"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (255 page)

130.
Above all, it was a matter of declaring incitement of Poles by Germans to so-called anti-German behavior punishable under the terms of clause 1A, par. 3, of the Decree on Penal Law for Poles, since this was “reprehensible behavior,” “which offends the sense of justice of the general public in the gravest manner” (commentary of September 9, 1942, by the presiding judges of the courts of appeal and chief public prosecutors on the Reich Ministry of Justice draft of August 11, 1942, State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
816, 6–11).

131.
See the examples cited in the commentary (ibid.): allowing a Pole to tell German jokes, because the German thereby “stabbed his compatriots in the back”; an invitation to a Pole to have sexual intercourse by a German woman whose husband was at the front, under the threat of denouncing him (punishable for the Pole as an “offense against the entire German national honor” under clause 1, par. 3, of the Decree on Penal Law for Poles; for the German woman it was a matter of “giving herself away to a member of a people that had proved itself to be inferior”); secret transportation of Jews to East Prussia by a German transport company for payment of a large sum, to give them an opportunity to flee to Russia (“Doing business” in “the most distasteful manner imaginable”); good treatment of Polish domestic staff by German employers (“
völkisch
-unworthy behavior”). “Pole-friendly behavior” by Party members was particularly disapproved of (for example: “the head of a German public office, a Party member, a war veteran and fighter against the Polish insurrection movement, openly declares that he disapproves of the entire political measures regarding the treatment of Poles. He therefore demonstratively treats his Polish servant girl in such a way that the German population of the small town is generally outraged by his behavior. He has special charwomen to do the girl’s menial work. He takes his meals together with her; when he has guests, he allows the girl to be present and treats her like a guest. He goes for walks with her, helps her over ditches like a gentleman, stretching out his hand to her, goes shopping together with her and carries her shopping bag, etc. Remonstrances by the authorities have been of no avail,” ibid.). A further example of “Pole-friendly behavior” was to help Poles with the “unauthorized mailing of parcels” (letter from the Wartheland Gauleiter and Reich governor to the Party Chancellery and the Reich Ministry of Justice, May 27, 1943, State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
816, Bl. 35–36).

132.
Commentary of September 9, 1942 (see note 130 above).

133.
Minutes of July 28, 1942 (see note 128 above); Reich Ministry of Justice circular of May 29, 1942 (Az. II a 2–812/42, quoted in the minutes, see note 126). Draft with preamble by State Secretary Freisler, with a letter from the Reich Ministry of the Interior of August 25, 1942 to the governors (
Oberpräsidenten
) of the Annexed Eastern Territories (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
816, Bl. 1–3).

134.
Commentary of September 9, 1942, on the Reich Ministry of Justice draft, by the presiding judges of the Posen courts of appeal and chief public prosecutors, which was supported by the presiding judges of the courts of appeal of Königsberg, Danzig, and Kattowitz (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
816, 6–11).

135.
Letter of October 1942 (precise date unknown) from the Wartheland Reich governor to the Reich Ministry of the Interior (ibid., Bl. 24–25); for a detailed discussion of the drafts, see memorandum from Policy Desk I/23 at the office of the Reich governor, October 1942 (no precise date) (Bl. 22–23).

136.
Unsigned memorandum of September 1942 (precise date unknown) (ibid., Bl. 18) from the office of the Reich governor of Posen and letter of October 1942 (no day given) with the same content from the Wartheland Reich governor to the presiding judges of the courts of appeal and chief public prosecutors (Bl. 26).

137.
Letter of November 5, 1942, from the Wartheland Reich governor—personal adviser—to the head of Policy Desk I/50 (personal); letter of November 26, 1942, from the Wartheland Reich governor to the head of Policy Desk I/50 (ibid., Bl. 27).

138.
Thus, the head of the Security Service of the
Leitabschnitt
Posen and adviser for nationhood questions to the Wartheland Reich governor, SS-
Sturmbannführer
Höppner, expressed the opinion in September 1942 that it appeared “extremely questionable whether we should not leave as it is the previous punishment by the Security Police of offenses that, under the terms of the new draft [by the presiding judge of the court of appeal and chief public prosecutor, Posen], would be brought before the courts” (memorandum by Höppner dated September 26, 1942, ibid., Bl. 20).

139.
Letter of November 5, 1942, from the Wartheland Reich governor—personal adviser—to the head of Policy Desk I/50 (ibid., Bl. 27).

