by The Destruction of the European Jews, Vol. 1-3 (Third Edition) Yale University Press (2003) (pdf)
The
Finance
Minister
expressed
his
opposition to the Reich’s extension of credit to buyers (“the credit of
the Reich must not be impaired’’) and to the cancellation of debts owed
to non-Jewish creditors. In his reply he concluded that if compulsory
transfers of Jewish property were desired, it would be best to set up 103 104
103. Memorandum by Dr. P. Binder, May 23, 1938, NI-6906.
104. RGB1 I, 627. Drafts of the decree were circulated, after an interministeriai
conference and before publication, to Gbring, the Labor, Economy, Finance, and Justice
Ministries; the Foreign Office; the Reich Chancellery; and the Deputy of the Fiihrer
(Hess). See circular letter by Sluckart, April 30. 1938, NG-3938. The decree was signed
by Frick (Interior), Hess, Funk (Economy), and GOrtner (Justice).
103. Frick to Oberregierungsrat Hallwachs (Office of the Four-Year Plan), Minis-
terialbQrodirektor Reinecke (Economy Ministry), SS-Oberftihrer Klopfer (Party Chancellery), SS-UntersturmfUhrer Regierungsrat Dr. Tanzmann (Security Police), June 14, 1938, NG-3937.
ARYANIZATIONS
time limits in which the Jews would be required to dispose of their
business.'“
The final word in this debate was said by Goring in the conference
of November 12, 1938:
It is easily understood that strong attempts will be made to get all these
[Jewish] stores into the hands of party members. ... 1 have witnessed
terrible things in the past; little chauffeurs of Gauleiters have profited so
much by these transactions, they have now about half a million. You
gentlemen know it. Is that correct? (Assent) Of course, things like that are
impossible. ... We shall insist upon it that the Aryan taking over the
establishment is experienced in the business and knows his job. Generally
speaking, he will have to pay for the store with his own money. ""
That was the end of the debate.
From July to December 1938 the ministerial bureaucracy wiped out
in six consecutive blows the remaining structure of Jewish business
and self-employed activity. The decrees (1) set termination dates for
the
operation
of
commercial
services,
doctors’
offices,
lawyers’
offices, and retail establishments; (2) provided for trustee administration (by appointees of the Economy Ministry) of retail establishments, industrial
enterprises,
real
estate,
and
agricultural
properties.
It
is
noteworthy that
these measures proceeded from the assumption that
small Jewish firms, particularly in “overcrowded” fields, were to be
liquidated entirely. Only efficient enterprises or businesses with a high
plant value were found worthy of transfer into Aryan hands.1“
106. Von Kxosigk to Frick, Goring, Hess, Ribbentrop, Lammers, Funk, and Heyd-
rich. August 23, 1938, NG-3937. See also Finance Ministry memorandum of July 16,
1938, NG-4031. For Economy Ministry's attitude, see memorandum by Dr. Binder
(Dresdner Bank) on his discussion with Regierungsrat Dr. Gotthardt, May 23, 1938, Nl-
6906. See also Binder to Götz, May 30, 1938, Ni-6906. Götz was chairman of the
Vorstand (board) and chairman of the Aufsichtsrat (president) of the Dresdner Bank.
107. Minutes of conference, November 12, 1938, PS-1816.
108. In Austria before the Anschluss there were 25,898 Jewish enterprises (not
including doctors’ and lawyers' offices). By the end of 1939.21,143 had been liquidated.
The percentages of liquidations in individual branches were as follows:
Artisan trades
87
Sales
83
Travel and shipping
82
Banks
81
Industrial
26
Agricultural
2
Krakauer Zeitung, December 2,1939, page headed Wirtschafts-Kurier. For similar Berlin
statistic, see Bennathan, "Struktur," Entscheidungsiahr, p. 131.
125
EXPROPRIATION
The first decree, dated July 6, 1938,'· dealt with commercial services. It provided for the termination, by December 31,1938, of Jewish business activities in guard services, credit information bureaus, real
estate
agencies,
brokerage
agencies,
tourist
guides,
marriage
agencies
catering to non-Jews, and peddling. No compensation was provided for
any financial losses resulting from cessation of business.
The second decree was enacted on July 25,1938."° In pursuance of
this measure, licenses were withdrawn from Jewish physicians. However, the Interior Ministry was empowered to issue permits restricting the practice of Jewish doctors to the treatment of Jews. This was no
more than a reenactment of canonical law, but a modem innovation
was the provision that leases for apartments rented by Jewish physicians were terminable at the option of either landlord or tenant. The decree was signed by Hitler, Frick (Interior Ministry), Hess (Führer
Deputy), Gürtner (Justice Ministry), and Reinhardt (Staatssekretär, Finance Ministry).1"
On September 27, 1938, a decree signed by Hitler, Gürtner, Frick,
Hess, and Reinhardt provided for the elimination of all Jewish lawyers,
effective December 31.m
These three measures, it must be emphasized, were straight liquidation decrees. Under the terms of these laws, there was no transfer of enterprises from Jews to Germans. Only the customers, patients,
and clients were transferred to German patronage.
