Raul Hilberg

Home > Other > Raul Hilberg > Page 43


  Generalstabes, October 15, 1942, NOKW-132.

  233. Haider diary, February 5, 1940, and February 24, 1940, NOKW-3140.

  252

  POLAND

  In the course of further planning the Himmler line was trimmed a

  bit. The ditch was confined to the Bug-San gap, a stretch of territory

  without a river to hold up a Red advance. The project required the

  employment not of millions of Jews, as originally envisaged, but only

  of a few thousand. Labor camps were set up at Bettec, Ptaszdw and a

  few other locations. By October 1940 the project was nearing its end.““

  However, the Himmler line was only the beginning. The Lublin

  district administration launched a major river-regulation and canalization project that used 10,000 Jews in forty-five camps (overall director, Regierungsbaurat

  Haller).“5

  In

  the

  Warsaw

  district

  a

  similar

  land-

  restoration program was started in 1941. About 25,000 Jews were required for that project.25* In the incorporated territories labor camps dotted the landscape of Upper Silesia. The largest Silesian camp was

  Markstadt. It had 3,000 Jewish inmates.227 The Warthegau too had big

  plans for the “outside employment” (Ausseneinsatz) of Jews, and in

  1940 camps were set up in Pabianice and Lowenstadt.iJ!

  At first the inmates of camps were used only in outdoor projects

  such as digging antitank ditches, canalization and river regulation, road

  and railroad construction, and so on. Later on, industrial enterprises

  moved into some of the camps, and camps were built near major

  plants. Camp labor thus became a permanent institution, no longer

  dependent

  on

  projects.

  What

  effect

  the

  industrialization

  of

  Jewish

  labor had on the deportations will be discussed in a following chapter.

  Like the labor columns, Jewish camp workers were recruited by

  the Judenrate.2” The camp groups were furnished complete with Jewish

  “supervisors”

  (Aufseher)

  and

  "group

  leaders”

  (Judengruppen-

  fiihrer). Furthermore, the proper behavior of the forced laborer was

  insured by keeping a record of the family members he left behind. In 234 * 236 237 238 239

  234,

  Gouverneur of Lubtin/lnterior Division/Population and Welfare to Generalgouvernement Main Division Interior/Population and Welfare (attention Dr. Föhl), October 21, 1940. Dokumenty i materiaty, vol. l,pp. 220-21.

  23J. Krakauer Zeitung, December 17, 1940. Generalgouvernement page. These

  Jews were working eight to ten hours a day, standing without boots up to their knees in

  water infested by leeches. Report by Warsaw Judenrat/Referat Arbeitslager, end of 1940,

  in Jüdisches Historisches Institut, Faschismus-Gelto-Massenmord, pp. 218-20. Warsaw

  Jews were sent to Lublin.

  236. Krakauer Zeitung, April 18, 1941, p. 5.

  237. Affidavit by Rudolf Schönberg (Jewish survivor), July 21, 1946, PS-4071.

  238. Office of the Regierungspräsident in L6di (signed Regierungsrat von Herder)

  to Gettoverwaltung in L6di, October 28, 1940, enclosing summary of conference held

  under chairmanship of Moser on October 18. 1940. Dokumenty i materiaty. vol. 3, pp.

  102-4.

  239. Entries by Czemiakdw, September 6 and 28, 1940, in Hilberg, Staron, and

  Kermisz, eds., Warsaw Diary, pp. 194, 202.

