valid to object that the relevant paragraph of the Fundamental Rights has 
not yet been promulgated. It has all along been the practice of administrative 
authorities in all constitutional states to suspend the execution of regulations such as 
the right of expulsion and other restrictions on personal freedom when a resolution 
abolishing these regulations has been passed by the appropriate Legislative Assembly 
and only awaits formal promulgation. 

We are here dealing, then, with a resolution of the National Assembly which 
abolishes the powers of expulsion and a royal charter which recognises this resolution 
in advance. Consequently I believe that I am fully within my rights when I declare 

that I protest against the expulsion order, which was not even communicated to 
me in writing or accompanied by a statement of reasons, as an illegal act and that I 
will only yield to force. 

Sir, I would ask you to be so kind as to lodge this protest with the appropriate 
authorities and to forward the decision to me as soon as possible, for if it is ignored I 
will appeal immediately to the royal Regierungsprasident or the Ministry of the Interior 
and in the last instance to the Berlin Constituent Assembly and the German National 
Assembly. 

Cologne, August 17, 1848 
(signed) Karl Schapper 
The “cathedral of German unity’, in which the solemn speeches that 
our great political architects made for three days running culminate, 

has, as its foundation stone the expulsion of a citizen of Nassau from 
Cologne on the Rhine.