On the occasion of the November riots, Hitler and Goring had a
discussion about fines and similar matters. One of the products of this
discussion was Hitler’s decision to undertake the “economic solution"
of the Jewish problem; in other words, he wanted all remaining Jewish
enterprises to be Aryanized. Characteristically for Hitler, his motivation was not at all economic. He wanted a quick Aryanization—
particularly of the department stores—because he did not think that
Aryan
customers,
notably
officials
and
government
employees
who
could shop only between 6 and 7 p.m., obtained adequate service."’ 109 110 111 112 113
109. RGBI 1,823.
110. RGBI 1,969.
111. The Jewish doctors, whose practice was restricted to Jews, were deprived not
only of their business but also of their title. They were henceforth called Kranken-
behandler. Jewish dentists were deprived of their licenses by the decree of January 17,
1939, RGBl I, 47.
112. RGBI I. 1403. Lawyers whose practice was restricted to Jews were called
Konsulenten. Patent agents had already been removed by the decree of April 22, 1933,
signed by Hindenburg, Hitler, and Frick, RGBI 1,217. Tax advisors had been eliminated
by the decree of May 6, 1933, signed by Hitler and Gürtner, RGBI 1,257.
113. Testimony by Goring, Trial of the Major War Criminals, IX, 278.
126
ARYANIZATIONS
Whatever the logic of this reasoning, th
e remedy was applied immediately.
On
November
12,
1938,
retail
establishments
were
ordered
to
cease all business activity by December 31."' In elaboration of this
decree, the ordinance of November 23, 1938,113 signed by Staatssekretär Brinkmann (Economy Ministry) and Reichsminister Gürtner (Justice Ministry), ordered that the entire Jewish retail trade, including shops, mail order houses, department stores, and so on, be dissolved
and liquidated as a matter of principle. The Jewish owners were forbidden to sell their stock to consumers. All goods were to be offered to the competent
branch
group
or association (Fachgruppe or Zweckvereinigung). Prices were to be fixed by experts appointed by the presidents of the competent Chambers of Commerce. In other words, the German
consumer was to get nothing out of this deal; the German competitor
was to get the bargain. To hurry matters along, the Economy Ministry
was empowered to appoint liquidators, and it could grant in special
cases the right of transfer (Aryanization) to a German buyer. The Jewish owners of handicraft shops, however, were simply to be struck off the register and their licenses confiscated.
On December 3, 1938, the last and most important measure was
enacted."4 This decree, which was signed by Funk and Frick, dealt with
industrial enterprises, real estate, and securities. With respect to Jewish industrial firms, the measure provided that the owners could be ordered to sell or liquidate within a definite time. A “trustee” could be
appointed to effect the sale or liquidation. The trustees were to be
appointed by the Economy Ministry, but they were to be “supervised"
by the top regional officials of the Reich. To conduct a sale, the trustees
had to have the permission also of those agencies that exercised a veto
power
in
these
matters
(the
Gau
economic
advisors.
Chambers
of
Commerce, and industrial associations). As a negotiator, the authority
of a trustee replaced any legally required power of attorney.
The decree also provided that a Jew could be ordered to sell his
land, forest, or real estate properties. In these holdings, too, trustees
could be appointed to make the sale. However, as we shall see, the real
estate Aryanizations lagged for several years because, in many cases,
the Jews had mortgaged their houses to the “roof antenna.”"7 Finally,
114. RGBl I, 1580. Wholesale establishments remained outside of the compulsory
Aryanization process.
115. RGBl I, 1642.
116. RGBl 1, 1709.
117. The average mortgage was 75 percent. See the Deutsche Volkswirt, July 29,
1938, pp. 2(42—43.
127
EXPROPRIATION
the decree ordered the Jews to deposit all stocks, bonds, and other
securities at the regional offices of the Finance Ministry. Deposits and
titles were to be marked as Jewish. Disposal of securities henceforth
required the authorization of the Economy Ministry.
That was the “economic solution.” We might note that these decrees did not solve all problems. To begin with, they were not in effect in the so-called Protektorat of Bohemia and Moravia, where the Dresdner Bank and its cohorts were busy with “voluntary” Aryanizations."·
Second, the laws did not apply to foreign Jewish enterprises in the
Reich. The attempt to cover foreigners was made, but it did not succeed. Under the registration decree of April 26, the foreign Jews had been ordered to register their domestic property. The decree also contained a phrase that was in part administrative, in part propagandist^.