  253

  CONCENTRATION

  conformity

  with

  this

  hostage

  policy,

  the

  German

  administration

  in

  L6d2 decided that “out-employment” would be reserved primarily for

  heads of families.240 241 242 243 244 Consequently it was not necessary to divert large

  police forces for the guarding of the camps and of the Jewish work

  parties. The meager SS and Police regulars were supplemented by

  ethnic German police auxiliaries,241 hired guards of the Wach- und

  Schliessgesellschaft

  (Watchmen’s

  Association),242

  SA

  men,

  army

  men,

  members of the Organisation Todt (the Reich agency in charge of construction),245 and Polish work foremen.244

  The cost of the labor camps was very low. Their sanitary facilities

  were

  “naturally

  quite

  primitive"

  (natürlich

  ziemlich

  primitiv l-245

  Men

  slept in crowded quarters on hard floors. No clothes were issued. Food

  in some camps was supplied by the nearest Judenrat and in other camps

  by the civil administration, but the chief ingredients of the workers’

  diet

  were

  only

  bread, watery

  soup,

  potatoes,

  margarine,

  and meat

  leftovers.246 247 Working from dawn to dusk seven days a week, the Jews

  were driven to collapse. A survivor reports that even small camps,

  with no more than 400 to 500 inmates, had approximately twelve dead

  every day.242

  The financial aspects of the camps were not very complicated.

  Reich agencies were not required to pay any wages, and public employers were therefore free to exploit their Jewish workers without limit. Private enterprises were not “entitled” to Jewish labor. In the

  240. Von Herder to Gettoverwaltung, October 28, 1940, enclosing conference summary of October 18,1940. Dokumenly i materiaty, vol. 3, pp. 102-4. The conference was attended by Regierungsvizepräsident Dr. Moser, Regierungsrat Baur, Polizeipräsident

  Albert, Bürgermeister Dr. Marder, Dr. Moldenhauer, Chief of Gettoverwaltung Biebow

  and Regierungsrat von Herder.

  241. Krakauer Zeiiung, December 17, 1940. Generalgouvernement page. Ethnic

  German auxiliaries in the Generalgouvemment were organized into the Selbstschutz

  (self-defense force), placed under the command of the BdO (Order Police), and the

  Sonderdienst (Special Service), originally controlled by the Kreishauptmänner but later

  taken overby the commander of the Order Police, ibid., May 21, 1940, August 16, 1940,

  April 9, 1941, Generalgouvernement page; Frank diary, PS-2233. The Himmler line project was guarded in part by the Sonderkommando Dirlewanger, a special SS unit composed of unreliables. Globocnik to Berger. August 5, 1941, NO-2921.

  242. Labor Ministry memorandum, May 9, 1941, NG-1368.

  243. Affidavit by Schönberg (survivor), July 21, 1946, PS-4071.

  244. Krakauer Zeitung, December 17, 1940, Generalgouvernement page.

  245. Report for August 1940 by Kreishauptmann Weihenmaier of ZamoSC (Lublin

  district), September 10, 1940, Yad Vashem microfilm JM 814.

  246. Report of inspection trip to Betzec by Major Braune-Krikau (Oberfeldkommandantur 379), September 23, 1940, T 501, roll 213. The food supplier in this camp was the Judenrat of Lublin.

  247. Affidavit by Schönberg, July 21, 1946, PS-4071.

  254

  POLAND

  Generalgouvernement private firms did not enter into the labor camps

  before 1942. In the incorporated territories the Reich Labor Trustees

  (one in each Reichsgau) directed the enterp
rises to pay wages, at rates

  considerably lower than prevailing wages for German workers. However, not even the reduced wage was paid wholly to the Jewish camp inmate; the bulk of the money was kept by the regional offices of the

  Reich for the “upkeep” of the camps. As a rule, the Reichsstatthalter

  and Oberprasident could make a profit in the transaction.’“

  Because camp labor was so cheap, it did not always occur to the

  bureaucracy to return Jewish workers to their ghettos at the conclusion

  of a project. Many a Jewish camp laborer never saw his community

  again. When he was no longer needed in one camp, he was simply

  shifted to another. A report by a local Lublin official revealed the

  attitude of the bureaucracy toward Jewish camp labor. In October 1940

  the Betzec labor camp was broken up. Thousands of Jews were to be

  sent elsewhere. One train left with 920 Jews for the town of Hrubies-

  zdw, but the official who reported the matter did not even know

  whether the guards were SS men or members of the ethnic German

  auxiliary, the Selbstschutz. When the train arrived in Hrubieszdw, only

  500 Jews were aboard; the other 400 were missing. “Since they could

  not very well have been shot in such large numbers,” wrote this

  official, "I have heard suspicions that perhaps these Jews had been

  released against payment of some kind of money.” The second train,

  carrying another 900 Jews, he continued, had arrived in Radom intact.