140.
See the situation report of July 1942 by the chief public prosecutor of Kattowitz (BA R 22/3372).

141.
Letter of March 20, 1943, from the Reich Ministry of Justice to the Wartheland Reich governor (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
816, Bl. 32).

142.
Telegram of May 27, 1943, from the Wartheland Gauleiter and Reich governor to the head of the Party Chancellery, Reich Ministry of the Interior, and Reich Ministry of Justice (ibid., Bl. 35–36).

143.
In his telegram of June 4, 1943, Dr. Klemm of the Party Chancellery stated that in place of the Reich Ministry of Justice draft, a change in the Treachery Law of December 1, 1934, was being examined, the wording of which corresponded almost exactly to that proposed by the Reich governor, but which was “somewhat more elastic.” Discussions were close to completion, he said, so that the issue of a decree by the Reich governor was “not appropriate” (ibid., Bl. 37).

Part Two. Section 2. B. II. The Status of “Non-German” Individuals in Procedural Law

1.
Instead, special introductory decrees were necessary, which selectively enacted German organizational and procedural law; see, e.g., the Decree on the Introduction of the Court Constitution Law and Coordination of the Courts of June 13, 1940 (
RGBl.
I 907).

2.
Decree of September 5, 1939, by the commander in chief of the army (
VOBl. Polen,
2, quoted in
Doc. Occ.
5:40 ff.).

3.
On the self-defense corps, see full details in H. von Krannhals,
Die Einsatzgruppen der Sicherheitspolizei in Polen, 1.9.1939–31.10.1939
(BA R 58, 1082); Broszat,
Nationalsozialistische Polenpolitik
(1961), 29 ff., 41 ff.; Nawrocki,
Policja hitlerowska w tzw. kraju warty
(1970), 35 ff., 51 ff.; see also the decision of July 23, 1940, by the Posen Special Court against the commissary
Landrat
and SA leader, von Hirschfeld (excerpts in
Doc. Occ.
5:41 n.9).

4.
More details in Broszat,
Nationalsozialistische Polenpolitik,
50 f.

5.
Thiemann, “Anwendung und Fortbildung” (1941), 2474; State Secretary Freisler had already personally set up a special court in Bromberg (Bydgoszcz) designed to punish the activities that took place on the so-called “Bromberg bloody Sunday” (September 3, 1939), Freisler, “Das deutsche Polenstrafrecht” (1941), 1130 (see K. M. Pospieszalski in
Doc. Occ.
5:40 n. 9; referring to the corresponding instruction in
VOBlatt des Militärbefehlshabers Danzig-Westpreußen,
p. 91, he dates the establishment of the special court at September 27, 1939). In the ten months up to April 1941, the Bromberg Special Court condemned no fewer than 201 people to death, 11 to penitentiary for life, and 93 to penitentiary sentences totaling 912 years (letter of April 17, 1941, from State Secretary Schlegelberger to the RMuChdRkzlei, Nuremberg doc. NG-144). In Posen a special court was already operative on September 20, 1939 (by order of the military commander, Posen, of that date, ZS, Polen-Film 56, Bl. 461)—it passed its first death sentence on September 27, 1939 (K. M. Pospieszalski,
Doc. Occ.
5:41 n. 9)—and in Kattowitz (Katowice) since September 22, 1939 (notification regarding jurisdiction of September 22, 1939,
VOBl. Grenzschutz,
no. 10, quoted in
Doc. Occ.
5:40 f. n. 9); in the regional district of Zichenau, the Gauleiter and supreme president of East Prussia, Erich Koch, had already abolished the special court in the late fall of 1939, because “a German jurisdiction is an obstacle to the development of the district” (as Koch said at a meeting with the Königsberg Court of Appeal presiding judge on May 27, 1940, minutes in BA R 22/848). It was able to resume its activity only on March 15, 1940 (Reich Ministry of Justice administrative instructions of March 11, 1940,
DJ
[1940]: 323), but was stopped once again after a short time, since Koch again forbade the activity of
all
judicial bodies until the German Penal Code came into effect in the Annexed Eastern Territories in June 1940. (See the report of the former head of the public prosecutor’s office in the regional district of Zichenau, quoted by Broszat,
Nationalsozialistische Polenpolitik,
128 ff. [no date or source], and the minutes of May 27, 1940, BA R 22/848).