The phrase was to the effect that the registered properties would be
used in accordance with the necessities of the German economy. In
consequence
of
these
provisions,
the
United
States,
Great
Britain,
France, Belgium, Switzerland, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Czechoslovakia protested. All of these countries, except Belgium and Poland, also had treaties with Germany that specifically prohibited the parties
to take the properties of each other’s nationals without adequate compensation.
As a result of these protests, Staatssekretär Weizsäcker of the
Foreign Office pointed out that an indiscriminate application of the
principle
of
“utilization”
would
have
serious
political
consequences
disproportionate
to
any
advantages
gained."’
This
opinion
was
confirmed by Lammers, the Chief of the Reich Chancellery, after a
discussion with Ribbentrop, Frick, and Hitler. The four men had considered the interesting question—pregnant with implications for future policy—whether Jews of foreign nationality should be treated as foreigners or as Jews. It was decided that, as a matter of principle, they should be treated as Jews, but that exceptions might be necessary in
individual cases for reasons of foreign policy.'“ The upshot of these
discussions was Göring’s grudging decision to exempt the foreign Jews
from forced Aryanizations. As he put it during the conference of
November 12, 1938: "We shall try to induce them through slight, and 118 119 120
118. The Protektorat decree of June 21, 1939 (signed by Reichsprotektor von
Neurath), stipulated that the transfer of a Jewish business was permissible only with
special written authorization. In addition, the Reichsprotektor empowered himself to
appoint trustees “in cases which seem appropriate to him.” Verordnungsblatt des
Reichsprotektors in Böhmen und Mähren, 1939, p. 45.
119. Weizsäcker to Brinkmann (Staatssekretär. Economy Ministry), June, 1938,
NG-3802.
120. Ummers to Hess, July 21, 1938, NG-1526.
128
ARYANIZATIONS
then through stronger pressure, and through clever maneuvering to let
themselves be pushed out voluntarily.’’111
The party was not quite satisfied with the “solution” to the Aryani-
zation problem, because the “the middle class,” or the “little chauffeurs of Gauleiter”—whichever way one wished to look at the matter—
were left out in the cold. In the Gau Franken, Streicher’s district, the
party decided on its own economic solution. On the eve of the November decrees, suspecting that no time was to be lost, the offices of Gauleiter Streicher went to work. One Jew after another was called in
and made to sign a paper transferring his real estate to the city of Fürth,
the Gau, or some other worthy purchaser. From the Jewish community
organization the city of Fürth acquired 100,000 reichsmark worth of
property for 100 reichsmark. From a private person the city took
20,000 reichsmark worth of real estate for 180 reichsmark, and so on.
Jew after Jew filed in, and document after document was signed.
However, there was a difficulty because some court officers refused to enter the transactions in the real estate book (Grundbuch), a step required to make the deal legal. One of the judges, Amtsgerichtsrat Leiss, wa
s willing to go ahead. He reasoned that “the question of freedom of will was perhaps dubious but that every action
in life was governed by some influence or other.” But Leiss wanted to
put
the
circumstances
of
the
transaction
into
writing.
Furthermore,
some of the judicial officials insisted that Gauleiter Streicher be entered
as purchaser for such properties as were transferred to the Gau, because the Gau as such had no “legal personality." The party men decided that the name of the Gauleiter had to be “left out of this” and entered the name of Deputy Gauleiter Holz as a “trustee.” Staatssekretär Schlegelberger of the Justice Ministry had no objection to this procedure, and the party officials explained in their defense that “the
Gau Franken had made special contributions in the Jewish question
and that therefore it was entitled to special rights.”'”
If the party had its grievances, the Reich had more cause for complaint. For when all was said and done, the major profit accrued neither to the party nor the Reich but to private business interests: the purchasers of Jewish enterprises and the competitors of liquidated firms.
This
was
true
under
involuntary
Aryanization
no
less
than
under
voluntary Aryanization. The idea that one special class should have all 121 122
121. Minutes of Goring conference, November 12, 1938, PS-1816.
122. The story of the Franken Aryanizations is taken from the memorandum by
Oberstaatsanwalt Joel, February 15, 1939, NG-616. A special commission was appointed
by Goring to look into these transactions. For its report, see document PS-1757. An
unpublished decree, signed by Göring and dated December 10, 1939, invalidated all
irregular Aryanizations concluded after November 1, 1938, NG-1520.
129
EXPROPRIATION
the profit from a measure taken for the “good of the people” was a
distasteful one, even for Goring. Consequently, it was decided that the
new owners would have to part with some of their gains.
First, there was the problem of bridging the gap between purchase
price and actual value. It seemed to Goring that the trustees were not
supposed to serve the Jews. They were appointed to serve the state. As
he saw it, the trustees were to fix the amount to be paid to the Jewish
owner for his property. “Naturally,” he said, “this amount is to be set
as low as possible." But in turning over the property to a German