  Many of the Jews on the second train were Lublin residents. It would

  be very difficult, he concluded, to get them back.’*’

  The labor exploitation regime in Poland consisted of three parts;

  (1) the forced labor columns, which were only a makeshift device but

  which persisted because of their low cost; (2) the labor camps, which

  were an offshoot of the labor columns but which soon overshadowed

  the columns in importance; and (3) the ghetto labor system.

  Essentially, there were two kinds of ghetto labor utilization; the

  municipal

  workshop

  system

  and

  employment

  by

  private

  enterprises.

  Municipal workshops, the prevalent form of ghetto employment, were

  actually run by the Judenrate under the close supervision of the control

  organs. The

  largest

  workshop ghetto, in

  L6di, maintained its own

  railroad station at Radegast, from which seventy to ninety loaded cars 248 249

  248. For detailed regulations by the labor trustees, see the Labor Ministry

  memorandum of May 9, 1941, NO-1368.

  249. Gouvemeur of Lublin/Interior Division/Population and Welfare to General-

  gouvemement, Main Division Interior/Population and Welfare, attention Dr. F6hl, October 21. 1940, Dokumenty i maUriafy. vol. 1, pp. 220-21.

  255

  CONCENTRATION

  were dispatched every day.2” Cheap fabrication of every sort (billige

  Fertigung jeder Art) was being obtained there in exchange for a prison

  diet

  and

  the

  simplest

  conceivable

  life

  style

  (denkbar

  einfachsten

  Lebensführung). On this basis the ghetto was earning its keep and

  returning to the city a profit that was “not to be underestimated” (einen

  nicht zu unterschätzenden wirtschaftlichen Gewinn) by the end of

  1941.

  Private

  enterprises

  wishing

  to

  avail

  themselves

  of

  ghetto

  labor

  could also expect their production costs to be greatly reduced. In fact,

  as the director of the Warsaw Transferstelle Bischof noted in one of his

  monthly reports, wages were of “minor significance” (geringer Bedeutung).211 German firms did not, however, rush into the ghettos. The history of the industrialization of the Warsaw ghetto reveals a slow

  development, beginning from ground zero and accelerating only in the

  spring and summer of 1942. The effort to increase manufacturing in the

  ghetto was hampered by a variety of recurring problems, including

  interruptions in the flow of electricity, relocations due to boundary

  changes, or requisitions by the Armament Command in Warsaw—not

  to speak of the hunger of the work force, which Bischof attempted to

  alleviate (in the case of armament firms and important export enterprises) by allotments of additional rations in the factories.“5 Bischof avidly

  recruited

  German

  and

  ethnic

  German

  firms,

  among

  them

  Walther

  Többens,

  Schultz

  &

  Co.,

  Waldemar

  Schmidt,

  and

  Astra

  Werke, and evidently realizing the limit of his success, he also encouraged Jewish capitalism. Jewish tax delinquencies were forgiven,"*

  and funds for investment were released from blocked accounts,“5 with

  the result that the volume of production of Jewish companies was

  ultimately much larger than the output of German shops.250 251 252 253 254 255 256 Much to his

  chagrin, however, Jewish enterprises were trading with Polish firms on

  250. Memorandum by Technischer KriegsverwaJtungsiniendam Merkel on conversation with Biebow, March 18, 1941, Wi/ID 1.40.

  251. Report by RQstungsinspektion XXI, covering October 1, 1940, to December

  31, 1941, pt. 2, pp. 33-34 Wi/ID 1.20. The first deportations from tddi began in January

  1942, but the ghetto continued until the summer of 1944.

  252. Report by Bischof to Auerswald for April 1942, dated May S, 1942, Yad

  Vashem microfilm JM 1112.

  253. See Bischof's monthly reports in JM 1112.

  254. See Bischof's report for November 1941, JM 1112.

  255. Proclamation by the Kommissar für den jüdischen Wohnbezirk (signed Auerswald). August I. 1941, Amtlicher Anzeiger für das Generalgouvernement. 1941,p. 1329.

  Private Jewish firms operated not only in the Warsaw ghetto. See letter by Jewish

  Kultusgemeinde/Office of the President In Sosnowlec, Upper Silesia, to David Passermann Füllfeder-Reparaturwerkstatt Sosnowitz, March 21. 1941, in Natan Eliasz Sztemfinkel, Zagtada Zyddw Sosnowca (Katowice, 1946), pp. 63-64.

  256. See Bischofs monthly reports for July and August 1942, Yad Vashem

  microfilm JM 1112.

  256

  POLAND

  the black market. Bischof attempted to remove the incentives for this

  traffic by urging the price control office to agree to “sensible" (vernünftige)—that is to say, higher—prices,“’ but the Warsaw price supervisor, Dr. Meisen, decided after pondering the question not to make concessions.

  Proposed

  prices

  in

  contracts

  were

  really

  “indefensible”

  (unvertretbar), Meisen reported, and therefore had to be voided. Although he could recognize the interest of German agencies “in the smoothest and least financially burdensome maintenance of the Jewish

  district until its possible liquidation,” he had to consider the political

  importance of upholding the price structure.“* Bischof did not curb the

  black market, and therefore he
could not harness the total production

  of the ghetto, as the Gettoverwaltung in L6dl had done, for the maximization of German gains, but like his colleagues in L6 di he could always neglect to send enough food and fuel into the ghetto, thus

  constraining his costs. To the Jewish population suffering from this

  officially imposed privation, the black market offered little salvation.

  Dealers in smuggled goods are rarely philanthropists.

  Given a mixture of legal and illegal transactions, there was but one

  overall measure of economic activity: the number of employees. When

  Bischof arrived in Warsaw, he heard Auerswald admit to Gouverneur

  Fischer that only 170 Jews were working on outside contracts (öffentliche Aufträge).1” In September 1941, barely 34,000 persons were “economically active” (9,000 of them as clerks for the community or its affiliated organizations),*“ but by July 11, 1942, the work force had

  risen to 95,000,“' an employment rate that was nearing 50 percent. To

  be sure, this figure, which represented the theoretical subsistence level

  envisaged by the Generalgouvernement economists, was attained only

  during

  the

  month

  that

  the

  deportation

  of

  the

  ghetto’s

  population

  began.

  Labor utilization in the workshop ghettos was more stringent than

  in the free enterprise atmosphere of Warsaw. In L6di, for example, the

  “Eldest of the Jews,” Rumkowski, was empowered to “recruit all Jews

  for unpaid labor."“2 In Opole regimentation was carried so far that the 257 258 259 260 261 262

  257. See Bischofs report for December 1941 and January 7, 1942, JM 1112.

  258. Meisen (Warsaw district Ami für Preisverwaitung) to Oberregiemngsrat Dr.

  Schulte·Wissermann (Ami für Preisbildung) in Staatssekretariat, Generalgouvernement,

  April 4, 1942, enclosing report for March, JM 1112.

  259. Memorandum by Bischof on meeting with Fischer, May 8, 1941, JM 1112.

  260. Table in Emanuel Ringelblum, Polish-Jewish Relations During the Second

  World War, ed. Josef Kermisz and Shmuel Krakowski (New York, 1976), footnote on pp.

  71-72.

  261. Czemiaköw’s entry for that date, in Hilberg, Staron, and Kermisz, eds„ Warsaw Diary, p. 378.

  262. Office of the Oberbürgermeister (signed Schiffer) to Rumkowski, April 30,

  1940, Dokumenty i maleriafy, vol. 3, pp. 74-75.

  257

  CONCENTRATION

  entire

  Jewish

  population

  was

  divided

  into

  labor-oriented

 

‹ Prev